Editorial Pages Weigh In On Russia-Clinton Uranium Deal
Hillary Clinton’s miserable Thursday has spilled into the Friday editorial pages with the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, and New York Post all taking whacks at Clinton’s pay-to-play scheme with a Russian company, which obtained U.S. uranium production capacity:
It’s an axiom in politics that money always creates important friendships, influence and special consideration. Wise politicians recognize this danger and work to keep it at bay. When she announced her candidacy, Mrs. Clinton resigned from the foundation board (Bill Clinton remains on the board). This was followed by the announcement of tighter foundation restrictions on donations from foreign countries, which had resumed after she left the State Department.
These half steps show that candidate Clinton is aware of the complications she and Bill Clinton have created for themselves. She needs to do a lot more, because this problem is not going away.
We’re not the first to make the comparison, but Bill and Hillary Clinton’s adventures in the uranium trade recall nothing as much as Tammany Hall’s concept of “honest graft.” Except maybe their never-ending use of power and status for personal and political gain requires a new special terminology. Dishonest graft?
Say this for Hillary Clinton: She learns from her life experiences.
From her time on the Nixon-hunting House impeachment committee, she seems to have learned all about how cash and politics are joined at the hip — not to mention the ins and outs of stonewalling and of lashing out at your critics when they call you out on it.
And from her days in New York politics, she’s learned one of Albany’s favorite tricks: how to grow filthy rich through a family-controlled nonprofit.