November 10, 2016

Now that there's no influence to peddle, the Clinton Foundation must soldier on, lest it look like it was an influence-peddling operation.

That's what I think.

I don't know what other people are saying. I found a Daily Caller article, "Experts Question If Clinton Foundation Will Survive." That's about the investigations looking into what the Foundation did during the period, now ended, when donors could gain influence with a Secretary of State and quite possibly the next President. I'm wondering how the Foundation will operate going forward. It can be what it has purported to be, a legitimate and beneficent charity that gives luster to the Clinton legacy. Whether that's what it has been all these years or not — and especially if that's not what it was — that's what it must be now.

63 comments:

Tom Grey said...

It's never to late to start being good -- for real, not just in PR.

Building more actual houses in Haiti, for instance; possibly with Habitat for Humanity or some other charity.

And I suspect there will be a big pivot towards doing this. I also hope so.

Ignorance is Bliss said...

Of course it will continue. If nothing else, it will continue to pay travel expenses for the Clintons as they go the various places they want to go, doing fundraising and whatnot. And certainly some donations will trickle in. The big tell will be how large a drop-off we see in the donations, particularly from other countries and people with international business interests.

robother said...

Like most Foundations, payment of salary and benefits and travel expenses of its staff accounts for the biggest percentage of its "charitable" activities. Originally set up to fund the construction and operation of the Clinton Library in Lil Rock, I assume that noble mission will continue on unto the eternal future, or at least until Chelsea's political future is determined.

MadisonMan said...

Why are Presidential Libraries "noble". They seem to me to be monuments to Presidential Ego.

Meade said...

"...gives luster to the Clinton legacy" made me laugh out loud.

WisRich said...

I'm estimating it'll be closed down inside of three years. Donation's for 2017 will shrink 50% minimum.

tim in vermont said...

(b) Whoever, having the custody of any such record, proceeding, map, book, document, paper, or other thing, willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, falsifies, or destroys the same, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both; and shall forfeit his office and be disqualified from holding any office under the United States.

You know what records Hillary destroyed in that burn bag, according to Huma's deposition? Records of meetings, as Secretary of State, with donors to the Clinton Foundation.


“I spent eight years at the State Department and watched as four US ambassadors and two secretaries of state shared their daily schedules with a variety of State Department employees and US officials,” said Richard Grenell, former diplomat and US spokesman at the United Nations.
Modal Trigger
Huma AbedinPhoto: AP

“I’ve never seen anyone put their schedule in the burn bag — because every one of them had a state.gov email address and therefore their daily schedules became public records, as required by law.”
- Christian Science Monitor

So I am "keeping hope alive" that the FBI has mixed the above crime into that investigation.

They are going to have to start giving some money away in some other form than as bonuses to Clinton loyalists, that's for sure.

tam said...

I wondered about that too.

I saw a funny false tweet on the interwebs yesterday.

@ClintonFoundation

Sorry, no refunds.

tim in vermont said...

I am picturing Enron level shredding going on right now.

tim in vermont said...

I think that the way to handle it would be a pardon after an indictment. Let her enjoy the millions she raised selling insider information for cash on the barrel head.

Larry J said...

Ignorance is Bliss said...
The big tell will be how large a drop-off we see in the donations, particularly from other countries and people with international business interests.


Indeed. Something tells me the Clintons won't be getting very many 6-figure speaking fee offers for the foreseeable future, either. She'll likely be offered another book deal with a big advance as a payoff for services rendered but that's about it. If the reports of the FBI investigating how the Clinton Foundation operated are true, it may be shut down quite soon. Of course, if Obama pardons her for all criminal offenses, nothing will come of those investigations.

I Have Misplaced My Pants said...

Chelsea's political future

lol

Chelsea has a nice future as a wealthy stay at home mom.

Sebastian said...

"It can be what it has purported to be, a legitimate and beneficent charity that gives luster to the Clinton legacy. Whether that's what it has been all these years or not — and especially if that's not what it was." Now that's funny. The "Whether" is particularly good.

Michael McClain said...

A spokesman for the Clinton Foundation announced that there would be no refunds.

DanTheMan said...

And a very similar question: How many $500K speeches will she be giving on Wall Street over the next 4 years?
My guess is: Zero.

Obama will be giving plenty of them, of course. Now that the Clinton's have proven you can get away with taking millions in bribes...

Hagar said...

The Clintons cop to owning $30-40 million at present, I think. That is enough to keep after being pardoned. The assets of the foundations should be turned over to the U.S. Treasury.

Scott McGlasson said...

Whatever happened to Mister She'll-run-and-she'll-win-in-a-landslide, Crack Emcee?

Mike said...

