Now They’re Targeting Hillary’s Family
[su_publirb]
Jessica Kourkounis for The New York Times
Since they’ve had no success smearing Hillary Clinton, her detractors are now targeting her family and, in particular, her brother Tony.
On and off for two decades, the affable Mr. Rodham has tried to use his connections with his sister and his brother-in-law, former President Bill Clinton, to further a business career that has seen more failures than successes. The connections to the Clintons have given Mr. Rodham, a self-described “facilitator,” a unique appeal and a range of opportunities, like addressing Chinese investor conferences and joining an advisory board of a company seeking permission to mine for gold in Haiti.
But his business dealings have often invited public scrutiny and uncomfortable questions for the Clintons as Mr. Rodham has cycled through a variety of ventures, leveraging his ties to them and sometimes directly seeking their help…
As Mrs. Clinton began her 2016 campaign for the presidency, Hugh Rodham and Roger Clinton had faded from public view, but Tony Rodham emerged as a controversial figure. A government investigation in March found that GreenTech, which sought green cards for its Chinese investors through an American government program, had received special treatment in the handling of its visa applications. The report described instances when Mr. McAuliffe and Mr. Rodham contacted an official from the Department of Homeland Security to complain about the pace of the visa process.
Mr. Rodham’s unsuccessful pursuit of housing contracts in Haiti, which has not previously been reported, raised new questions.
[su_facebook]
[su_center_ad]
Carla Akins May 11th, 2015 at 1:27 pm
Every president has had “that guy” family member, I figure unless they’re a foreign spy or war criminal it’s just something everybody has to do deal with.
tracey marie May 11th, 2015 at 3:30 pm
Everything is a conspiracy and suspicious to the right.
StoneyCurtisll May 11th, 2015 at 9:09 pm
I remember Billy Carter…(Billy Beer)..
Herb Sarge Phelps May 11th, 2015 at 2:34 pm
Still no policy ideas from the right, just more smear attempts.
Robert M. Snyder May 11th, 2015 at 2:37 pm
Why is it okay to discuss Jeb’s brother but not Hillary’s brother?
Herb Sarge Phelps May 11th, 2015 at 2:41 pm
First W was President not Rodham. Secondly we want the right’s governing ideas not another reality TV show.
Robert M. Snyder May 11th, 2015 at 3:01 pm
The right has a large and growing number of candidates who are putting forth a diverse set of governing ideas for primary voters to weigh and consider. Meanwhile, the left has virtually anointed a single candidate who will apparently have no serious challengers. All of the ideas and diversity are on the right. It must be pretty embarrassing for lefties.
Budda May 11th, 2015 at 3:16 pm
The ‘large number of candidates’ that the right are putting out are no putting forth diverse ideas. On the contrary, it’s the same old crap.
Robert M. Snyder May 11th, 2015 at 3:25 pm
I didn’t say they were new ideas. I said they were diverse ideas. If you think that all of the candidates are saying the same things, then you haven’t been paying attention. That’s understandable. There is no reason for lefties to pay attention, because they will apparently have only one viable candidate on primary election day. You decision has already been made for you. Now please get in line and pull the “Hillary” lever, comrade.
tracey marie May 11th, 2015 at 3:30 pm
Lefties, says the teabagger whining.
Budda May 11th, 2015 at 8:00 pm
Diverse perhaps, but still the same old garbage. I do pay attention, that’s why I know the Republicans are still pushing the same old stuff. Times are changing ( you know , evolving) you and all cons need to keep up.
Robert M. Snyder May 11th, 2015 at 8:38 pm
Interesting that you used the term “evolving”. Ideally we would have a respectable number of candidates (organisms) with each candidate having different ideas (random mutations). The election (survival of the fittest) provides a way for our society (species) to evolve. Democracy is far from perfect, but then so too is natural evolution.
If democracy is viewed as an evolutionary process, then having ten or twenty candidates competing in a primary is not a bad thing. We should not equate candidates and ideas. A candidate is a vessel for a set of ideas. But campaigns are about finding the best ideas as much as the best candidates. Smart candidates will adopt the best ideas during a campaign, or at least once elected.
You say R’s are pushing the same old stuff. Maybe so. But they are not all pushing the *same* stuff. You won’t get the same stuff from Rand Paul that you would get from Jeb Bush, for example. And what is Hillary pushing that is so new and revolutionary?
