Are Democrats really this desperate?

Yes we can (be France)!

All right! The check cleared!

All right! The check cleared!

The series of stories this week casting light onto shadowy aspects of Bill and Hillary Clinton’s finances are newsworthy, but not entirely surprising.

The same goes for the Clintons’ instinctive reaction to them: deny, deflect and demean, as the journalist who probably knows them best, Ron Fournier, put it this week.

But what we don’t know — and what will be extremely telling — is what these revelations will mean for Democrats and their supporters.

In case you aren’t up to speed, the New York Times this week broke the story of the Clintons’ dealings with a Russian company that came to control one-fifth of the uranium deposits in the United States. Lest you think the “reset” with Russia couldn’t have been any worse:

“Since uranium is considered a strategic asset, with implications for national security, the deal had to be approved by a committee composed of representatives from a number of United States government agencies. Among the agencies that eventually signed off was the State Department, then headed by … Hillary Rodham Clinton.

“As the Russians gradually assumed control of Uranium One in three separate transactions from 2009 to 2013, Canadian records show, a flow of cash made its way to the Clinton Foundation. Uranium One’s chairman used his family foundation to make four donations totaling $2.35 million. Those contributions were not publicly disclosed by the Clintons, despite an agreement Mrs. Clinton had struck with the Obama White House to publicly identify all donors. Other people with ties to the company made donations as well.

“And shortly after the Russians announced their intention to acquire a majority stake in Uranium One, Mr. Clinton received $500,000 for a Moscow speech from a Russian investment bank with links to the Kremlin that was promoting Uranium One stock.

“At the time, both Rosatom and the United States government made promises intended to ease concerns about ceding control of the company’s assets to the Russians. Those promises have been repeatedly broken, records show.”

That looks bad enough on its face, and yet a couple of other stories from this week provide some important context to illustrate just how bad those details are:

  • Not only did the Clintons fail to disclose that contribution. When one of the Times’ reporters asked the Clintons about a meeting they held at their private home with company officials, the initial response was a denial that the meeting had taken place. Only after the reporter said one of the participants had confirmed the meeting took place — and had a picture of himself with Bill Clinton at the home — did a spokesman acknowledge it. See the video below, starting at the 30-second mark:

  • And the $2.35 million in donations to the Clinton Foundation are not the only such transactions that weren’t disclosed: Reuters reports the Clintons’ charities “are refiling at least five annual tax returns after a Reuters review found errors in how they reported donations from governments.” These were not minor discrepancies in terms of either timing or magnitude:

    “For three years in a row beginning in 2010, the Clinton Foundation reported to the IRS that it received zero in funds from foreign and U.S. governments, a dramatic fall-off from the tens of millions of dollars in foreign government contributions reported in preceding years.

    Those entries were errors, according to the foundation: several foreign governments continued to give tens of millions of dollars toward the foundation’s work on climate change and economic development through this three-year period. Those governments were identified on the foundation’s annually updated donor list, along with broad indications of how much each had cumulatively given since they began donating.”

    Just your run-of-the-mill, tens-of-millions-of-dollars error about gifts that were controversial enough in nature Hillary Clinton had made special disclosure arrangements with the president.

  • As for that $500,000 speaking fee for Bill Clinton: It was much higher than what he used to get before his wife became secretary of state, and it wasn’t a one-off deal. ABC News reports:

    “(His speaking fees) often doubled or tripled what he had been charging earlier in his post White House years, bringing in millions of dollars from groups that included several with interests pending before the State Department, an ABC News review of financial disclosure records shows.

    “Where he once had drawn $150,000 for a typical address in the years following his presidency, Clinton saw a succession of staggering paydays for speeches in 2010 and 2011, including $500,000 paid by a Russian investment bank and $750,000 to address a telecom conference in China.”

Of course, all of this leads one to wonder if anything of relevance to these stories was included in the thousands of emails deleted from the private server that handled all of Hillary’s email correspondence while she was secretary of state.

***

Many Americans were never going to vote for Hillary Clinton to be president. But many others have been determined to get her into the White House. The question is whether these revelations will change their minds — and, if not, what could possibly persuade them not to support her.