The Clintons owe millions of dollars to a lot of bad people in foreign countries. We don't even know the extent of their donor network. Hell, they just admitted to a Qatari donation of $1 million that they "forgot to report" earlier. These foreign criminals and tyrants aren't going to be amused that the Clinton promise that "the fix was in" came not to pass and the favors cannot be granted.

There will be demands for refunds. There will be threats. Maybe worse. Schadenfreudian deliciousness.

MayBee said...

It's never to late to start being good -- for real, not just in PR.

Building more actual houses in Haiti, for instance; possibly with Habitat for Humanity or some other charity.


I like this idea.

Perhaps it will work. Possibly all the political hangers-on who have been making their living from it will move on and give them space to do good.

I find it interesting there's so little discussion about what post-office Obama will do. Will he create The Obama Foundation?

Michael said...

They will not raise a nickel

PackerBronco said...

The Clintons will be fine. I understand Hillary's quite the accomplished speaker. Look, she was getting hundreds of thousands of dollars for her speeches. When Charles Dickens was touring the U.S. giving speeches, he couldn't even approach that number. Neither could Winston Churchill. So she must be AWESOME. I have no worries for her.

MayBee said...

You know what I think a great charity would be for Hillary?

A college fund for Illegal Immigrants to go to universities in their home countries. They can get reacquainted with the country of their citizenship, and they can be poised to make a difference there, which will eventually solve the illegal immigrant problem here.

tim in vermont said...

The ironic situation is that Trump won with Clinton's 2008 primary voters, who were drummed out of the party by Obama. Sanders ran to force her to the left, and was successful. I think Sanders helped us dodge a bullet.

Susan said...

She may regret her attitude toward her secret service detail if her many nefarious donors come to call for refunds.

Mike said...

MayBee, we regret to inform you that there is so little opportunity for graft in your suggestion that it has been rejected by the Clinton Crime Foundation without comment.

tcrosse said...

The Clinton Foundation has outlived its usefulness. Has the Clinton marriage also outlived its usefulness ? Stay tuned.

Drago said...

Tom Grey: "It's never to late to start being good -- for real, not just in PR.
Building more actual houses in Haiti, for instance; possibly with Habitat for Humanity or some other charity.
And I suspect there will be a big pivot towards doing this. I also hope so."

Get a grip.

Have you not been watching these people for the last 40 years?

The CGI was the money laundering/slush fund/pay for play construct for all things Clinton, from Chelsea's wedding expenses and salary to all their travel to keeping their shadow political army employed and well fed, etc.

People like that don't change.

They have just enough cash on hand to keep Billy boy in hookers and coke, Chelsea safely ensconced in the Clinton NYC bubble and Hillary flush with bourbon.

They won't be anything "left over" for anything else.

MayBee said...

This is in Politico today. Let's count the ways it is ridiculous:

Prepare for an imperial presidency.

Donald Trump has pledged to “reform the entire regulatory code,” to “cancel immediately all illegal and overreaching executive orders,” and to place a “temporary moratorium on new agency regulations that are not compelled by Congress or public safety.”


On the chopping block will be regulations to address climate change (which he’s labeled a Chinese hoax); to implement Obamacare (“a disaster”); and to rein in Wall Street (“We’re too involved in regulation of the banks”). Gone, too will be President Barack Obama’s executive actions protecting the children of undocumented immigrants and tightening restrictions on gun sales.

The GOP’s continuing majorities in the House and Senate will clear the decks for any legislation the president-elect proposes, but Trump is impatient to assert his presidential authority (“I alone can fix it”) and to dismantle much of Obama’s agenda with the stroke of a pen.


Drago said...

tcrosse: "The Clinton Foundation has outlived its usefulness. Has the Clinton marriage also outlived its usefulness ? Stay tuned."

I see no reason why this Clinton marriage "arrangement", active for at least since Chelseas birth and probably before, cannot easily be continued for the duration.

tcrosse said...

The Pundits who told us Trump couldn't win are now telling us exactly what he'll do when in office.

tola'at sfarim said...

"that gives luster to the Clinton legacy." Did you mean lucre?

traditionalguy said...

I can see Hillary running a Bake Sale. Or hosting a covered dish supper. She claims she is a Methodist.

Fritz said...

Meade said...
"...gives luster to the Clinton legacy" made me laugh out loud.


Well, you can polish a turd:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yiJ9fy1qSFI

Kirk Parker said...

Larry J.,

We need a law (or constitutional amendment) prohibiting prospective pardons. Something along the lines of "The president's power to pardon shall extend only to actual, specific crimes charged via an indictment.".

Kirk Parker said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
rightguy2 said...

