Posted on 04/26/2015 7:00:37 PM PDT by afraidfortherepublic
On the surface, it isnt that hard to understand the Clinton Cash scandal that Democrats are trying very hard to ignore this week. We have a former president making millions giving speeches and doing favors for wealthy foreign entities and nations that give massive sums to the Clinton family charity that subsidizes the lavish lifestyle of the former First Family. He did this at the same time as his wife spent four years as secretary of state where she made decisions that influence the fortunes of those donors. And all this was happening while said former first lady/secretary of state is planning to run for president herself at the next opportunity. No one can deny that this smells to high heaven of impropriety, and the best Billy and Hillarys court of admirers and apologists can say in their defense is that the evidence of a conflict of interest is circumstantial and that there is no smoking gun proving their guilt. But there is another defense that Politicos national editor Michael Hirsch hints at in a piece published yesterday: their marriage is so dysfunctional that any alleged coordination between the two is unlikely.
As Hirsh notes, to discuss the impenetrable Clinton marriage is a difficult task. Upon their arrival on the national stage in the 1992 presidential campaign, Americans have on the one hand been deluged with far more information about the Clintons relationship than we wanted, as he confessed to having caused pain, while never giving us any further explanations. A few years later Bill plunged the nation into a degrading debate about the definition of sex and whether its OK to commit perjury about acts of sexual harassment after his dalliance with an intern in the Oval Office. Since then weve been asked at one and the same time to sympathize with Hillary as the long suffering wife while also being warned to keep our noses out of their private business.
Would that we could. As Brit Hume recently noted on Fox, one of the key questions about Hillarys presidential prospects is whether the American people want another four, eight years of the Clintons and their weird marriage.
That sounds pretty harsh and uncharacteristically ungentlemanly coming from the courtly Hume. But hes on to something that can neither be ignored nor swept under the carpet. Having asked us to take them as a two-for-one package in 1992, the ordeal of watching their odd contortions as a couple has become a long national nightmare that, if she wins in 2016, will have no end in sight.
If the questions about them were merely the prosaic ones about whether their continuing union is one primarily of convenience like some royal dynastic pairing rather than a conventional marriage in which two people strive to love and stay together, any queries about their private lives would be rude and even inadmissible. Whether the Clintons are in any sense a romantic couple is none of our business. But if they are still a working political partnership, then we are entitled to know a great deal about their personal interactions. In particular, we deserve to learn about how large a role Bill played as an advisor to her when she was running U.S. foreign policy. Were also entitled to know more about her role in their charitys insatiable campaign to raise enormous amounts of cash from individuals, companies, and countries. In classic pay for play style, those donors thought they could do themselves quite a bit of good by giving to the Clintons rather than more established philanthropies that were not run by former and perhaps future presidents.
Other than merely claiming that we cant prove it to a legal certainty without a smoking gun, Mrs. Clintons defense against the allegations raised in Clinton Cash rests on a few shaky limbs onto which her defenders can climb. One is to assert that the actions the Department of State took that benefitted Clinton donors were handled below her level. Which is to say she was, shades of Benghazi, not in the know about crucial decisions taking place on her watch. Which is to say she was an incompetent secretary of state.
Another possible defense raised by Hirsh is that Clinton was completely removed from major policy decisions in the Obama administration. This has a ring of truth to it as Obama distrusts the Clintons and runs a top-down administration in which Cabinet secretaries have little say on important matters, though that doesnt absolve her on issues that the president did not decide. It also further undermines her claim that her experience as secretary of state entitles her to the presidency.
Yet there is an even more credible defense that Clintons clique cant raise. It is that Bill and Hillary are just so disconnected a couple that the idea that they coordinated the family charity business with her foreign-policy ambitions is absurd.
Is this true? We dont know for sure and, as with so much else about the Clintons, we may never know. Whatever their personal problems might be, their political and business partnership seems to be intact. Moreover, that defense didnt work for an equally dysfunctional couple, Bob and Maureen McDonnell, when they faced prosecution for pay to play charges for their actions during his time as governor of Virginia.
Whatever form their personal relationship now takes, its too late to say that the vast charitable and political web they have woven is none of our business. Both Bill and Hillary have benefitted enormously from their charitable empire and so have those who donated to it.
Getting to the bottom of the Clinton Cash problem may require us, as Hirsh says, to unscramble the omelet. The putative 2016 Democratic Party candidate for president has shown no signs of being willing to speak candidly about these questions and a presidential campaign is a bad time for the pair to sort out their marriage for the public. It might be the best defense she can offer, but Hillary is unlikely to try to acquit herself of any involvement in the Clinton Foundations dirty business by telling us the truth about how disconnected the two really are.
Dunno
Cruz knows and reveres the constitution. That’s all
The rest of them can either work with him or against him he’ll know who’s who and what to do about them
he says what we THINK. He said repub voters are beginning to wonder what the difference is between the two parties!!! that was awesome!!
He does his research. I’ll say that for him
he talks like he really CARES about conservatism and America. He has so many qualities of the Great One, and, I think, although the Great One was smart, Cruz is brilliant on a different level than we’ve seen in a long time.
BTW, the Great One is of course, RR
the mountain of evidence against her wont be denied.
shes tripped over her pride and cant get up
The other shoe to drop will be the Clinton foundation funneling funds to Hillary’s campaign.
The other shoe to drop will be the Clinton foundation funneling funds to Hillary’s campaign.
You can never be sure how deep nobama (Val Jarret) hatred for klintoons goes. They are unrestrained on protocol, this Admin could do it out of spite.
Only if her plans to get thousands of small donors from foreign countries doesn’t work.
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.