Are there not some Democrats out there who see their all-in gamble on Hillary, to this point anyway, as too risky? Would they not listen if one of the other potential candidates on their side — Martin O’Malley, Jim Webb, perhaps Joe Biden or Elizabeth Warren — made an issue of the Clintons’ financial conflicts of interest? Would any of those candidates dare to make an issue of the conflicts, and risk further damaging the person who’s still likely to be their party’s nominee?

Yes, the coming weeks and months will be very telling about how much of a mess folks on the left will be willing to make, or tolerate, as they try to break that glass ceiling.

Reader Comments 0

89 comments
BurroughstonBroch
BurroughstonBroch

Hillary says she will save me from the depredations of the dread 1%.

Hillary, Chelsea and Bill are members of the dread 1%.

So Hillary will save me from Hillary, Chelsea and Bill?

I think not.

notagain
notagain

Democrats desperate,no but America is...

Lil_Barry_Bailout
Lil_Barry_Bailout

1)  The Democrat base cares not one whit about Clinton scumbaggery.  It has no effect on their free stuff.

2)  The Democrat elite will take down Hillary.  Not because she's a crook, but because she's not far-left enough.  Her promise to topple the successful in this country was probably too little, too late for the America-hating left.

Dusty2
Dusty2

Republicans do not hate the president as a human being.  They do hate the way he is ruining the country.  The next president should be elected on his or her abilities.  Vote for someone who is capable, intelligent, experienced and honest ; no matter their skin color or their gender.  Then we will have a good president and a strong country once again.

JamVet
JamVet

She is a horrific candidate.

For numerous reasons.

But her imbecilic vote to allow the Head Imbecile George to do you know what in you know where proved her unworthy of EVER sitting in the West Wing.

We don't need another Permanent War Republicrat in the White House...

MarkeAnderson
MarkeAnderson

I support her Kyle, you don't and that's enough for me.

MarkVV
MarkVV

Kyle’s column is a badly botched hatchet job, which misses its mark by a mile. While it purports to be - starting with the picture and the title – about the candidate for President, Mrs. Clinton, the most remarkable aspect is that there is virtually nothing about her, the less showing any wrongdoing on her side. Just as in the original NYT article, the closest it comes to any such allegation is that a business deal, which gave a Russian company “control of one-fifth of all uranium production capacity in the United States” was approved “by a committee composed of representatives from a number of United States government agencies. Among the agencies that eventually signed off was the State Department, then headed by Mr. Clinton’s wife, Hillary Rodham Clinton.” As told by the Jose Fernandez, former assistant secretary assigned to the foreign investment committee at the time “Mrs. Clinton never intervened with me on any C.F.I.U.S. matter.”


Most of the rest is about donations to a charitable organization, which bears the name “Clinton,” and about one speaking fee received by Mr. Clinton.


If the Republicans cannot do any better than this, then it shows that they really are desperate.

Jack®
Jack®

Hillary and Bill worship power and will sell anything to keep their share of it. Their souls have price tags attached.

Pub Heaven
Pub Heaven

Republican reactions to Hillary Clinton tell us a lot.

bu2
bu2

Has there ever been a non-incumbent like this in either party with so little interest in challenging the front runner?  The only ones talking about running against her are a former Republican Senator from RI and a Socialist from Vermont.  They can't even get a real Democrat to run against her.

gmaye
gmaye

I just did not think the good old boy rep party could hate any body worst then the first Black President, boy was I was wrong,  the hate from the good old white male party is even worst. The good old boy party has never had a women or African American to come  close to nominate as President.



NorthAtlanta
NorthAtlanta

@gmaye

When you can't refute the charges, then pull out the "hate" card or the "good old white male" card.  I think I'm seeing some projection in your posts.

notagain
notagain

This jury is out on the nominee,I suppose you could say it's pending.

ALibNotToBeMessedW/
ALibNotToBeMessedW/

Jim Webb would make a fine President and he would get my vote.  Alas, as someone who isn't particularly religious and who is on his third wife, he will be automatically - on that basis alone - be disqualified in the minds of more than a few Americans.

