Clinton Cash author Schweizer

Clinton Cash author Schweizer continues to have credibility problems, with even Christopher Ruddy of Newsmax defending the Clinton Foundation.
Photo: screen capture via Twitter

For two years Clinton has been the target of the most personally hostile, lavishly financed and longest-lasting negative campaign of personal destruction and character assassination in the history of presidential politics. – Brent Budowsky [The Hill]

IT HAS only just begun and is only going to escalate, but as has already been revealed after the hype of Clinton Cash, it takes more than an author like Peter Schweizer making allegations for prove the ongoing fantasy running in the borg mind of the Republican hit machine.

Princeton Lyman, who served as an ambassador under Republican and Democratic administrations, has rebuked Clinton Cash author Peter Schweizer for taking his comments about the Clinton Foundation’s work “badly out of context.” Lyman has held numerous senior government positions, including ambassadorships to Nigeria and South Africa under President Reagan and President Clinton, respectively. He’s now a senior advisor to the president of the U.S. Institute of Peace. [MMFA]

From BuzzFeed, with Schweizer and his publisher Harper Collins now in the hot seat.

“The book’s reporting is false. President Clinton did not personally receive speaking fees for any of these three speaking engagements in Ireland,” McKenna said.

Additionally, the Kingston speech appears to have occurred in October 2010, not October 2011, a full year before Digicel’s contract was awarded.

Schweizer’s contention that Digicel had not received USAID grants prior to its involvement with Clinton also appears to be incorrect. According to federal records, Digicel received more than $29,000 in contracts from USAID in 2007 and 2008

Multiple requests for comment sent to the publisher and to Schweizer were not returned.

On top of Peter Schweizer’s inability to produce a smoking gun, a “pattern of behavior” doesn’t prove anything, except that the celebrity of the Clintons made people want to be involved in projects with them. Allies have yet to lead to any quid pro quo, which has never been suggested before, let alone proven.

When Newsmax head Christopher Ruddy’s “defense of the Clinton Foundation,” you could almost hearing the air go out of the Fox News Channel wind bags. Almost.

When I heard that Bill Clinton was making as much as $500,000 per speech and made many more millions in his post-presidency, I thought to myself, God bless him. This is the American way.

Former President Clinton’s speaker fees are probably in line with other former presidents who draw big fees, maybe bigger owing to his global popularity.

But God bless them all.

[…] Importantly, The New York Times reported that no less than nine federal agencies and officials including the Defense, Treasury and Energy Departments, as well as the White House, had to approve the Uranium One deal.

Jose Fernandez, who held the position of the department’s principal representative on the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), which reviewed the sale, told The Wall Street Journal: “Secretary Clinton never intervened with me on any CFIUS matter.”

Well, if there’s smoke — there’s fire? Perhaps it’s better to say, Where there’s smear, there’s not always fact.

I think the imperative for journalists is more appropriate: Follow the money. So let’s do that.

The sister companies of News Corp and 21st Century Fox own HarperCollins, which published Peter Schweizer’s book; they own The Wall Street Journal, which first raised the issue of the foreign donations; they own the New York Post, which broke the details about the Schweizer book; and they own Fox News, which gave the story oxygen and legs.

With so much media mojo from one company, there is no doubt they will be doing some pretty good “cashing in” from the many millions of dollars their new best-seller will generate.

Nothing wrong with that, it’s the American way. […]

Schweizer also walked back his unfounded allegations linking the Clinton speaking fees to Iran sanctions.