Mrs. Hillary Clinton has a new title to add to her resume. She has been given the award, “Worst Ethics Violator of 2015,” by the “Foundation for Accountability and Government Trust.” FACT’s list of ethical violators was neutral and nonpartisan. Democrat Rep. Alan Grayson (FL) was on the list beside Republican Rep. Mark Meadows (NC). Each had their own ethical issues.) They found:
- Secretary of State Hillary Clinton Gave Preferential Treatment Her Son-in-Law’s Clients. Mrs. Clinton gave special treatment to a “private mining company” per her son-in-law, and “interested” donors to the Clinton Foundation. The Clinton Foundation has been referred to as a “slush fund” for the Clintons. Emails revealed Harry Siklas, a close friend of Chelsea Clinton’s husband, has a client called Neptune Minerals. Hillary Clinton was in the middle of an attempt to pass the Law of the Sea Treaty to govern deep-sea mining, and it appears her influence as Secretary of State helped the company win financing from Goldman Sachs. Federal ethics guidelines warn government officials about not giving preferential treatment to any private organization or individual.
- The Clinton Foundation Payments to Hillary Clinton’s 2008 Presidential Campaign: The IRS was asked to investigate if the Clinton Foundation broke federal laws by making payments of nearly $350,000 to Hillary Clinton’s 2008 campaign. The payments came when her 2008 campaign was paying off its debt, and State Department ethics rules limited her abilities to fund-raise.
- Hillary Clinton Illegally Interacted with a Super PAC: Federal law explicitly prohibits a candidate from coordinating with and accepting donations. Hillary Clinton was closely involved with organizing the super PAC, Ready for Hillary, and others.
- Clinton Violated Ethics Rules by Meeting with Senate Democrats: Meetings took place between Hillary Clinton’s campaign team and key Senate Democrats inside official Senate offices where political activities are barred.
And that was from 2015. Consider Mrs. Clinton and her husband’s more recent behavior, since Jan 1st, 2016.
Bill Clinton showed up at four polling stations during Massachusetts’ Super Tuesday, pressuring people to vote for his wife and blocking Bernie Sanders’ votes. This is illegal behavior per the voting laws of Massachusetts. (Within 150 feet of a polling place as defined in 950 CMR 53.03(18)(c), no person shall solicit votes for or against, or otherwise promote or oppose, any person or political party or position on a ballot question, to be voted on at the current election.) Similar laws exist in many other states. They were warned about the laws and chose to continue, anyway. You can hear people complaining about not being able to vote in the video below:
In Nevada, she was able to send groups of unregistered, unidentified voters into the primaries to vote. It should be noted, these are only the ones we know know about.
Mrs. Clinton has control of a new Super PAC, called, Correct The Record, and her intimate relationship with this super PAC is also legally questionable.
Her close political ally, DNC Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, has essentially bankrupted the DNC in supporting Mrs. Clinton over Bernie Sanders. Should we believe Mrs. Clinton is unaware of this and has not coordinated with Wasserman-Scultz. (Consider the sudden increase in debates when Mrs. Clinton was doing badly and facing criticism. They didn’t do it out a sense of fair play for Bernie Sanders.)
Regarding the FBI investigation into her emails, Mrs. Clinton stated during the New Hampshire debate with Senator Bernie Sanders, “I am 100 percent confident. This is a security review that was requested. It is being carried out.”
“Not true,” says Steve Pomerantz, a retired assistant director of the FBI. He offered the following opinion,
“They (the FBI) do not do security reviews. What they primarily do and what they are clearly doing in this instance is a criminal investigation.There is no mechanism for her to be briefed and to have information about the conduct, the substance, the direction or the result of any FBI investigation.”
In 2003, she said, “I am, you know, adamantly against illegal immigrants. People have to stop employing illegal immigrants.” In 2014 she said the unaccompanied children crossing the border should be “sent back. We have to send a clear message: Just because your child gets across the border doesn’t mean your child gets to stay.” Now, in the 2016, Mrs. Clinton wants to offer illegal aliens access to Obamacare, and a “path to citizenship.”
Mrs. Clinton’s position on the Trans-Pacific Partnership was positive before she changed her mind. In 2008, Hillary Clinton called the TPP “the gold standard” of trade deals. Today she insists she said she “hoped” it would be the gold standard. But it’s a blatant effort at rewriting history, and a lie. Her exact quote was,
“This TPP sets the gold standard in trade agreements to open free, transparent, fair trade, the kind of environment that has the rule of law and a level playing field.”
Mrs. Clinton’s campaign donors suggest another lapse in ethics. Rupert Murdoch has given donations to no other Democrat, just Hillary. Washington lobbyists from industries such as banking, weapons manufacture, and oil production are her largest source of income. Then there is the Nebraska data processing firm, InfoUSA, and its CEO, Vin Gupta, who gives favors to the Clintons in the form of private corporate jets to transport the Clintons on business, campaign, and personal trips, who paid Bill Clinton a $3.3 million consulting contract, and is now under investigation. The list goes on. And then there are the countries that donate to the Clinton Foundation.
Mrs. Clinton has shown a pattern of accepting money for supporting questionable business transactions, a curious ability to rewrite history in her own mind, and support from her husband, who has also displayed a lack of ethical behavior.