ALibNotToBeMessedW/
ALibNotToBeMessedW/

Meh. These fake, phony or immaterial scandals are much ado about nothing and simply the con way of diverting peoples' attention from the fact that the conservative agenda amounts to nothing but smoke and mirrors and destroying the gains from Dem administrations.


Bill Clinton was an excellent president.  The country prospered under his leadership.  As it has done under Barack Obama's.  I'm not sure Hillary would win, which is why I'd like to see someone else on the ticket.  But she is head and shoulders better than anyone currently on the GOP list of contenders and she would probably make a very good president, just like the two Dem presidents who will have preceded her.

GMFA
GMFA

I quit looking at the video when I realized it was FAUX Opinion Network. 

DawgDadII
DawgDadII

Glass ceiling? Does anybody alive today REALLY believe this exists?

MarkVV
MarkVV

Are Republicans really this desperate?


All the efforts of the Republicans regarding Mrs Clinton’s candidacy appear to be about anything else other than what policies and programs she would pursue if elected. And, of course, it is all, about “the Clintons,” as if the candidate for the President were the Clinton Foundation. As for this latest, apart from accusations of failure to disclose contributions –such a rare thing, isn’t it, on both political sides – the remarkable aspect is the lack of evidence. It just “bad enough on its face,” meaning innuendos pretending to be evidence.

JFMcNamara
JFMcNamara

She needs to leave now if she really cares about her party. Her time has passed. Hiding emails and taking bribes... I probably would just not vote.

Why won't they give O'Malley some money. At this point, there has to be a female senator to check the box.

RafeHollister
RafeHollister

Sad, but the MSM is going to ignore this story, as they do with every story reflecting poorly on the proggies.  I checked Yahoo News, USA Today, and CNN on line, no prominent mention of what should be the most important story of the day.  If corruption in our government is not the #1 story, you don't have serious journalism anymore, just propaganda for the Democrats. 

bu2
bu2

@Kyle_Wingfield @RafeHollister 


They sure downplayed the stuff in Arkansas when Bill was governor.


Every single investment Merrill Lynch made for Hillary made money?  So if she's not crooked, she's financially illiterate and unqualified to be president.  I have a strong feeling which it is.


Bruno2
Bruno2

Caius: I would say that a Republican candidate who embraces the women's issues that have resulted in the Democrats taking over 54% of the women's vote in the last two presidential elections. 

Caius--I don't share your opinion that women's issues were the deciding factor in the last election.  According to this article, abortion was the #11 concern on the list.  As many surveys have shown in the past, people usually pick the more vitalistic, more attractive candidate.   In that way, Obama held a big edge over both McCain and Romney.  In fact, I think it's very telling that the races were as close as they were considering all of the negatives that McCain and Romney brought with them to the table.

My expectation for the next election is that those roles will be reversed, with Hillary appearing as the older, more tired candidate.

http://www.people-press.org/2012/09/24/for-voters-its-still-the-economy/

TomGaff
TomGaff

Last post this morning, you know in a way it might be kinda fun to put Hillary in the WH. Just imagine Bill and his good friend Mr Weiner from NY(remember the disgraced politician who kept sending young women photos of his Johnson, until caught red-handed) roaming the halls with the young interns! Will keep the liberal media quite busy covering up for those two? By the way, those two are best friends. I guess birds of a feather stick together and all that!! Bye folks(as Bill O Reilly would say)!!!!!!!

TomGaff
TomGaff

@HeadleyLamar @TomGaff Yes it does, when done in the White House! Would really like to know where in the WH and how many times it occurred before getting revealed. How he got away with it so long is a question millions of folks want to know. Monica could make a fortune if she told ALL! Now that is a guy you would really like to have a beer with! My guess is Hillary knew all about it but condoned it to stay in power or else she had her own thing going on? That is not the type role models we want for our children or grandchildren!

Hedley_Lammar
Hedley_Lammar

@TomGaff Something about the Clinton's sex life sure does get Republicans all hot and bothered. 

Pub Heaven
Pub Heaven

@TomGaff @HeadleyLamar

Inquiring minds want to know...

How many times? Exactly where? Hillary had her own thing going on?

