First Read looks at the wave of negative stories about the Clinton Foundation and concludes:
- The Clintons became wealthy due to paid speeches, and the Clinton Foundation raked in millions due to celebrity/access reasons.
- They didn’t seem concerned about appearances. If they believed they weren’t being bought off then they didn’t see a problem with an appearance. The problem: Can the same be said for the folks who spent the money either lavishing the foundation or paying for a speech/appearance?
- These stories do undermine – politically — Hillary’s attempt to refashion herself as an economic populist. The Clintons made it because of power and access. And now they want to argue for fairness. Do these stories make them more or less credible?
- We are an electorate burned out on the polarizing political wars. These new stories are a reminder that the war isn’t going anywhere.