Hillary is too clever by half!

Sanders has more than once clearly spoken about his TOTAL OPPOSITION to the influence of big money in electoral politics, especially through Super PACs and donations from big business houses either directly or through other legal methods such as speaking fees, donations to institutions, especially charities, controlled by politicians. While we all know about the millions collected by her from at least one source, Goldman Sachs, she has not yet disclosed any other such payments. Unless she does so now, it will be quite embarrassing to her if they are found out by Sanders before the election. The least she could do is to come clean NOW about ALL donations to her or institutions associated with her.

Coming to the speaking fees from Goldman, MSNBC has asked her to disclose the text of her speeches, so valuable that each of them cost more than 1.5 million! But there should be some quid pro quo. Otherwise even the tax authorities may not allow such expenses. If she was queried about the payment by IRS, this is the time she should come clean about such queries and replies, instead of saying even Obama received payments from business houses. Of course he did. But the difference is he specifically received the donations for fighting the election and the amounts were spent by the Party which had control over it. In her case, the amounts were paid to her as speaking fee and she exclusively had control over it. Why did she try to camouflage the payments?

Her next justification is in the form of a challenge. She asks Sanders to prove that she had changed her stand on any issue influenced by the money received by her. She thinks her listeners are fools! How does she think very senior government officials will react to someone asking for a big favor from them and telling them they had just paid 6.0 million to the most likely next President? The money was paid for not her doing anything specific, but allow them use her name again and again throughout her tenure as President to get things done by government officials. There is no question of their mentioning specifically anything on which they required her to lobby for them; in these transactions it is never done.

Think of her ratings in the last couple of years. Her support ranged around 80% or more. She expected, as almost all democrats and most of the big business, the path to the White House to be a walk over. Money was pouring in from people currying favor. She could see even a couple of candidates who floated their names falling on the wayside. This had made her careless and therefore she failed to cover tracks. This will be the albatross around her neck when she drowns, come November! Note that her support has come down to 50% or less now! Where is it going to end? Most likely democrats not giving her the nomination to become the next President.