Hillary Clinton movies can move mountains.
Remember that Citizens United case before the Supreme Court? You know, the one that allowed for the creation of the super PAC, which changed how races across the country are financed by outside interests, dumping massive amounts of what amounts to anonymous money without "collaborating" with the candidates?
That was brought about by a Hillary Rodham Clinton movie. Citizens United — the advocacy group that made it in an effort to criticize the former (and perhaps future) presidential candidate — didn't think the movie should be subject to campaign rules, such as disclosing who paid for it. That complaint made its way up to the highest court, paving the legal basis for the super PAC.
So if a Hillary Clinton movie can spur that, it could help serve conservative interests again, right?
Here's the background. In production right now are two separate, unrelated movies about the former secretary of State. One is a miniseries for NBC starring Diane Lane that NBC has said will air before the 2016 campaign season gets under way. The other is a documentary, directed by Academy Award-winning filmmaker Charles Ferguson, in the works for CNN.
On Monday, Reince Priebus, the chairman of the Republican National Committee, wrote to the networks, claiming the movies are indicative of bias heading into the 2016 election. Never mind that Clinton is not yet a candidate and it's currently 2013. Priebus writes in the letter to NBC:
This special treatment is unfair to the candidates for the Democratic nomination in 2016 who might compete against Secretary Clinton ... and to the Republican nominee, should Clinton compete in the general election.
He continues that the series "would be most accurately described as an in-kind donation." If the series is not pulled, he warns, if the movie is to be aired, no Republican primary debate will air on NBC.