I really wish they’d just run together and save everyone time and money:
“Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton received nearly a quarter of a million dollars last year for a speaking engagement on behalf of Academic Partnerships, a for-profit education company in which Jeb Bush held an ownership stake and on whose board he served.”
and
“Though he did not share the stage with Clinton, Bush spoke at the same conference.”
Glen Greenwald' Wordplay
You’re referencing Glen Greenwald’s Intercept web site. The title is “Hillary Clinton Paid By Jeb Bush’s Education Company”. Having been a follower and not a fan of Greenwalds years prior to Snowden days, this is a classic example of how he can misinform. While one might want to get all worked up about Clinton speaking at a company he was involved with, Academic Partnerships was by no definition Jeb Bush’s company. His “ownership stake” was minimal ($60,000) for a company worth over $100 million.
Greenwald has a history of letting his personal dislikes set the tone for his “reporting” but certainly letting this little blurb go ahead with the title “Jeb Bush’s . . . Company” is really out of line. That is IF Greenwald wants to be considered a responsible journalist. To my mind he gave up that goal years before the Snowden episode which still has a lot of questions behind it as far as timelines involving Greenwald and Snowden’s employment.
Some may not like Clinton speaking at a conference co-hosted by a company that Bush had a connection with (there was another sponsor as well as AP). Or find her speaking engagement payments high. But trying to make some sort of in cahoots connection between Bush and Clinton over this one speaking engagement is a bit of a stretch. After years of reading Greenwald I would caution anyone about relying solely on him for info, you will usually be missing a few pertinent facts if they don’t fit into his scenario or, as in this case, a skewing of the information. ..or, if you will, a little word play.
The Company Greenwald Keeps
Interestingly that bastion of fine online journalism, Breitbart’s web site, has a very similar article to Greenwalds. Almost word for word and also uses the term Jeb Bush’s company. Lie down with dogs, get fleas.
The point
I’m not sure of your point. Are you saying the two didn’t have these connections? That the story is untrue?
My point is they travel in similar circles, taking similar funds, from similar people.
They both want to be president, and it’s likely they will be the major candidates. Rather than have 4 years of left vs. right again, let them share the office and spare us the drama. I’m somewhat joking, but they seem more similar to one another than they are like all of us.
(The story was by Lee Fang, btw, not the people you mention. Same news outlet as Greenwald, but that’s all.)
What I'm Saying
First of all I’m not saying the story is untrue, I am saying that the title for one thing is very misleading. This is not Jeb Bush’s company by a long shot. I usually like Lee Fang and I do realize the story was by him but it’s posted on Greenwald’s site and as far as I’m concerned the untrue headline alone makes it suspect and more of a smear attempt. We have no way to know if the headline was intended to be part of the article or an edit by the web site.
Intercept is not just an outlet where Greenwald also happens to post. Intercept was created by Glenn Greenwald along with the woman who worked on the Snowden stuff with him and Jeremy Scahill. It isn’t just a news outlet Greenwald posts on, it is Greenwald’s site. Hence he has to take some responsibility for the headline and it is pretty typical of him to my mind. I also doubt Lee Fang would like the Breitbart connection but it’s pretty interesting that the Greenwald Intercept article is almost identical to Breitbarts including the claim that this is Bush’s company.
I get that you were joking (somewhat) however I don’t think for a moment that Clinton and Bush are all that similar or would govern similarly particularly when it comes to social issues and women’s rights. I also think that it’s quite unlikely that they meet up all that often although the lecture circuit can make strange bedfellows. I think this was a fluke and not to be made much of. But Greenwald (who has a long history of disliking the Clintons) and Breitbart, who is simply creepy, are trying to create something out of nothing here. I think Lee Fang should be more careful about who he gets in bed with. Working with Greenwald might be detrimental to his usually higher ethical standards.