• Menu
  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Before Header

  • About Us
  • Lexicon
  • Contact Us
  • Our Store
  • ↑
  • ↓
  • ←
  • →

Balloon Juice

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

Democrats have delivered the Square Deal, the New Deal, the Fair Deal, and now… the Big Joe Biden Deal.

Cole is on a roll !

You can’t love your country only when you win.

They are lying in pursuit of an agenda.

Republicans do not pay their debts.

A democracy can’t function when people can’t distinguish facts from lies.

Speaking of republicans, is there a way for a political party to declare intellectual bankruptcy?

I did not have this on my fuck 2022 bingo card.

Every reporter and pundit should have to declare if they ever vacationed with a billionaire.

Stop using mental illness to avoid talking about armed white supremacy.

Fuck these fucking interesting times.

Since when do we limit our critiques to things we could do better ourselves?

I like you, you’re my kind of trouble.

The rest of the comments were smacking Boebert like she was a piñata.

“Everybody’s entitled to be an idiot.”

In after Baud. Damn.

They think we are photo bombing their nice little lives.

Jack be nimble, jack be quick, hurry up and indict this prick.

Republican speaker of the house Mike Johnson is the bland and smiling face of evil.

Accused of treason; bitches about the ratings. I am in awe.

Red lights blinking on democracy’s dashboard

I know this must be bad for Joe Biden, I just don’t know how.

I’m sure you banged some questionable people yourself. We’re allowed to grow past that.

Their freedom requires your slavery.

Mobile Menu

  • Four Directions Montana
  • Donate with Venmo, Zelle & PayPal
  • Site Feedback
  • War in Ukraine
  • Submit Photos to On the Road
  • Politics
  • On The Road
  • Open Threads
  • Topics
  • COVID-19 Coronavirus
  • Authors
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Lexicon
  • Our Store
  • Politics
  • Open Threads
  • 2024 Elections
  • Garden Chats
  • On The Road
  • Targeted Fundraising!
You are here: Home / Open Threads / Excellent Links / Your All in One Debunking of the Latest Clinton Stuff

Your All in One Debunking of the Latest Clinton Stuff

by John Cole|  April 24, 20152:39 pm| 29 Comments

This post is in: Excellent Links

FacebookTweetEmail

Joe Conason.

FacebookTweetEmail
Previous Post: « Because White Feminists Know Exactly What’s It Like To Be A Trans Woman Of Color
Next Post: Fast Track To Hell »

Reader Interactions

29Comments

  1. 1.

    different-church-lady

    April 24, 2015 at 2:48 pm

    What, nobody want to talk about Greenwald anymore?

  2. 2.

    Brachiator

    April 24, 2015 at 2:50 pm

    I really liked this part of the article.

    Nowhere did the Times prove or even suggest that the State Department drove the Russian uranium decision, because that isn’t how CFIUS works. And nowhere did the Times report show that Hillary Clinton personally influenced the decision. Indeed, the record indicates that she played no role whatsoever. Knowledgeable observers of CFIUS believe that its operations are dominated by Treasury and Defense, not State.

    I had wondered how much power that State actually had over the uranium decision. Apparently, not much.

    But that’s the great thing about smear jobs. You don’t really have to prove anything, just suggest that “something doesn’t look right.”

  3. 3.

    jl

    April 24, 2015 at 2:50 pm

    Thanks, Cole. I read a similar debunker, and was going to put link in comments yesterday.

    But could not find it again.

    Sadly, because I did not realize how Clinton scandal stories have sprouted like mushrooms in last few days. Looking for the debuker (what had like detailed facty things and actual dates on which facty things actually happened, and what speeches were actually paid for and what not) was like looking for needle in a haystack.

    On the bright side, if we are going to get the 90s back, then at least that means it will rain and snow in California again, right?

  4. 4.

    agorabum

    April 24, 2015 at 2:50 pm

    Yes. The kochs giving walker vast sums to turn Wisconsin into its subsidiary – no mention. But someone donates to a charity that does great things and pays a former president – and great orator – a speaking fee and suddenly it’s all whispers.
    There is a reason Bill is such a get, and it isn’t because of the State Dept.
    Also, if he can’t take their money, drink their whiskey, screw their women, and still vote against them, he wouldn’t be slick Willie…

  5. 5.

    Emma

    April 24, 2015 at 2:51 pm

    And thus proving you have more integrity than most media outlets that carry on about the Clintons in the front page and, if they ever print a retraction, hide it next to the obits.

    I do not, however, expect it to calm the usual suspects.

  6. 6.

