Reports say that Hillary Clinton sent money from her campaign account to a company she owns totaling $150,000.
The money is ostensibly for rent, but since when does a campaign need office space a year and a half after it was humiliated in an election? Federal law makes it a crime to use campaign funds for personal use.
There is also a double-edged sword in the report. It does not say what the prevailing rate for rentals in the area and overpaying or underpaying are both illegal. Just ask Charlie Rangel. If she is overpaying, that would indicate that Hillary was trying to funnel cash to her personal company, while underpaying would constitute an in-kind donation. But obviously, if there is a faulty payment it would be to the plus side. Any woman who takes a five dollar write off on her taxes for every used pair of underwear given to charity is not about to cheat herself.
So, what do you think? Is Hillary being honest or not?
“Obviously, it has a certain fishiness to it,” former FEC chairman and founder of the Institute for Free Speech Brad Smith told The Daily Caller News Foundation about the rent payments.
If ZFS is undercharging the Clinton campaign for rent, it could “constitute something of value to the committee and would thus be an in-kind contribution,” according to a 1995 FEC ruling. But if ZFS is overcharging the campaign, it could mean campaign funds are going to the company Clinton solely owns.
Using campaign funds for personal use is a violation of federal campaign law. According to Campaigns and Elections, “knowing and willful” violations of the personal use rule can result in prosecution and jail time.
Clinton registered ZFS as a single-member LLC shortly after she left the Department of State in early 2013 for the purpose of managing her speech and book income, according to financial disclosures she filed with the FEC.