Immediately, Hillbillary demanded that her brother give the money back. After all, money is not supposed to be involved with pardons. She was furious with her brother, right? She made certain he did the right thing.

Now, we are supposed to believe that our former President and First Lady took appropriate action against an errant relative. They did the right thing and Dan Burton’s committee will never prove that malicious greed or quid-pro-quo was ever involved. Let’s look at what’s unmentioned here.

First of all, I’m peeved if these crooks got their pardons for free. Having once come up with a substantial amount of money, and only God knows how much went to other places and people, I don’t think the crooks should get any of their money back. Why should their pardons be free, especially when the Justice Department did not condone these pardons?

Isn’t this the woman who wrote “It Takes A Village” and is now a New York Senator supposedly fighting for the common people and the down and out? She could have at least made certain that the money went to Head Start, the homeless, or some worthwhile non-Hasidic charity somewhere, even if it was in Arkansas or Chicago. Charities can except money from crooks, can’t they?

Third, if you think that Hugh Rodham wrote refund checks to these guys before his offshore bank told him the money had arrived or without an under-the-table back woods exchange, then you probably also believe that politicians are honest and putting your needs ahead of their own. God bless and help you.

And don’t you wonder how someone who hasn’t been convicted can receive a pardon in the first place? Is accepting it an admission of guilt?

Marc Rich was an expert at making deals and money laundering. He may even be the one who taught Clinton how to launder our Social Security and Medicare money into the national debt while getting future taxpayers to replace the original entitlement surpluses. That may be the quid-pro-quo Dan Burton is seeking in the wrong direction.