Posted on 02/21/2015 3:37:03 AM PST by Libloather
The editorial board of The New York Times is urging the Clinton Foundation to ban foreign contributions ahead of Hillary Clinton's likely presidential bid.
In its Friday editorial, the newspaper notes that the foundation has pulled in nearly $2 billion in cash and pledges since 2001, including millions in contributions from foreign governments.
"All of which underlines the need for Hillary Rodham Clinton, in her all but certified role as a Democratic presidential candidate, to reinstate the foundation's ban against foreign contributors, who might have matters of concern to bring before a future Clinton administration," they wrote.
Clinton came under fire this week after The Wall Street Journal reported that the foundation had dropped its self-imposed ban on donations from foreign governments, which took effect in 2009 after Clinton became secretary of State.
After leaving the State Department in 2013, she joined the renamed Bill, Hillary & Chelsea Clinton Foundation, which has since accepted donations from countries including the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia and Oman, as well as a Canadian government agency promoting approval of the Keystone XL oil pipeline.
Foundation officials suggested Thursday that they might reconsider whether to accept foreign donations, pointing to the former policy, which prohibited donations not cleared by the State Department.
"Should Secretary Clinton decide to run for office, we will continue to ensure the Foundation's policies and practices regarding support from international partners are appropriate, just as we did when she served as secretary of State," the foundation said in a statement.
The U.S. prohibits foreign citizens from contributing to American political campaigns, and the Clinton Foundation accepting funds creates a perceived conflict of interest, the Times editorial board suggested.
"This ban does not apply to private foundations, but the idea behind it — that influence should not be bought — is relevant to a political campaign, where appearances can count for much," they wrote.
The paper added that it was important for Clinton to "reassure the public that the foundation will not become a vehicle for insiders' favoritism, should she run for and win the White House."
But hey...in this culture all she has to is say she doesn’t know...or recall...or just didn’t realize she wasn’t supposed to...lying is expected by her followers.
Ban the freaking Witch/Bitch.
NYTimes, get of your high horse, banning foreign contributions now is a little late
Too bad the Slimes never said that about foreign donations to the Obongo campaign.
Don’t they know that when the Clinton$ left the white house they were poor?
The millions she gets from China is well, illegal and should disqualify her.
What does the Foundation’s 990 says?
Let’s see how much came in, what went out, and how much its officers are paid.
If a GOP candidate had gathered two billion dollars from shady sources, the NYT would condem him as being unfit to run. They certainly wouldn’t be as diffident and low-key in their suggestion that she.stop her foreign money machine.
Hillary had a choice. She took the money.
“Let’s see how much came in, what went out, and how much its officers are paid.”
Well...they spent nearly 9 million on travel last year.
Wonder how much of that was on the ‘Lolita Express’ rape plane?
BTW...’their officers are, Bill, Hillary, and Chelsea.
Does this mean the times has chosen to support Liz warren instead?
A NYT Friday editorial dump, never to be covered again.
Like banning donations will stop her getting money from foreigners,she will have to go back to Brown bags full of cash from Charlie tree,and her bag man Cheryl Mills
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.