3 ms·
So you are sayibg the original article that is basically saying "high speaking fees are normal, Clinton is normal, don't worry about it" is non-partisan; but pr
by jeffdavis 10y ago
So you are sayibg the original article that is basically saying "high speaking fees are normal, Clinton is normal, don't worry about it" is non-partisan; but providing a counter-argument that seems to show a conflict of interest is partisan?
It doesn't work that way.
- parasubvert 10y agoThe original article is non-partisan in its argument, the high speaking fees being normal applies equally to all parties, all famous people. The OP I was responding to could be seen as making a non-partisan argument, however the focus was on Clinton rather than Trump and Clinton. So I interpreted is as partisan (and got a fact wrong about her new book). Tomahawk has responded since that it was not intended as partisan, and I'll take his/her word for it.