The fiasco over Donald Trump’s alleged “s**thole” comments about places like Haiti had some unexpected side effects.
For one, the American people witnessed just how desperate outlets like CNN are to sanctimoniously attack the president based on rumors and hearsay.
At the same time, the ruckus cast a spotlight on just how bad Haiti is, and reminded people about a scandal that implicates the Clinton’s in exploiting the island for their own personal gain.
When a devastating earthquake hit Haiti in 2010, the supposedly non-profit Clinton Foundation jumped at the chance to step in — and had no problem accepting millions of dollars of people’s money to do it.
There’s one big problem: Critics allege that much of the money never actually ended up helping the Haitian people… but it may have helped Chelsea Clinton.
After the now famous email leak from within the Democrat party, several back-and-forth messages were revealed which raise serious questions about how Clinton Foundation funds — including, no doubt, money earmarked for Haiti — was actually used.
The biggest question is whether Foundation resources helped pay for Chelsea Clinton’s lavish wedding, which also took place in 2010.
Former President Bill Clinton was so intent on dispelling that claim that he used Twitter to deny it… but came across as a bit over-eager.
“No Clinton Foundation funds—dedicated to Haiti or otherwise—were used to pay for Chelsea’s wedding,” the 42nd president declared on Twitter. “It’s not only untrue, it’s a personal insult to me, to Hillary, and to Chelsea and Marc.”
Yes, an adulterer who was impeached by Congress is “personally insulted.” Remember, this is a person who is a known, proven liar, and was censured for perjury. His lying under oath resulted in him being disbarred from ever practicing law. But just trust him on this one.
The truth has a way of coming out. Not content to let an infamous liar spin more yarns, WikiLeaks hit Bill Clinton with a dose of reality, and backed it up with proof.
“Bill Clinton claims that no Clinton Foundation ‘funds’ were used to pay for Chelsea Clinton’s wedding,” the watchdog group responded on Twitter. “However, the leaked email from then top Bill Clinton aide Doug Band doesn’t say ‘funds’ it says ‘resources.’”
Bill Clinton claims that no Clinton Foundation "funds" were used to pay for Chelsea Clinton's wedding. However, the leaked email from then top Bill Clinton aide Doug Band doesn't say "funds" it says "resources": https://t.co/hHY9OUwry3 https://t.co/mU2xJhASnL
— WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) January 14, 2018
Resources. Funds. It looks like Clinton might have been trying to pull another one of his Slick Willie maneuvers. You can just imagine him slyly testifying in his strained voice: “That depends on what your definition of the word ‘funds’ is. I did not inhale.”
WikiLeaks then linked to the smoking gun: A leaked email from 2012, showing a concerned conversation between various Clinton insiders, including John Podesta and Doug Band.
“I just received a call from a close friend of wjcs [William J. Clinton’s] who said that cvc [Chelsea V. Clinton] told one of the bush 43 kids that she is conducting an internal investigation of money within the foundation from cgi to the foundation,” a worried Doug Band wrote.
“Not smart,” he cautioned.
In a follow-up email within the same thread, the Clinton insider dropped a bombshell.
“The investigation into her getting paid for campaigning, using foundation resources for her wedding and life for a decade, taxes on money from her parents….” Band wrote about Chelsea Clinton. “I hope that you will speak to her and end this.” Emphasis added.
Plain as day, it looks very much like Clinton allies were openly alarmed that the use of Clinton Foundation “resources” would be uncovered, and were cautioning Chelsea and others to stop before they were found out.
We don’t know the full scale of this situation, or exactly how all of the Foundation funds were used. What we doknow is that the Clinton’s have a frustrating history of corruption and scandals… and Bill Clinton’s word is worth about as much as a fading “I’m With Her” bumper sticker.
If Clinton Foundation “resources” were used in any way to cover Chelsea’s “rich one percenter” wedding, it means that funds which could have gone to help Haiti were instead used on a president’s spoiled daughter.
Whether or not the money was specifically marked for Haiti is irrelevant; using resources from a non-profit group to cover personal luxuries while thousands of Haitians were dying of disease and starvation is simply wrong.
If this email means what it appears to say, then the media should be far less outraged about a rude word Trump said, and a lot more angry that one of the most powerful families in liberal politics raided Haiti like a broken piggy bank.