Maybe I’m missing something. Yes, I know that there is a narrative that Hillary Clinton is dishonest and untrustworthy. There’s even the alt-right version where she is a criminal who should be locked up (for, among other things, assassinating 40 people).
To me, it just seems like people are taking any story about her and viewing it through that lens. This is not a question of me drinking kool-aid for Clinton (or even carrying water for her). I have been critical of both Clintons many times in the past. When they deserved it.
The scandal du jour is that, OMG, she had meetings while she was secretary of state with people who donated money to the Clinton foundation. A foundation that nobody disputes has done lots of good things around the world, including saving millions of lives.
First of all, the fact that a small percentage of the people who met with Clinton while she was Secretary of State also happened to be donors to the Clinton Foundation is not at all suspicious. Correlation does not imply causation. Is there any evidence that donating money to the foundation got those people access? No. Even if it did, would anyone be the least bit surprised that money drives our politics? Even the Supreme Court says that money is free speech, and is protected.
The important question is, is there any evidence that donating money to the foundation got the donors special favors from Clinton? And the answer here is a resounding no. Some of the donors asked for favors. Most of the time they did not get them. And the few favors that were done appear to be things that likely would have been granted even if the person had never donated to the foundation.
I’ve also heard people complain that Clinton should release the schedule of all her meetings as secretary of state. Uh, she already did that. You can read them yourself online. But you don’t have to, because one reporter read all 3,721 pages and gives you a an overview of the “surprisingly intimate portrait of the life of the Democratic nominee for president” revealed by her schedule. Conclusion? Hillary Clinton works very hard and meets with a lot of people.
The bottom line is that scandals sell newspapers, and the media is only too happy to play along with the Clinton narrative created through endless Benghazi hearings. In particular, the original AP story about the Clinton Foundation “scandal” was very sloppy reporting. And adding insult to injury, the AP promoted the story widely with tweets that were downright inaccurate and misleading.
I’ve condemned Obama when he has done bad things, and that’s about someone I’m happy to admit that I really like and think has been one of our best presidents ever. I’m not afraid to condemn Clinton, but seriously, this is a scandal? It’s almost enough to convince me that sexism is alive and well in the US.
Also published on Medium.