Clintons: Prove Schweizer wrong

Like most of you, I have not read the book.  And yes, Mr. Schweizer comes from the right.  Maybe he has an agenda.  Maybe he is on a mission to destroy Hillary Clinton's candidacy.

So here is my challenge to the Clintons: prove him wrong!  Prove that his story is wrong.

Hold a press conference, answer questions, and let your lawyers tear up the book.

I agree with Mike Lupica:

If this book is nothing more than another smear by a member of the bullhorn right, nothing more than a hatchet job by a former flunky for the George W. Bush administration — and, boy, is that some job reference — then it isn’t Bill Clinton’s job to call out the author, nor a job for members of Hillary Clinton’s staff. If this is all a lie then she is the one who has to go right at Schweizer, whether she helps sell his book for him or not.

This isn’t about the risks of dignifying a smear by addressing it. We’re way past that, because of the coverage “Clinton Cash” is getting from legitimate media. This is about correcting the record about foreign money that has flowed into the Clinton Foundation, starting with the $2.35 million donated to the foundation by some rich Canadian mining entrepreneurs at the same time they were selling a uranium company to a state-owned Russian nuclear energy company.

It was a deal, by the way, on which the federal government, which includes the State Department, had to sign off. On top of that there was no disclosure about this money from Bill Clinton’s foundation, which means the people in charge were negligent or sloppy or both, opening themselves to at least the suggestion from such as Schweizer that this was some backdoor shakedown.

So let's get started.  The Clintons owe that to the Democrats!

My guess is that the Clintons' game will continue. 

First, they will send Lanny Davis to Fox News to say that there is nothing wrong with anything.

Second, they will send James Carville to MSNBC.  Carville will entertain the hosts, and the two people watching the network, with some Southern slang and more about "right-wing talking points."

Third, they will try to destroy the author rather than challenge the contents of the book, as Josh Green said.

Fourth, going after the author probably won't work this time, as Eleanor Clift wrote.

We have seen this movie or before.

The big difference is that we had 4% unemployment when they went after Monica Lewinski in 1998.  Frankly, most of the country was too busy making money to care.  And most people thought it was about inappropriate behavior with a young woman.

It's different now, especially since Hillary Clinton's foreign policy is a mess and there are millions of dollars going into the family pockets.

This is not going away, because the Clintons are either blatantly careless or just corrupt. 

Nevertheless, I will be happy to hear the Clinton defense, especially if Mrs. Clinton decides to speak about the issue.  Let the debate start!

P.S. You can hear my show (CantoTalk) or follow me on Twitter.

If you experience technical problems, please write to