Campaign Fundraising Scandals, Socialized Medicine, Proposed Tax Increases — Is This a Bad Recurring Nightmare? 

Like a tawdry traveling Vaudeville act, the murky Clinton troupe is again descending upon American life. 

Between increasingly-frequent campaign fundraising scandals, the resurrection this week of HillaryCare, personal demonization of political enemies and looming tax increases, it's all like a collective nightmare returning to haunt America. 

The question is whether the public has the patience and fortitude to stomach another four-year — or eight-year — repeat performance of the Clintons' familiar act. 

This week, a Virginia woman named Pamela Layton alleged that she and her husband received reimbursement from her husband's employer for $9,200 that they contributed to Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign.  Mrs. Layton alleges that she attended a fundraiser at Mrs. Clinton's Washington home in March of this year, at which she and her husband made matching $4,600 donations (the maximum allowed under campaign-finance laws).  According to Mrs. Layton, William Danielczyk, her husband's employer, then reimbursed them for the donations in violation of campaign finance laws. 

Perhaps most interesting is what Mrs. Layton told The Wall Street Journal, saying that "it wasn't personal money.  It was all corporate money.  I don't even like Hillary.  I'm a Republican." 

As for Mr. Danielczyk, he has unsurprisingly achieved the status of "HillRaiser," the name for bundlers who raise $100,000 or more for Mrs. Clinton.  Last year, his company FractionAir, Inc. went out of business after the Federal Aviation Administration asked it to surrender its license because the company failed to verify that its pilots had completed mandatory training. 

In other words, Mr. Danielczyk fits the popular profile of sketchy fundraisers who have long buzzed amidst the hazy cloud of Clinton loyalists. 

In total, Mr. Danielczyk, his family, employees and friends donated $120,000 to the Clinton campaign, some of which came from people with Republican affiliations or no previous history of political donations.  According to The Wall Street Journal, these Republican voters contributing the maximum $4,600 to Mrs. Clinton included Mr. Danielczyk's mother, his sister, his personal assistant and several employees or their spouses.  Most of these people had never made a political donation before contributing these large $4,600 amounts, interestingly. 

Is this all starting to sound familiar? 

As is quickly becoming its habit, Clinton's embarrassed campaign announced that it would return the $9,200 donated by Mr. and Mrs. Layton.  How convenient — Team Clinton rakes in millions and millions of campaign cash, and apologetically promises to return small individual amounts when the heat rises. 

This comes on the heels of the blossoming campaign fundraising scandal involving Norman Hsu.  Mr. Hsu, you'll recall, is the man whose enormous contributions to Clinton closely tracked large campaign donations from a family of very modest means in Daly City, California.  The United States Justice Department is now investigating the matter, and Mr. Hsu sits in a Colorado jail awaiting extradition to California on grand theft charges after skipping bail. 

As with Mr. Danielczyk, Clinton's campaign quickly pledged that it will return Mr. Hsu's money or give it to charity.  At this rate, charities across America will be swimming in money from Mrs. Clinton's campaign alone. 

In addition to these all-too-predictable fundraising scandals, this week also saw the resurrection of the 1990s "HillaryCare" debacle.  Under her new healthcare proposal, which is scheduled to cost American taxpayers an additional $110 billion per year, Mrs. Clinton will raise taxes, create a government-run insurance bureaucracy, impose a single national plan upon all 50 states, form an entirely new government coverage program and literally coerce every American to purchase insurance regardless of their circumstances. 

This preference for government mandates over free market solutions is exactly what characterized her original healthcare monstrosity that never even made it to Congress.  Even Mrs. Clinton herself reportedly joked that it's "déjà vu all over again." 

Furthermore, we were even treated to a prototypically Clintonian episode of character assassination against former Solicitor General Ted Olson, who was discussed as a possible nominee for Attorney General.  Because Mr. Olson had the audacity to count former targets of the notorious Clinton hit machine among his personal friends, Democrats immediately rallied to slur his name and preemptively sink any possibility that this eminently respected man could be nominated for that position. 

All in all, this week's Clinton shenanigans combine with the latest O.J. Simpson saga to create a nightmarish return to the worst 1990s farces.  It appears that America's stomach for bad sequels is about to face its ultimate test.