Welcome to Detroit Sports Forum!

By joining our community, you'll be able to connect with fellow fans that live and breathe Detroit sports just like you!

Get Started
  • If you are no longer able to access your account since our recent switch from vBulletin to XenForo, you may need to reset your password via email. If you no longer have access to the email attached to your account, please fill out our contact form and we will assist you ASAP. Thanks for your continued support of DSF.

MotherJones article on the Rodham Brothers

Michchamp

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 4, 2011
Messages
34,243
aka "Hillary Clinton's brothers."

some of their hijinks are pretty amusing, like this: "in 1994, Hugh decided to run for the Senate in Florida against Republican incumbent Connie Mack. But he struggled to defeat his Democratic primary opponent, a talk radio host who believed the government was covering up the truth about aliens and who accused Bill Clinton of pushing a Nazi agenda. Hugh got demolished in the general election."
 
I'm surprised I don't remember a big stink over the pardons. You'd think a president would get raked over the coals for that.
 
I'm surprised I don't remember a big stink over the pardons. You'd think a president would get raked over the coals for that.

I remember him getting a lot of crap for the Marc Rich pardon; maybe no one in the press at the time noticed the Rodham Brothers connection to those other pardons.

also, I think most people in the political business, including the major players in the media, don't attack candidates' family members out of a sense of fair play. Only the Karl Roves of the world and candidates desperate to make an impressione dare "go there." It's probably a good policy, since as the article shows, pretty much every candidate has had some bad apples in his or her clan... campaigns would get bogged down in these stories which are mostly irrelevent.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I remember him getting a lot of crap for the Marc Rich pardon; maybe no one in the press at the time noticed the Rodham Brothers connection to those other pardons.

also, I think most people in the political business, including the major players in the media, don't attack candidates' family members out of a sense of fair play. Only the Karl Roves of the world and candidates desperate to make an impressione dare "go there." It's probably a good policy, since as the article shows, pretty much every candidate has had some bad apples in his or her clan... campaigns would get bogged down in these stories which are mostly irrelevent.

Yeah, but this is more than just the family connection. They were paid by the people they got a pardon for.
 
Yeah, but this is more than just the family connection. They were paid by the people they got a pardon for.

I'm not trying to defend it in any way. I'm just saying why it might've been ignored... either the fact that the money was handed to the Rodham brothers was enough of a cushion to escape scrutiny, or people in the media & GOP decided to give them a pass because it was family, not the Clintons themselves. The GOP because... well... their family members do the same thing.

the case where Bill had a direct relationship with a pardonee (Marc Rich) generated a lot of criticism from what I recall.
 
I'm not trying to defend it in any way. I'm just saying why it might've been ignored... either the fact that the money was handed to the Rodham brothers was enough of a cushion to escape scrutiny, or people in the media & GOP decided to give them a pass because it was family, not the Clintons themselves. The GOP because... well... their family members do the same thing.

the case where Bill had a direct relationship with a pardonee (Marc Rich) generated a lot of criticism from what I recall.

Maybe back then. Now the idea that they wouldn't want to be hypocrites seems quaint. I bet if we had a tea Party back then it would have received more attention.
 
Back
Top