Over the course of 2015, HillaryMen chronicled the deplorable coverage of Hillary Clinton in excruciating detail, identifying countless instances of anti-Hillary bias and spin, from deceptive polls to vicious personal vendettas.
The national media have behaved like an undeclared third party, determined to defeat Hillary. Major media outlets continue to contort themselves into rhetorical pretzels to find new attack lines, new ways to undermine Hillary’s public image.
The latest is the absurd “release the transcripts” hit, which is an implicit character smear reinforcing a reprehensible negative frame pushed by the Sanders campaign. Suggesting Hillary is corrupt without a shred of evidence is as low as politics gets.
Eric Boehlert elaborates:
As journalists continue to press Hillary Clinton to release the transcripts from all the paid speeches she made as a private citizen, including those made to Wall Street powerhouse Goldman Sachs, it’s helpful to keep in mind how unusual the request is. Reading the coverage you might think the transcript demand is routine for all candidates. (i.e. Why won’t she just do it already?) But it’s not the norm. In fact, it’s the opposite of normal.
Note that in 2014 Clinton gave a series of lucrative speeches paid for by a pair of Canadian banks that were aligned with the proposed Keystone XL pipeline. Both banks would have benefited financially from the pipeline being built. But after accepting their speaking fees, Clinton came out against the pipeline in 2014. That’s the opposite of a quid pro quo.
Goldman Sachs regularly brings in a wide array of speakers, including clergy, athletes, researchers,journalists, and entrepreneurs. Is Clinton the only one who received Goldman Sachs speech paychecks and was then expected to deliver favors to the company?
On what grounds are CNBC, MSNBC, CBS, and POLITICO asking for Hillary’s speech transcripts? None, other than echoing another specious attack that impugns her integrity.
Candace Kirby frames it perfectly:
The media is relentless in its pursuit to paint Hillary Clinton as the candidate voters find “untrustworthy.” They deluge the former U.S. senator and secretary of state with the same accusatory — and, frankly, downright offensive — questions ad nauseam: Are you a liar? Why don’t people like you? Why don’t people trust you? Ninety-percent of Millennials believe if I left my puppy with you for a week, you wouldn’t have the heart to feed it. Why do you think that is?
Hillary is exactly right: the manufactured “release the transcripts” media drumbeat is simply a double standard. And yes, that’s the definition of sexism.