Trump or Clinton? Who Can Claim The Moral High Ground?
The Lesser of Two Evils
I realized early on that most of the candidates in the race had at least a little baggage. Some more than others. When the primaries were over, we were left with two candidates who, frankly, had the most baggage of anyone in the field. I don’t understand how that happened, but like it or not, we are now faced with that result. So I’ve been doing my due diligence. Here is my analysis of a few of the better known scandals for both candidates.
Let’s begin with Trump University. It was an online “educational” institution, offering to teach students ways to “get rich quick” from Donald’s real estate development tricks. It turns out that Trump had little to do with the instructors, or the course curriculum. It’s a horrible case of “using” Trump’s name to get people to buy-in. That said, if you sign up for something, pay big money without doing your own research, all for the purpose of making a fast buck, I am not that torn up about your losses. You get what you pay for, and these “students” used their own free will to participate.
On the evil scale – of 10 being the devil incarnate, and 1 being a bit naughty – I give this one a rating of three. Come on, folks. If something is sold as a “get rich” scheme, and you get burned, you should take some responsibility.
The Clinton Foundation
Meanwhile in the Clinton camp, with have multiple “pay to play” allegations, stemming from Hillary’s use of her influence as Secretary of State. There are numerous examples, so I will select just one to illustrate the process. Frank Giustra (of UrAsia, which later merged with Uranium One) acquired uranium interests in Kazakhstan while on a trip with former President Bill Clinton. The next year, Frank gave over $31 million to the Clinton Foundation. Because uranium is considered to be a strategic asset, its acquisition has to be approved by a government commission. Evidently, as Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton sat on that commission.
Subsequently, even more millions of dollars in donations were made to the Clinton Foundation stemming from this deal – donations which were not disclosed at the time, despite an agreement to that effect with the White House. Bill Clinton also received $500,000 for one speech in particular, boosting Uranium One stock. There are more twists and turns to this story, but those are the high-level facts. I leave it to you to draw your own conclusions. And again, this is only one of many such situations involving Hillary’s influence pedaling as Secretary of State.
On the evil scale – of 10 being the devil incarnate, and 1 being a bit naughty – I give this one a rating of eight. Influence at the highest levels of government was sold, to be completely blunt. The American people were potentially put at risk, since uranium is a controlled asset for very good reason. Also, there are many more of these types of deals.
Trump's Four Bankruptcies
Over the course of his career, Trump’s companies (not Trump personally) have entered into bankruptcy four times between 1991 and 2009. They all had something to do with hotels and casino resorts. To him, it has never been anything “personal,” just business. He explains it by saying that he “used the laws of this country to pare debt.”
Each of the bankruptcies were played out in the newspapers and in court. No “secret” deals have emerged, and although they did hurt many people financially, nothing he did was actually illegal.
On the evil scale – of 10 being the devil incarnate, and 1 being a bit naughty – I give this one a rating of five. People lost money, but nothing illegal occurred. The worst part is that it shows Trump to be less of the wheeler-dealer than he makes out to be.
The Private Email Server
The Clinton private email server has been covered to death in the media. In case you live under a rock, she essentially used not just a personal email account (such as AOL, Hotmail, etc.), but she actually had a private server installed in her house located in New York. This gave her ultimate control over which emails would become public record, and which would be destroyed. She said in 2010 that she would be open to a departmental email but added, "I don’t want any risk of the personal being accessible." She never requested permission to set up a private server, and it’s a documented fact that such a request would have been denied if she had.
The FBI investigated for months, and in the end FBI Director James Comey stated “there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.” He also found evidence of potential violations, but concluded that “no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case.” This is not the same as saying nothing criminal occurred.
More recently, when Congress received a transcript of Hillary’s FBI testimony, it had large sections blacked out because they were so sensitive that not even the chairman of the House Oversight Committee charged with investigations can see it. There were emails which the intelligence community found too damaging to national security to make public. Former military intelligence officer Tony Shaffer said, “You cannot say one day this is unclassified ‘nothing to see here’ and the next day, only certain people can see this and you must not be able to take it outside of a secure facility.”
On the evil scale – of 10 being the devil incarnate, and 1 being a bit naughty – I give this one a rating of seven. There was clear wrong-doing, but the Justice Department has decided to drop it. Please note that if Congress pursues a perjury charge for her statements before Congress on this matter, I many need to revisit this rating.
Hillary has never personally been accused of any sexual misconduct. Her husband, on the other hand, has had numerous sexual scandals. In fairness, Bill’s conduct is not at issue here, but Hillary’s involvement in the cover-ups of his behavior is another thing.
For purposes of illustration, let’s take Paula Jones as our case in point. Bill Clinton allegedly groped and exposed himself to her in a hotel room. Wanting nothing to do with him, she rejected his advances and left as quickly as possible. Ms. Jones has since spoken out concerning Hillary’s perception as a woman who stands by her man.
In a recent interview Jones stated, “Well, she stood by her man, all right. And she allowed her husband to abuse women, to harass women, possibly other things that he did wrong to women. And she allowed it to happen. As a matter of fact, she would go out and she would try to discredit these women, including me. And called us the ‘bimbo eruption.’ You know, these ‘bimbos.’ Okay. For what her husband did to us. But she didn’t believe us. None of us women.”
Donald has also been in the news concerning alleged sexual misconduct. His reputation as a womanizer is well known, but not nearly as damaging as three accusations of rape. It should be noted that anyone can file a civil complaint, but that in and of itself is not proof of the allegations. However, three separate cases is definitely a pattern.
So, bottom-line, we have a female enabler and a male womanizer. I am going to call this category a “tie” in terms of evilness. Disgusting, horrible, and vile – but neither camp can claim the moral high ground.
The Final Analysis
On the one hand, we have a polished liar, with the ability to wrap the media around her little finger. On the other hand we have an egotistical blow-hard, who can’t seem to please the media regardless of what he says or does. That having been said, I need to give Trump more of a benefit of the doubt than I would to Clinton, simply because of this media bias.
So who is the least evil, you ask? I leave you to draw your own conclusions.
So, who has the moral high ground?See results without voting
More by this Author
I feel it is necessary, at this point in the electoral process, to size up the candidates on something other than hairstyles and clothing choices.