Chelsea Clinton said Tuesday that, given that Ivanka Trump works in the White House, it’s fair to ask her about her father’s alleged sexual affairs.
First of all, she sounds like her mother, which is annoying. Secondly, I’d note that Chelsea has been extremely insulated by the press from all of her father’s nonsense, all her life. And her mother’s corruption as well. It’s a little rich to hear this from her.
Finally, there’s a personal issue here. Chelsea and Ivanka used to be friends, but reportedly have not spoken in a long time. The Clintons, I’m sure, are very bitter people.
All that said, I have come to agree with those who say Ivanka is fair game on this issue. The reason is not because she works in the White House, but because she presents herself as an advocate for women.
Actually, as Tucker Carlson noted in this commentary, the award is for being Chelsea Clinton. I’m not sure what she has done to merit any kind of serious award, and certainly, there should be penalties detracting from her award chits for working in her family’s criminal enterprise, the Clinton Foundation.
Seems Chelsea forced Foundation staffers to pack 25,000 pounds of grapefruit to “fight hunger” in New York.
Now, for me, giving me grapefruit causes hunger because I can’t stand it. But what I really want to know is, do New York’s homeless take their grapefruit with cottage cheese? And do they use cloth napkins or paper?
I know well-heeled New Yorkers on a diet consume lots of grapefruit because it helps keep them thin. Now, why wouldn’t it occur to Ms. Clinton that it would do exactly the same thing for the homeless? I can think of few foods, if any, with more water content than grapefruit. For goodness sake, give them some of the chicken fried steak her father fattened up on before he supposedly went vegan, which I don’t think he did, because he lies all the time.
One of our astute readers points out to me that Hillary Clinton didn’t get it quite right the other day when discussing Chelsea Clinton’s education.
Talking about the Zika virus the other day, Hillary said she had been alerted to the problem nine months ago because her over-educated daughter Chelsea already knew about it way back then, since she has a PhD in public health.
Alas, Chelsea does not have a PhD in public health. Her PhD is in international relations. She has a Masters degree public health, as well as one in international relations.
That’s quite a family business they got going there.
Chelsea Clinton made a brief appearance at the University of Missouri-Kansas City in February 2014 and billed the school $65,000. The money went to the Clinton Foundation.
What’s with these universities? How many kids could they have given a scholarship to instead of hearing Chelsea talk about nothing, since she knows nothing in particular and has done nothing in particular.
More than 500 pages of e-mails, contracts and other internal documents obtained by The Washington Post from the university under Missouri public record laws detail the school’s long courtship of the Clintons. They also show the meticulous efforts by Chelsea Clinton’s image-makers to exert tight control over the visit, ranging from close editing of marketing materials and the introductory remarks of a high school student to limits on the amount of time she spent on campus.
The schedule she negotiated called for her to speak for 10 minutes, participate in a 20-minute, moderated question-and-answer session and spend a half-hour posing for pictures with VIPs offstage.
As with Hillary Clinton’s paid speeches at universities, Chelsea Clinton made no personal income from the appearance, her spokesman said, and directed her fee to the Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton Foundation.
More $1,000 per minute, just to be in the presence of someone famous.
Chelsea Clinton was asked why the Clinton foundation, which she helps run, was taking money from regimes that oppress women, like Saudi Arabia, and other questionable regimes, and, “Were favors done in exchange for funding?”
To which Chelsea replied: Blah blah blah blah small holder farmers blah blah blah injectable long-lasting reversible contraceptives blah blah blah transparency, transparent, even more transparent, and also blah blah blah. Have a look.
During an interview with Fast Company in April that is now being brought to light, Chelsea Clinton suggested her decision to join her parents’ charitable organization stemmed from a recognition that she just couldn’t sully herself with the mundane aspiration to make a lot of money.
From the piece:
I’ve tried really hard to care about things that were very different from my parents. I was curious if I could care about [money] on some fundamental level, and I couldn’t. That wasn’t the metric of success that I wanted in my life. I’ve talked about this to my friends who are doctors and whose parents are doctors, or who are lawyers and their parents are lawyers.
How noble of her, then to accept $600,000 per year from NBC News for a job that doesn’t appear to have cost her lots of sweat. It was have cause an identity crisis to be pulling in so much cash. I’m glad she seems to be surviving the experience.
Maybe I wouldn’t fundamentally care about money either IF THERE WEREN’T SO MANY BILLS TO PAY. Those things get my fundamental attention.
Really, these Clintons are living on a different planet. And increasingly, I’m coming to think that planet does not include the White House.
Looks like making outlandish sums of money for little work runs in the family!
Trading on her famous name, Chelsea Clinton picked up an obscene $600,000 annual salary at NBC News, where she has worked as a special correspondent, according to Politico.
Extra-special, it turns out.
She started at NBC in November 2011 working up fluff pieces for a Brian Williams show that, uh, got cancelled in June 2013, and has since worked on packages for the evening news. This year she’s on a month-to-month contract in case NBC wants to cut her off should her mom run for president.
Still, her $600,000 pales next to the tens of millions amassed by her parents for speeches and some polite trade association Q&A.
The former first daughter tied the knot yesterday with Mark Mezvinksy, her (very) long time beau – like 15 years or something. You may remember that his mother, Marjorie Margolies-Mezvinksy, lost her seat in Congress in 1994 after voting for President Clinton’s 1993 budget, which included a tax increase. No hard feelings, I suppose. Here… Continue Reading