The national polls mostly indicate Hillary Clinton holds a moderate to wide lead over Donald Trump. The Clinton Campaign is smug. There are media reports of campaign staff secretly celebrating, convinced that all that is left for Clinton’s victory is the election, November 8th.
What comes to mind is Richard Nixon’s re-election campaign of 1972. He ran against liberal Senator George McGovern of tiny South Dakota. There wasn’t one reputable polling organization that predicted McGovern had any chance of victory. As Americans would discover shortly after his landslide election that November, Nixon was incredibly paranoid and distrusted the press immensely.
His campaign committee even released a campaign poster that read, Overcome Over-confidence. The poster had a famous photo of Harry Truman holding up the Chicago Tribune after the 1948 election, which he won by inches, that read, Dewey defeats Truman.
Obviously that did not occur, and went down as the biggest upset in American political history. Again, in the election of 1980, Ronald Reagan was portrayed as a reckless cowboy, a Grade B actor, and a warmonger. Until the very last week of the campaign, virtually all national polls showed President Jimmy Carter with a narrow lead, or even larger.
Ronald Reagan, the man who would start WWIII, won in a walk and ended the Cold War in the process. The mainstream media despised the former California governor, but the American people, apparently never surveyed, or afraid to admit it, loved Ronald Reagan.
It is late August with a little over two months to go in this presidential election. There are three national debates ahead, in late September and early October. There a number of factors that could possibly alter the course of this election for Hillary Clinton and her over-confident staff.
Clinton Pay-to-Play In The Open
The Clinton Foundation is under increasing attack from all sides of the spectrum. Even the notoriously biased, left-wing media is under national pressure to practice something alien to them; objective journalism. It cannot be avoided due to its continuing releases of wrongdoing and corruption.
Trump describes it as a pay-to-play organization that traded cash for access to the State Department when Hillary Clinton was in charge (2009-2013). Even the FBI is conducting a criminal investigation on the alleged corruption sending Clinton’s trustworthy polling into the tank.
It all culminated in the worst and most damaging publicity the campaign has suffered yet. It forced Bill Clinton to announce the foundation would stop taking foreign and corporate donations if his wife wins the presidency. That is a clear recognition of a possible conflict of interest with big foreign entities identified with the Clintons.
There is little doubt that Clinton Foundation donors received VIP attention, which in some cases allowed direct access to the nation’s top diplomat, Hillary Clinton. It was clearly proven in the release of private emails sent by top Clinton aide Huma Abedin.
There are many factual examples including, the Crown Prince of Bahrain; a visa request pushed by Hollywood executive Casey Wasserman; a meeting scheduled with SlimFast tycoon S. Daniel Abraham; and the apparent connection of Gilbert Chagoury, a Lebanese-Nigerian developer and top foundation donor, with a senior State Department official. This is positive proof. Even the Washington Post reported this.
Clinton Campaign Denials
Naturally, the Clinton campaign denies anything improper happened. There are numerous documented incidents of high-level contacts between top Clinton Foundation donors and either Clinton or other senior department officials.
All the Clinton attack dogs can provide as their defense is that Judicial Watch, a conservative watchdog organization responsible for many of the Freedom of Information requests that have been made public, is a right-wing organization that has been going after the Clintons since the 1990s.
Clinton Statements of Intent Mean Little
Prior to being installed as secretary of State in 2009, Hillary voluntarily made public statements to the Obama administration to curtail public suspicion about any conflicts of interest between the Clinton Foundation, and her work running U.S. foreign policy.
She said in a letter to a State Department ethics official, “I will not participate personally and substantially in any particular matter involving specific parties in which The William J. Clinton Foundation, or the Clinton Global Initiative, is a party or represents a party.” She also made the same pledge to the office of President-elect Obama.
Furthermore, the foundation agreed to submit for review to the State Departments ethics official any increase in donations from foreign countries or foreign government-owned corporations. Any new donor countries would also need to be reviewed.
The pledge was like an Indian treaty with the United States government. Clinton stayed afar mostly, but PolitiFact has judged such claims as mostly false, considering the spirit with which they were pledged. Top aides did have extensive communications that intersected with Clinton Foundation business or the personal interests of donors. In other words, treaty broken almost from day one.
Clinton Foundation Facts
Fact: The Clinton Foundation failed to uphold its disclosure promises, including $2.35 million through a Canadian foundation connected to a U.S. company with business before the State Department and a $500,000 donation from Algeria.
Editor’s Note: This is Part One of Two Columns