Tens of millions of dollars have gone to the Clinton Foundation, and tens of millions more to the ex-president in the form of speaking fees from around the world. Both fundings have primarily come from foreign governments and businessmen, and quite often are temporally associated with deals involving U.S. actions that benefit the donors and required approvals from our government.
It has long been illegal for foreigners to contribute to U.S. political campaigns. Yet, that hasn’t deterred the Clintons from this parallel practice. Further, the amounts of these donations, per Schweizer, are often far larger than allowable campaign contributions. Thus, the Clintons have become quite wealthy – Bill Clinton receiving $105 million in speaking fees through 2012..(Also donations to the Clinton library, the Democratic Party, etc.) This pattern of major donations followed by major beneficial U.S. government acts (eg. dropping proposed regulations, DOJ investigations, and the Marc Rich pardon) began in 1999 while Clinton was still president.
An obvious question – Why haven’t these foreign donors (eg. in India) given money directly to local charities instead of to the Clinton Foundation? Another – Doesn’t this make Hillary’s deleting innumerable official emails while Secretary of State especially suspicious? Clinton Cash: The Unto... Best Price: $2.89 Buy New $7.65 (as of 11:55 EDT - Details)
Prior to Hillary’s being approved as Secretary of State, a detailed agreement was worked out requiring public notification of gifts from foreign entities and businessmen, as well as prior approval for donations from foreign government-owned businesses. Unfortunately, this agreement was almost immediately violated.
The bulk of Schweizer’s excellent report consists of detailing various donations and possibly associated U.S. government actions. The most glaring – selling control of a major U.S. uranium resource to Russia, while we don’t even have enough of that invaluable fuel for our own current power needs. He also points out that the Clinton’s most ‘profitable’ responses don’t occur in nations where business and politics are separated by rules (eg. Germany, G.B.), but ‘in despotic areas of the world where the rules are very different.’ There, when the government needed to help a Clinton supporter/cause was, naturally, a despot, Bill Clinton would even praise that person for his ‘enlightened rule.’ Another damning observation – ‘In his first eight years on the global lecture circuit, Bill had never been paid to speak in Nigeria. But once Hillary was appointed secretary of state, he booked two of his top three highest-paid speeches ever by traveling to Nigeria, pulling in a whopping $700,000 each.’
Reprinted from Amazon.com.