Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
2016 Postmortem
Showing Original Post only (View all)Know Your Right Wing Publications: The New York Post [View all]
Before you post articles to smear the opposing candidate, I thought I would give a brief primer on a newly popular source here on DU: The New York Post.
The Murdoch-owned New York Post just published a story by Peter Schweizer, author of Clinton Cash, the the widely debunked book from Murdochs HarperCollins publishing subsidiary. The Post article then became the topic of a segment on Murdochs Fox News program Fox & Friends. The article was also re-posted on the Fox News community website, Fox Nation. This is obviously an effort to flood the zone with as many Murdoch-run outlets as possible. The article features a headline that will likely score the Delusional Headline of the Week Award: Clinton Cash Author Demolishes Hillarys Self-Defense. That headline is completely accurate as long as your definition of demolish is to utterly fail to rationally impair.
Schweizer attempts to rebut some recent comments made by Clinton in response to a reporters inquiry. She was asked about her role in approving the sale of a uranium mining company to a Russian enterprise. She answered clearly that she had no role in the decision as it does not fall into the purview of the Secretary of State. Schweizer seems to have been incapable of understanding that response and set about to demolish it in three steps. Here is what Post readers and Fox viewers are supposed to think is a demolition of Clintons defense in Schweizers own words:
The issue of donations to the Clinton Foundation is old news that has been extensively analyzed and dismissed for lack of any trace of wrongdoing. There are thousands of donors to the Foundation which, unlike similar groups, fully discloses who their donors are. And with all of that information available, there has not been a single proven allegation of the Clintons trading favors for contributions. Furthermore, Clinton has never said that she had no knowledge of these affairs, just that the decisions were made at a lower level within the State Department. Therefore, there could not have been any influence peddling.
Schweizer attempts to rebut some recent comments made by Clinton in response to a reporters inquiry. She was asked about her role in approving the sale of a uranium mining company to a Russian enterprise. She answered clearly that she had no role in the decision as it does not fall into the purview of the Secretary of State. Schweizer seems to have been incapable of understanding that response and set about to demolish it in three steps. Here is what Post readers and Fox viewers are supposed to think is a demolition of Clintons defense in Schweizers own words:
First, nine investors who profited from the uranium deal collectively donated $145 million to Hillarys family foundation But Hillary expects Americans to believe she had no knowledge [of it].
The issue of donations to the Clinton Foundation is old news that has been extensively analyzed and dismissed for lack of any trace of wrongdoing. There are thousands of donors to the Foundation which, unlike similar groups, fully discloses who their donors are. And with all of that information available, there has not been a single proven allegation of the Clintons trading favors for contributions. Furthermore, Clinton has never said that she had no knowledge of these affairs, just that the decisions were made at a lower level within the State Department. Therefore, there could not have been any influence peddling.
http://www.newscorpse.com/ncWP/?p=28952
20 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Yet, these lies about Hillary and the Clinton Foundation show up repeatedly--even
riversedge
Nov 2015
#2
Maybe no favors to this point. The big favors can come after she is elected. Agreed, 1% takes care
canosoviejo
Nov 2015
#4
Quid Pro Quo - And - Cui Bono - The Two Key Questions To Addressed With The Specter Of HRC
cantbeserious
Nov 2015
#14
And Clinton supporters have quoted the Wall Street Journal and Forbes to attack Bernie Sanders.
Jim Lane
Nov 2015
#12
Does that mean we can't quote certain Fox pundits that are current Hillary supporters? nt
Live and Learn
Nov 2015
#15