A new book is going to hit the shelves on May 5th – one which threatens to blow the lid off Hillary Clinton\’s campaign for President…and one which, for interesting reasons (more on this later) is virtually certain to be pursued by media venues which, under other circumstances, might sweep much of the book\’s contents under that rug.
The name of the book is “Clinton Cash: The Untold Story of How and Why Foreign Governments and Businesses Helped Make Bill and Hillary Rich”. The author is Peter Schweizer, a politically conservative, Oxford-educated, award-winning writer: in other words, someone who the CDT (Clinton Defamation Team) will have a great deal of difficulty attacking as some kind of three-tooth, mouth-breathing trailor park resident (which has worked for them in the past).
And the reason that it is certain to be covered by usually Clinton-friendly media is that, according to Amy Chozick\’s article in today\’s New York Times, “major news organizations including The Times, The Washington Post and Fox News have exclusive agreements with the author to pursue the story lines found in the book”.
Personally, have never heard of news organizations cutting such agreements. But, based on the above information, apparently it is done. And if the New York Times and Washington Post have exclusives, you can bet your bottom dollar they are not going to look the other way – if, for no other reason, that they won\’t want Fox News to be the sole beneficiary of their decision.
So what is in Peter Schweizer\’s book and why would the be a concern of Hillary & Co.? Well, here are a few excerpts from Ms. Chosick\’s article:
The book, a copy of which was obtained by The New York Times, asserts that foreign entities who made payments to the Clinton Foundation and to Mr. Clinton through high speaking fees received favors from Mrs. Clinton\’s State Department in return.
“We will see a pattern of financial transactions involving the Clintons that occurred contemporaneous with favorable U.S. policy decisions benefiting those providing the funds,” Mr. Schweizer writes.
His examples include a free-trade agreement in Colombia that benefited a major foundation donor\’s natural resource investments in the South American nation, development projects in the aftermath of the Haitian earthquake in 2010, and more than $1 million in payments to Mr. Clinton by a Canadian bank and major shareholder in the Keystone XL oil pipeline around the time the project was being debated in the State Department.
Charges like that have the potential to be catastrophic for Hillary Clinton\’s campaign. Especially when combined with the disappearance of her State Department emails.
Earlier I mentioned that the “exclusive agreement” insured coverage of these allegations by the Times and Washington Post. The fact that they are in this article – thus Times readers have now been given a heads-up that they are coming – would, it seems to me, foreshadow that coverage.
The CDT better be ready to work overtime on this one. And they\’ll need more than what is left of James Carville\’s patented “ah, that ain\’t nuthin” routine and Lanny Davis\’s more grammatically correct seconding of the motion to make it go away.
Maybe they can and maybe they can\’t. But if I were Hillary Clinton, this would be, and should be, haunting me every day.