It seems to me that all of the political philosophies have already been thought of. The question is not whether something is new, but whether it is right for our time. For example, automation and robotics will continue to eliminate jobs, not just in the US, but all around the world. I was taught that every able-bodied person should be required to work for his keep. But is that realistic in today’s world? As a conservative, it violates my instincts, but I have to admit that I no longer feel comfortable saying “Get a job”, because I don’t see a lot of new jobs opening up in the future. Quite the contrary.
I would love to see Rep and Dem candidates discussing and debating the question of how people will earn a living in the highly automated world that we are now entering. If they are NOT discussing this issue, I think we have to blame the media. They should be asking the question and demanding sensible answers.
Budda May 11th, 2015 at 10:07 pm
Just because you have 10 or 12 candidates doesn’t mean they aren’t all on a dead end track.
You are correct in that the press is very lacks in asking the tough questions.
Times they are a changing
Robert M. Snyder May 11th, 2015 at 10:27 pm
Polling by Gallup and Rasmussen consistently show that job creation is one of the top voter concerns. Given the unstoppable trend toward greater automation and robotics, it seems to me that there is very little that government can do to create jobs (apart from creating a new Civilian Conservation Corps or something similar). All of the candidates are going to promise that they have the “secret sauce” that will create jobs. But I think they are spitting into the winds of change.
Politicians need to speak truth to power. The voters have the power to decide who gets elected. The truth is that there is very little that ANY president can do to create jobs.
The voters need to hear the truth. They need to stop waiting for a magical solution from Washington. The largest employer in China (Foxconn) is making massive investments in robotics. This is a worldwide phenomenon. The general public is in denial. If they think that ANY politician is going to create a significant number of jobs, they are going to be sadly mistaken. We need to recognize the new reality of increasing automation and start talking about how to adapt.
tracey marie May 11th, 2015 at 3:29 pm
Just because you know you will lose the election is no reason for you to whine and pretend as if you have a point.
arc99 May 11th, 2015 at 2:48 pm
Because Jeb’s brother aka former President George W. Bush was responsible for the policies that governed this country from 2001-2008. If Jeb is suggesting we return to those very same policies under his administration, it is more than appropriate to discuss.
If the time comes that Mr. Rodham defines policy that is legislated into laws which govern the United States of America, then we can discuss him too.
Robert M. Snyder May 11th, 2015 at 2:55 pm
So you’re saying it was wrong for people to discuss Laura Bush’s youthful auto accident when George was running for president?
tracey marie May 11th, 2015 at 3:28 pm
wow, you are just going to push your garbage and pretend you have a point. This brother is not political, he was never a politition like gw who crashed the economy and allowed 9-11 to happen. He is not a advisor for Hillary and is not raising money for Hillary like gw is for his brother Jeb.
Robert M. Snyder May 11th, 2015 at 6:53 pm
Read this and then tell me he is not political.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tony_Rodham
arc99 May 11th, 2015 at 4:07 pm
yes, it most certainly was wrong. I agree 100% with the President on the issue of attacking family members not involved in government.
here is what he said when some attempted to bring Palin’s family issues into the 2008 campaign.
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/01/obama.palin/
MONROE, Michigan (CNN) — Sen. Barack Obama said firmly that families are off-limits in the campaign for president, reacting to news that GOP running mate Sarah Palin’s 17-year-old daughter is pregnant.
“Let me be as clear as possible,” Obama said. “I think people’s families are off-limits, and people’s children are especially off-limits. This shouldn’t be part of our politics. It has no relevance to Gov. Palin’s performance as governor or her potential performance as a vice president.”
Obama said reporters should “back off these kinds of stories” and noted that he was born to an 18-year-old mother.
“How a family deals with issues and teenage children, that shouldn’t be the topic of our politics, and I hope that anybody who is supporting me understands that’s off-limits.”
Robert M. Snyder May 11th, 2015 at 4:14 pm
I completely agree that children should be off limits. But when it comes to adult siblings, there is a chicken-and-egg problem. How can the media know the manner and extent to which a family member is involved in government without first doing a little digging?
Laura Bush was a librarian. But according to the article, “The connections to the Clintons have given Mr. Rodham, a self-described “facilitator,” a unique appeal and a range of opportunities, like addressing Chinese investor conferences and joining an advisory board of a company seeking permission to mine for gold in Haiti.”
Anyone who addresses a Chinese investor conference and mines gold in Haiti is no mere librarian.
arc99 May 11th, 2015 at 4:24 pm
I concede that the attacks on Mrs. Bush were wrong, so now you move the goalposts, comparing her occupation to that of Mr. Rodham. So could you give us a spreadsheet where you list which occupations of family members deserve scrutiny. Pardon the sarcasm, but Robert that was a pretty lame rationalization where we move from saying family members are off limits to saying family members are off limits only for certain occupations.
