Yes, the Clintons should be investigated by Marc A. Thiessen of The Washington Post
Click download link to listen on this device: Download Show
Clintons should be investigated
BY MARC A. THIESSEN The Washington Post
KELLY P. KISSEL AP
Former President Bill Clinton, accompanied by Hillary Clinton, speaks at a gathering in Little Rock, Ark., on Saturday, marking 25 years since his election.
President Donald Trump’s critics are arguing that GOP calls for the Justice Department to investigate Hillary Clinton and Democrats’ ties to Russia are an effort to distract from the real Russia investigation, into potential Trump-Russia collusion.
No, they are not.
Ever since Watergate, the mantra of all major corruption investigations has been to “follow the money.” Americans of all political stripes should be outraged by the fact that both Democrats and Republicans in Washington are up to their eyeballs in Kremlin cash. Russian money found its way into the pockets of not only Trump advisers like Paul Manafort and Rick Gates – who were recently indicted by special counsel Robert S. Mueller III – but also Democratic power lobbyist Tony Podesta, Bill Clinton and the Clinton Foundation.
This should suggest to objective observers that Russia was using its money to influence both sides in order to advance the Kremlin’s interests. And it means that any full and impartial investigation of Russia’s efforts to influence our political process needs to follow the Russian money flowing into the coffers of the Clintons, their foundation and their top associates.
The New York Times reported in 2015 that “shortly after the Russians announced their intention to acquire a majority stake in Uranium One, [former President Bill] Clinton received $500,000 for a Moscow speech from a Russian investment bank with links to the Kremlin that was promoting Uranium One stock.” In total, $145 million went to the Clinton Foundation from interests linked to Uranium One, which was acquired by the Russian government nuclear agency Rosatum.
Think that was just a coincidence? Ask yourself: How many half-a-million-dollar speeches has Bill Clinton given to Kremlin-linked banks since Hillary Clinton was defeated? How much Russian money is flowing into the Clinton Foundation’s coffers today? If Donald Trump had given a $500,000 speech paid for by a Kremlin bank, and his private foundation had accepted $145 million from Vladimir Putin-linked oligarchs and their Western business partners, do you think that his critics would be insisting there was nothing to see here?
Then there is Tony Podesta. It is now front-page news that Podesta has been forced to step down from his soon-to-be-defunct lobbying firm, the Podesta Group, after being ensnared in the same scandal that led to the indictment of Trump campaign aides Manafort and Gates. The Podesta Group failed to register as a foreign agent for Russian interests while lobbying on behalf of the European Center for a Modern Ukraine – a front group that Mueller’s indictment says was “under the ultimate direction” of Ukraine’s Putin-backed president and his political party.
We should all be deeply concerned by how much Russian cash was sloshing around Washington, and how much of it found its way into the bank accounts of the Clintons and those around them. And we should all, Democrats and Republicans alike, want to get to the bottom of it.
As Americans, it goes against our sensibilities to encourage the Justice Department of one party to investigate the vanquished candidate of the other party. But does the fact that Clinton lost mean Americans don’t deserve to know the full extent of Russia’s efforts to influence our political process?
None of this absolves the Trump campaign or calls into question the intelligence community’s conclusion that “Putin and the Russian Government aspired to help . . . Trump’s election chances.” But it does underscore that the Russians were smart in what the intelligence community calls their efforts to “undermine public faith in the US democratic process.” They played both sides, and in so doing preyed on the singular weakness of the Clintons and those around them – greed.
Any impartial investigation of Russia’s efforts to meddle in our democratic process needs to include a full inquiry of the Russian money flowing into Clinton world. Such an inquiry is not a distraction. It is critical to restoring public faith in American democracy.
Marc A. Thiessen is a fellow with the American Enterprise Institute and former chief speechwriter to President George W. Bush.
Can’t disagree at all with you, Dick
That’s a valid point DT.
At this point it is a day late and dollar short, and the investigations should have been done in 2010, 2011, and 2012.
Like you mentioned their are much bigger deals and cronyism going all all the time!
Think about the scandals that would come up for Regan, Bush, Clinton, Bush Jr, Obama etc if all the weapons and military deals cut behind the scenes were really brought to the light of day.
their = there
For lawmakers, I never cease to be amazed at how ignorant of the law, politicians can be.
There happens to be a statutory limitation for prosecuting things like asking for and accepting bribes. I am not an attorney, but 5 years statute of limitations rears its ugly head, to prevent simple punishment.
I can’t see a charge of treason being made or sticking, even though I know deep down that crooked Hillary deserves no less.
What is the real crime, that is easy to prosecute is violation of the charity laws and their use to wash all donations to the Clintons and thus enable TAX EVASION.
I’m sure the Clintons have done everything they can to destroy records, which is a violation of the charitable foundation laws, but fraudulent tax evasion has a 10 year statute of limitations, and thus still pertains……just.
CFS, don’t you find it interesting that both the New York Times and the Washington Post share these types of editorials? I certainly do. Maybe “A New Day is Coming”
You really should read Mark Bitz’s book. He really tells it like it is.
I believe the NY Times and the Washington Post both realize that there is nothing to lose regarding the Clintons, since they are now has-beens.
On the other hand, they also must realize they have been self-destructive of their newspapers’ relevance and importance due to their attempts to slant the news.
