In the nearly two-year smorgasbord of scandal (real and faux) that the Hillary Rodham Clinton presidential campaign promises to deliver, last month’s brouhaha over her email was but an appetizer.
Not two weeks after she officially announced her run for president, Clinton has been informed that she will be hauled not once, but twice, before the House committee re-investigating the attacks on the U.S. compound in Benghazi in 2012.
The book, Clinton Cash, by conservative author Peter Schweizer, makes a circumstantial case for possible wrongdoing by Clinton, tying the timing of speaking fees paid to her husband and donations to the foundation to actions taken by the State Dept. that benefited the donors.
While Schweizer has no proof of any quid pro quos, the attention generated by the not-yet-published book has forced the Clinton Foundation into a defensive posture, and in the early going, things aren’t working out very well.
“In 2013, for example, only 10 percent of the Clinton Foundation’s expenditures were for direct charitable grants,” Davis writes. “The amount it spent on charitable grants–$8.8 million–was dwarfed by the $17.2 million it cumulatively spent on travel, rent, and office supplies. Between 2011 and 2013, the organization spent only 9.9 percent of the $252 million it collected on direct charitable grants.”
If these circumstantial allegations stick to Clinton, it can affect not only the presidential race, but also tilt the balance in the House and Senate.
(Excerpt) Read more at thefiscaltimes.com ...
