#251
Posted: 4/22/15 at 6:56pm
The narrative should be the poor vs. the wealthy, how they're limiting our vote.
Stephanatic
Hillary Clinton officially launching her presidential run on Sunday — Page 11
#252
Posted: 4/23/15 at 6:57am
Hillary would totally be on team wealthy.
Cash Flowed to Clinton Foundation as Russians Pressed for Control of Uranium Company
#253
Posted: 4/23/15 at 8:30am
You're falling for a false scandal instigated by the same Republican slime machine that impeached Bill Clinton and hounded Barack Obama. Don't fall for it this time.
#254
Posted: 4/23/15 at 9:03am
No. Hillary's record speaks pretty clearly for itself.
Also Jo Becker from the NYT is a pretty well respected journalist. I don't think she can be considered part of the Republican smear machine.
Updated On: 4/23/15 at 09:03 AM
#255
Posted: 4/23/15 at 10:05am
I was going to say, Erik... Since when is Jo Becker part of the "Republican smear machine"? It is clear a certain someone doesn't follow their NYT journalists close enough. I would also hardly call New York Times, a typically loyal and staunch left-leaning publication, a "Republican smear machine." That's absolutely nuts.
Amazing to me that when a respected and trusted newspaper turns on the people PalJoey likes, they're suddenly supposed to be disregarded. Sure. The NYT should only be taken seriously when they're railing against Republicans. Okay, then. Interesting.
#256
Posted: 4/23/15 at 10:45am
Jo Becker, I would point out, is the NY Times writer who wrote that much-disliked book about the gay-marriage battle that gave all the credit to Chad Griffin and HRC and the straight lawyers Olson and Boies--and none of the credit to Edie Windsor, her lesbian lawyer Roberta Kaplan, Evan Wolfson and Lambda Legal or the gay grass-roots campaigns across the country. She has very little credibility nowadays, because she's too gullible. When she's wrong, she's very, very wrong.
Both the New York Times and the Washington Post fell hook, line and sinker for Schweizer's slime. He's an avowed muckraker, but, well, newspapers must sell copies nowadays, and anti-Clinton slime sells well.
In the portions of the book that have been leaked so far, Schweizer himself admits that he cannot prove any of the allegations he makes. He says he is leaving that up to journalists and law-enforcement agencies.
“Short of someone involved coming forward to give sworn testimony, we don’t know what might or might not have been said in private conversations, the exact nature of the transition, or why people in power make the decision they do. ... We cannot ultimately know what goes on in their minds and ultimately provide the links between the money they took and the benefits that subsequently accrued to themselves, their friends, and their associates.”
This is the first of two takedowns he is publishing this year. A book on Jeb Bush's finances comes out this summer. I'm sure it will make similar timeline allegations, and we'll see how many of them stick.
Both books will be bestsellers. Neither will lead to any legal action or abandonment of campaigns. These books will do nothing except make cynics more cynical.
Updated On: 4/23/15 at 10:45 AM
#257
Posted: 4/23/15 at 10:51am
I. Hate. Jo. Becker.
Twitter @NamoInExile
Instagram none
#258
Posted: 4/23/15 at 10:59am
Of course you do! 
#259
Posted: 4/23/15 at 11:11am
What's wrong with journalism nowadays--and the reason that newspaper and magazine circulations figures are dwindling as readers get more and more of their news digitally--what's wrong is that journalists like Jo Becker are not what used to be known as "investigative journalists." Instead they are "fed" information from "subjects," which they then write up and pretend is news.
Jo Becker was "embedded" in the Olson/Boies team and in bed (figuratively, of course) with Chad Griffin and HRC. She believed them when they said that the California Prop 8 case would make its way to the Supreme Court and not Edie Windsor's case.
Well, of course, the Supreme Court did the opposite, took the Windsor case not Prop 8, and delivered a stunningly triumphant verdict for Edie Windsor, Roberta Kaplan, Evan Wolfson and activists all over the country.
Meanwhile, Jo Becker was left with a 500-page book that told the wrong story and reached the wrong conclusion.
For Fox News to make a deal with this Schweizer book is not surprising--it is completely on-brand for them to be embedded with him.
But for the NY Times and the Washington Post to strike deals for "exclusive" access--that's just really lazy.
According to this Politico story, both 60 Minutes and ABC NEws turned down similar offers for exclusive access.