    Woodrow/Asim

    April 24, 2015 at 2:52 pm

    You know, I used to irregularly read Chait. I liked a lot of what he had to say, and was annoyed I couldn’t get a feed/newsletter with just his columns.

    I’m not exactly glad he’s managed to solve that annoyance for me, by becoming a much, much bigger one.

  7. 7.

    NonyNony

    April 24, 2015 at 2:55 pm

    I knew something like this was going to come out as soon as I read Jonathon Chait’s article.

    Because Chait is an ass and he doesn’t check his facts – I’ve learned never to trust his stuff until I’ve had time to read up on what he’s reporting on myself or read articles that fisk his work from his detractors. So while I didn’t know the facts about this particular case I knew that eventually someone who actually bothers to check facts – and knows Chait’s an ass – would climb that mountain just to nail Chait’s sorry butt to the wall once again. And here we are.

  8. 8.

    jl

    April 24, 2015 at 2:57 pm

    OK, as I remember, the debunker I found had much more detail on the uranium deal n particular. I will dive into the mushroom field and look again. Been another day, so the scandal monger pieces have probably doubled by now.

  9. 9.

    Redshift

    April 24, 2015 at 3:01 pm

    @agorabum:

    The kochs giving walker vast sums to turn Wisconsin into its subsidiary – no mention.

    Even bigger deal – there are no restrictions on foreigners being among those donating unlimited amounts to candidates’ 501c4’s, and since the donors don’t have to be disclosed, we have no way of knowing. The billionaires who are buying GOP candidates don’t even have to be American billionaires. The Saudis could be financing a candidate who’s in favor of our going to war with Iran for them.

  10. 10.

    jl

    April 24, 2015 at 3:02 pm

    I cannot help noting the double standard you see over and over again by the media and the GOP hacks and assorted concern trolls that comprise most of the pundit class.

    You got a controversy with a Republican and the ‘did they break the law’ standard is applied. And what they mean by ‘the law’ is the most crabbed and legalistic parsing of the letter (never mind the spirit or the intention of the law). Anything else is being unfair, scandal mongering and obviously viciously partisan attack.

    Now you got the HRC emails, and the fact that she, AFAIK, followed standard procedure and precedent, and laws and regulations in force at the time, in determining personal versus official, means nothing. Even the ‘liberal’ Mika lady on Mornin’ Joe brushed off that as total BS and irrelevant.

  11. 11.

    Redshift

    April 24, 2015 at 3:03 pm

    @jl: Forbes had a debunking article with a lot of detail back when the NYT first floated this allegation in 2008.

  12. 12.

    bemused

    April 24, 2015 at 3:03 pm

    When Chait is good, he can be very good but when he is bad, he is appallingly awful.

  13. 13.

    jl

    April 24, 2015 at 3:05 pm

    @Redshift: thanks. I will look for that.

  14. 14.

    Myiq2xu

    April 24, 2015 at 3:13 pm

    These are not the droids you are looking for. Now drink your Koolaid.

  15. 15.

    Tree With Water

    April 24, 2015 at 3:20 pm

    To think the Clinton’s would have failed to cross every t and dotted every i in the running of that outfit is insulting their political IQ.

  16. 16.

    catclub

    April 24, 2015 at 3:24 pm

    @jl:

    the debunker I found had much more detail on the uranium deal n particular.

    I noticed that Bill gave a talk paid for by the investment bank that handled the uranium company sale. What fraction of its business was made by this one transaction? I suspect not much.

  17. 17.

    catclub

    April 24, 2015 at 3:28 pm

    @Redshift:

    there are no restrictions on foreigners being among those donating unlimited amounts to candidates’ 501c4’s, and since the donors don’t have to be disclosed, we have no way of knowing.

    THIS. Actually, it is not ok to have those foreign donations go to political ads, but how do you find out if they do? I suspect the easter bunny will investigate for us.

    Plus, Guy owns gambling establishment in Macau – could Chinese money get laundered through that? I know it has never been considered, but I’m just spitballing here.

  18. 18.

    d58826

    April 24, 2015 at 3:53 pm

    I guess my problem with all of this is that once people reach that level of government they have accumulated so many friends, contributors, conflicts of interest that it is impossible to sort it all out. Sure there were stories about Chaney and Halliburton but they ran for a day or two and then were dropped. Rummy didn’t have conflicts with his old employers? Really? And then there is the bush family. I don’t recall anyone making it an impeachable offense that Bush 41 had conflicts when he was CIA director/VP or POTUS. Bush 43 was bailed out of one failed business venture after another. We are seeing a rehash of Hillary’s 1000. investment but no one cared that W walked away with a fortune from his investment in a baseball team even though the original sum that he put in was relatively modest. The right still talks about draft-doggier pot smoking Bill while ignoring the draft habits of Chaney, et. al. or W’s drinking

    Most of these stories were reported on and forgotten within a few days. The difference is that the GOP doesn’t have to put up the the likes of Faux news. It doesn’t matter what democrat is running and how ‘pure’ they are, Faux will find (or more likely make-up) something. I doubt that there is a single democratic politician who doesn’t have an late fee at the library in his record. Faux will turn that into the crime of the century. The MSM, in order to avoid being labeled liberal, will of course have to cover it since it is being talked about on the Sunday shows and therefore is ‘news’..

