By Bill Maher
Clinton Cash author Peter Schweizer admitted to George Stephanopoulos that he doesn’t have any direct evidence that Hillary Clinton intervened on behalf of a donor on anything. He said she should still be investigated, though, because of the broader “pattern of behavior.”
The “pattern of behavior” that’s more disturbing to me is how this is the exact same playbook from the 90s. Some right wing rich guy – then Richard Mellon Scaife, now the Koch brothers - funds some right wing journalist – then David Brock at The American Spectator, now Schweizer’s Government Accountability Institute – to cast a bunch of loose aspersions on the Clintons and lure the likes of The New York Times and The Washington Post into taking the bait. We get embroiled in a never-ending circle jerk of investigations and, rather than blame the perpetrators, we blame the Clintons for being shadowy.
Hillary called it “the vast right wing conspiracy.” She wasn’t wrong. Her only mistake was calling it a “conspiracy,” because it was right out there in the open, for anybody to see. She should have called it a “vast right wing network” instead – and it’s stronger than ever today.