HH: I begin with Columnist To the World, Mark Steyn. Mark, welcome, it’s good to talk to you.
MS: Hey, good to be with you, Hugh.
HH: I’m looking at an extraordinary article – “Cash Flowed To Clinton Foundation As Russians Press For Control Of Uranium Company.” It’s by Jo Becker and Mike McIntire from today’s New York Times. It’s almost unfathomable that Hillary Clinton would consider running for president after this article comes out, but what say you, Mark Steyn?
MS: Yes, I agree. And I like Elizabeth Warren, and I want her to run. And when I say like, don’t get me wrong. I think she would be a disastrous president for this country, and she would want to turn it into a socialist basket case. But she believes in something, and she wants to do something. And Hillary Clinton is an entirely hollow creation. She is basically just an empty vessel in which the dodgiest characters on the planet pour money in return for favors. And I regret to say her daughter is becoming much the same kind of thing, too. Her daughter’s joined the family on stage with this Kazak oligarch and all the rest of it. In fairness to Bill Clinton, he likes chasing nymphets. He’s the only Clinton with a human characteristic. Mrs. Clinton doesn’t believe in anything. She is someone who has become rich. If you remember the way the Democrats who hammered Mitt Romney for the way he became rich, Mitt Romney built companies and turned around companies. Hillary Clinton has got super rich just from fellows like this Kazak guy and the Canadian guy and the Ukrainian guy and various Saudis giving them money for favors. And if the American people, for me, the big issue is the corruption of the republic. To turn this, to elect the family that most embodies that corruption is, I think, a road from which it would be very difficult to turn back if they were to prevail.
HH: Now I don’t want to overstate the complexity, but in a nutshell, Russia has cornered the world uranium market.
HH: They have done so through acquiring huge uranium resources in Canada and the United State subject to review by the State Department was given, and Bill Clinton pocketed a half million along the way, and the foundation picked up two and a half million bucks from interested parties. But Mr. Brian Fallon, Mark Steyn, I quote from the New York Times, a spokesman for Mrs. Clinton’s presidential campaign, said, “No one has ever produced a shred of evidence supporting the theory that Hillary Clinton took action as Secretary of State to support the interest of the Clinton Foundation. Fallon emphasized that multiple United States agencies as well as the Canadian government had signed off on the deal, and that in general, such matters were handled at a level below the Secretary. To suggest the State Department under then-Secretary Clinton exerted undue influence in the U.S. Government’s review of the sale of Uranium One is utterly baseless.” How do you respond, Mark Steyn?
MS: Yeah, I don’t think that is how it works. You know, in other words, this, to me, is about degrees of separation. For example, Bill Clinton denied that he had ever met with these key bigshot Kazaks at their home in Chappaqua, New York State. He denied that. He did the Clinton thing – deny, deny, deny. Then the New York Times guy, Jo Becker, shows Mr. Clinton pictures from the meeting. The Kazaks were naturally honored to be in the presence of a former president, and they took souvenir snaps, same thing over in Kazakhstan, where Bill and Hillary and Chelsea are at the guy’s birthday party. And this is, these are not people who should have that degree of contact with the next president, with former presidents, serving Secretaries of State, or the next president.
HH: I’m going to ask after the break, Mark Steyn, Lindsey Graham, whether or not Senate hearings are in order, because I want to know if Iran has given money to the Clinton Foundation. Honestly, at this point…
MS: Well wait, but just a minute, Hugh, there is no Clinton Foundation. We all talk about this as if the only purpose of this foundation is to enable this family to lead the lifestyle of a head of state after it has ceased to be head of state. They spent $70 million dollars on travel at the Clinton Foundation. By comparison, the entire Royal Family, to fly between their various realms, the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, that’s a lot of air miles, the entire Royal Family in one year spent $7 million dollars. So in other words, the Clintons have ten times the airplane costs of the Royal Family who are heads of state of dozens of bits of real estate around the world. The Clinton Foundation is a hollow shell foundation playing the usual shell game with U.S. taxation. There’s no need for a Clinton Foundation except for them to rake in money from Kazaks and Ukrainians and Iranians and Saudis and everybody else.
