Here’s Why Chelsea Clinton May Be a Huge Problem If Hillary Becomes President

In late August, with Election Day still over two months away, former President Bill Clinton wrote in a blog post that “[w]hile it would be presumptive to assume a victory in November, now that Hillary is her party’s nominee, it would be irresponsible not to plan for it.” He was announcing that changes would take place at the Clinton Foundation should his wife Hillary win the presidency.

Some of the planned changes to the foundation included:

A name change from the official Bill, Hillary & Chelsea Clinton Foundation title to the Clinton Foundation;

A policy change to accepting “contributions only from U.S. citizens, permanent residents, and U.S.-based independent foundations”;

Bill stepping down from the foundation’s board and his ceasing of fundraising activities.

So far, these changes sound much better than the sheer veil they draped over the Clinton Foundation when Hillary became secretary of state. During that time, the Clinton Foundation continued to receive money from foreign governments, and Hillary’s chief aide, Huma Abedin, simultaneously worked for both the State Department and Clinton Foundation — a glaring conflict of interest.

Even The Washington Post admits that “[r]arely, if ever, has a potential commander in chief been so closely associated with an organization that has solicited financial support from foreign governments.”

So while the potential changes to Bill’s role at the Clinton Foundation might sound good on paper (no more donations from foreign governments!), here’s the unsaid: Chelsea Clinton will remain on the global foundation’s board.

Here’s why this is a problem: Chelsea is very, very close to her parents (if you need proof, check out her leaked emails), and as The Wall Street Journal previously reported, “the foundation and Ms. Clinton don’t intend to say whether she would raise money for the foundation until after the election.”

According to the Congressional Research Service, while executive branch employees are “subject to criminal penalties if they personally and substantially participate in matters in which they (or their immediate families, business partners or associated organizations) hold financial interests[,]” this does not include the president and the vice president.

In fact, “there is no current legal requirement that would compel the President to relinquish financial interest because of a conflict of interest.”

How can someone never consider past financial donations — in the millions of dollars, no less — from countries like Saudi Arabia and Qatar to a family-run foundation when making foreign policy decisions? How can someone be totally divorced from her namesake organization when her only child is on the board and fundraising for it?

Finally, how can someone ever be truly divorced from an organization that will surely expand and continue to take money from foreign governments once out of office?

You can’t. That is why the existence of the Clinton Foundation was always problematic (especially during Hillary’s tenure as secretary of state), and will remain problematic should the Democratic nominee become president.

So what can be done about it? Honestly, not much. The Congressional Research Service determines that putting more restrictions on a president other than requiring campaign finance disclosures and disclosures of “personal assets, investments, interests, and income upon entering office,” to require any other disclosures “may require a constitutional amendment.”

Should we enter another Clinton presidency, that means the citizens and media will be especially responsible for holding Hillary Clinton accountable.

Conservative media, in particular, will have to rise to the challenge and be more robust, ethical, and meticulous than ever. (For more from the author of “Here’s Why Chelsea Clinton May Be a Huge Problem If Hillary Becomes President” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.