Yes, Laura Bush was a relatively unknown librarian. Mr. Rodham was relatively unknown private citizen until his sister and brother in law moved into the White House. I fail to see any relevant distinction.
If there are suspicions of unethical or illegal family member activity THAT THE CANDIDATE KNOWS ABOUT, then let law enforcement pursue the matter. And even if the family member is engaged in something nefarious, if the candidate knows nothing about it, it is entirely irrelevant.
Robert M. Snyder May 11th, 2015 at 6:51 pm
The original article said that “Hillary’s detractors are now targeting her family”. I think that you and I both made the same assumption as the author, namely that any investigation of Rodham was necessarily related to Hillary’s candidacy. But it would appear that these investigations and the controversy surrounding Rodham are nothing new, and therefore not entirely due to her candidacy.
According to the Wikipedia article on Tony Rodham:
“In 1997, Rodham tried to arrange meetings between Paraguayan President Juan Carlos Wasmosy and President Clinton, and also powerful Moscow Mayor Yuri Luzhkov and the President. In 1998, he paid a visit to dictatorial Prime Minister Hun Sen of Cambodia. In each of these cases, there was criticism that he was giving an unauthorized impression of White House approval to these foreign figures, or was seeking financial gain for himself.”
“In 1999, Tony and brother Hugh Rodham entered into a $118 million venture to grow and export hazelnuts from the Republic of Georgia. The U.S. State Department and National Security Advisor Sandy Berger became upset, however, when the Rodhams’ local business connection in Batumi turned out to be Aslan Abashidze, a major political opponent of Georgian President Eduard Shevardnadze, then a key U.S. ally in the region. Moreover, Tony Rodham flew to Rome to become godfather to Abashidze’s grandson. After initial resistance, Berger and the Clintons prevailed upon the Rodham brothers to drop the deal.”
“In March 2001, it was revealed that Tony Rodham had helped gain a March 2000 presidential pardon for Edgar Allen Gregory, Jr. and his wife, Vonna Jo, a Tennessee couple in the carnival business who had been convicted of bank fraud. The pardon was granted over the objections of the U.S. Justice Department. Rodham acknowledged talking to President Clinton about a pardon; he said he received no money for his work, but he did have financial ties to the couple as a consultant.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tony_Rodham
arc99 May 11th, 2015 at 4:07 pm
yes, it most certainly was wrong. I agree 100% with the President on the issue of attacking family members not involved in government.
here is what he said when some attempted to bring Palin’s family issues into the 2008 campaign.
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/01/obama.palin/
MONROE, Michigan (CNN) — Sen. Barack Obama said firmly that families are off-limits in the campaign for president, reacting to news that GOP running mate Sarah Palin’s 17-year-old daughter is pregnant.
“Let me be as clear as possible,” Obama said. “I think people’s families are off-limits, and people’s children are especially off-limits. This shouldn’t be part of our politics. It has no relevance to Gov. Palin’s performance as governor or her potential performance as a vice president.”
Obama said reporters should “back off these kinds of stories” and noted that he was born to an 18-year-old mother.
“How a family deals with issues and teenage children, that shouldn’t be the topic of our politics, and I hope that anybody who is supporting me understands that’s off-limits.”
causeican May 13th, 2015 at 11:17 am
Yes!
bpollen May 11th, 2015 at 3:55 pm
Was Hillary’s brother a shining example of how NOT to be a president? Did Hillary’s brother start any wars? Did Hillary’s brother try to sell America on privatizing social security? Did Hillary’s brother send thousands of soldiers and hundreds of thousands of civilians to their death based on lies he and his cronies manufactured? Did Hillary’s brother’s administration out a CIA agent for political revenge?
The minute you can say yes to all those questions, THEN you won’t be playing the “false equivalency” game. Badly.
Robert M. Snyder May 11th, 2015 at 4:06 pm
I am not equating the people. I am equating the relationships. In both cases we are talking about biological siblings. That’s where the equivalency lies.
Nobody is claiming that Jeb had any influence over George’s decision making. So why would anybody suppose that George would have any influence over Jeb’s decision making? Anyone who suggests that Jeb might be influenced by George due to their biological relationship would have to allow that Hillary might be influenced by her siblings as well. If her brother were a small-town auto mechanic, nobody would care. But the article stated that “A government investigation in March found that GreenTech, which sought green cards for its Chinese investors through an American government program, had received special treatment in the handling of its visa applications. The report described instances when Mr. McAuliffe and Mr. Rodham contacted an official from the Department of Homeland Security to complain about the pace of the visa process.”