HH: Well, I have just tweeted out, Mark, this is very timely, unfortunately, for the country, but very timely for me. My new book on Hillary is titled The Queen: The Epic Ambition Of Hillary And The Coming Of A Second Clinton Era. Its prerelease is out now and people can preorder it. But I actually didn’t expect people to be making sua sponte royalty analogies until it came out. But you just made on sua sponte, and they do act like royalty.
MS: Well, I don’t, that’s the difference. My old colleague from the Independent in London, Alexander Chancellor, had a piece out today saying he’d rather have, over in London, he’d rather have the Windsors than Bushes and Clintons. And I think that’s right just on a, the idea of a hereditary political class is not in the least bit appealing. But the idea of an hereditary corrupt political class, which is what Hillary Clinton represents, as I said, she’s hollow. There’s nothing she wants to do. Elizabeth Warren has every single wrong idea stuffed into her head, and she sincerely believes them. Elizabeth Warren has a program. Hillary Clinton has a coronation proclamation, and that is the difference.
HH: Well, let me ask you. There are two questions. Which is more transparent – the Windsor or the Clinton family? And which is less tacky – the Windsors or the Clintons?
MS: Well, one can make arguments about the last point, but the House of Windsor is certainly, the House of Windsor is certainly more transparent. You can go to, I think it’s Royalty.gov.uk, and the Lord Chamberlain who runs the Queen’s household posts every itemized bit of travel. So if you were to ask the Queen, if you happened to be meeting the Queen and you happened to say why did her Royal Highness, the Duchess of Gloucester, spend $700 dollars getting from Calgary to Bermuda in 2009, she’ll give you a straight answer, whereas if you ask a similar question to Hillary Rodham Clinton, she’ll say oh, well, these are just more distractions from the right wing Koch-funded media, and I’m just here to talk to everyday Americans as long as they’ve undergone a background check and have been prescreened so that it’s safe for me to pretend to interact with them.
HH: Mark Steyn, I’m actually kind of…
MS: And that isn’t a queen. There’s a real Queen and an ersatz queen.
HH: I’m stunned. You are actually saying the House of Windsor is more transparent than the house of Clinton?
MS: Yes, because the one advantage of a real monarchy, Hugh, is that it comes in built with a certain amount of chippiness. So for example…
MS: …when the Duke of Cambridge and his lovely bride were in Canada a couple of years ago, and the Canadian press was going why do we have to pay for these pampered, disgusting royal deadbeats, what’s it costing us to have to grovel in form in front of them, and they revealed, a master corporal with the Royal Canadian Air Force revealed that she’d splashed out, she’d gone to the mall, and bought a $128 dollar comforter set for the Duchess of Cambridge’s bed. And she said it was such a bargain at, you know, whatever branch of Wal-Mart she got it at, it was such a bargain that she bought one for herself. So you can know that the Duchess of Cambridge is sleeping on a $128 dollar comforter set from Wal-Mart, but you can’t, but the Clinton Foundation, which is just a kind of big octopus sucking in through its various arms and legs money from all over the planet, if you ask Hillary about that, then she just sails by as if she’s Cleopatra.
HH: All right, one minute left, Mark Steyn. Former Governor Romney is joining me on today’s program. I’m just curious, how do you think he reacts to these stories given the Harry Reid treatment he got by that archenemy of the truth? And now we have this thing that goes unremarked upon. What do you think Romney thinks?
MS: Well, you know, I have my differences with Governor Romney and his various bits of his presidential campaign I was unsatisfied with. But I will say this, because he’s a New Hampshire neighbor of mine a couple of hours to the southeast of me. And I think the difference is that inside, he’s a real guy who’s content to live like a regular guy. So when you see him driving around in his pickup truck in the Lakes region, he’s driving like a real guy. Hillary Clinton is not real. She’s basically an ATM for putting money in. That’s all she is.
HH: Mark Steyn, read everything he writes at www.steynonline.com, America.
End of interview.