The Washington Post’s Dana Milbank wrote about Hillary’s critics today, and joined me this afternoon to discuss Hillary and her critics:
HH: I begin this hour, though, with Dana Milbank, columnist for the Washington Post. You can follow Dana online at Twitter, of course, @DanaMilbank and at WashingtonPost.com. and I’m celebrating. It’s a rare moment of agreement between Dana Milbank and I. I, too, was underwhelmed by James O’Keefe’s latest expose of Hillary. Dana, welcome, good to talk to you.
DM: A pleasure to talk with you, Hugh.
HH: So I saw the column today, and I thought okay, let’s break this down into two parts. The James O’Keefe part, and why don’t you describe what James O’Keefe, known for Project Veritas, tried to interest the D.C. press corps in this week and failed to do so.
DM: Well look, I mean, O’Keefe has a pretty successful record if you look at what he did with ACORN, and what he did with NPR. So he got, I think, 50 of us reporters and a dozen TV cameras in there for what he said was going to be evidence of illegal activity by the Clinton campaign. So we thought he had the goods. But then it was basically this transaction for $75 dollars for this Canadian woman who wanted to buy a T-shirt and some pins, and O’Keefe’s videographer, because she evidently couldn’t do this, because that would be considered a foreign contribution, his videographer, an American, facilitated this. And he said well, that was a conduit transaction, and that was illegal, and Hillary is taking foreign contributions. Now I think foreign contributions to, say, the Clinton Foundation in the tens of millions of dollars are a very important and huge issue, but I think this $75 dollar acquisition of a T-shirt and some pins at a Hillary rally are falling a little bit short of scandal. Continue Reading