The Clinton Rules Still Apply
By 
Finally, the Justice Department might be going after the real scandals, says the New York Times:
The Justice Department said Monday that prosecutors were looking into whether a special counsel should be appointed to investigate political rivals President Trump has singled out for scrutiny, including Hillary Clinton.
The department, in a letter sent to the House Judiciary Committee, said the prosecutors would examine allegations that donations to the Clinton Foundation were tied to a 2010 decision by the Obama administration to allow a Russian nuclear agency to buy Uranium One, a company that owned access to uranium in the United States, and other issues.
But wait — that’s not what the original version of this story (which does not have a correction notice) says:
Goog lord. Did the Times cut and paste this paragraph from a Breitbart piece? pic.twitter.com/wT7Qj9rK7Q
— Josh Marshall (@joshtpm) November 14, 2017
1)It is amazing that the Times is still getting this wrong. 2)It’s nice that this egregious mistake was corrected, but there really needs not only to be an indication that a correction was made but an explanation for why the Times keeps publishing false or misleading stories about this non-scandal.
This is also telling:
Republicans have long tried to link Mrs. Clinton to the uranium deal, which was revealed in the run-up to her 2016 presidential campaign. The deal was approved by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States when she was secretary of state under President Barack Obama and had a voting seat on the panel.
Conservative news outlets have kept the story line alive and pushed the allegations as part of a continuing narrative that the Clintons are corrupt. They claim Mrs. Clinton was part of a quid pro quo in which the Clinton Foundation received large donations in exchange for support of the deal.
The most important “news outlet” that pushed the false implication that donations to the Clinton Foundation were linked to the approval of the Uranium One deal, although Clinton had no authority over the deal and there is not a shred of evidence that she was involved in any way, was…the New York Times. Their refusal to acknowledge their mistake is why they keep making the same mistakes. And don’t kid yourself — they can do the same thing to any Democratic nominee in 2020. Donald Trump is going to produce a lot of material to create a need for fake balance so that “nobody can say we aren’t being aggressive on this,” after all.
…via Steve in comments, an astounding tweet from the deputy editor of the New York Times:
Breaking: Attorney General Jeff Sessions asked prosecutors to look into a special prosecutor to investigate misconduct by the Clinton Foundationhttps://t.co/4d5kD9lzE7
— Clifford Levy (@cliffordlevy) November 14, 2017
Not even “alleged” or “potential” or something — just a straightforward implication that Uranium One, a deal there is literally zero evidence Hillary Clinton had any involvement with, constitutes “misconduct” by the Clinton Foundation. Heckuva job!