Hillary Clinton’s determination to keep control of the scandal-plagued Clinton Foundation shows that she’s willing to sell favors if she’s elected to the Oval Office, says a spokesman for Donald Trump.
“Given the repeated examples of Clinton Foundation donors and officials receiving access and favors from Hillary Clinton’s State Department, what she is proposing is to essentially plant a giant ‘for sale’ sign on the White House lawn,” said the statement from campaign spokesman Jason Miller.
Miller’s comments came after Clinton insisted on Monday that Bill Clinton should help run the foundation if she is elected president. “I don’t think there are conflicts of interest,” the Democratic presidential nominee told ABC News. “I know that that’s what has been alleged and never proven,” she added.
Trump’s campaign quickly slammed Clinton’s plan to keep family control over the foundation, which would allow foreign governments and private lobbies to put money into her back pocket by donating to the New York-based foundation.
“The fact Hillary Clinton believes it is appropriate for her husband to remain on the board of the Clinton Foundation if she is elected is proof that she operates in a permanent ethical blind spot and lacks the judgment to be president,” said Miller.
This would present an unacceptable and unprecedented conflict of interest which would compromise her presidency beyond repair. That’s why the country’s leading newspapers, ethicists, and even top Democrats are calling on the Clintons to separate from the Clinton Foundation or to even shut it down.
Clinton’s continued desire to keep family control over the foundation, however, is facing increased rhetorical opposition from liberal and progressive media outlets, which have grown alarmed over the political hazards created by evidence of large-scale corruption and favor-peddling at the foundation.
On Aug. 30, The New York Times editorial board said the family should “End Their Operational Involvement In The Foundation And Its Affiliates For The Duration Of Her Presidency.”
A wiser course would be to ban contributions from foreign and corporate entities now. If Mrs. Clinton wins, Bill and Chelsea Clinton should both end their operational involvement in the foundation and its affiliates for the duration of her presidency, relinquishing any control over spending, hiring and board appointments.
The Boston Globe declared Aug. 16 that the foundation should be shuttered.
Although the charity founded by former President Bill Clinton has done admirable work over the last 15 years, the Clinton Foundation is also clearly a liability for Hillary Clinton as she seeks the presidency. The once-and-maybe-future first family will have plenty to keep them busy next year if Hillary Clinton defeats Donald Trump in November. The foundation should remove a political — and actual — distraction and stop accepting funding. If Clinton is elected, the foundation should be shut down.
On Aug. 23, The Washington Post‘s editorial board called for the family to quit the foundation.
Should Ms. Clinton win, all of that work and all of the foundation’s assets should be spun off to an organization with no ties to the first family.
Even establishment Republicans are speaking up. “She was playing both sides …It’s absolutely deplorable,” Sen. John Cornyn told The Hill on Friday. “As she was performing her job of secretary of State, the Clinton Foundation was shaking down donors who were buying access.”
But Clinton is defending the foundation, and she told ABC:
I feel very good about the work of the foundation. I feel very good about my service as secretary of state. No decision I ever made was influenced by anybody. What I made a decision based on was what was good for the United States, what was good for our values, our interests, and our security. And the State Department has confirmed there’s no evidence of any such influence at all.
All of these questions about the Clinton Foundation, I am more than happy to answer. But I do hope that people will take a look at what the foundation has done, what charitable enterprises it’s involved in. … No decision I made was, you know, influenced by anything other than doing what was best for the United States.
To learn more about the foundation’s scandals, click here.