The previous post suggested that the New York Times – the usually Hillary-friendly New York Times – may finally be turning on Hillary Clinton.
Well, they ain\’t the only ones.
Excerpted from Rosalind S. Helderman\’s article in today\’s Washington Post:
Bill Clinton was paid at least $26 million in speaking fees by companies and organizations that are also major donors to the foundation he created after leaving the White House, according to a Washington Post analysis of public records and foundation data.
The amount, about one-quarter of Clinton\’s overall speaking income between 2001 and 2013, demonstrates how closely intertwined Bill and Hillary Clinton\’s charitable work has become with their growing personal wealth.
The Clintons\’ relationships with major funders present an unusual political challenge for Hillary Rodham Clinton. Now that she has formally entered the presidential race, the family may face political pressure and some legal requirements to provide further details of their personal finances and those of the foundation, giving voters a clearer view of the global network of patrons that have supported the Clintons and their work over the past 15 years.
I\’m happy that The Clinton Foundation does good work in places around the world (which it does). But I am not at all suprised that Hillary and Bill Clinton use that foundation to hugely enrich themselves, including the dispensing of political favors for contributions.
That is who they are. That is what they are. That is what they do.
Is this what you want back in the White House? Voters should be thinking about that.
Apparently the New York Times and the Washington Post are.
