Don Crawford

Don Crawford

President of Crawford Broadcasting and the voice of the STAND Podcast



So said candidate for President Hillary Clinton as she took off in a van dubbed by Clintonians the SCOOBY DOO, named after the lovable cartoon dog prone to high jinks. The van of course was headed for Iowa and the first formal attempt at vote getting and fundraising by the former First Lady, Senator from New York and Secretary of State. Clinton not only wants to be a champion, she desperately wants to be:



Mrs. Clinton has pledged to bring prosperity to our country’s struggling middle class. There is of course no platform provided, no details and no plan of action. And of course, whatever or whoever may the middle class is never identified. In any event, so began in the Clinton campaign which has as a goal the raising of as much as:


In campaign funds. $2.5 billion! An absolutely staggering sum. But again, as with all careful politicians with the only goal of being elected, and in this case the highest election of all, candidate for President Clinton, said the publication THE ECONOMIST is “strangely hard to pin down.” Clinton says the publication has “questions to answer” on foreign policy, the economy and virtually every other major issue. I wonder if we will get those answers, those specifics so that we can really understand who she is and what she believes.

Candidate Clinton went onto say that one of her priorities would be stopping the flood of DARK MONEY in politics, possibly through a Constitutional Amendment. What a strange way to begin a campaign talking about dark money when her very own non-profit organization THE CLINTON FOUNDATION is under scrutiny and investigation for improprieties, lawbreaking and even fraud. Foreign governments and wealthy businesspersons from abroad, including large foreign corporations contributed tens of millions of dollars to the Clinton Foundation, most while Clinton was Secretary of State and so many were doing business with or otherwise had ties with the American government. Any ultimate economic, political or legal objectives all such persons or entities may have had could have been moved forward by Secretary Clinton in her official capacity even as the contributions poured in to her foundation.

An inspection by Judicial Watch and The Examiner of donations to the Clinton Foundation, the personal financial disclosure forms and the State Department conflict-of-interest reviews shows that at least $48 million flowed to the Clinton’s personal coffers from many entities that clearly had interests in influencing the Obama Administration and perhaps currying favor with a future President as well.

Saudi Arabia for example was a key Clinton benefactor. The extremely wealthy oil-producing giant has had a relationship with the Clintons dating back to Bill Clinton’s time as Governor of Arkansas. In 1992, while running for President, then Governor Bill Clinton secured a $3.5 million Saudi donation for a Middle East studies program at the University of Arkansas. A few weeks after Clinton was inaugurated as President, the Saudis contributed yet another $20 million, a deal which was brokered by a close Clinton friend one David Edwards. Some estimate that Saudi Arabia may have given the Clinton Foundation as much as $50 million, an unbelievable sum. TALK ABOUT DARK MONEY!

The Clinton Foundation claims to devote 88% of its expenditures on “life-changing work.” But an investigation of the financial affairs of the Clinton Foundation indicates that it really spent a mere 10 percent on charitable grants that support such works.

Sean Davis, founder of the publication THE FEDERALIST says the following:

“Hillary Clinton’s non-profit spent more on office supplies and rent than it did on charitable grants.”

Davis reached that conclusion after examining the foundation’s 2013 tax filings and doing the math. Ten percent of the Clinton Foundation’s expenditures, at or about $8.5 million, went to travel costs. Employee fringe benefits amounted to $3.7 million, computer and tech costs were $2.1 million, rent was $4 million and the expenditure for foundation conferences was $9.2 million. Davis then concludes that the Clinton Foundation claim that 88% of all expenditures go directly to life-changing work is demonstrably false. And now candidate Clinton and the Clinton Foundation intend to raise as much as $2.5 billion for her campaign to become President. Talk about even darker money!

It is also reported that from the years 2001 to 2012, Bill Clinton collected $105.5 million for speeches that he gave. Many of those speeches were given abroad and to foreign countries including the UAE (United Arab Emirates), Saudi Arabia, Egypt, among others. Those speeches contained the most expensive words ever communicated by any American statesman! I sure would have loved to have heard those wealthy words of wisdom, wouldn’t you? And of course, in connection with those speeches and otherwise, Bill Clinton himself raised hundreds of millions of dollars for the Clinton Foundation. Ironically, neither Clinton sees any conflict of interest for that, says one pundit, is the Clinton way of doing business.

All such behavior was even of concern to the Obama Administration which has indeed had its own ethical challenges. President Obama himself pressed for a memorandum of understanding in which the Clinton’s would agree to submit speeches to the Department of State’s ethics office, disclose the names of major donors to the foundation, and seek Administration approval before accepting direct contributions to the Clinton Foundation from foreign governments. Surprisingly, the Clintons accepted the agreement and as one writer said “violated it almost immediately.” As with so many ethical things in the world of Washington D.C., there was no accountability, no consequences for violating the agreement, it was business as usual and the money rolled in. The Obama Administration turned a deaf ear to the quite obvious conflicts of interest in the giving.