I think you could see some dems calling out the Clintons and turning against them, now that She will not be president. Obama will pardon Hillary, but that doesn't have to stop any fact-finding by congress and any investigations into the foundation with possible indictments of her operatives.

Of course, if we had justice in this country, the Clintons would be put in prison and have their money taken away from them.

Bruce Hayden said...

I am reminded by Bill Clinton of what my partner said of someone, that he would lie and cheat until the time his wife had to push him around in a wheel chair. I have little doubt that Bill is either taking testosterone and/or using an ED medication to perform, and I seem to remember some high blood pressure problems in the past. Point is that he has to be losing interest in sexual conquests at his age. For me, it was maybe sixty, when I woke up one day realizing that so much of my adult life had been spent with women punching my male buttons. It isn't bad - it is what makes the world go round. But it does mean that at some point, your relationship with your mate changes. I still leer at my partner's ample bosom, when she shows cleavage, but we both also know that it isn't probably going anywhere. The relationship changes from one at least partially built on sex, to one more built on companionship and taking care of each other. Getting back to the Clintons - he is looking a bit frail, starting to look his age, and her probable health issues are fairly well known. I think that they will find that after so long kinda together, that they will be spending more and more time together. If she can keep the drinking under control. We shall see.

Ann Althouse said...

"You know what records Hillary destroyed in that burn bag, according to Huma's deposition? Records of meetings, as Secretary of State, with donors to the Clinton Foundation."

We're talking about evidence. Evidence includes evidence of what should exist and is missing or evidence that something was destroyed. You need inferences, and inferences include putting all the evidence together. Evidence that the foundation operated properly would include that it continued operating in a similar way after there was no influence to peddle. That has some probative value, so I would say you must keep operating the foundation as if nothing has changed because that will be evidence that is useful to your side of the argument.

Ann Althouse said...

"Whatever happened to Mister She'll-run-and-she'll-win-in-a-landslide, Crack Emcee?"

He may still read this blog and refrain from commenting for whatever reason. He should know that we love him and would welcome reading his comments again if he'd like to contribute again.

Bruce Hayden said...

I do find this discussion interesting. A couple weeks ago, the question was whether Chelsea could keep their foundation/slush fund going with both her parents living again in the White House (at times, in her father's case). Putting these two discussions together, and looking back, what that previous discussion was really talking about was whether they could continue to accept bribes, while in the White House, as long as the benefits accrued to their daughter, and not themselves personally. And, notably, I think, Crooked Hillary never agreed to her daughter being separated from their foundation too, despite being asked several times. Which is of course, another way of saying that, of course, they were planning to continuing to sell political influence, using their foundation, just with the fig leaf of the bribes being directed to their daughter instead.

hawkeyedjb said...

Forget about the Clinton Foundation. Without influence to peddle, what does Hillary have to offer the world? She hasn't demonstrated any talent other than influence peddling. (Well, other than "Helping to wreck countries in the Middle East" but that isn't a skill in demand either). I hope she goes away quietly, offers no advice to anyone, and is ignored.

Bruce Hayden said...

The problem for the Clintons is not whether or not they want their foundation to continue operating (in order that it looks like a legitimate charity, and not a slush fund used for personal profit and to help fund their cronies). But, rather, whether, they can continue to operate. The problem is funding. They have a horrible track record as an actual charity - bad enough that they should probably lost their tax exempt status long ago, if the IRS weren't so politicized. So, why should anyone give them money charitably? Esp since almost any other charity would probably do more societal good with the donation? The reason in the past to donate to their foundation was to buy influence and not to save the world through good works. But they really don't have that much left to sell. They aren't going to get their hands on the US Treasury.

We shall see.

MikeR said...

It's really up to Trump. He can drop it, or order the DOJ and FBI (replacing their top people with his people) to open their records to his people and see what really happened in their investigations. Then he can really that the investigations were honest and say so and drop it. Or decide that the investigations were rigged and restart them, along with obstruction of justice investigations against those who did the rigging, or he can decide to drop it after all. All of this can be done whether or not President Obama has pardoned the Clintons.
I don't personally care what happens to Hillary Clinton, but a lot of us would like to know that no one is above the law. Trump would have to be very transparent, making what is learned very public, so that everyone can see exactly who is guilty and why.

Paul Zrimsek said...

If I had a dime for every time someone has predicted the end of the Clintons' marriage, I could have donated them all to the Clinton Foundation and bought an ambassadorship.

PackerBronco said...

Despite all of the nasty stuff I've written about the Clintons and Hillary, I wish them a happy and peaceful retirement. Once she fully realizes that she will never be president and will never even run for president, perhaps she can listen to the better angels of her nature and pursue good works untainted by personal ambition.

Rick said...

I would say you must keep operating the foundation as if nothing has changed because that will be evidence that is useful to your side of the argument.