  19. 19.

    Betty Cracker

    April 24, 2015 at 4:05 pm

    I was hoping Conason would pipe up since he’s generally sane about the Clintons. Thanks for linking it!

  20. 20.

    Waysel

    April 24, 2015 at 4:05 pm

    @jl: Any chance it appears in ‘history’ in your computer or browser?

  21. 21.

    jl

    April 24, 2015 at 4:24 pm

    @Waysel: Good idea. Though my browser history has mushroomed with HRC scandal stories too. I will look later today.

  22. 22.

    ThresherK (GPad)

    April 24, 2015 at 4:43 pm

    To be fair, GWB’s post-presidency has been a net boon to the USA, by the “stop poking my ear with a hatpin” standard. So measured that way, Bill Clinton stopping being Prez isn’t so great.

    But that’s not what Chait means. As I am a not young, straight white urbane male liberal, I need ome word to give eberyone so the know Chait and I are not to be lumped together.

  23. 23.

    EconWatcher

    April 24, 2015 at 5:28 pm

    @Brachiator:

    It’s possible that Conason will turn out to be right. But did this article seem to you like an honest assessment of the evidence? Example: “Knowledgeable observers of CFIUS believe that its operations are dominated by Treasury and Defense, not State.”

    Read that sentence a couple of times. Does that sound like good reporting to you?

    For conflict of interest, what unnamed people “believe” about who “dominates” CFIUS is irrelevant. For conflict of interest analysis, the relevant question is, was State’s approval or assent required? If it was, then Hillary was required to formally recuse herself from decisionmaking if she had a conflict, and it would be no defense that others also had to approve, or even “doiminated” the approval. The charitable explanation is that Conason is a poor writer who doesn’t explain himself very well, but the language has the feel of a smokescreen.

    And another seeming sleight of hand, or at least sloppiness: He says that Hillary wasn’t “personally involved” in State’s decision. Again, not the question. She’s SOS. State does many things for which she is responsible, even if she’s not “personally involved.” (And what does “personally involved” mean? The implication is that she was involved, but not personally.) If she had a conflict, she had to formally recuse herself. Did she?

    It could be that this whole scandal has been trumped up. Many others about the Clintons have been.But if so, someone else needs to write the definitive debunking, because this article is not persuasive.

  24. 24.

    Emma

    April 24, 2015 at 5:33 pm

    @EconWatcher: For people like you, nothing that shows the Clintons as anything but horrible will be a persuasive debunking. It has always been thus, since his first campaign.

  25. 25.

    D58826

    April 24, 2015 at 5:37 pm

    Just one other thought on the Clinton ‘scandals’. It seems that most of the reporting has been done using information that is in the public domain, the Foundation web site for example. Now the Clinton’s have been under an electron microscope since at least 1992. Does it seem reasonable that these two very smart people along with their legion of lawyers and accountants are going to lay out in plain sight the trail of corruption that has been alleged? This kind of corruption is usually wrapped up in dummy corporations, Swiss bank accounts, money laundering in the Cayman s, etc.

  26. 26.

    Turgidson

    April 24, 2015 at 5:39 pm

    @Woodrow/Asim:

    Chait is fine when he sticks to making fun of Paul Ryan and various other GOP frauds and grifters. It gets hairy whenever he wanders out of that safe zone.

  27. 27.

    EconWatcher

    April 24, 2015 at 8:04 pm

    @Emma:

    I voted for Clinton twice, and defended him to one and all when they tried to impeach him over a consensual sexual dalliance. Then he pardoned Marc Rich, and I was left speechless. If you read about that one and are OK with it, then we just have no common ground for discussion.

    I’m done defending them, but as you’ll see if you read my post fairly, I won’t condemn them without good evidence either. But I’m a lawyer, and I recognize language that’s been carefully parsed for a reason, and that’s what I see in the Conason piece.

