A 2009 letter from Sen. Cornyn warned Hillary Clinton of potential conflicts that have emerged

IJ Review:
...
On January 20, 2009, the U.S. Senate was poised to nominate Mrs. Clinton “by unanimous consent,” but Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) stood up and objected.
At the time, The New York Times reported:

Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton’s smooth ride to confirmation as secretary of state hit a small bump on Tuesday as one of her Republican colleagues blocked a vote on Mrs. Clinton’s nomination, citing ethical questions arising from donors to her husband’s charitable foundation.
Cornyn also sent a detailed letter to then-Sen. Clinton detailing his concerns over the potential conflict (full text below). In the letter, Cornyn specifically raised the specter of the Clinton Foundation’s international fundraising activities while Clinton served at the State Department:

I believe that during your tenure as Secretary of State, the Foundation should refuse all pledges and contributions from foreign sources. As Senator Lugar noted at your confirmation hearing on Tuesday, the Foundation “exists as a temptation for any foreign entity or government that believes it could curry favor through a donation” and thus arise “potential perception problems with any action taken by the Secretary of State in relation to foreign givers or their countries.”
Cornyn urged Mrs. Clinton to change the foundations policy on foreign donations:

“…the Foundation’s refusal of foreign-source donations while you serve as Secretary of State is in this nation’s interest.”
The final vote for Mrs. Clinton as Secretary of State occurred on January 21st, with only two senators opposing her nomination: Jim DeMint (R-SC), and David Vitter (R-LA).

Here is the full text of Sen. Cornyn’s letter to Mrs. Clinton in 2009....
...
The text of the letter is also printed at the above link.  It appears his concerns have been validated by recent revelations that suggest large speaking fees for Bill Clinton were connected to her approval of certain transactions.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Should Republicans go ahead and add Supreme Court Justices to head off Democrats

Washington Post: Some Democrats eye adding more justices to the Supreme Court to change its ideological bent The once-remote idea has gained the attention of liberals angered by the GOP push to remake the federal courts. Probably the easy way to defeat this court-packing scheme is for Trump to propose doing the same thing now.  It would lead to Democrat denunciations and claims that it would be wrong, thereby blowing up any attempt by them in the unfortunate event of Democrats winning a presidential election.
Read more

29 % of companies say they are unlikely to keep insurance after Obamacare

Conn Carroll: A new survey of 368 midsize to large companies found that 29% of them are considering terminating their active employee health care plans when Obamacare is full implemented in 2014. Only 71% of employers surveyed said they did not expect to drop their health coverage, while 20% said they did not know and 9% said they were planning to exit. The latest survey, conducted by Towers Watson, echoes an ealier survey by McKinsey & Co. finding that 30% of private-sector employers were planning to drop their employee health insurance coverage by 2014. When the Congressional Budget Office crunched Obamacare's spending numbers, they estimated that only 7% of employees currently covered by employer-sponsored plans would lose their plans. ... This means the cost of the health care fiasco will be hundreds of billions more than estimated by the CBO and Congressional Democrat. It is also clear that Obama's pledge that you could keep your health care plan if you wanted t
Read more