IT was Bernie Sanders during a Democratic presidential primary debate last October, in responding to a moderator’s question about then rival Hillary Clinton’s emails controversy, said: “The American people are sick and tired of hearing about your damn emails. Enough of the emails. Let’s talk about the real issues facing America.” While Mrs Clinton nodded and smiled assent to Sanders’ comments, from news that continues to circulate around the emails, it seems as though persons are not quite yet sick and tired of it and find such useful for political and economic mileage.
It is no secret that the dislike for Bill and Hillary Clinton, more particularity by Republicans, has fuelled a literary enterprise, where authors have written best sellers and made millions writing stories, good and bad, about the politics, public and private lives of these two. It is not an unfair statement to say that the Clintons are among, if not the most, simultaneously vilified and admired political couple.
Mrs Clinton’s pursuit now for the United States’ highest office, like much that have surrounded her public life, is evidently not going to be without its challenges. Where Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump has sought to cast her in the light as “crooked Hillary,” the Clinton Foundation as a “pay- to-play” institution and is threatening to appoint a Special Prosecutor to investigate it should he become president, the Associated Press (AP) story of August 24 “Many donors to Clinton Foundation met with her at State” will undoubtedly add to her headache and distraction.
According to the report, “More than half the people outside the government who met with Hillary Clinton while she was secretary of state gave money — either personally or through companies or groups — to the Clinton Foundation.” It goes on to say that “at least 85 of 154 people from private interests who met or had phone conversations scheduled with Clinton while she led the State Department, donated to her family charity or pledged commitments to its international programs, according to a review of State Department calendars released so far….”
It should be said that AP made it known that such actions do not appear to violate legal agreements Mr and Mrs Clinton signed with the State Department before she assumed the secretary portfolio in 2009, though AP and experts say such raise questions about access and influence. And here is where Trump is using the opportunity to “prove” that he has been right all along about the Clintons and the use of the foundation, even though he donated more than $100,000, but was quick to say he never personally benefitted from his donation. The Clinton campaign has responded to the AP’s story by challenging its veracity, which Campaign Manager Robby Mook called “outrageous” and asked that the focus be placed on what matters to voters, even as he identified and stated that Trump has ties to foreign leaders and countries and urged the media to pursue the information.
Last week the Clintons made a commitment to put distance between them and the foundation. Should Mrs Clinton win the presidency, the Clintons have committed that the foundation will not take foreign money and former President Bill Clinton will leave the institution.
AP’s revelations and the Clintons’ commitments come against a background where the candidate faces trust and “highly unfavourable” issues with the electorate and where in the latter instance, her rival’s rating is higher (Trump 42% to Clinton’s 33%), and in the presence of polling that shows were the election to be held today, she would win. Unfavourable figures are taken from Gallop polling conducted between June 14-23 and published 1st July 2016. Though the presidential election is in the homestretch, i.e. less than three months away, a week is a lifetime in politics, and anything can happen in between; this election is being watched with much anxiety by people and governments around the world. Outside of the candidates’ history-making moments, the U.S. is considered the bastion of democracy. Its leadership plays a very influential role in global relations and efforts at country and human development. Against such a backdrop, there will be abiding interest in how the emails issue plays out and the measurable impact, if any, on polling, which is the only gauge for election watchers until the election is held and the results declared.