The Puffington Host reports that the Clinton Foundation will restrict donations from foreign nations to just six friendly nations—Australia, Canada, Germany, the Netherlands, Norway and the United Kingdom. But why just these six? Why not Spain, Sweden, South Africa, or Japan? Why any? Look, I can understand that the Clinton Foundation needs to make its bloated payroll, and Goldman Sachs can only cough up so much. But this list just begs a lot of questions about why they should accept any foreign contributions. Just because they are “friendly” nations doesn’t mean they don’t want to influence Madam Hillary, or be in her good graces. Maybe other “friendly” nations won’t pay up the demanded rate from Bubba’s telemarketers?
But, as always with the Clintons, there’s a loophole:
While direct contributions from other governments would be halted, those nations could continue participating in the Clinton Global Initiative, a subsidiary program that encourages donors to match contributions from others to tackle international problems without direct donations to the charity.
Be nice to see the accounting for “overhead” that these “matching contributions” will cross-subsidize.
Question I’d love to see a reporter ask Hillary on the campaign trail: “Secretary Clinton—If you’re elected president, what will be the going overnight rate for the Lincoln bedroom in your administration?”