Ron Fournier’s article is worthwhile reading even though it’s a bit soft at times.

“Clinton Foundation failed to disclose 1,100 foreign donations.” The co-founder of the Clinton Foundation’s Canadian affiliate revealed to Joshua Green of Bloomberg Politics that 1,100 donors to the foundation had never been disclosed. “The reason this is a politically explosive revelation is because the Clinton Foundation promised to disclose its donors as a condition of Hillary Clinton becoming secretary of state,” writes Green, a widely respected political reporter.

“Clinton charity never provided foreign data.” A spokeswoman for the Clinton Health Access Initiative, which makes up nearly 60 percent of the Clinton charitable network, told the Boston Globe that CHAI never submitted information on foreign donations to State Department lawyers for review during her tenure as Secretary of State. The reviews were required as a condition of her joining President Obama’s cabinet, the Globe reported.

In March, Reuters reported that CHAI didn’t disclose any donors to the public, as required. The Washington Post reported that a donation from Switzerland to the group was not reviewed. While digging deeper into the review process, the Globe was told by a Clinton spokeswoman “the charity deemed it unnecessary.”

Just like that, the Clintons deemed an ethics rule unnecessary.

I’d word that last sentence differently. Here’s what I would’ve written:

Just like that, the Clintons deemed an ethics rule inconvenient.

Another option would be to say that they found the ethics rule annoying. Here’s where Fournier went soft:

Clinton should rather be totally honest and transparent, true to her word and a credible force for restoring trust in our politics.

Hillary won’t restore trust in politics. She’s consistently proven that she isn’t trustworthy. She’s a known quantity because she’s done the same things again and again. If a person does something twice, you might convincingly argue that it’s a coincidence. When a person does something repeatedly, it’s a pattern.

2 Responses to “Hillary’s congenital defect”

  • Gretchen Leisen says:

    Fournier’s comment that Hillary should become more honest or transparent so as to revive confidence in government sounds like he (Fournier) believes in the tooth fairy.

    Gary – your last comment is right on. Why should anyone trust Hillary with any political power when she has never demonstrated honesty in her actions?

  • Gary Gross says:

    Gretchen, I’m willing to cut someone some slack if they do wrong once. That tells me that it’s something they did. If the person frequently does the wrong thing, then that’s proof that it’s part of who they are.

    That’s entirely different.

Leave a Reply