Skip to content
Breaking News Alert It Could Soon Be Illegal For California Teachers To Tell Parents About Kids' Trans Confusion

If Hillary And Democrats Laundered $84 Million In 2016, They Should Face Justice


Hillary Clinton’s days of political relevance may be behind her, but her scandals are not. While Clinton’s years at the State Department were marred by scandal after scandal, they pale in comparison to her time running for higher office.

In 2016, the Democratic presidential candidate may have presided over the largest campaign finance scandal in U.S. history. A lawsuit based on federal records alleges the Clinton machine laundered $84 million in excessive six-figure contributions through the Hillary Victory Fund, to dozens of Democratic state parties, on to the Democratic National Committee (DNC), and ultimately to Clinton’s campaign.

Democrats and their media allies downplay the accusation as some partisan ploy, claiming the accusers are “fishing for publicity.” They chalk it up to a Donald Trump supporter’s anti-Clinton bias. That’s when Democrats mention it at all, otherwise staying stunningly silent in the face of growing information that boggles the mind.

Yes, I’m a Trump supporter, but dodging the question doesn’t make it go away: Did Hillary Clinton, dozens of Democratic Party officials, and hundreds of liberal mega-donors break the law? The evidence—built entirely from Democrats’ own Federal Election Commission (FEC) reporters and public statements—clearly points to “yes.”

The lawsuit is likely to result in many more public documents being aired about what really went on behind the scenes in 2016, which is already giving rise to negative news coverage. In recent weeks, news stories from around the country have implicated Democratic state parties in DelawareKansasMaineNevada, and other states for their part in papering over excessive donations from mega-donors like fashion icon Calvin Klein and “Family Guy” creator Seth MacFarlane to the Clinton campaign.

Reports say the Virginia Democratic Party, for example, was used to funnel nearly $2.4 million from the Hillary Victory Fund to the DNC during the 2016 election, retaining not a single penny from six-figure contributors who almost certainly understood how their money would flow. The Nevada Democratic Party is on the hook for roughly $1.6 millionKansas Democrats, meanwhile, “can’t account for $900,000” in excessive funds.

Clinton’s campaign finance violations came to light last December, when the Committee to Defend the President filed a complaint with the FEC, documenting “an unprecedented, massive, nationwide multi-million dollar conspiracy.” The 101-page complaint is based entirely on FEC reports filed by Democrats, memos authored by Clinton campaign manager Robbie Mook, and public statements from former DNC chairwoman Donna Brazile and others.

After the FEC refused to act on the complaint within a statutory 120-day timeframe, the committee sued the FEC to force action, claiming its failure to act is “arbitrary, capricious, contrary to law, and an abuse of discretion.”

On Friday, the FEC made its first court filing. Tellingly, the agency didn’t challenge the committee’s legal arguments, or claim to be engaged in a diligent inquiry. Instead, the FEC filed a procedural “motion to dismiss,” arguing the law should be ignored so they can prevent outside groups from filing lawsuits to shield complicit Democrats. Democratic FEC Commissioner Ellen Weintraub called for just such a suit when it involved a Republican.

Don’t expect the pro-Clinton mainstream media to give this the coverage and investigative reporting it deserves, or call for the same accountability they have when liberal groups target Republicans. After all, the overwhelming majority of the scandal’s news coverage has come from Fox News and other conservative outlets, and from in-state newspapers tracing the money trail through local Democratic operations. The New York Times remains silent, refusing to cover the story. So do CNN and MSNBC. Where is their outrage?

Last month, the liberal media predictably pilloried President Trump’s pardon of Dinesh D’Souza, who was prosecuted, convicted, and served eight months in a community confinement center and five years of probation for a similar campaign finance violation totaling $20,000 in straw man contributions. The Clinton machine stands accused of steering $84 million in straw man contributions to Hillary’s campaign—more than 4,000 times more!

Democrats and their media allies should hold their own accountable, like they would any Republican. If I’m wrong, then I urge Democrats to present evidence to the contrary, starting with their reply to December’s FEC complaint, which they have refused to make public. National media also needs to drop the double standard and cover the story.

Until the full truth comes out, Hillary Clinton and her enablers have plenty of reasons to be nervous—84 million of them.