POLITICO: New York Times, Washington Post, Fox News strike deals for anti-Clinton research
#260
Posted: 4/23/15 at 11:26am
That's such a perfect description of the state of the world of journalism today. My favorite associated story about the Becker book was how Andro Sullivan condemned her narrative. I thought, "Oh, the little nudge got something right, he actually wants acknowledgment for the work the Gay and Lesbian Task Force and Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders did to actually make this happen." But no. He was mad because it left HIM out. Him and his little blog.
Twitter @NamoInExile
Instagram none
#261
Posted: 4/23/15 at 12:08pm
Well, the little nudge deserves credit for two things: writing in favor of gay marriage in 1989 and for gay-marrying his hunky boyfriend in 2007.
#262
Posted: 4/23/15 at 12:11pm
NGLTF was working on it then. But Andrew has a tendency to think things spring spontaneously from the vacuum in his head. He would never ever ever give credit to the radicals of that group, in fact he disparaged them.
Twitter @NamoInExile
Instagram none
#264
Posted: 4/23/15 at 3:38pm
| 30. Would you say that - Hillary Clinton is honest and trustworthy or not? | |
AGE IN YRS....... |
#266
Posted: 4/23/15 at 4:03pm
Wow.
#267
Posted: 4/24/15 at 1:15am
I wish I could under report my income for five years by a few thousand dollars let alone 145 million and just say, " Oh we just made a little mistake." and just go ahead and change it.
#268
Posted: 4/24/15 at 8:46am
dented. To be clear, the Reuters report has nothing to do with personal income but rather 990 reporting on private support for a Foundation. That being said, as someone who has had extensive experience in the not-for-profit sector, a foundation of this size failing to report hundreds of millions in contributions over the last several years is completely inexplicable. You have some of the best and brightest minds running your operations. How could one ever justify or explain this inaccurate reporting? At the very least they should be penalized by the IRS, not to even speak of exploring the possibility of revoking their tax-exempt status. Unreal.
#269
Posted: 4/24/15 at 11:18am
Yes Liza, I understand. But the quid pro quo inherent with these unreported and reported donations are so frequent, egregious, and obvious in their timing that it is astounding. You can look past a couple of incidents where impropriety can be misconstrued as coincidence but this reminds me of influence peddling like the mafia.
#270
Posted: 4/24/15 at 12:58pm
The Times follows up on its attack on Hillary with some hard reporting in Jeb Bush: He's lost weight by giving up pizza for Paleo.
NY TIMES: Paleo Diet In and Pizza Out, a Slimmer Jeb Bush Seems Intent on Staying That Way
Updated On: 4/24/15 at 12:58 PM
#271
Posted: 4/24/15 at 1:34pm
The Editorial Board at NYT, which is a well-respected body and historically left leaning, published a fairly critical opinion piece today. I will just assume that PalJoey missed it when he was posting the story above...
The increasing scrutiny of the foundation has raised several points that need to be addressed by Mrs. Clinton and the former president. These relate most importantly to the flow of multimillions in donations from foreigners and others to the foundation, how Mrs. Clinton dealt with potential conflicts as secretary of state and how she intends to guard against such conflicts should she win the White House.
NY Times Editorial Board: Candidate Clinton and the Foundation
#272
Posted: 4/24/15 at 7:01pm
If Bernie Sanders was running for office he would get Liza's vote, and I respect him/her for that. PJ this is by no means a lock. 2016 is gonna be dirtier and meaner than ever. A bunch of us lefties don't like her, and Republicans hate her and will turn out in droves.
Stephanatic
#273
Posted: 4/24/15 at 8:38pm
If the Democratic candidate is anyone but Hillary, the Republican will win.
The Koch brothers plan is to win over the lefties to support a leftie who will lose to a "centrist" Republican on whom they will shower their $900 million. Nine hundred million dollars. Y'know, like almost a billion?
If the Headband gets his way, Scott Walker or Marco Rubio will be president.
Hillary is the only Democratic wizard with powers powerful enough to beat the Koch Money.
The Headband may not know it, but he is in league with the Koch brothers to elect a Republican.
Updated On: 4/25/15 at 08:38 PM
#274
Posted: 4/25/15 at 7:49am
So, someone will run against Hillary in the primaries with Koch money? How would that be possible?
Stephanatic
#275
Posted: 4/25/15 at 8:42am
The New Yorker says the Times got it wrong.
THE NEW YORKER: Five Questions About the Clintons and a Uranium Company
.jpg?format=auto&width=365)
Tickets From $58
Tickets From $71
Tickets From $71
Tickets From $71
