CNN’s Clinton Cash ‘Fact-Check’ Ends in Embarrassment for Cristina Alesci and Laurie Frankel

Breitbart ^ | June 23,2016

[Hojczyk]

Those questions apparently did not occur to Cristina Alesci and Laurie Frankel.

Also, in addition to the $145 million being funneled to the Clinton Foundation before the CFIUS approval, why was a Kremlin-backed bank bankrolling a $500,000 speech in Moscow for Bill Clinton while his wife led the Russian reset? As even the progressive New Yorker magazine put it, “But there is a bigger question: Why was Bill Clinton taking any money from a bank linked to the Kremlin while his wife was Secretary of State?” Shockingly, CNN Money fact-checkers Alesci and Frankel make no mention of the Kremlin-backed $500,000 Clinton speaking payment.

Nor did CNN’s crack “fact-checkers” mention that the Clinton Foundation received $2.35 million in hidden, undisclosed donations from Ian Telfer, the former head of the Russian government’s uranium company—another fact that multiple liberal news outlets have confirmed.

Indeed, as Bloomberg, Washington Post, New Yorker, ABC News, New York Times, and myriad other Establishment media have all confirmed, Clinton Cash’s most explosive revelations are accurate.

Apparently, CNN’s Cristina Alesci and Laurie Frankel are among the last to know.

[Buckeye McFrog]

Aside from David Gergen

[blackdog]

“Echo Chamber” journalism.

[VanDeKoik]

"Indeed, as Bloomberg, Washington Post, New Yorker, ABC News, New York Times, and myriad other Establishment media have all confirmed, Clinton Cash’s most explosive revelations are accurate. "

[epluribus_2]

Clinton News Network

[WENDLE]

I would enjoy emphasizing here that New York is a community property sate meaning the Hillary was getting 1/2 of the bribe money and Bill the other. It mattered not what account it was placed it. It is important that she release all of her bank record before she is nominated . The people have a right to know if she was selling State department favors for personal cash. Then of course we get to the alter ego “foundation” but focus on her personal direct deposits first.

[timestax]

bttt

[timestax]

[timestax]

[bankwalker]

Mr. Trump set this in motion yesterday. More is coming. Enjoy.

[wildbill]

Gergen should be ashamed of himself for associating his name with a defense of that woman, Ms. Clinton. (As Bill would say)

[alloysteel]

Fact-checking the fact checkers.

People who live in stone houses should not throw glass. The shards end up cutting their own fingers.

[editor-surveyor]

.
As we already knew, one cannot debunk that which contains no bunk.

[McGruff]

“Why was Bill Clinton taking any money from a bank linked to the Kremlin while his wife was Secretary of State?””

Because they are the Clinton’s dammit.

[Milton Miteybad]

The following are community property states:

Louisiana, Arizona, California, Texas, Washington, Idaho, Nevada, New Mexico, and Wisconsin. Alaska couples can opt into a community property arrangement if they so desire.

New York is not a community property state in the strictest sense of the word. (Community property is a legal concept borrowed from Mexico, and with some exceptions, is more prevalent in the area of the U.S. which was formerly subject to Mexican sovereignty.) Rather, New York is more properly characterized as an "equitable distribution" state, i.e., one in which property acquired during the marriage is subject to "equitable" or "fair" (but not necessarily equal) distribution upon the dissolution of the marriage.

So, the proceeds of the Clinton influence peddling/money-laundering operation may be subject to "equitable" division upon the dissolution of their marriage, but for those statutes to be applicable, the Clintons would have to be heading to divorce court.

And if that hasn't happened by now, it's probably not going to happen at all.

[euram]

So far, I haven’t heard any real defense being put up by the Clinton campaign. I did hear her say in a speech yesterday, that Trump was attacking her personally because he doesn’t have any answers to her on substance, she then stated that the Clinton Foundation was for charitable work. Essentially, the response she came up with was, “I am not a crook”, or at least that is what it sounded like to me. You would think that with 800 staffers they could come up with something substantive, but so far, I haven’t heard anything. It’s because she really has no defense other than to try to distract people from the truthfulness of what Trump accused her of.

[DrDude]

Not sure when Fact Checkers started but it wasn’t that long ago. It has never been anything but spin and media propaganda. We need to debunk the entire notion of “FACT CHECKING”.

[joshua c]

Hillary was asked if Bill would cut ties with the foundation if she was elected.

Her response? We will cross that bridge when we get to it, i.e., NO.

h/t intellectual froglegs

[justlurking]

Apparently, CNN’s Cristina Alesci and Laurie Frankel are among the last to know.

Oh, they knew it. But, their assignment was to write an article that omitted it, with the expectation that most readers of the article would NOT know it.

An ethical journalist would refuse to write such an article. But, Alesci and Frankel are either ethical or journalists. They are nothing more than willing partisan shills for Hillary.

[karnage]

Trump will continue to blast away with this stuff. The dinosaur media will try to suppress/dismiss it. Trump will bypass them and go directly to the American people - like another American political leader whose hair was the subject of much discussion!