I think Bill Clinton makes some fair points in his intemperate rant against Todd Purdum. But in a lot of ways, the flaws in Purdum's article (lots of innuendos about illicit sex) serve to obscure the valid points (we know very little about the financing of Clinton's lifestyle and his foundation) and the notion that the publication of a a single article on this subject far too late to impact the process represents a vast pro-Obama conspiracy in the press is laughable.
It's GQ after all, that killed a critical story about Hillary Clinton because Bill threatened to freeze them out unless they did it. In general, coverage of Bill's post-presidency has been exceedingly respectful, even in the generally Obamaphilic Atlantic.
We want to hear what you think about this article. Submit a letter to the editor or write to firstname.lastname@example.org.