Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

riversedge

(70,242 posts)
Sat May 14, 2016, 07:29 AM May 2016

Hit Job: A Closer Look at the WSJ’s Clueless Attack on the Clinton Foundation




So many are just too eager to hit on anything Clinton!



Another Hillary Hit Job: A Closer Look at the WSJ’s Clueless Attack on the Clinton Foundation

http://www.insidephilanthropy.com/home/2016/5/13/hit-job-a-closer-look-at-the-wsjs-clueless-attack-on-the-cli.html#.VzaTcW02rag.twitter


Author David Callahan

Last year, I made the (obvious) prediction that scrutiny of the Clinton Foundation would pick up in 2016 as the election approached. Such scrutiny is well deserved. .......................

Yet other allegations about the Clinton Foundation have been almost comically clueless in their failure to understand modern philanthropy or how this unique outfit operates.

A new story published in the Wall Street Journal, by James Grimaldi, falls into the latter category. It alleges that the Clinton Foundation improperly aided a for-profit energy business founded by friends of Bill Clinton. The company, Energy Pioneer Solutions, describes its mission as building a “sustainable energy model that provides streamlined, turn-key solutions for both energy providers and American homeowners alike.” Among its ideas is finding new ways to insulate homes that don’t require big upfront outlays for homeowners. The founders of the company have various ties to Bill Clinton, both political and personal.

As part of the 2010 Clinton Global Initiative, a $2 million investment was arranged with Energy Pioneer Solutions by Kim Samuel, a Canadian businessperson and philanthropist. Additionally, Bill Clinton recommended to Obama’s Energy Secretary, Steven Chu, that the company receive a federal grant from the Energy Department, which it did.

Those are the facts of the case, as breathlessly reported in the Wall Street Journal, complete with a graphic laying out the web of relationships involved.

What’s your reaction to those facts? My own is: Good work, Bill! The former president and Clinton Foundation did a wise thing here—albeit without a keen enough eye toward how a Rupert Murdoch-owned newspaper might work with this material when Hillary made a White House run.

Finding new ways to finance sustainable energy solutions for homeowners has emerged as one of the most promising frontiers in clean energy in recent years
. Most notably, solar panels have spread rapidly across rooftops as private companies have shouldered the cost of installing those panels, at no cost to homeowners. Bill Clinton clearly grasped the potential of this model back in 2010, before many other people did, and also grasped that it was critical to find new ways to finance home insulation and other efficiency steps so that homeowners didn’t have to shell out the money themselves.

While the WSJ’s Grimaldi writes darkly about the Clinton Foundation arranging support for a for-profit business, this is an .............................
17 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Hit Job: A Closer Look at the WSJ’s Clueless Attack on the Clinton Foundation (Original Post) riversedge May 2016 OP
KICK! Cha May 2016 #1
Good morning Cha. stonecutter357 May 2016 #2
Good Morning, stonecutter~ Cha May 2016 #4
Some of the largest critics are the same people who wants to tax the hell out of Thinkingabout May 2016 #3
Good resource - thanks for posting SharonClark May 2016 #8
Could you imagine going through life like this? yallerdawg May 2016 #5
Yes, and their yearn to help others blows my mind, the RW lies, just attack after Thinkingabout May 2016 #10
K&R mcar May 2016 #6
Thanks, good find. nt BootinUp May 2016 #7
K&R ismnotwasm May 2016 #9
Thanks, rivers - BlueMTexpat May 2016 #11
I've been working in the non-profit field for 12 years, stopbush May 2016 #12
You nailed it! pandr32 May 2016 #13
thank you riversedge! DemonGoddess May 2016 #14
It's the WSJ. Since Murdoch took over, it's little more than a paper version of Fox News... TwilightZone May 2016 #15
K&R fleabiscuit May 2016 #16
interesting that Whimsey May 2016 #17

Thinkingabout

(30,058 posts)
3. Some of the largest critics are the same people who wants to tax the hell out of
Sat May 14, 2016, 08:12 AM
May 2016

Rich people to be given to others but complain about the Clinton Foundation which gives to those in need. I guess they want those who give to charities to stop.

yallerdawg

(16,104 posts)
5. Could you imagine going through life like this?
Sat May 14, 2016, 08:46 AM
May 2016

Everything you do and everything you say - no matter what good it does in the world, how harmless and simple it may be, how utterly innocuous any set of three words are in context - everything twisted to fit a sick, rightwing, attack, fictional narrative for three decades!

And 'the left' falls for this crap because of the endless repetition by the M$M ("It must be true or they wouldn't report it!&quot and the need for 'the left' to latch on to 'confirming their bias' against this particular candidate - for whatever personal reasons.

Hillary - and Bill - have made lifelong commitment to public service and making our world a better place that should be honored and respected.

Despite the endless sad bullshit aimed at them the entire time.

The link ends with what we should consider a sad note regarding good people in this world. Even if it's your ex-president husband managing the philanthropy!

So here’s a piece of advice for future presidential aspirants: If you have enemies out to get you—and you’re not so bad at wounding yourself—don’t set yourself up as a philanthropic middleman, raising money from numerous major donors and directing it to myriad projects. It’s just going to end up as a big mess in the end.

Thinkingabout

(30,058 posts)
10. Yes, and their yearn to help others blows my mind, the RW lies, just attack after
Sat May 14, 2016, 09:55 AM
May 2016

Attack. Do we see them whining all of the time and playing the victim, no just get up and brush themselves and look to see how they can help someone else. About 89% of the Clinton foundation goes to help others, very good for charities.

ismnotwasm

(41,989 posts)
9. K&R
Sat May 14, 2016, 09:55 AM
May 2016

So tired of the CT woo woo x-files Manchuria candidate grassy knoll I'm too lazy to think or find and use good information people--who are growing in number,, and apparently think bullshit times bullshit divided by enough people equals truth.

BlueMTexpat

(15,369 posts)
11. Thanks, rivers -
Sat May 14, 2016, 10:21 AM
May 2016

trying to bring in the facts, as usual!

It is such an uphill battle - especially when there is a determined Fifth Column on DU that is every bit as determined to smear Hillary constantly and bring the RW slurs to us here. Thanks for your true grit in getting the truth out there!

stopbush

(24,396 posts)
12. I've been working in the non-profit field for 12 years,
Sat May 14, 2016, 10:38 AM
May 2016

and I find it inexcusable that so many people - especially those in the media - have no idea how non-profits operate, what they are legally permitted to do and not do, and why they exist in the first place.

The Clinton Foundation is a model for the way a non-profit should operate. Their program-to-overhead ratio (ie: where they spend the $ they collect) is way above the 75% that is considered to be exemplary, and their mission is certainly to be admired.

It's disappointing that a foundation that is so well run and that does so much good is villified simply because the stream of RW lies told against the Clintons over the decades have metastitized into received opinion.

TwilightZone

(25,471 posts)
15. It's the WSJ. Since Murdoch took over, it's little more than a paper version of Fox News...
Sat May 14, 2016, 11:54 AM
May 2016

especially the editorial side.

 

Whimsey

(236 posts)
17. interesting that
Sun May 15, 2016, 12:24 AM
May 2016

when its a Gate's micro-soft global initiative like birth control that is ok foundation-wise, but Clinton clean energy is not. The reality is, is that money talks in the USA and if you want to change the world money still talks. At least the Clinton Foundation is trying to achieve global change on energy. What is Trump doing with his billions(?). Get laid?

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»Hillary Clinton»Hit Job: A Closer Look at...