Advertisement

The Hugh Hewitt Show

Listen 24/7 Live: Mon - Fri   6 - 9 AM Eastern
Call the Show 800-520-1234

The Globe On Hillary And Bill’s Pardons

Wednesday, February 28, 2007  |  posted by Hugh Hewitt
Advertisement

The back stories to Bill Clitnon’s pardonalozza were never fully investigated because he left town after the Florida follies.

Now one of them is back in the news, as Hillary’s brother Tony gets tagged for a repayment of a loan made in connection to one of the pardons.

But note how the Boston Globe insists it is part of a scheme to injure Hillary:

Clinton critics have been seeking to revive an array of controversies, from the Whitewater land deal to the Monica Lewinsky case. The Clinton campaign has sought to depict them as old or moot cases. But the Tony Rodham case could be different because it is in court just as Senator Clinton’s campaign reaches full speed.

Clinton critics have been seeking to revive an array of controversies, from the Whitewater land deal to the Monica Lewinsky case. The Clinton campaign has sought to depict them as old or moot cases. But the Tony Rodham case could be different because it is in court just as Senator Clinton’s campaign reaches full speed.

I’d love to see some detail on which “Clinton critics” reporter Michael Kranish is referring to.  David Geffen is mentioned in the story, but he’s a Hollywood mogul and old FOB.  Kranish suggests more than that, but having portrayed Hillary as set upon by the same old mob, he moves on to the details of a case that was developing yesterday:

Yesterday, US Bankruptcy Court Judge Marian Harrison of Nashville ordered Tony Rodham to respond by March 16 to the allegation that he failed to repay a loan of $107,000 from the couple pardoned by Clinton, according to attorneys involved in the case.

There is zero connection between the unamed “Clinton critics” seeking to revive old scandals and a ruling from a court made on February 27, 2007.  That Kranish would bother to muddy up breaking news with a preemptive defense of the Clintons only makes sense if the paper is concerned that the Clintons not be unfairly smeared. 

It looks like a reflex:  Charges against the Clintons must be discounted, contained, given context.  They are on the same side, after all, as the paper.

Advertise With UsAdvertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Sierra Pacific Mortgage
Advertisement
Advertisement
Back to Top