Ron Fournier: Foundation Scandal Makes Clintons Look ‘Stupid And Sleazy’ [VIDEO]

Alex Griswold Media Reporter
Font Size:

National Journal editor and columnist Ron Fournier tore into the Clintons over the personal email and Clinton Foundation donor scandals on “The Laura Ingraham Show” Monday, saying it looked “stupid and sleazy.” (RELATED: National Journal Editor: RFRA Laws Are ‘Not Unlike Jim Crow Laws’)

FOURNIER: Think about what the Clintons are doing here: there is no doubt that there was huge conflicts-of-interest. There is no doubt that while she was Secretary of State, her charity—which helped prop up their lifestyle—was taking money from foreign companies and foreign countries, who in any sense of common sense, are hoping to curry favor with the Clintons. There is no doubt that she took our emails rogue and then deleted most of them.

So those are all known facts. I think it takes a pretty desperate and cynical campaign to set the bar of acceptable behavior at anything short of bribery. To sit up there now and say ‘Oh there’s no evidence of quid pro quo,’ well that’s not where the bar is here, folks! We might get to that. But right now, let’s talk about why she hasn’t turned over her server. Let’s talk about why they’re still taking foreign donations.

Again, we know that Secretary Clinton violated the rules of the White House and the government in both the email and in the Foundation scandals… So we have to get the bottom as to why? Is it just because she’s against transparency and is paranoid? Which is bad enough– it’s not disqualifying, but it’s something we need to know before we decide whether or not we’re going to elect her. Is it because of something more nefarious that could be disqualifying? I honestly don’t know.

I wrote in February when the first Foundation story came out, in February when we first heard, that it was stupid and sleazy. Because at the very least, we know that. It’s stupid, one, because politically why are you taking money from foreign companies and foreign donations that raise the possibility of conflict of interest, and gets you exactly where you are now? I mean, you could predict this; I did in February, and I’m ain’t the smartest man on the beat.

And it’s sleazy because you’re talking money from people who you know are trying to curry favor with you. Whether or not you’re giving them favors is a separate matter, and it’s possible that the Clintons—there was no quid pro quo. I don’t know. But they know that these companies and these corporations were currying favor with them. It was wrong of them, it was sleazy of them, to take that money. At the very least!

Follow Alex Griswold on Twitter