2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumConfessions of a Clinton reporter
http://www.vox.com/2015/7/6/8900143/hillary-clinton-reporting-rules
<snip>
1) Everything, no matter how ludicrous-sounding, is worthy of a full investigation by federal agencies, Congress, the "vast right-wing conspiracy," and mainstream media outlets
One of my former colleagues, a hard-nosed reporter who has put countless political pelts on his wall, once told me that everyone in public life has something to hide. Who goes down in the flames of scandal? The politicians we decide to go after.
That may not be 100 percent true, but it's true enough. The act of choosing, time and again, to go after the same person has the effect of tainting that person, even when an investigation or reporting turns up nothing nefarious and it's time not spent digging into his or her adversaries. The original source of alleged malfeasance could come from the other party, within a politician's party, or from the reporter's own observations and industrious digging. But two things are crystal clear: If there's no investigation, there's no scandal. And if there's no scandal, there's no scalp.
The Clintons have been under investigation for about 25 years now. There's little doubt they've produced more information for investigators, lawyers, and journalists about their finances, their business and philanthropic dealings, and their decision-making processes in government than any officials in American history. They've watched countless friends frog-marched into congressional hearings and, in some cases, to jail. They know there's a good chance that any expressed thought will become part of the public record and twisted for political gain.
The most absurd allegations against Hillary Clinton have been bookends on her public career so far: that she had something to do with the suicide of Clinton White House aide Vince Foster, and that she bears responsibility for the terrorist attack that killed US Ambassador to Libya Chris Stevens.
More at the above link.
OKNancy
(41,832 posts)I'm going to repost in the Hillary Group.
RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)The press is owned by the rich and they hate all democrats and treat all of us badly.
OKNancy
(41,832 posts)No, you are incorrect. In no way do other candidates get the same attitudes and coverage that the Clinton's do.
RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)Heh, they tried to crucify him, but he was too clean.
Kerry? Gore? Sorry, I am not biased... I see them do it to all Dems.
OKNancy
(41,832 posts)or maybe you dislike CLinton so much you dismiss everything about what this author is saying ( I think this is the case)
------------
The Clinton rules are driven by reporters' and editors' desire to score the ultimate prize in contemporary journalism: the scoop that brings down Hillary Clinton and her family's political empire. At least in that way, Republicans and the media have a common interest.
-----
Want to drive traffic to a website? Write something nasty about a Clinton, particularly Hillary.
-----
1) Everything, no matter how ludicrous-sounding, is worthy of a full investigation by federal agencies, Congress, the "vast right-wing conspiracy," and mainstream media outlets
2) Every allegation, no matter how ludicrous, is believable until it can be proven completely and utterly false. And even then, it keeps a life of its own in the conservative media world.
3) The media assumes that Clinton is acting in bad faith until there's hard evidence otherwise.
4) Everything is newsworthy because the Clintons are the equivalent of America's royal family
5) Everything she does is fake and calculated for maximum political benefit
RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)Of course they make excuses and look for any way to explain their attacks on any Democrat. Hillary has been running for 12 years now so she has been in the crosshairs a lot. She really isn't that special.
And might I suggest you keep the personal attacks to yourself?
OKNancy
(41,832 posts)Oh nevermind. I will no longer respond to any of your posts.
RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)" You didn't read the article and/or didn't absorb it
or maybe you dislike CLinton so much you dismiss everything about what this author is saying ( I think this is the case)"
Iliyah
(25,111 posts)Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)Privacy to be honored.
Baitball Blogger
(46,757 posts)that the Clinton's experienced.
This would be a far better world.
Admiral Loinpresser
(3,859 posts)Hillary has gotten all kinds of unfair national press for over two decades. It has translated into high national negatives and I think that really hurts her cross over appeal. This is one of the advantages for Bernie in the general election. Not a fair one, but I think it's real.
The media, including the so-called "liberal" media, has done it's best to trash, smear and bring down HRC and former Pres. Clinton. Every Democrat should be aware of this - especially those of us who lived through Bill Clinton's presidency.
There are several very good books about the subject.
I don't think HRC should be criticized for not kowtowing to these jackals.
tularetom
(23,664 posts)The difference is, he more or less just rolls with the punches and takes all the bullshit in stride, and turns it back on them when he can instead of getting all butthurt about it.
They're looking for a reaction when they publish this kind of crap and Obama is smart enough not to give them one. Consequently, all the made up scandals sort of vanish.
SunSeeker
(51,694 posts)She can handle it.
HFRN
(1,469 posts)hasn't it?
Martin Eden
(12,875 posts)... to any malfeasance relative to other politicians. The whole Whitewater investigation was a politically motivated witch hunt. The rightwing strategy is to endlessly repeat false narratives until they seep into conventional wisdom.
The Clintons have my sympathy in regards to unfair treatment, but Hillary will never get my vote in a Democratic primary because of her vote for the IWR, hawkish foreign policy, and cozy relationship with big Wall Street donors.