Former Clinton Aide: Hillary Broke Campaign Finance Laws, Not Trump

Hillary Clinton
Look at that guilty face! Where the heck is Jeff Sessions when you need him?

President Trump is under fire from the left for allegedly breaking campaign finance laws–for paying two women with his personal funds during the presidential campaign.

But a former aide for Bill Clinton is now claiming that it’s really Hillary Clinton who broke the law.

“Why was Michael Cohen investigated?” asked former Clinton pollster Mark Penn. “Because the ‘Steele dossier’ had him making secret trips to meet with Russians that never happened, so his business dealings got a thorough scrubbing and, in the process, he fell into the Paul Manafort bin reserved by the special counsel for squeezing until the juice comes out.”

“We are back to 1998 all over again, with presidents and candidates covering up their alleged marital misdeeds and prosecutors trying to turn legal acts into illegal ones by inventing new crimes,” Penn added.

“The plot to get President Trump out of office thickens, as Cohen obviously was his own mini crime syndicate and decided that his betrayals meant he would be better served turning on his old boss to cut the best deal with prosecutors he could rather than holding out and getting the full Manafort treatment,” he continued. “That was clear the minute he hired attorney Lanny Davis, who does not try cases and did past work for Hillary Clinton.”

Cohen claimed that President Trump directed him to pay off two women who claimed they had an affair with Trump. Trump has said that he paid both of them from his own pocket–but the media has been screaming about Trump breaking campaign finance laws anyway.

Penn continued: “Contrast what is going on here with the treatment of the millions of dollars paid [from Hillary Clinton’s campaign] to a Democratic law firm which, in turn, paid out money to political research firm Fusion GPS and British spy Christopher Steele without listing them on any campaign expenditure form, despite crystal clear laws and regulations that the ultimate beneficiaries of the funds must be listed. This rule was even tightened recently. There is no question that hiring spies to do opposition research in Russia is a campaign expenditure, yet no prosecutorial raids have been sprung on the law firm, Fusion GPS or Steele. The reason? It does not ‘get’ Trump.”

“So, Trump spends $130,000 to keep the lid on a personal story and the full weight of state prosecutors comes down on his lawyer, tossing attorney-client privilege to the wind,” Penn said. “Democrats spend potentially millions on secret opposition research and no serious criminal investigation occurs.”