Appearing to now attack irrelevant targets like the Clintons produces an air of impartiality while doing little actual further damage to left wing power. The Clintons have already done the damage, and most people did eventually realize the corruption.
Meanwhile, much of the swamp goes on un-drained.
https://www.federalcharges.com/bribery-laws-charges/
for education purposes.
Thanks for the informative information, CFS
The initial Uranium plans involving Russian bribes apparently date back to 2009.
Tick-tock.
This is the image I want to see……
There is a great big lie out there that has been with held from the American Public for some time now.
Those in the know, I’m sure knew this all along.
Ludwig von Mises talks about with increasing income,every new increment is used for the satisfaction of a want less urgently felt want already satisfied before the increment took place.
Could this not also be an explanation for criminals always seeming to do a bigger crime after the one they just committed?
Could this possibly be a rational explanation of the Clinton’s crime spree?
After we get done with the Clinton’s,someone needs to take a seriously hard look at the Bushes as well.One cannot claim credibility when it comes to this matter with the information out there suggesting the contrary.To accept that the media and the CIA have not been involved in the affairs of the U.S Government for years is just plain ignorant.
Just remember the Clinton’ s got their start in Arkansas. Mena,Arkansas is the airport. You do the rest.
Wherever there is a chance of breaking a law, an investigation should definitely take place, JohnK
I messed this up. This is what Mises said.
With increasing income,every new increment is used for the satisfaction of a want less urgently felt than the least urgently felt want already satisfied before this increment took place.
Am I totally off base here?
No, I have definitely experienced that JohnK. And I know that you are correct. That is why I always ask the question, “how much is enough”.
I am not filthy rich but I did ask myself this question many times before I turned the Show over to Cory.
We are all very fortunate to have this forum.Thanks for all you do.
Like I told Doc,sometimes I forget where I came from.Politics is good way to loose friends.
If I get ornery don’t mind me.
“the satisfaction of a want less urgently felt” — I believe this is what economists refer to as ‘declining marginal utility’, JohnK.
Thanks GH:
I don’t think I’m probably are as smart as I believe I am. But I’m trying.
I do know the key to continual growth is educating yourself. Isn’t it interesting how the American Public was put in a vacuum concerning the Clintons,The Obama’s and for that matter the Bushes to.Right now I don’t think I would want to be any of the three.President Trump at this point must be included also. The comment about the Native Americans I made on the other forum partially came from the comment you made to Al about the genocide committed on the Native Americans.It is all to easy to dismiss where we actually came from.Of course the U.S isn’t alone with their history of the Native Peoples.
“U.S isn’t alone with their history of the Native Peoples.”
No it isn’t. All of the Natives of Japan were wiped out. In fact most island natives were wiped out.
Do people really believe the African people brought to Jamaica or the Bahamas are the native peoples?
Wherever the British or Spanish or Portuguese colonized they had a tendency to wipe out huge swaths of native peoples.
– Are Canadians & British Queen the rightful owners of Canada or is the “First Nations”?
Should the British Queen and their penal colony be the rightful owners of Australia or does that belong to the native aboriginals?
Do the Jews own the land that they claim now is Israel that they took from other peoples, but it was sanctioned by the US & UN?
Wasn’t Mexico inhabited by the Mayan & Aztecs & Zapotecs before the Spanish came over and wiped out huge swaths of the population?
Do people believe it is right what China is doing to the people of Tibet wiping them out?
Seriously, I’m so sick of everyone pointing to what happened to the US Native American population like it is some kind of isolated incident globally (and my lady’s folks are both 1/2 Native American).
It is ridiculous how the US is the only one constantly singled out. The semetic tribes were enslaved by Persians and Egyptians in the past too but nobody is asking for retribution on what happened in the past. There STILL is slavery in parts of Africa and the Middle east and if people want to get on their high horses about things then start there…. not bitching constantly about what happened hundreds of years ago.
True enough, it’s happened all over the place.
And yes, it’s ridiculous how somehow in the fevered minds of the new (fake) Left, white men, especially Americans, are to blame for all the world’s ills. This, of course, is a diversionary ploy of the relatively small handful of power brokers who are really responsible for all the large-scale organized crime.
The point of my original post is that the relatively recent events in the US are not to be made light of. Furthermore they assume additional significance considering our embroilment in an analagous issue today in Palestine.
Good thoughts GH. I didn’t see the original post you put up, and was just adding on to the last sentence JohnK wrote above.
Yeah, if you want to know what happened, ask Hillary. The Minutemen can see the horizon.
Hilarious Buzz. If her lips are moving she’s lying. Just do the opposite 🙂
The Russia Scandal Just Got Much Worse … For Hillary Clinton And Barack Obama
Investors Business Daily – 6:20 PM
https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/russia-scandal-uranium-one-clinton-foundation/
If indeed The Russians were buying influence, this only tells me that there are other scandals juicier and more reeking. A lot of people must have seen a lot more than just uranium gate. Most of them are holding their noses and hoping that the other scandals that haven’t received attention don’t come out. I remember reading about corruption in The Veterans Administration. One can conclude that there are many more instances we have not heard about, but this reminds of The Harding Administration. The buck stops at The President’s desk and if his administration is seen as being a pushover corruption will abound. We all know that Obama was The President when this happened and the Clintons weren’t the only people that knew Washington was for sale.