MUST READ: Clinton's 'artful smear' and artful dodge

GREAT READ AT THE LINK.

As Thomas Jefferson recognized when he penned the Declaration of Independence, the legitimacy of any government is contingent upon the "consent of the governed." Consent is meaningless unless it is "informed." An opposing candidate not only has the right but an obligation to educate the public as to matters that have a direct bearing on their ultimate decision as to who would best serve their interests.

The public has a right to know that four of the top five firms that had furnished campaign contributions to Clinton over the course of her political career are the same Wall Street banks and investment firms whose exponential growth was facilitated by the repeal of Glass-Steagall. The public is also entitled to know that, after she resigned as secretary of state, Bill and Hillary Clinton received more than $25 million in speaking fees in just 14 months.

When placed in this context, Clinton's claim that her proposals are tougher on Wall Street than those advanced by Sanders and Warren make no sense. Clinton would have the American electorate believe that Wall Street has donated millions of dollars to her campaign because they want a president who will crack down harder on their fraudulent schemes?

http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/presidential-campaign/270053-hillary-clintons-artful-smear-an-artful-dodge