Last Friday, Hillary Clinton filed a mandatory financial disclosure form which showed that she and her husband collected a whopping $25 million in speaking fees between January of 2014, and April of 2015.
The revelations have raised more than a few eyebrows, and have opened the door to several issues the former First Lady will have to explain during her presidential run.
Here are 4 such issues:
Um … It’s $25 million.
It was mere weeks ago that Clinton was talking about the economic need for “toppling” the wealthiest 1% of Americans. She’s also on record as saying something needs to be done about the “growing economic inequality that is tearing our country apart.”
But how could she possibly reconcile such class warfare rhetoric while raking in millions for giving speeches?
Bloomberg News asks the question: How difficult will it be to run a campaign on a platform of tackling wealth inequality when we have all just learned that she and her husband can pretty much just burp money?
Lack of Transparency
That $25 million fails to include speech income that had been diverted to the Clinton Foundation.
Politico reports that “The long-awaited disclosure omits an unknown number of speeches the Clintons delivered while directing the payment or honoraria to the Clinton Foundation.”
This, despite the fact that the form from the Office of Government Ethics states that “honoraria over $200” and directed to a charity should be reported.
State Department Corruption
Millions of dollars were paid out in speaking fees to the Clintons by groups that had previously lobbied the State Department, while Hillary was serving as Secretary of State.
The International Business Times writes: “… Hillary Clinton was paid $2.2 million in 2014 by organizations that lobbied the State Department while she was secretary of state, according to the latest financial-disclosure form she filed with the Federal Election Commission.”
Her husband, former President Bill Clinton, did even better, earning “more than $2.5 million in speaking fees from 13 companies and trade associations that lobbied the State Department while Hillary Clinton was secretary of state.”
Some of those companies paid to play rather successfully, receiving lucrative contracts from the State Department.
Buying More Influence
The Vox headline says it all: Hillary Clinton personally took money from companies that sought to influence her.
The report indicates that Clinton, in one example, received a $225,000 speaking fee from Corning, Inc., a company that has long donated to her and in exchange, she “advanced the company’s interests.”
Such payments “involve(s) the clear, direct personal enrichment of Hillary Clinton, presidential candidate, by people who have a lot of money at stake in the outcome of government decisions.”
American voters are growing more concerned about Hillary Clinton as a typical elitist politician.
American Crossroads Communication Director, Ian Prior, writes in a recent press release: “Hillary Clinton’s biggest problem with voters is that they think she is out-of-touch and untrustworthy. Now she is confirming voters’ doubts by filing a financial disclosure that omits income and further raises the specter of influence peddling in Clintonworld.”
Comment: Do you believe Hillary Clinton’s financial disclosures will put a dent in her presidential campaign? If so, why?