Notes on the effect of media reporting on the sandal THAT is the Clinton Foundation . . . . . emphasis on "the reporting."

I want you to read this excerpt.  Don't worry about the fact that it is taken from the heart of the article  (which will link) .  Just know that you don't have to know the context to get my point: 

"When Clinton first took office in 2008, the foundation disclosed that Saudi Arabia donated between $10 to $25 million, with some donations coming as recently as 2014 when Clinton prepared her run for the presidency. The foundation received an additional $1 to $5 million donation from the “Friends of Saudi Arabia,” which was cofounded by a Saudi prince. Critics question the ethics of taking such vast sums of money from individuals and a government with one of the worst human rights records in the world."  

The article goes on to say that Hillary (her Foundation) took 12 million dollars in a donation from Morocco,  while Secretary of State,  a donation that eventually lead to a 92 million dollar contract for that country,  a "no-bid" contract,  no less.  

My point?   Besides the fact that no one cares  (a sad sad statement about the collective morality of this nation),  the article is a bit silly.   Did the Saudis give Secretary of State,  Hillary Clinton, 10 million or 25 million dollars?  I mean,  the two numbers are not even close.  And,  if we do not have an answer to this  question,  how do any of us know that this nefarious donation was not 100 million or 25 to the Foundation and another 25 to Hillary "under the table?"  The fact of the matter is this: we do not know, and,  we do not know because the media does not want us to know, or, they would do their stinking job.   We only know that money (a lot of money?) changed hands.  We tacitly know that this money would have never gone to Hillary if she had not been in a political position giving her the power/authority to influence the granting of a huge no-bid contract.  More than this,  in a related matter,  did the friends of the Saudis give one million or 5 million dollars?  Is there not a meaningful difference between giving someone 1000 dollars and 5000 ? 

In other words,  all we know from reading this article is that money was given to Hillary   . . . .  some money was given to Hillary and this passes for news.   

Here is my take-away:  media reporters are wildly partisan and should be discounted for that reason alone.  But,  more than this,  when it comes to their primary function,  investigative journalism,  they are, also, lazy  and/or inept  belief.  The Founders believed the "press" would be a "enemy" of the Left and the Right.  Without that,  "representative democracy" does not survive   . . . . .   and we are at that point,  today.  

Understand that "democracy,"  per se,  is not a good thing.  "Democracy" is another word for "the rule of the majority."  What about blacks,  or Hispanics,  or gays, or Christians or whoever?  "Representative democracy" is the gift of our Founders to the world  . . . . .   and the world has rejected that gift as has the Progressives in our country.  

You ask, "You got that point out of this article?!!!"  

Yes !!  And in this regard:  In the end and after reading this "news" article,  I am telling you that we actually know next to nothing.  And the partisan media wins the popularity contest without  - once again - doing its job.  AND, true representative democracy takes another hit.  If the media is not going to report on facts that it could have known,  certainly it will not report on facts that do harm to their political views.  And, we are all so screwed   . . . . .   at least those of us who are part of the Patriot Nation. 
___________________________

No comments:

Post a Comment