• State Department Won’t Review Clinton Ethics Breaches

    May 8, 2015

    Tags: ,
    Posted in: Embassy/State

    Clinton-Global-Initiative-in-Marrakech

    When Hillary Clinton became Secretary of State in 2009, the Obama White House required her to sign an agreement promising to have her family’s charities, under the umbrella of the Clinton Global Initiative (CGI; now known as the Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton Foundation) submit new donations from foreign countries to the State Department for review.

    The Agreement

    The agreement was designed to avoid potential conflicts of interest, given her new government role. The arrangement was made by an Obama administration covering its flanks over the appearance, at a minimum, of impropriety, given the significant sums of money the charities pulled in from overseas. Many of the countries and foreign corporations who gave the most money also had issues in front of the State Department, where a positive decision could change the donor’s fortunes.

    The Violations

    The Clinton Foundation repeatedly violated this agreement with the Obama White House.

    The Washington Post reported the Clinton Foundation failed to disclose $500,000 from Algeria at the time the country was lobbying the State Department over human-rights issues. Bloomberg learned the Clinton Giustra Enterprise Partnership, a Clinton Foundation affiliate, failed to disclose 1,100 foreign contributions.

    But the Boston Globe’s report on the Clinton Health Access Initiative (CHAI), yet another foundation affiliate (these people have more shell groups than a Mafia crime family), may cover the most notable omissions yet. Tens of millions of dollars went undisclosed to the State Department.

    Overall, the Clinton charities accepted new donations from at least six foreign governments while Clinton was Secretary: Switzerland, Papua New Guinea, Swaziland, Rwanda, Sweden and Algeria. Australia and the United Kingdom increased their funding by millions of dollars during this period.

    The Lack of Consequences

    The Obama White House remains deadly silent over the violations of its own agreement with Hillary and the Clinton charities.

    Now the State Department, the organization charged with overseeing the agreement and monitoring its own Secretary for impropriety, says it too will do nothing.

    On May 7, State Department spokesperson Jeff Rathke stated the Department “regrets” that it did not get to review the new foreign government funding, but does not plan to look into the matter further. “The State Department has not and does not intend to initiate a formal review or to make a retroactive judgment about items that were not submitted during Secretary Clinton’s tenure.”

    The State Department spokesman said the Department was not aware of donations having an undue influence on U.S. foreign policy.

    When reporters asked how the Department could know this without reviewing the belated disclosures, he declined to comment further.



    The Questions

    No one can anticipate what issues may confront a president. No president’s full span of decisions can be made in public. There is, in the electoral process, a huge granting of trust from the people to their leader. In cases like the violation of the ethics agreement by Clinton, undisclosed for eight years, one must ask about that trust — has it been earned?

    One must also ask how, and more importantly, why, the White House and the State Department simply wash their hands of this issue. The Congress and elements of the media, so obsessed with events in Benghazi, seem nearly unaware of these financial issues while Clinton held one of the most powerful positions in government.

    Lastly, given that Clinton now seeks the most powerful position in government, one must ask why the American voters seem oblivious to the clear trail she has left behind of how she views trust and ethics in government.



    Related Articles:




    Copyright © 2020. All rights reserved. The views expressed here are solely those of the author(s) in their private capacity.

  • Recent Comments

    • John Poole said...

      1

      Because the American public wants an absolute monarch and Hillary is best suited for the position. Monarchs are given “special” treatment. Others who prefer a different governing setup had best stay far way from her royal routes. Being run over by a monarch’s carriage in today’s America would be like being killed by a speer while shouldering a M16 (Apocalypse Now)- ironical.

      05/8/15 11:00 AM | Comment Link

    • Bruce said...

      2

      ElIgnore Rusevelt RULE$! (AND Both she and Company man, 0bama do belong to the [Poppy] Bush crime family).

      05/8/15 12:16 PM | Comment Link

    • RICH BAUER said...

      3

      “One must also ask how, and more importantly, why, the White House and the State Department simply wash their hands of this issue.”

      Do we expect whores and prostitutes to report the sordid services they provide for money? Why hold Hlllarious to a higher standard? God only knows what Slick Willie made her do. I would want to wash my hands too.

      05/8/15 3:28 PM | Comment Link

    • RICH BAUER said...

      4

      05/8/15 3:35 PM | Comment Link

    Leave A Comment

    Mail (will not be published) (required)