The recent revelations from The Western Journal shed light on a troubling matter involving the FBI’s handling of Hillary Clinton’s activities and the financial connections tied to the Clinton Foundation. The documents released to the Senate Judiciary Committee point toward a pattern of behavior that raises serious questions about foreign influence and potential bribery.
FBI New York Assistant Director Diego Rodriguez urged agents to ask Clinton pertinent questions about her foundation. These inquiries, now made public, reveal substantial concerns surrounding foreign donations, raising alarm bells about a “pay-to-play” dynamic tied to her time as Secretary of State. One piece of evidence includes a recorded discussion between Clinton and Indian hotel mogul Sant Singh Chatwal regarding donations and her lingering campaign debts from 2008.
It is striking that when Clinton finally answered questions at the FBI in July 2016—two months after Rodriguez’s recommendations—agents failed to address the allegations concerning foreign donations and their potential impact on U.S. policy. This glaring omission stands out, especially considering the scrutiny surrounding the flow of funds to the Clinton Foundation while the former Secretary of State was reshaping American foreign policy.
Back in 2016, campaign financing issues during her presidential bid were also front and center. Reports indicated that a hefty sum of Saudi funding was funneled into her campaign. As Clinton championed a tough stance against funding for terrorism, she simultaneously accepted significant contributions from sources like Saudi Arabia, which has been implicated in terrorism support. During a speech addressing national security issues following the Orlando shooting, Clinton called out the Saudis for their role in promoting extremism yet remained connected to their financial support of her campaign.
The contradictions don’t end there. Leaked emails from WikiLeaks exhibited a troubling approach to campaign financing, where Clinton’s aides deliberated over accepting funds from foreign entities and urged one another to push for increased donations. A notable comment from a campaign manager stated, “Take the money!” reflecting a disregard for the legal and ethical implications of foreign contributions.
Moreover, the Clintons benefited from lucrative commitments tied to their political positions, such as a $12 million contribution from the king of Morocco, facilitated personally by Clinton. This kind of financial entanglement suggests a broader pattern of behavior within the Clinton orbit that may warrant deeper investigation.
Ultimately, the FBI’s apparent inaction regarding the allegations surrounding the Clinton Foundation raises questions about the integrity of its previous inquiries. Evidence of foreign financial relationships and ethical lapses surrounding her campaign portrays a complex web of actions that may have fundamentally influenced U.S. foreign policy while compromising American democratic principles. The extent of the FBI’s cover-up may be more significant than previously acknowledged, leaving many to ponder the implications for accountability and transparency in political leadership.
"*" indicates required fields
