Comparing the two is like comparing a mild case of heartburn to a full cardiac arrest.
Desperate to distract from the pay to play access of Hillary Clinton’s State Department using her de facto bank account (at the Clinton Foundation), a morsel of Trump-truth is being conflated into a mountain of projected crimes.
It's true that Donald Trump’s foundation gave $25,000 to the campaign of Pam Bondi, the Florida Atty. Gen. while her office was investigating Trump University. Because the donation violated campaign finance law, he was fined $2500; He refunded his foundation both the donation and the fine.
The left is comparing this to Hillary Clinton’s email and pay-for-play scandal with the Clinton Foundation - her ‘straw-bank.’ The two scenarios are polar opposite. First, no one has been focused on the people who paid Hillary Clinton. We’ve been focused on Clinton, the person who accepted the money and reciprocated hundreds of favors, effectively prostituting her role as Secretary of State.
Because the FBI did not ultimately prosecute her, most Democrats say this is “case closed.” But since Donald Trump was ordered to pay a fine he's guilty!
Eighty-five (or more) individuals (not holding any diplomatic status) received unprecedented access to the Clinton State Department while she was Secretary of State. Conveniently, nearly $160 million in donations came from those individuals into the Clinton Foundation with very suspicious timing.
This week, Trump surrogate Boris Epshteyn, was silenced by CNN ‘New Day’ anchor Chris Cuomo, saying, “The FBI looked at [all of this].” in other words ‘the system has spoken and Clinton is not guilty.’
The reality of this Clinton, miscarriage of justice is that the Inspector General and the FBI only investigated her intent to distribute classified information to unauthorized individuals. I've never believed Clinton intended to distribute any information to anyone without proper security clearance. It was her incompetence that caused that.
What I do believe is that Clinton clearly intended to hide her communications as Secretary of State from the American people which violated the Freedom of Information
Act. Proving the existence of a ‘quid pro quo’ is a bit more challenging. Without a doubt, it’s true. But, with all those deleted emails, how do we prove that? We can prove obstruction.
I guess and obstruction of justice charge is a lot less punitive than selling access to the government for $160 million.
‘Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics’ in Washington initially sought records from the State Department after Clinton’s departure. As the State Department compiled those records, they discovered a number of official emails bearing the personal email account of Clinton. This was referred to the Inspector General who later referred it to the FBI.
On March 3, 2015, there was a preservation (of evidence letter) sent to Clinton by the Benghazi committee. On March 4, 2015, there was a subpoena sent to Clinton (for records). In late March of 2015, Clinton’s team of lawyers used Bleach Bit to scrub the server clean of an estimated 33,000 emails.
You and me would already be in handcuffs for such an act.
Much of the establishment in Washington believes in the perfection of our governmental system. They believe the Justice Department, the federal judiciary and most of the departments are the cleanest most efficient and flawless possible. If you believe otherwise, then you are an ignorant ‘know-nothing.’ Because you are ignorant and thus radical, your opinion does not deserve to be indulged. That’s why Clinton escapes charges: She cheats the system.
It’s this belief in the system that is allowing vets to die, the Internal Revenue Service to be used as a political action-force and impoverished people are getting lost in the entrails of our government. The moment a whistleblower or truth teller appears, they are immediately cast aside as a conspiracy-theorist.
Remember Trump’s comments on Judge Curiel who is handling the Trump University civil case? Trump asserted that this federal judge, of Mexican heritage, might be biased against Trump and could not properly hear the case. There was an immediate rush to defend the judge, because Trump asserted the potential of an ethnic-bias in the case. Even worse, he asserted there was an imperfection in the federal judicial system.
What American believes that every judge in America is honest and fair? Those in government do.
Our government is broken, and the officials who are running it are responsible. The resulting chaos keeps the American people's attention on the pain of our ‘brokenness’ instead of the source of the problem.
Trump has admitted he gave donations in exchange for incredible access. This is how a ‘perfect’ system operates. He gave it; they took it. I suggest he not do the same if elected. Hillary already did.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member