Following the Texas debate, the Clinton campaign decided to go negative on Obama. They proclaimed they would be "throwing the kitchen sink" at him. Their minions circulated the best opposition research they could dig up, none of which amounted to much more than blatant misrepresentations, and silliness. As former Clinton strategist and Fox network talking head Dick Morris pointed out in critiquing HRC's campaign: if you decide to go negative you need to come up with real negatives. Not petty smears.
One of the negatives they circulated was what they termed the Rezko "scandal." Apparently Clinton thinks the term scandal applies when one of your financial contributors ends up breaking the law, in matters having nothing to do with the politician, years after the funds had been donated. And even though there was no legal obligation to do so, Obama donated to charity every penny of Rezko-related money he'd received over they years--specifically to avoid any hint of scandal.
Okay, Hillary, now let's apply this scandal standard to you....
By Lisa Myers and Jim Popkin, NBC News
Sen. Hillary Clinton has declined to return $170,000 in campaign contributions from individuals at a company accused of widespread sexual harassment, and whose CEO is a disbarred lawyer with a criminal record, federal campaign records show.
The federal government has accused the Illinois management consulting firm, International Profit Associates, or IPA, of a brazen pattern of sexual harassment including "sexual assaults," "degrading anti-female language" and "obscene suggestions."
In a 2001 lawsuit full of lurid details, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission claims that 103 women employees at IPA were victimized for years. The civil case is ongoing, and IPA vigorously denies the allegations.
"This is by far, hands down, the worst case I've ever experienced," said Diane Smason, one of the EEOC lawyers handling the lawsuit. "Every woman there experienced sex harassment, they were part of a hostile work environment of sex harassment. And this occurred from the top down."
Sen. Clinton’s spokesman, Howard Wolfson, told NBC News in a statement that the senator decided to keep the funds because the lawsuit is "ongoing" and because none of the sexual harassment allegations has been proven in court.
So, let's see Obama returns around $160,000 from Rezko who has not yet even gone to trial, simply to avoid the hint of scandal. He does so even though at the time Obama accepted the money Rezko was not yet in trouble with the law. In contrast Clinton actually accepted funds from IPA, spoke at its convention (yikes!) and rode on their private jet, years after the EEOC filed massive sexual harrassment charges in which 103 women at the company were charging gross sexual misconduct. And not only that but the founder of the company, and its managing director, who himself was accused of sexual harrassment by ten separate women, had a serious criminal past, long before he became a Clinton backer. And Clinton still holds onto the money and claims to be a crusader for women's rights.
The EEOC lawyers say the man at the top of the firm - IPA founder and Managing Director John R. Burgess - was among the worst offenders. The EEOC lawsuit claims, "The harassment emanated from the top: the owner and Managing Director, John Burgess, is accused of sexual harassment by at least 10 different women."
Burgess has a criminal record, too. The former lawyer pleaded guilty to attempted grand larceny in 1987 and was disbarred in New York, court documents show. Burgess also pleaded guilty to "patronizing a prostitute" in 1984, according to Erie County, N.Y., court records.
Still, none of that has stopped powerful politicians in both parties from being courted by Burgess and IPA. Since 2000, IPA officials and their family members have given Sen. Clinton at least $170,000 for her Senate and presidential campaigns, federal campaign records show. Senator Clinton also spoke at a company event and rode on an IPA jet in 2004.
In May 2006, the New York Times brought Burgess's criminal history, and the allegations against IPA, to Sen. Clinton's attention. The May 7, 2006, article was titled "Rubbing Shoulders with Trouble, and Presidents." In the article, a spokeswoman for Sen. Clinton was quoted as saying the Senator was not aware of Burgess’s criminal past and "will be reviewing" the contributions.
So here we are in 2008, and the Clinton campaign still has not divested itself of this money, even after pressed to do so for years.
Hillary, your behavior is scandalous! No, not because of your questionable judgment in accepting sponsorship from gross tramplers of women's rights and dignity, nor from your lack of integrity for keeping the money even after you found out where it came from, but for having the chutzpah to allege as scandal Obama's relationship to Rezko, when your own house of corporate sponsors is massively more criminal and your relationship more questionable than his. Shame on you.