We publish the objective news, period. If you want the facts, then sign up below and join our movement for objective news:


Latest News

Turley Criticizes Clinton's Claims of Trump's Election Meddling As 'New Low'

 May 11, 2024

In a pointed critique on Fox News' Special Report, legal analyst Jonathan Turley lambasted former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton over her recent comments regarding alleged election interference related to President Donald Trump's legal challenges.

Turley compared legal issues from Hillary Clinton's 2016 campaign with those currently facing Donald Trump, highlighting significant differences in their defenses, as RealClearPolitics reports.

The segment opened with Turley discussing the current legal scenario confronting Donald Trump, emphasizing the various charges and the nature of the alleged infringements.

This survey of the political landscape set the stage for a broader discussion on past electoral controversies, including those involving Clinton.

Clinton's Recent Comments on Election Interference

During the program, Turley addressed comments made by Hillary Clinton in which she described the ongoing case in New York as centered on preventing "election interference." She suggested that the proceedings were crucial for informing the public about influences that might have swayed voter decisions during the 2016 election.

Fox News anchor Bret Baier discussed during the segment, shared that had he been the interviewer in Clinton's recent media appearances, he would have pressed her on the involvement of her campaign in funding the controversial Steele dossier.

The Controversy Around the Steele Dossier

This dossier, which played a significant role in the politically charged atmosphere of the 2016 election, was indirectly funded by Clinton's campaign. They channeled money through legal avenues, describing these transactions as legal expenses, as reported by the general counsel, Marc Elias.

The funding for the Steele dossier became a contentious issue when it was revealed that the Clinton campaign had not been transparent about their role in its commissioning. This led to a fine from the Federal Election Commission, though criminal charges were not pursued.

Turley pointed out the discrepancies in how the campaign handled the dossier's funding and disclosure, stressing that these actions merited significant scrutiny. He criticized the Clinton campaign's justification that the dossier expenses were covered under general legal costs, a defense similar to that presented by Trump's team in other contexts.

Analysis of Electoral Integrity and Legal Defense

The discussion on Special Report not only explored the specifics of the Steele dossier but also delved into broader themes of electoral integrity and transparency. Turley emphasized that transparency in campaign financing is crucial to maintaining public trust in electoral processes.

He expressed discomfort with Clinton's recent stance on her past campaign's actions, describing them as a "new low." His disapproval was rooted in a belief that such maneuvers could erode public confidence in political figures.

Turley concluded his appearance by reflecting on the need for accountability and clarity from political leaders, especially in matters involving electoral influence and legal entanglements.

Turley's Take on Journalistic Integrity

Amid these discussions, Baier highlighted the role of journalistic integrity in navigating such complex political narratives. He hinted that a probing journalistic approach could have brought more clarity to the public discussion surrounding Clinton's interview.

Turley agreed, underscoring the importance of journalists asking tough, consequential questions that pierce through political narratives. He praised Baier's hypothetical approach to interviewing Clinton, emphasizing that it reflects a diligent pursuit of the truth.

Comparative Analysis of Electoral Controversies

The segment with Turley on Fox News not only highlighted the specific case of the Steele dossier but also placed it within the larger context of ongoing legal battles faced by political figures. It called attention to the nuanced differences in how legal defenses are structured and perceived in the public eye.

This comparative analysis provided viewers with a broader understanding of the challenges and controversies that can influence presidential elections and the subsequent interpretations in media and legal circles.

In conclusion, the discussion on with Jonathan Turley offered a compelling examination of the discrepancies between the legal narratives surrounding Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump. It underscored the complexities of electoral integrity, the pivotal role of transparency, and the ongoing impact of these issues on public trust and political accountability.