House Democrats cheer Clinton influence peddling

house democrats

This is not surprising. The House Democrat caucus is one of the most morally dissolute gatherings west of anything in the Kremlin. So when they were asked their opinion of the blatantly obvious and causal relationship between Bill Clinton giving a speech and Hillary Clinton, while Secretary of State, granting a favor an overwhelming majority answered, “I don’t understand, what’s the problem?”

House Democrats say there’s nothing wrong with Bill Clinton getting paid to give speeches while Hillary Clinton runs for president.

Critics of the speeches, including former Clinton administration official Robert Reich and others, are a distraction, say the Democrats, who argue that voters don’t care how the former president makes his money.

The story includes some howlers.

The Hill asked a dozen House Democrats whether they believe Bill Clinton should stop giving the paid speeches. The overwhelming response was that there is no problem.

“Look at what they’ve done,” said [mc_name name=’Rep. Gene Green (D-TX)’ chamber=’house’ mcid=’G000410′ ] (D-Texas). “Everything I’ve seen they spent money on was for things that were really good: for Haiti, Africa, you name it.”

Money for Clinton’s appearances goes to the Clinton Foundation, which supports a range of charitable initiatives around the world. The speeches have also enriched the couple.

In fact, as Sean Davis of The Federalist has documented, the primary beneficiary of the Clinton’s speechifying for the Clinton Foundation is the Clinton family. Barely 10% of the spending of the Foundation goes back out as grants. Most is spent on travel and accommodations.

The article identifies two other reasons, other than general amorality, that drive this widespread acceptance of corruption and influence peddling as the natural state of affairs.

1. Fear of political fallout.

“I respect Robert Reich,” Israel added. I don’t believe it’s ever a good idea for Democrats to be creating distractions, and that’s just a distraction.”

The distraction, in this case, would be the magnificently ambitious level of criminality in Hillary Clinton’s life.

2. Fort Marcy Park Syndrome.

Some Democrats say the dearth of House lawmakers willing to criticize the Clintons might stem from the fear of taking on a political dynasty with a history of political retribution.

In 2008, the Clintons kept a “hit list” of politicians who betrayed them by backing then-Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.).

“Let’s face it, the Clintons keep score,” said Brad Bannon, a Democratic strategist. “A lot of people in Washington are probably scared to death of the Clintons, and they probably have a good right to be.”

The Democrats know that no matter how much the shut their eyes and shout lalalalala! that the reek of corruption, incompetence, and evil that hangs upon Clinton like the stench of a corpse’s armpit will not go away, in fact, it is getting stronger by the day.

A growing number of people say she is not honest and trustworthy (57%, up from 49% in March), less than half feel she cares about people like them (47%, down from 53% last July) and more now feel she does not inspire confidence (50%, up from 42% last March).