On Monday’s The Kelly File, Fox News Senior Judicial Analyst Judge Andrew Napolitano hammered Hillary Clinton over her foundation’s alleged practice of receiving foreign donations in exchange for political benefits during her tenure as Secretary of State.
Napolitano insisted that the allegations against Mrs. Clinton are "far more serious than those for which [Senator] Robert Menendez of New Jersey was indicted and they essentially form the same – the same type of allegation, a quid pro quo."
The former judge’s remarks came during a discussion of a new book entitled "Clinton Cash" which details the funding scheme within the Clinton Foundation. Napolitano argued the "allegations are truly damning" and are "clearly enough to trigger an investigation."
During the segment, Napolitano suggested the foundation may have been engaged in bribery if its donations actually influenced State Department policy:
The allegations show time lines of contributions to the family – family foundation and decisions made by Mrs. Clinton favorable to the contributor or contributions to the family foundation and sky high, $500,000 a speech, unheard of in this business.
Speaking fees to her husband or contributions to the family foundation and two years later, sky high speaking fees Mrs. Clinton. Look, the essence of bribery is the quid pro quo. You do something for me, or in my behalf, and I exercise my official governmental powers in favor of you.
When Kelly pressed her guest to say whether or not he believed Clinton committed a felony, Napolitano maintained that "if the version of the book that we have read stands up under scrutiny, the Justice Department must commence a criminal investigation of Mrs. Clinton's behavior about the time period about which the book is written."
Later in the segment, Kelly argued that if one believes Clinton "actually changed U.S. policy to line her own pockets, that of her family, you would have to be incredibly cynical" to which Napolitano pointed out that if the allegations in "Clinton Cash" are true the Justice Department must take action or risk embarrassing itself within the legal community:
The Justice Department will have no choice but commence an investigation or endure the mocking of the legal community that the Justice Department of the United States of America is not there to enforce federal law against a popular – they perceive to be popular – political figure.
See relevant transcript below.
FNC’s The Kelly File
04/20/15
MEGYN KELLY: Joining us now with more, Fox News senior judicial analyst Judge Andrew Napolitano. How serious is this if it got it on her – if they can prove it?
JUDGE ANDREW NAPOLITANO: Well, these allegations are far more serious than those for which Robert Menendez of New Jersey was indicted and they essentially form the same – the same type of allegation, a quid pro quo. You give cash to me or someone else on my behalf and I exercise my official, governmental judgment in favor of you.
Now, I haven't seen the book. We haven't seen it, but we have read a version of it in The New York Times or a summary of it in The New York Times and allegations are truly damning. They are clearly enough to trigger an investigation. The allegations show time lines of contributions to the family – family foundation and decisions made by Mrs. Clinton favorable to the contributor or contributions to the family foundation and sky high, $500,000 a speech, unheard of in this business. Speaking fees to her husband or contributions to the family foundation and two years later, sky high speaking fees Mrs. Clinton.
Look, the essence of bribery is the quid pro quo. You do something for me, or in my behalf, and I exercise my official governmental powers in favor of you. That's what Senator Menendez was indicted for. Having to do with visas and having to do with Medicare reimbursement. This has to do with the foreign policy and arguably the security of the nation.
KELLY: You're saying that this is not only potentially unethical, but she may have actually committed felonies while in office?
NAPOLITANO: I am saying that if the version of the book that we have read stands up under scrutiny, the Justice Department must commence a criminal investigation of Mrs. Clinton's behavior about the time period about which the book is written.
KELLY: To believe she did this, she actually changed U.S. policy to line her own pockets, that of her family, you would have to be incredibly cynical, would you not? You would have to believe that Barack Obama put a public servant in there who cared much more about herself and her own wallet than she did the person people?
NAPOLITIANO: Well, Barack Obama put a public servant in there who kept all her e-mails from him and from the federal government, contrary to federal law.
KELLY: Well, but as I’ve said before on this show, is it really paranoia if they really are out to get you? I mean, I’m not excusing it. I’m just saying, that's somebody who’s worried about people prying into her life and she thinks she doesn’t deserve it. I'm not excusing it, I'm saying, that's one mind set, but to actually be compromising U.S. policy to enrich yourself –
[ON-SCREEN HEADLINE: Breaking Tonight; Book: Money Influenced Secretary Clinton]
NAPOLITANO: That is the allegation in the book. I don’t know what Peter Schweizer, the author, I don’t know what his motivation may be. I understand Fox is going to interview him at the end of the week, but is sound there, the Justice Department will have no choice but commence an investigation or endure the mocking of the legal community that the Justice Department of the United States of America is not there to enforce federal law against a popular – they perceive to be popular – political figure.
KELLY: If the time line is convincing, it’s a problem. She’s going to have to explain it. If the timeline matches up or is suspicious. Judge, good to see you.
NAPOLITANO: Thank you.
