So much for the Times claim that they would do their own independent reporting on the allegations of a quid pro quo between the work of Hillary Clinton and the work of the Clinton Global Initiative raised by Right-wing operative Peter Schweizer in his new book, "Clinton Cash". The Times appears to have copied today's attack on the Clintons pretty much directly from the book and published under the by-lines of two Times staffers.
The Times relies on the same anonymous sources to imply that there was collusion between the Clintons in a plot to generate donations for the Clinton Global Initiative using Hillary's position as Secretary of State.
The article, like the Republican oppo research it is based on offers nothing but innuendo and anonymous quotes as evidence. This is nothing more than a hit job. It is very much like the Times reporting on Whitewater, which was based on the same lack of facts. It took $50 million in taxpayer money to prove that one was bs.
This Times article sweetens the plot by bringing in Vladimir Putin, US uranium mining, and greedy Canadian businessmen. It is almost entirely fact free. Here is how the Times sums up their reporting:
Whether the donations played any role in the approval of the uranium deal is unknown.
The Times acknowledges that they have no evidence of wrong doing, but that doesn't stop them from slinging mud. They also rely on tactics like this,
The American Embassy ultimately reported to the secretary of state, Mrs. Clinton. Though the Clarke cable was copied to her, it was given wide circulation, and it is unclear if she would have read it; the Clinton campaign did not address questions about the cable..
It is useful to know that the Secretary of State, no matter who they might be, is copied on every cable sent to the State Department. I'll wager that the cables from Kazakhstan aren't at the top of the pile. What is most telling is the sleazy way the Times reporters imply that there is something fishy about the lack of response from the Clinton Campaign, as if they should have reviewed the tens of thousands of cables that arrive in Foggy Bottom every day.
I'm not going to refute this garbage point by point, but the Times offers no evidence of any collusion between Hillary's actions at State and the Clinton foundation. They offer an interesting narrative about international uranium mining, but they can only connect the Clintons to it tangentially. But I guess thats all you need for a hit job.
Here's the link to the Times: NY Times