COLUMN: Corruption continues to define Hillary’s character

To understand the gravity of the situation I’m about to describe to you, one must have a basic knowledge of several things — all involving the Democratic Party’s nominee for president, Hillary Rodham Clinton.

She, her husband Bill and daughter Chelsea are the three directors of the Clinton Foundation and its subsidiary the Clinton Global Initiative, a nonprofit established in 2005 that “convenes global leaders to create and implement innovative solutions to the world’s most pressing challenges,” according to its website.

This lofty mission statement, loosely translated, actually means the CF and the CGI are convenient repositories through which international countries and foreign agents can channel money — ostensibly to use for humanitarian endeavors — but in reality as a way to curry favor with the U.S. via Hillary Clinton’s State Department and, as they hope, a Hillary Clinton White House.

Since its founding, the Clinton Foundation has received more than $2 billion in cash and pledges, according to a Feb. 18, 2015, Washington Post article on the Clintons. But not every dollar pressed into Bill’s palm makes its way to needy hands.

In a New York Post story published April 26, 2015, staff writer Isabel Vincent wrote: “The Clinton family’s mega-charity took in more than $140 million in grants and pledges in 2013 but spent just $9 million on direct aid. The group spent the bulk of its windfall on administration, travel, salaries and bonuses, with the fattest payouts going to family friends. On its 2013 tax forms, the most recent available, the foundation claimed it spent $30 million on payroll and employee benefits; $8.7 million in rent and office expenses; $9.2 million on conferences, conventions and meetings; $8 million on fundraising; and nearly $8.5 million on travel. In all, the group reported $84.6 million in “functional expenses” on its 2013 tax return and had more than $64 million left over — money the organization has said represents pledges rather than actual cash on hand.”

Hillary Clinton was U.S. Secretary of State from January 2009 until February 2013. Now add the state of American / Russian relations in 2009 when President Barack Obama announced after a state visit to the communist country a need for a “reset” in the two countries’ relationship with one another and the formation of the U.S.–Russian Bilateral Presidential Commission. The U.S. delegation was headed by Secretary Clinton and the Russian side was represented by Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov. The intent of the endeavor was to increase peaceful cooperation through joint projects involving international security, economic initiatives and strengthening social ties between Americans and Russians.

The incubator for much of this collaboration was centered in the Moscow suburb of Skolkova, a small town with half the population of Jacksonville. Skolkova is Russian President Vladimir Putin’s pet-project of turning this tiny enclave into the equivalent of America’s Silicon Valley.

But as money was flowing like water from well-heeled U.S. companies, venture capitalists and Russian investors, including the Kremlin, research and development taking place inside the communist “Silicon Valley’ was raising red flags with U.S. intelligence agencies. Since 2011, U.S. analysts believed Skolkova engineers were developing military components including a hypersonic cruise missile engine, delivering lethal munitions to strike anywhere in the world within 60 minutes from launch.

Imagine this capability in the hands of Putin, his proxies or rogue nations or terrorist groups?

The Federal Bureau of Investigation warned state department officials, including Secretary Clinton, of the dual role they believed was unfolding in Skolkovo. Those concerns were ignored by Secretary Clinton either because she had faith in Putin’s promise of only good intentions emanating from the high-tech collaboration or that she didn’t want to curtail the flow of money from wealthy Skolkova participants to the CF and CGI.

The Clintons’ greed channeled through their nefarious foundation has surely made them all uber-wealthy; but their avarice may have given our enemies the ability to develop lethal weapons that members of the armed forces could confront someday on the battlefield. The Clintons have a long history of self-gratification at the expense of others, from Hillary’s 1,000-percent return on a cattle-futures contract, their involvement in the Arkansas land deal called Whitewater to the Clinton Global Initiative, an entity that when the light of truth is shined upon it may bring new meaning and raise the bar in the pay-to-play arena.

A wise man once told me — Charlie Smith, are your ears ringing? — “Zebras don’t change their stripes.”

Hillary Clinton has proven through her tenure as secretary of state that she does not have the best interests of America at heart — think Benghazi and now, it appears, Skolkovo. Her motives are and have always been-self-serving, which is why she has remained tethered to her partner in crime, Bill Clinton.