As I said, if George W. Bush is fair game, then Tony Rodham is fair game as well.
Robert M. Snyder May 11th, 2015 at 4:06 pm
I am not equating the people. I am equating the relationships. In both cases we are talking about biological siblings. That’s where the equivalency lies.
Nobody is claiming that Jeb had any influence over George’s decision making. So why would anybody suppose that George would have any influence over Jeb’s decision making? Anyone who suggests that Jeb might be influenced by George due to their biological relationship would have to allow that Hillary might be influenced by her siblings as well. If her brother were a small-town auto mechanic, nobody would care. But the article stated that “A government investigation in March found that GreenTech, which sought green cards for its Chinese investors through an American government program, had received special treatment in the handling of its visa applications. The report described instances when Mr. McAuliffe and Mr. Rodham contacted an official from the Department of Homeland Security to complain about the pace of the visa process.”
As I said, if George W. Bush is fair game, then Tony Rodham is fair game as well.
arc99 May 11th, 2015 at 4:12 pm
You can say it all you like. Repetition does not make it true.
If George W. Bush is fair game (and he is), then William Jefferson Clinton is fair game as well. I have no problem with that.
We all constantly complain about the calibre of politicians running for office, while at the same time some of us declare that all is fair. I would ask why would our best and brightest enter a career in politics, if now not only is their own personal character under attack, but that of their families and loved ones as well?
Why would anyone want to subject themselves to that. As Pogo said, we have met the enemy and it is us. Most of the people who run for office are those who have a thick enough skin, and enough money. Ability to actually do the job for which they are running is a secondary consideration. Then we whine about the quality of our government. It is no one’s fault but ours that our most talented citizens choose not to subject themselves to public humiliation in order to get hired.
Robert M. Snyder May 11th, 2015 at 4:20 pm
I once served on my local school board, but would be very hesitant about serving at a higher level in government, for the very reasons that you so clearly laid out. We agree on this. But Tony Rodham cannot possibly have believed that his self-described “facilitator” role would never be scrutinized if his sister ran for president.
bpollen May 11th, 2015 at 4:33 pm
No. You are not. You are saying that an ex-president is the equivalent of a non-politician. So, if we can go after W, we can go after Rodham. Again, false equivalency. Pretty it up all you want, but no matter how much lipstick you put on it, it is still a false equivalency pig.
YOU are the one who says they are equivalent and both should be equally viable targets. So to claim that you are NOT claiming that is pure sophistry. “As I said, if George W. Bush is fair game, then Tony Rodham is fair game as well.” Your own words. Equating them. Disingenuous arguments aside, YOU are equating them and saying they are BOTH fair game because of relationship. *i* am calling your argument pure BS.
Robert M. Snyder May 11th, 2015 at 6:35 pm
Yeah, well your mother wears combat boots! 🙂
causeican May 13th, 2015 at 11:15 am
Mine does.
StoneyCurtisll May 11th, 2015 at 9:12 pm
Jed’s brother, and his Father are former Presidents of the United States of America..
If you dont get the false equivalence, nothing I can do or say will help ya out.
fahvel May 12th, 2015 at 3:12 am
dumb ass question fella.
Warman1138 May 11th, 2015 at 3:56 pm
Before you know it they’ll be robbing graves in desperation.
liberalMD May 12th, 2015 at 2:50 am
Don’t go messing with dead people.
The Republicans will need them on election day.
rg9rts May 12th, 2015 at 4:59 am
Hillary’s father’s grave was just trashed a short time ago
Hirightnow May 11th, 2015 at 4:58 pm
” a business career that has seen more failures than successes.”
Mrs. Clinton is related to G.W. Bush?
Obewon May 11th, 2015 at 8:57 pm
Apparently GOP TP baggers say it’s open season on Jeb’s Sister Doro(thy) Bush Koch!!!
Lets illustrate how all Businesses Work visa’s are “specially treated” (MSFT, ORCL, etc) “sought green cards for its (RICH) Chinese investors through an American government program, had received special treatment in the handling of its visa applications.” E.g. Australia requires $250,000+ investment capital for immigration, or you’ll always recycle your position to the end of the line. RWNJ’s are petrified of HRC’s majority voter landslide!
fahvel May 12th, 2015 at 3:11 am
just the beginning – anyone running for pres should not be voted for because to do that proves their insanity. – all of them!
rg9rts May 12th, 2015 at 4:58 am
Anyone remember Billie Beer?? Another calamity that was supposed to bring down civilization as we know it