An interesting book was published by author Peter Schweizer entitled:



The book is replete with facts unfavorable to the Clintons and to our country. Peter Schweizer offers a very tough view of the Clinton Foundation itself. Schweizer says it is not a traditional charity in that there is a problem “delineating where the Clinton political machines and money making ventures end and where their charities begin.” the Clinton Foundation purports to promote preventing obesity, alleviating AIDS suffering, providing food and medicines to sick children in Africa as foundation objectives, all good of course. But in reality, perhaps no more than 10% of all contributions are in fact invested in achieving those objectives while perhaps as much as 90% of the Clinton Foundation monies is used for other purposes. Even the Better Business Bureau in 2013 said that the Clinton Foundation failed to meet minimum standards of accountability and transparency. On the dark side of things, Schweizer indicates that “at least four Clinton Foundation trustees have either been charged or convicted of financial crimes including bribery and fraud.” So, this is the background, the behavior, the character and the morality of candidate for President Hillary Clinton who indeed is the presumed favorite of the Democrat Party for President of the United States. God bless America.

The behavior of Hillary Rodham Clinton and the Clinton Foundation has led a top Democrat running man to put all fundraising on hold. New York businessman Jon Cooper, who Team Clinton enlisted for its elite core of early fundraisers known as HILLSTARTERSsays he can no longer raise funds with a clear conscience because the former Secretary of State has too many unanswered questions swirling around her. Clinton, says Cooper has not provided enough answers about foreign donations to the Clinton Foundation while she ran the State Department. Cooper goes on to express his grave concern for Clinton’s exclusive use of private email for official business as America’s top diplomat and her commitment to liberal priorities. The use of the private email server was also of grave concern for representative Trey Gowdy, Chairman of the House Select Committee on Ben Ghazi, regarding Clinton’s use of a private email server as Secretary of State. Chairman Gowdy posed three questions to Hillary Clinton as follows:




Those were but 3 of the 136 questions Representative Gowdy demanded answers from Hillary Clinton in her official capacity as Secretary of State.

It is estimated that Clinton shredded 33,000 emails from that private email server, never again to be found. 33,000 EMAILS! Would anyone from the liberal media ever attempt to hold her accountable for such potentially fraudulent actions?

Even the Democrat Party has concerns about Hillary Rodham Clinton as the runaway favorite. She begins now to get challenges from others including Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, Senator Bernie Sanders so-called Independent Senator from Vermont, Governor O’Malley of Maryland and even the potentiality of competition from Vice President Joe Biden. Other men and women in the Democrat Party want to be heard. Interestingly, those voices think that candidate Clinton comes too much from the center, perhaps mildly center-left in philosophy and thinking and not merely left enough for the truly liberal, progressive base of the Democrat Party. Clinton is aware of the necessity to maintain the energy, support and of course the promised-voting of the leftist liberal base which led the Wall Street Journal to say that Clinton now “goes left” in order to be the champion, the voice not just of the middle class, but the liberal left as well. That requires strong economic statements and sure enough, Clinton, commenting on the economy and quoted in THE NEW YORK TIMES said that the economy required a toppling of the richest 1% of Americans. Not an Obama-like redistribution, but an actual toppling of the richest 1% of Americans. Maybe the Obama polices aren’t so bad after all.
Willing to do anything to get elected and become our President, Clinton now tells WE THE PEOPLE that Obama’s Executive Order legalizing up to 5 million illegal immigrants has not gone far enough. Said Clinton:

“I would do everything under the law to go even further.”

Clinton really is quite the politician, all about the power and willing to do or say whatever is required to get elected. Recall the words of the publication THE ECONOMIST which stated so clearly that in fact Clinton’s true beliefs of foreign policy, the economy, illegal immigration and virtually all other issues are:



She really does have questions to answer, in detail, with clarity and transparency so that all can know where this candidate stands, what she truly thinks and believes, and how she would act and conduct the affairs of this great country should she be elected President. It looks like the Democrats in 2016 will have no one who was centrist, but the party once again driven to the left by progressives, liberals and even radicals virtually ignoring those Democrat voices which wish to be heard at the center.

Interestingly, in 2016, Hillary Clinton would be just slightly older than Ronald Reagan when he was elected which may make voters concerned with her health. Megan McArdle in states that the former First Lady really isn’t a “particularly good candidate,” with a public demeanor that ranges from “well coached to annoyed.” Party leaders express concern regarding Clinton’s “bristling reaction to criticism” which could really greatly affect her public appeal. It will be interesting to see how this First Lady pursues her dream, her craving to become President of the United States and the first female to do so. With the Benghazi issue far from settled, the Clinton Foundation under scrutiny and investigation, with conflicts of interest abounding everywhere, with supporter and the party faithful disenchanted and concerned, the First Lady riding around in the Scooby Doo is not off to a very good start. Especially as she continues to change philosophy and move to the left.

The Bible verse Ecclesiastes 10:2 reads as follows:

“The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left.”

Thus sayeth the Lord and thus sayeth I. What sayeth you?

Share this post