Have you always been this interested in politics, Thomas?

Caius
Caius

"The question is whether these revelations will change their minds — and, if not, what could possibly persuade them not to support her."

I would say that a Republican candidate who embraces the women's issues that have resulted in the Democrats taking over 54% of the women's vote in the last two presidential elections.


But that person probably does not exist.

Stephenson_Billings
Stephenson_Billings

So the Clinton's are and always have been pathological liars. This is news how? Of course it does help to inform the millenials who weren't even around when we experienced the other Clinton.

Pub Heaven
Pub Heaven

Does this mean Hillary can't audition before the Kochs? 

TomGaff
TomGaff

@332-206 You do know Koch Industries employs 60,000 people in good paying jobs? Evenly split with Dems and Repubs, I think! Those are the people I admire, that work for a living and not Hillary's people who expect the govt(us taxpayers) to provide for them from Cradle to Grave! Is that what you what this country to become, dependent upon us taxpayers for their way of life? If you do vote HILLARY!!!!!!

Pub Heaven
Pub Heaven

@TomGaff @332-206

Talking 'bout the Koch/Adelson Primaries, Thomas.

But I do see that Hillary Clinton gets you excited...

AnsweredTHIS
AnsweredTHIS

Funny. If you remove the Clinton's name, change a few of the stories and replace it with Obama it so appears I read articles like this 8 years ago...good luck with winning the office with these same stories you putting out....again!

AnsweredTHIS
AnsweredTHIS

Nope Kyle they did not. But I think, I mentioned in my post that if you change some of the stories. Just saying!

I have a new song for the GOP Party that someone said on a blog the other day that would fit perfect for the run at the White House....

Sing it with me....

Dont stop believing....

Kyle_Wingfield
Kyle_Wingfield moderator

@AnsweredTHIS Obama and his spouse got a financial windfall from foreign governments while serving as secretary of state?

Kyle_Wingfield
Kyle_Wingfield moderator


@AnsweredTHIS I guess I was confused by your "I read articles like this 8 years ago" and "these same stories." So, what's really the same here is that there were negative things to write about each candidate.

AnsweredTHIS
AnsweredTHIS

@Kyle

Yep! Negative articles like this is what put the President in office now. Much like the GOP they are " confused" as you put it because they never stick to topics that will actually allow the party to win the office. Instead as usual they sling mud and do all they can to get off topic and promote agendas that have nothing to do with running the country.

Dig a little Kyle and I am sure you can find the same "negative things" about whatever candidate the GOP puts forward. Still not about running the country for you guys more than it is about tearing down the one who will run the country so that you make sure the curtain is not pulled so that we can see the great wizard behind the curtain is just full of lights and switches.

Count of three Kyle...hope you a Journey fan.

1

2

3

You know the words...dont stop believing....

DownInAlbany
DownInAlbany

Are Democrats really this desperate?

In a word, YES.

IF you would like a little taste of the desperation, visit Bookman's blog.

MHSmith
MHSmith

Are Democrats really this desperate?

.

.

Rhetorical question, right Kyle? LOL

Stephenson_Billings
Stephenson_Billings

With liberals it is not about the nature of the evidence but the seriousness of the charges.... unless it is a liberal who is being charged of course.

MHSmith
MHSmith

@HeadleyLamar @MHSmith @Stephenson_Billings


After 14 investigations we dang well rightly need 14 more investigations. Hillary said what does it matter, Benwhozi was a political cover up and she and her OboDemos couldn't delete it fast enough before they sent the media off to blaming the Obama foreign policy blunder on some phony outrage over a film that insulted Mohammad?  


DELETE! DELETE! DELETE! LOL LOL LOL


Lie, afta lie, afta lie... day, afta day, afta day... investigation, afta investigation, afta investigation



DELETE! DELETE! DELETE! ... Hillary last words...Why isn't this delete button working?! 

 

straker
straker

Kyle,  if these stories are true, did she break the law?


If so, wouldn't that disqualify here from running?

Visual_Cortex
Visual_Cortex

@straker

You can run for President while awaiting execution on death row, so long as you're over 35 and born a US citizen.