While this is the only way they could demonstrate the Foundation's legitimacy it's unlikely to work out for that way. This method only works if they can maintain funding reasonably close to its current level - and the source categories stay roughly the same. A loss of funding creates evidence against their position that doesn't have to exist.

I'm not sure which way they'll play this. If all they cared about was this single question they'd announce their retirement and close up shop. They understand better than anyone the a simple denial no matter how implausible works when the media supports you. And we know Clinton goes to extreme lengths to eliminate evidence that could be damaging (private server, stolen Rose Law Firm billing records, etc). But they don't have a political future so they may not care the outcome provides detrimental evidence. And there's a cost to closing the Foundation. Without the hook of the Foundation her power goes from low to zero. She may be willing to take the hit to keep some funds rolling in and to maintain a link to public life. She doesn't seem to have outside interests and pursuit of power has been her entire adult life.

YoungHegelian said...

Maybe the Clinton Foundation can specialize in the social problem of wayward girls. To paraphrase Peter Schickele, they can open the Clinton Foundation Home for Young Hussies & Trollops.

I'm sure Bill would get into the spirit of the endeavor.

harkin said...

I had a liberal friend texting me Tuesday night that the foreign and futures markets were in free fall once the world grasped that Trump would be president. He said "congratulations Trump supporters on destroying our economy".

I just texted back:

"I'll make a bet with you, I say that investment in the American economy will rebound faster than contributions to the Clinton Foundation"

No more texts were forthcoming.

Unknown said...

With Clinton losing, what's Obama have to sell...? No NBA team for you.

Jonathan Silber said...

A couple that claims a deduction on their tax bill for the value of hubby's old underwear is unlikely to shower their millions on chronic-poor Haitians.

Dude1394 said...

Well they sure as heck will not be able to sell influence from Chelsea. So I think the cash cow has sprung a leak.

mccullough said...

The refunds demanded by their donors will put them out of business

The Sanity Inspector said...

I'd hate to be the Gulf Arab states princeling in charge of their U.S. portfolio right now...

tim in vermont said...

Prepare for an imperial presidency

Well, that's one way to look at it, another headline could say, more accurately, "Undoing an imperial presidency." Had he passed actual laws you know, by compromising with the Congress, they would be far harder to undo.

Maybe Obama is going to not hand over his phone and pen?

Jack Sherman said...

No $1M from Qatar this year?

h said...

Pass the torch to a new generation. Marc Medvinsky for COngress.

Leigh said...

@Drago and @BruceHayden pretty much summed up what I was going to say. The "foundation" is over. There is zero incentive for donors to give to the Lolita jet-set when reputable charities exist that actually spend their money wisely.

The Clintons just became entirely and permanently irrelevant, overnight. They've had adoring entourages since 1992 and now it's all gone, in the blink of an eye. Their foreign & corporate donors and faux friends are heading for the doors. It's hard to imagine how that must feel.

JAORE said...

The Foundation, allegedly also employed a great number of those the Clintons found to be loyalists. Many, I suspect, were waiting for those plum assignments available when Hillary took office.

Like an NBA player at retirement, I suspect the Clinton posse will, by necessity, shrink dramatically.

Perhaps we will even see a journalist or two find an interest in delving into the Foundation.

At the very least there should be several folk that have knowledge of wrong doing that are too far down the food chain to hope for a pardon by Obama. Sleepless nights ahead. Who will crack first?

Unknown said...

I think the big 'tell' in this story was the Clinton's pledge to stop accepting donations from foreign governments once she assumes the presidency. Isn't that, in effect, an admission that accepting such donations while Hillary was Secretary of State was improper, to say the least?

Nigel Tufnel said...

"And a very similar question: How many $500K speeches will she be giving on Wall Street over the next 4 years?
My guess is: Zero.

Obama will be giving plenty of them, of course. Now that the Clinton's have proven you can get away with taking millions in bribes..."

Lots of speculation about Michelle O's political future. The Clinton Foundation is the model for how leveraging political capital is done. Just have to keep alive the chance that Barry or Michelle will regain power in the future.

Same goes for the $250,000 speeches. I assume Wall Street is no longer interested in what Hillary has to say. Which will show they never were. She no longer has anything they might need. If they become interested in Michelle you'll know why.

Just_Mike_S said...

This is not wishcasting, nor do I wish anyone ill, but I do not believe Hillary will be around 1 year from now. "Natural causes" real or conceived.

Larvell said...

At least now potential donors don't have to worry that their contributions will wrongly be seen as a quid pro quo. I imagine that kind of concern was a drag on fundraising in the past.

browninhawaii said...

Money laundering. Plenty of their old donors will still have need for that.