And after digging up so much dirt, The New York Times, The Washington Post, Politico, Reuters, Bloomberg News and others are not likely to be content with stonewalling and half-truths, especially given her recent lies about missing e-mails. No wonder the Times editorial page called on her to provide “straightforward answers” to the accusations.
I don’t see how she can meet that test. The outlines of cozy relationships and key transactions are not in dispute. The only issue is whether the millions the Clintons got amount to a quid pro quo.
On the face of it, that’s certainly what they look like. There are several deals we know of, and more could emerge, that put money in the Clintons’ pockets while helping businesses, including some loathsome international figures, make a killing. It is preposterous to argue that it’s all a coincidence.
Her position was further undercut when the family foundation announced it would refile five years of tax returns. In one three-year period, it omitted tens of millions in foreign contributions, reporting “zero” to the IRS. In another two-year period, it admitted to overreporting government grants by more than $100 million.
A foundation aide described the errors as “typographical,” which is bizarre — and par for the Clinton course. To concede the errors during the firestorm must mean keeping them quiet was an even greater liability.
Sooner rather than later, Hillary will have to meet the press — but what can she possibly say to alter the story lines?
If history is a guide, she’ll insist she did nothing wrong, offer ambiguous answers to specific questions, take offense at persistent reporters and end by playing the victim. She’ll follow up with a fund-raising pitch for money to keep “fighting for everyday Americans.”
To imagine that scenario is to realize it won’t fly, but I’m not sure what other options she has. She can’t tell the truth. It will sink her.