NY Times Once Again Gets it Wrong on Clintons
20 November 2008 9:07 am by Taylor Marsh
Here we go again. The Times has gotten it wrong so many times lately it’s turning into a journalistic parody. Two days in a row the Times misreported WJC’s transparency on his speaking fees. Today, WJC gave over 200,000 names to Obama-Biden today, according to Lisa Meyers of NBC news (see video above), as well as agreed to quite a few compromises, including restricting his future activities. He’s also promising more transparency regarding his charitable donations. WJC is doing all he can to make sure Obama-Biden have full assurances that there will be absolutely no conflict of interest going forward if Clinton is officially nominated for State.
But again, the Times channels the best of the haters on the Clintons’ intent, complete with no sourcing whatsoever.
In their public signals, the Clintons are trying to take the former president’s activities off the table as an issue, in their view eliminating any excuses for Mr. Obama not to give Mrs. Clinton the job. Some in the Obama camp are bristling at what they see as strategic leaks by the Clintons aimed at boxing in the president-elect and forcing him to offer the post.
“Some in the Obama camp are bristling”… at “strategic leaks by the Clintons,” which aren’t actually coming from the Clintons. The Times’ proof the leakers are “from the Clintons?” There isn’t any. None. Nada. Zippo.
Have you read any direct sourcing from the official Clinton camp? They’re not saying a word.
These so called “strategic leaks” are coming from, as Politico’s Tim Vogel accidentally opined yesterday, people with a “predilection for leaking things.”
Memo to all the Clinton obsessed blamers and haters. Hillary and Bill cannot control their fans and supporters on the outside who have sloppy speech control. The Obama drama is coming from outlets like the Times, which is allowing the other Clinton obsessed writers a day off, as they swiftboat the Clintons who are cooperating quietly while the media stirs up the storm.