  28. 28.

    ralphb

    April 24, 2015 at 8:05 pm

    @Brachiator: Sigh, From the NYT story:

    “Since uranium is considered a strategic asset, with implications for national security, the deal had to be approved by a committee composed of representatives from a number of United States government agencies. Among the agencies that eventually signed off was the State Department, then headed by Mr. Clinton’s wife, Hillary Rodham Clinton.”

    Allow me to explain the approval process for the curious.

    The Secretary of the Treasury is the Chairperson of CFIUS, and notices to CFIUS are received, processed, and coordinated at the staff level by the Staff Chairperson of CFIUS, who is the Director of the Office of Investment Security in the Department of the Treasury.

    The members of CFIUS include the heads of the following departments and offices:

    Department of the Treasury (chair)
    Department of Justice
    Department of Homeland Security
    Department of Commerce
    Department of Defense
    Department of State
    Department of Energy
    Office of the U.S. Trade Representative
    Office of Science & Technology Policy

    The following offices also observe and, as appropriate, participate in CFIUS’s activities:

    Office of Management & Budget
    Council of Economic Advisors
    National Security Council
    National Economic Council
    Homeland Security Council

    The Director of National Intelligence and the Secretary of Labor are non-voting, ex-officio members of CFIUS with roles as defined by statute and regulation.

    There is an Under-Secretary who handled CFIOS issue. He has stated and is quoted in the NYT story that Mrs Clinton never interfered with him in performance of his job. Is that a bit clearer?

  29. 29.

    Dennis

    April 25, 2015 at 9:51 am

    @EconWatcher: Normally I would agree with you. But the problem is that these agents of smear have done this to the Clintons so many times that they have forfeited any presumption of good faith in their presentations of “facts.” They count on reasonable Democrats like you to say “Well, I support the Clintons, but we shouldn’t dismiss this out of hand…”

    No. The time for that is past. The Clinton Rules are too obvious now. This kind of stuff will work if we try to engage the Swift Boaters as equal participants in a search for the truth. They must be shamed (if they even can be), they must be jeered at.

    Notice how Chait (correctly) states “The New York Times has a report…”. As predicted, the NYT is willing to sell what is left of it’s dwindling credibility in service to it’s Ahab-like chase of the Clinton White Whale.

Comments are closed.

Primary Sidebar

Recent Comments

  • Marmot on Late Night Weekend Wrap-Up Open Thread: Journamalism, Not A Dependable Profit Center (Apr 15, 2024 @ 9:28am)
  • Chris on Late Night Weekend Wrap-Up Open Thread: Journamalism, Not A Dependable Profit Center (Apr 15, 2024 @ 9:28am)
  • Soprano2 on Monday Morning Open Thread: The Tariff We Pay for Civilization (Apr 15, 2024 @ 9:27am)
  • Chris on Late Night Weekend Wrap-Up Open Thread: Journamalism, Not A Dependable Profit Center (Apr 15, 2024 @ 9:27am)
  • Chris T. on Monday Morning Open Thread: The Tariff We Pay for Civilization (Apr 15, 2024 @ 9:26am)

🎈Keep Balloon Juice Ad Free

Become a Balloon Juice Patreon
Donate with Venmo, Zelle or PayPal

Balloon Juice Posts

View by Topic
View by Author
View by Month & Year
View by Past Author

Balloon Juice Meetups!

All Meetups
Talk of Meetups – Meetup Planning
Proposed BJ meetups list from frosty

Fundraising 2023-24

Wis*Dems Supreme Court + SD-8
Virginia House Races
Four Directions – Montana
Worker Power AZ
Four Directions – Arizona
Four Directions – Nevada

Featuring

Medium Cool
Artists in Our Midst
Authors in Our Midst
Positive Climate News
War in Ukraine
Cole’s “Stories from the Road”
Classified Documents Primer

Calling All Jackals

Site Feedback
Nominate a Rotating Tag
Submit Photos to On the Road
Balloon Juice Mailing List Signup
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Links)
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Posts)

Fix Nyms with Apostrophes

Balloon Juice for Ukraine

Donate

Twitter / Spoutible

Balloon Juice (Spoutible)
WaterGirl (Spoutible)
TaMara (Spoutible)
John Cole
DougJ (aka NYT Pitchbot)
Betty Cracker
Tom Levenson
David Anderson
Major Major Major Major
ActualCitizensUnited

Political Action 2024

Postcard Writing Information

Balloon Juice for Four Directions AZ

Donate

Balloon Juice for Four Directions NV

Donate

Site Footer

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

  • Facebook
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • Comment Policy
  • Our Authors
  • Blogroll
  • Our Artists
  • Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2024 Dev Balloon Juice · All Rights Reserved · Powered by BizBudding Inc

Share this ArticleLike this article? Email it to a friend!

Email sent!