Media outlets strike deal with Republican operatives for dirt on Clinton

[IceSpear]

Well now, this smells like a REAL scandal to me. Did the media finally let down their thin vaneer of impartiality and go a bit too far for this time?

http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2015/04/new-york-times-fox-news-strike-deals-for-conservative-205791.html

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Beet]

If they want to research the Clinton Foundation, they would do better to hire someone themselves, rather than subcontracting out a partisan author with an obvious agenda.

[IceSpear]

Journalists dig. Nothing new here.

I wouldn't really say this is just "digging." As Beet said, why not do the research themselves? It seems awfully strange for the "nonpartisan media" to openly align and strike deals with a right wing author who has questionable (at best) credibility.

[Beet]

The ironic thing is, Schweizer is supposed to be accusing the Clintons of conflict of interest, but as president of a conservative research group, he doesn't even bother to hide his own conflict of interest in writing about them, and nor do the Times or the Post in basing their reporting off of him.

[CountryClassSF]

Look at what Palin had to deal with in Alaska with reporters swarming. Try being on the Right and having to deal with Hollywood and "news" propaganda on an hourly basis.

[Gallium]

The NYT have had a pathological animus against the Clintons for two decades now, it's very weird. There's a long history: they broke and then endlessly flogged Whitewater stories for years and years that they never retracted despite being widely debunked (coverage that till today is mostly responsible for the media narrative that the Clintons are scandal ridden); they had that creepy investigative exposé into the Clintons' marriage just before her last presidential run that they had to amend; they broke emailgate with coverage that misleadingly suggested she broke the law and then followed it up with a hundred thinkpieces, and Maureen Down remains on their payroll spewing pure venom. And their news coverage of her is regularly disdainful and often reads like regurgitated RNC press releases.

I don't know who the Clintons pissed off in their editorial team in the 90s, but they've never forgiven them for it.

[Sumner 1868]

Look at what Palin had to deal with in Alaska with reporters swarming. Try being on the Right and having to deal with Hollywood and "news" propaganda on an hourly basis.

The media worshiped Palin until September 2008.

[Reaganfan]

Fairness Doctrine vanished during the Reagan era. Media being media.

[CountryClassSF]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Nah - they just were afraid to attack her before it was popular to do so, since they spent the entire 200 8 campaign season trashing Hillary, they didn't want to continue with the sexism until it was "OK" to do it to a Republican.

[Ebsy]

The Grey Lady has fallen far.

[Sumner 1868]

The NYT have had a pathological animus against the Clintons for two decades now, it's very weird. There's a long history: they broke and then endlessly flogged Whitewater stories for years and years that they never retracted despite being widely debunked (coverage that till today is mostly responsible for the media narrative that the Clintons are scandal ridden); they had that creepy investigative exposé into the Clintons' marriage just before her last presidential run that they had to amend; they broke emailgate with coverage that misleadingly suggested she broke the law and then followed it up with a hundred thinkpieces, and Maureen Down remains on their payroll spewing pure venom. And their news coverage of her is regularly disdainful and often reads like regurgitated RNC press releases.

I don't know who the Clintons pissed off in their editorial team in the 90s, but they've never forgiven them for it.

Well, the paper endorsed Bill Clinton twice and will almost certainly endorse Hillary Clinton in 2016.

[Cory]

Well, the paper endorsed Bill Clinton twice and will almost certainly endorse Hillary Clinton in 2016.

And not a single vote will be swayed. It's just window dressing.

[Panda Express]

Good to see Fox News and the New York Times joining forces to take out Hillary Clinton. All their efforts so far have been for naught. Remember that Barack Obama, the greatest politician this country has ever seen, only barely managed to defeat Hillary.

However, even this alliance won't be enough. More of the media must join this unholy alliance. It must be the greatest media alliance ever created. Only then will there even be a sliver of a chance of stopping Hillary.

[Beet]

Good to see Fox News and the New York Times joining forces to take out Hillary Clinton. All their efforts so far have been for naught. Remember that Barack Obama, the greatest politician this country has ever seen, only barely managed to defeat Hillary.

However, even this alliance won't be enough. More of the media must join this unholy alliance. It must be the greatest media alliance ever created. Only then will there even be a sliver of a chance of stopping Hillary.

Well in that case, Hillary's prospects are looking good.

[IceSpear]

Good to see Fox News and the New York Times joining forces to take out Hillary Clinton. All their efforts so far have been for naught. Remember that Barack Obama, the greatest politician this country has ever seen, only barely managed to defeat Hillary.

However, even this alliance won't be enough. More of the media must join this unholy alliance. It must be the greatest media alliance ever created. Only then will there even be a sliver of a chance of stopping Hillary.

Well, it'll never work in the Democratic primary. Her position is simply too dominant that the only thing that could dethrone her is death, a medical issue, or a REAL scandal (i.e. something that results in criminal charges.) Most Democrats have learned to tune out the faux Hillary scandals by now. The problem will be the general election. So you may unknowably be cheering for President Walker here.

[Beet]

Clinton's response to this was perfect, IMO:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[CLARENCE 2015!]

Let them try! There is no one- I repeat NO ONE- more vetted by the media...

[IceSpear]

Clinton's response to this was perfect, IMO:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

She's absolutely right. The Republicans can do nothing besides endlessly bash her and Obama. They have nothing else to offer. Due to her pseudo incumbency, it's easy to see why they do it, but that strategy doesn't work. See 2004 and 2012.

[Lurker]

So, the New York Times and Washington Post makes a deal with a disgraceful hack who has made countless books that serves no other purposes than telling how evil Democrats are, as well as hagiographies of GOP leaders. Utterly disgraceful. Next they'll make a deal with Rush Limbaugh, who, after all, is no more partisan than Schweizer.

Will be interesting to see how the Clintons handle a relentlessly hostile media next year.

[Mister Mets]

I fail to see what the papers are doing wrong.

If the information is accurate, it doesn't matter where it came from.

[King]

I fail to see what the papers are doing wrong.

If the information is accurate, it doesn't matter where it came from.

That's what they're doing wrong. The information is most likely not accurate as in past Schweizer works.

[IceSpear]

I fail to see what the papers are doing wrong.

If the information is accurate, it doesn't matter where it came from.

That's what they're doing wrong. The information is most likely not accurate as in past Schweizer works.

Not to mention they seemingly struck the deal to give his book lots of free publicity before even checking to see whether the claims contained in it were valid.

[IceSpear]

http://thinkprogress.org/election/2015/04/21/3649392/clinton-cash/

You must be logged in to read this quote.

LOL. Looks like the media has egg on their face...again.

[Gallium]

Here they go. Headline story in the NYT:

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/us/cash-flowed-to-clinton-foundation-as-russians-pressed-for-control-of-uranium-company.html

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The media aren't even being subtle that they're trying to run a co-ordinated smear campaign against her.

[IceSpear]

I liked the throwaway line buried in the article where they admit they have no proof these two things are correlated. Then uh...what exactly is the point of the article?