You've heard of Benghazi and Uranium One. But more than a year after Hillary Clinton’s resounding loss to President Trump, she must now grapple with a new scandal: An ongoing Federal Election Commission investigation into an alleged $84 million money laundering scheme orchestrated by the Hillary Victory Fund — the $500 million joint fundraising committee between the Clinton campaign, the Democratic National Committee, and Democratic state parties.

Based on former DNC Chairwoman Donna Brazile’s public comments, a memo by former Clinton campaign manager Robbie Mook, and months of reviewing FEC reports, the Committee to Defend the President has filed an FEC complaint accusing the Democratic establishment of using state chapters as straw men to circumvent campaign donation limits and launder money to Clinton’s campaign. The Hillary Victory Fund solicited six-figure donations from major donors, including Calvin Klein and “Family Guy” creator Seth MacFarlane, “papered” them through state parties en route to DNC and then the Clinton campaign.

In reality, the fund either never transferred $84 million to state parties, sending the funds straight to the DNC, or it made the transfers without state parties having actual control of the money. In either case, the fund violated campaign finance laws in precisely the way the Supreme Court deemed illegal in its 2014 McCutcheon v. FEC ruling. And that’s only the tip of allegations in this particular iceberg.

If and when the allegations are confirmed by the FEC, Clinton’s $84 million money laundering scheme will go down as the single largest campaign finance scandal in U.S. history.

Of course, the New York Times has not devoted a single drop of ink to the $84 million scandal. While MSNBC’s lack of coverage is hardly surprising, CNN’s radio silence is deafening and once again contradicts the network’s self-described nonpartisanship. Even the Washington Post’s Dave Weigel, the only mainstream reporter to cover the scandal, acknowledged “most coverage of the FEC complaint had appeared in conservative media” before he covered it.

Can you imagine the media outrage if Republicans oversaw an $84 million money laundering scheme? Just consider the outrage they currently bear at every perceived impropriety by Trump, whether it be having a second scoop of ice cream or saying “Merry Christmas.”

Alas, the liberal media continues to defend Clinton from herself. In 2016, an estimated 91 percent of nightly newscasts’ Trump coverage was “hostile” to the president. When it came to covering “personal controversies,” ABC, CBS, and NBC devoted 56 percent of its coverage to Trump and only 38 percent to Clinton’s many scandals.

It’s no wonder the American people have lost trust in the liberal media. According to Gallup polling, the majority of 2016 U.S. voters believed media coverage favored Clinton over the president. Today, only 27 percent of Americans have “a great deal” or “quite a lot” of confidence in newspapers. Even fewer Americans ( 24 percent) trust television news.

If the liberal media won’t cover an unprecedented, meticulously documented $84 million scandal, why would they?

And if the media won’t do its job, then it falls on us as concerned citizens to hold our political leaders accountable. And hold them accountable we will: The FEC’s investigation of the latest Clinton scandal is already underway and could result in significant legal jeopardy for the Democratic establishment, their major donors, and Clinton herself.

Clinton will answer for her actions — whether the media covers it or not.

Ted Harvey is chairman of the Committee to Defend the President.

If you would like to write an op-ed for the Washington Examiner, please read our guidelines on submissions here.