Well, AP did more than “try” with what the info they had. They made stuff up. (“Of all the meetings SecState Clinton had, 5% were with Foundation donors…”.No wait, that doesn’t sound bad enough…“Of all the few “private” meetings she had in her spare time”…Yeah, that’s the ticket.)
4 Likes
Well if they move on it would just be “Emails! Emails!”. It would only be something they can try to slam her with, nothing policy-wise. In fact, the press is essentially avoiding policy issues completely. Because they know a. Clinton would embarrass them with her background and knowledge and b. it would not help Drumpf to have her sound presidential. Instead you get things like Mrs. Andrea Mitchell Greenspan ®, “senior correspondent”, specifically asking “What about those health rumors, Mrs. Clinton?”.
4 Likes
Got to love the media’s double standard. With ex-Gov. McDonnell of Virginia, they were all into the quid pro quo angle which made McDonnell look bad from the start. Now that there is no apparent quid pro quo with Clinton, they just go with “Meetings! Meetings!” and innuendo. Furthermore if the Supreme Court essentially threw out McDonnell’s conviction, saying his contacts were okay. But Clinton? No, the media has to assume there was something nefarious.
3 Likes
Fine then. It is getting REALLY OLD worrying about those ‘on the fence’. They aren’t on the fence. They are begging to be noticed. Yes, she shouldn’t have used the word ‘smoke’. What then? There is a lot of GARBAGE out there? BRUSH FIRES? SHT in paper bags being lit up by my adversaries? Where are her surrogates? Instead the Dems are doing what the Dems ALWAYS do and scold scold scold…geezzzzzzzz
1 Like
Um, please re-read my post. I’d hardly classify it as scolding anyone. All I did was acknowledge that the “smoke and fire” analogy isn’t that good in this instance especially if you don’t give an example of what the “smoke” is.
Though there are few people “on the fence” anymore, there are many who are what I’d call “soft supporters,” and those are the ones I’m more concerned about retaining.
2 Likes
I like the smoke/fire metaphor. The rightwing generates so much smoke and the press and the rabble assume there is fire where there isn’t. I have long thought that that the AP has a rightwing bias, and now it’s clear. The Clintons have every reason to be proud of the foundation and the great work that it does. And HRC has every reason to be proud of her work as SecState. By the way may I recommend her book Hard Choices - a remarkable political tour of the whole world.
3 Likes
Smoke=the Right Wing attempt. Didn’t start a fire though.
1 Like
If it’s smoke, it’s Trump’s smoke machine. He nicked it from one of the bands performing at his AC hotels in the 80s 
1 Like
There is no there there to this story expect that the Clinton’s have helped fund-raise billions for good causes. But i would of preferred her to say there has been a lot of hot air about the foundation.
1 Like
She definitely should not have said the smoke line
My standard reply to innuendos is that the GOP has been blowing a lot of smoke so you’ll think there’s a fire. I also flat out call it yet another witchhunt.
2 Likes
This is sooooo true!
1 Like
This ENTIRE “Scandal” is manufactured out of nothing and has been carefully coordinated, planned, packaged, and given to the lazy MSM in a nice neat shiny package.
My contacts in the MSM have told me that complete press packs with videos, talking points, and ENTIRE ARTICLES and video quotes to publish have been handed over to the Press in large volumes, simultaneously.
This is the quintessential “swift boat” attack that plays to the abject lack of integrity and laziness of the MSM.
Knowing that most 'News organizations" have no ability (or desire) to do any kind of actual research, analysis, or JOURNALISM they have handed them a nicely packaged “SCANDAL!!!” the feckless MSM can run for weeks without having to do any work of any kind.
It is a News Producers dream, and since everybody will be running with it at the same time they can tell their editors and producers “Everybody else is running it!”
Very, very well done by the Reich Winger Echo Chamber (slow clap, slow clap.)
Proof positive that Journalism is Dead.
2 Likes
So why not scoop the competitors by doing “an anatomy of a scandal” article. Write an exposé describing how a political group goes about attacking an A-rated global charity for political gain, a charity that’s instrumental in keeping AIDS under control to the benefit of the entire world. Shouldn’t be that hard. The foundation’s work is described on their website, and what you just posted is itself newsworthy.
1 Like
At least she’s not taking out loans with the Russia mob.
Trump needs to stop hiding his dependencies, and release his tax returns.
People with money to burn, try to buy more than access with that money. Nothing says that they did. If there is anything wrong here, it’s that rich people try to sway our government with their money.
As far as Hillary is concerned, the money just benefitted the charity that does great work around the world and uses that money wisely and for great outcomes.
There was no quid pro quo and the most that the ‘donators’ received for the money, is a tax write off.
Trump contributed at least $100,000 and he’s a heartless, stingy SOB. What was he trying to buy? Inquiring minds want to know!