Does Clinton Inc. Have its own Dictionary?

The Clintons’ tendency to redefine words is hardly a shock to political observers. However, recently revealed information regarding unreported foreign contributions to the Clinton Foundation suggests that an English to Clinton dictionary is a critical addition to our libraries…but those definitions are secrets Hillary actually cares to safeguard…

Sec. Clinton’s ethics agreement with the Obama Administration stipulated that they would be notified if a new foreign government donated to the Foundation, or if an existing donor wished to materially increase their support. Since the Wikileaks emails have shown significant amounts of foreign contributions, Clinton Inc. has latched on to the definition of “Materially increase” as their saving grace.

“Materially increase” is a vague phrase but one that I think we might find some general agreement on. If a donor increases their overall funding by, say 25%, perhaps that would be a material increase. Or if they initiated a significant one-time gift, that wasn’t part of a long-term giving strategy. Well, the Clintons’ dictionary defines that phrase a bit differently, so you’d be wrong.

We know this because Foundation and Campaign operatives have said that neither the $1 Million unreported donation from Qatar or the nearly 300% increase in funding from the British Government meet that critical reporting threshold.

Perhaps I’m alone in this, but the idea that neither $1 Million nor a 300% donation boost rises to the definition of “material increase,” is quite baffling.

Even further, it’s now clear that at least 8 foreign countries gave unreported first-time contributions or increased their donations. While the Clintons may be able to get mileage from stretching the definition of “material increase,” it’s a bit harder to say that a first-time donor isn’t a new donor…

While Campaign and Foundation lackeys have run to microphones to claim the “material increase” clause is their stay-out-of-jail-card, all attempts at identifying what they believe that term to mean have been met with silence.

At least when President Clinton challenged the definition of “is,” he was willing to offer an alternative explanation, however dubious…Hillary, on the other hand, doesn’t even trust these secrets to her faithful server!

About the author

Raz Shafer

Raz is a Christian, Texan, Conservative, Entrepreneur, Politico. Sigma Chi, Cigar/Fly-fishing/2nd amendment fan.
For the last 20 years, Raz has been involved in politics from grassroots organizing to running federal Pac efforts. Most of his current efforts are through his Candidate and Campaign Training organization, My Campaign Coach.

View all posts