With the announcement that the FBI is still investigating pay for play between Hillary Clinton’s State Department and the Clinton Foundation the mainstream media had to find a scapegoat to protect their candidate. As part of the pay for play investigation, more than once the FBI interviewed Peter Schweizer, the man whose book “Clinton Cash” broke the ice in the Hillary Clinton pay for play scandal. As soon as that news was published the media found their perfect scapegoat, Peter Schweizer.
Even before the book was published the Clinton machine and their lemmings media were creating attacks to trash the book. But it wasn’t easy, because ‘Clinton Cash’ was different. Rather than a personality based book with un-provable hearsay information about who cussed who, Peter Schweizer presented facts, events, spread sheets, and meticulously documented his sources, including tax records and government documents.
From the beginning Schweizer never said ‘Clinton Cash’ proved crimes, only that his book showed a pattern of behavior that warranted further investigation. A fact that almost twenty months since the book was published most ‘reporters’ have forgotten as they targeted the book and the author this week.
For example “CNN Newsroom pointed the finger at conservative author Peter Schweitzer for the “growing turmoil” at the Bureau over the investigations.”
I guess they haven’t been paying attention because in the weeks leading up to Comey’s announcement there were stories about discord at the FBI because of the director’s decision not to prosecute Hillary on the email scandal. In fact one report said that because of his email decision there was a pile of agents’ resignations on his desk.
CNN’s coverage was so laughable they even screwed up basic facts. For example in the quote from Even Perez below, if you check out what I hi-lighted in red:
It turns out that a lot of what they had, Carol, was based on this book called Clinton Cash. It was published by Peter Schweizer, and he’s now an editor at Breitbart. But a lot of the allegations in there have not been substantiated.
Schweizer did not self-publish his book, it was published by Harper Collins a major publishing house. Peter is not “now” a Breitbart editor he’s been for over six years. Schweizer was hired by Andrew Breitbart in 2010 to run the new site “Big Peace.” I should know that because I was his best reporter (okay that last part about best is opinion–mine)
As far allegations not being substantiated, that’s an interesting statement which I believe deserves the BS Button. Schweizer’s book presents facts. For example it explained how Russia was able to purchase 20% of the US uranium supply in the uranium one deal, it also presented the proof that many of the people involved in the deal donated large sums of money to the Clinton foundation, and that State was one of the departments that approved the deal. At the same time ally of Uranium One, a Russian investment bank called Renaissance Capital invited Bill Clinton to speak to its investor’s conference for $500,000.—all undisputed facts.
Peter Schweizer never claimed to have a smoking gun beyond the timing of the donations and the uranium deal, there is no evidence presented of a direct connection between Clinton Foundation donations, Bubba’s half a million dollar speaking pay day and the approval of the deal–It may all be a coincidence (if one believes in coincidences). The point of the book was to point out the deals that had similar “coincidences” and suggest that they presented a pattern which should be investigated.
Vanity Fair “reporter” Abigail Tracy also used her platform to cast aspersions on “Clinton Cash” and Mr. Schweitzer. She described the book as:
The controversial, mostly discredited book has been held up by many as irrefutable proof of wrongdoing, or at least common venality, by the Clintons.
Actually the book wasn’t largely discredited, there were seven or eight passages that were proven to be factually incorrect, none of them were major, all of them were corrected as soon as they were found. According to publisher Harper Collins at the time the changes were “actually quite minor.”
Apparently that happens in books quite often.
When discussing the case and the rejected FBI request for a Grand Jury, Ms Tracy reported, “senior officials in the F.B.I. and the Justice Department, however, were skeptical of the evidence and the primary source, Schweizer’s book.” That doesn’t quite mesh with other reports. The Senior Officials didn’t say they were skeptical of the evidence in “Clinton Cash,” but that the felt it wasn’t enough (something that Schweizer said from the beginning-no smoking gun).
She also brings up Schweitzer’s interview with George Stephanopoulos:
During an interview with ABC’s This Week in April 2015, the author said, “The smoking gun is the pattern of behavior,” and when pressed by host George Stephanopoulos, added, “It’s not up to an author to prove the crime.” Schweizer is also hardly without his own agenda. At Breitbart, Schweizer worked under former executive Stephen Bannon, now the campaign C.E.O. for Donald Trump.
Actually it was Stephanopoulos who had the agenda. In an email part of the October 7th WikiLeaks dump Team Clinton brags about supplying their old friend Stephanopoulos the information information he needed to attempt to trash Schweizer’s. Another email part of the same released proves that the “testimony” of the Stephanopoulos-produced witness claiming Ms. Clinton had no involvement with the Uranium One deal was tainted by the fact that the witness was someone made by someone who was asking campaign head John Podesta for a job within the Clinton campaign.
Abigail Tracy goes on to report that several GOP lawmakers are beginning to call for the impeachment of Hillary Clinton which has nothing to do with Peter Schweizer or the content of “Clinton Cash.” I would suspect that neither Ms. Tracy nor any of the other “reporters” commenting on ‘Clinton Cash’ have read the book.
There are other attacks by the liberal media which take a similar form to the ones above— Ad Hominem attacks devoid of facts. Instead of providing their readers the truth, they’ve provided their readers with falsehood an innuendo all with the purpose of obfuscating the truth and protecting their candidate for president, Hillary Clinton.
Funny thing is those same liberals loved Peter Schweizer in 2012, when Steve Kroft used Schweizer’s work as the basis for a blockbuster report on CBS’s 60 Minutes about Congressional insider trading. The Segment called “Insiders: The road to the STOCK act”, relied heavily the reporting in Schweizer’s book “Throw Them All Out,” and supplementary Schweizer reporting. The book demonstrates how politicians use their positions to participate in insider trading, and to protect themselves from charges. A year later, Kroft used Schweizer for another 60 Minutes segment, this time to demonstrate how members of Congress use the funds of their political action committees for private inurement.
Allow me to end on a personal note, Peter Schweizer was the editor of “Big Peace” when I wrote for them a few years ago. As an editor he was a stickler for facts and back up, based on reading “Clinton Cash” and checking the footnotes/references, I am convinced that he demands of himself an even higher level of proof and back up than he demanded of his reporters.