A Washington Post article is unfairly titled "As FIFA allegations swirled, Clintons gave Qatar a stage — and legitimacy". It's about a Clinton Foundation event in 2013. The title states "Clintons" in the plural, meaning HRC provided Qatar a stage and legitimacy.
Hillary was no longer Secretary of State at that point. She served on the Board of the Clinton Foundation, but it's a stretch to say that Hillary herself gave Qatar a stage and legitimacy. Bill? Sure, okay, he was right there in the photo.
But, Hillary? Come on. She was a Board member, one of 10. The Washington Post has misrepresented the article's findings.
(Side note: Bill's Foundation would justify this financial partnership with Qatar on humanitarian grounds...).
The 1,800 word article mentions Hillary twice. Some 700 words into the article:
The foundation’s financial practices are now emerging as a political complication as Hillary Clinton begins her campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination. A new Washington Post-ABC News poll indicated that half of all Americans disapprove of the way Hillary Clinton has handled questions about the charity.
While a number of controversial donations came during the years that Bill Clinton headed the organization alone, the Qatari committee’s involvement in CGI came in the months after Hillary Clinton stepped down as secretary of state and joined the foundation’s board.
Then at around 1,300 words there's this:
In response, Brian Fallon, a campaign spokesman for Hillary Clinton, said her record demonstrated a willingness to challenge Middle East regimes.
Fallon pointed to a 2012 report about Qatar by the Clinton-led State Department, which found that the country’s laws did not provide adequate collective bargaining and other rights for workers.
Fallon also pointed to a 2011 trip to Qatar in which then-Secretary Clinton said Arab leaders risked “sinking into the sand” unless they restructured their political and economic systems.
[snip]
Neither Bill nor Hillary Clinton’s spokesmen specifically addressed the question of labor conditions as Qatar readies for the 2022 World Cup.
FWIW, the Washington Post article is misleadingly titled.
----
Anyways, commentators have asked why is the DoJ even pursuing these soccer administrators. Because bribery was done in the US and using US banks, around the marketing rights for large sporting events, many of which have been held in the US (i.e. previous Gold Cup tournaments and the upcoming 2016 Copa America). Millions of Americans have indirectly paid their cable providers to watch these events and tens of thousands bought tickets to attend.
Just one of the people, who's already plead guilty, agreed to pay over $151 million to the Feds, of which $25 million has already been paid. So, while there are undoubtedly bigger fish to fry (i.e. Wall Street), the DoJ cases around FIFA corruption is certainly not a waste of resources. That's $151 million forfeited by one person. There's much more out there.
If the US is the only country where the court system will bring these international mafioso to account, then I'm fine with the US taking their ill-gotten millions as well... as long as folks go to jail. Football fans around the world would thank us.
.png?1441385880 "no image description available")
.png?1441385880)
