No. of Recommendations: 6
Any of them are better than a corrupt megalomaniac, like Hillary, or Trump.
Presidential job qualifications aside, to consider Hillary more than one tenth as corrupt as Trump - even before the 2016 election - is crazy talk.
Megalomania is pretty much a prerequisite to run for political office, but measuring it is an inexact science.
Corruption on the other hand is well accounted for. From your favorite "net sifter" - mine is Google's Gemini:
Whether Hillary Clinton is "corrupt" is a subject of intense public and political debate, often depending on one's perspective on her long career in public service. There have been several high-profile investigations into her actions, but no criminal charges were ever filed.
Here is a breakdown of the key areas that have fueled this discussion:
1. The Private Email Server Inquiry
While serving as Secretary of State, Clinton used a private email server for official communications.
The Investigation: The FBI conducted an extensive investigation into whether she mishandled classified information.
The Conclusion: In 2016, then-FBI Director James Comey described her actions as "extremely careless" but stated that "no reasonable prosecutor" would bring a case, as there was no clear evidence of intentional defiance of laws.
2. The Clinton Foundation
Critics have frequently raised concerns about "pay-to-play" politics, suggesting that donors to the Clinton Foundation received favorable treatment from the State Department.
The Allegations: Questions were raised regarding whether the foundation's work created conflicts of interest.
The Findings: While some internal memos and emails showed donors seeking access, multiple reviews and investigations have not produced evidence of a formal "quid pro quo" or illegal exchange of favors for donations.
3. Benghazi
The 2012 attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, led to years of congressional oversight.
The Focus: Investigators looked into whether the State Department ignored requests for more security and if the administration's initial public account of the attack was intentionally misleading.
The Result: After several exhaustive committee reports, investigators found systemic failures in security but no evidence of intentional wrongdoing or "corruption" by Clinton herself.
Perspective and Public Perception
Critics argue that the sheer number of investigations and "near misses" suggests a pattern of operating above the law or using public office for personal gain.
Supporters point out that despite decades of intense scrutiny and multimillion-dollar investigations by political opponents, she has never been charged with a crime, suggesting many of the claims are politically motivated.
