Is Hillary Clinton going to be held to account for her corrupt dealings between the State Department and the Clinton Foundation? That question just became highly relevant again.
According to the Daily Caller, this investigation — unlike the politically neutered FBI probe into Clinton’s reckless use of a private email server while Secretary of State — is being headed by Preet Bharara, a U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York. Bharara, the story notes, has a well-deserved reputation as a nonpartisan who fearlessly takes on powerful political interests.
If this is true, and the report is admittedly based on the word of an unnamed source, it could spell big trouble for Hillary.
This latest report comes just days after Judicial Watch released a batch of emails that exposed a cozy relationship between the State Department and the Clinton Foundation — a relationship Clinton swore she would avoid when taking the job.
Even the mainstream press was forced to admit that the new emails “raised questions” about “whether the charitable foundation worked to reward its donors with access and influence at the State Department.” On Sunday, the Washington Post editorialized that the emails reveal a “porous ethical wall” while Clinton was at State, and that the story would have been bigger news if so much attention weren’t being devoted to the imploding Trump campaign.
Meanwhile, CNN is reporting that in 2012, Clinton’s top State Department aide, Cheryl Mills, traveled to New York in 2012 to interview candidates to run the foundation. As CNN put it, this “raises new questions about the blurred lines that have dogged the Clintons in recent years.”
The Daily Caller report also comes amid news that three FBI field offices were pushing months ago to launch a public corruption investigation into the Clinton Foundation, but were rebuffed by the Justice Department.
The FBI announced in May that it was investigating longtime Clinton crony and Virginia’s ethically challenged Gov. Terry McAuliffe for possible illegal campaign contributions. The FBI said it was also looking into McAuliffe’s time as a board member of the Foundation’s Clinton Global Initiative.
Before taking the job at State, Clinton agreed to avoid conflicts of interest between the Foundation and her role at State. It should be obvious to everyone that this promise wasn’t worth the paper it was printed on.
All of this supports the central contention of Peter Schweizer’s 2015 book, “Clinton Cash,” that detailed how the Clinton’s used Hillary’s position at State to trade massive donations to the Foundation for favors from the Obama administration. As Schweizer put it, “they have monetized public service in a massive way.”
We also learned Friday that the Clintons made $1 million in donations to their own foundation, which effectively amounts to recirculating the money back to themselves and their friends while taking a massive tax deduction.
This sort of corruption would be intolerable to liberals and the mainstream media if a Republican were engaged in it. Yet these same liberals reflexively dismiss all such corruption claims against team Clinton as lacking “definitive proof” or as insignificant or immaterial.
As a result, for too long, the Clintons have gotten away such scams. One can only hope that this time Bill and Hillary meet their match in U.S. attorney Bharara.