Peter Schweizer, Author Of Controversial New Clinton Book, Admits That He Did Not Brief Democrats On Content

The author of an upcoming book examining foreign donations to the Clinton Foundation admitted on Sunday that he has informed congressional Republicans about the book's contents, but has not, to date, discussed the contents with congressional Democrats.

The book, Clinton Cash: The Untold Story of How and Why Foreign Governments and Businesses Helped Make Bill and Hillary Rich, suggests that the Clintons traded political favors for donations during Hillary Clinton's time as secretary of state. The Clinton camp has tried to discredit the book as a partisan attack, in part by casting doubt on the credibility of its author, Peter Schweizer, a former speechwriter for President George W. Bush.

While The New York Times reported earlier this week that Schweizer had briefed the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on the book, Democrats on the committee told The Huffington Post that they had not met with Schweizer. Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.), the committee's chairman, also told HuffPost that he had discussed the book with Schweizer, but that the committee had not received a formal briefing.

During an appearance on ABC's "This Week" on Sunday, Schweizer confirmed that he had not met with Democrats on the committee. He offered on Sunday to do so before the book is released next week.

Schweizer denied that his book is partisan.

"I went to the investigative unit at The New York Times, the investigative unit here at ABC. I went to the investigative unit at The Washington Post. And I shared with them my findings," Schweizer said. "These are not cupcakes. These are serious researchers and investigators. And they are confirming what I've reported."

On Thursday, The New York Times published a lengthy story, sparked by Schweizer's findings, that described how firms with a financial interest in a deal for Russia to take over a portion of the United States' uranium deposits donated millions to the Clinton Foundation while Hillary Clinton's State Department was one of several agencies that had to sign off on the deal.

The Times reported that the Clinton Foundation did not publicly disclose those donations -- a violation of an agreement with the Obama administration -- but it also reported that it had found no evidence that the donations directly influenced the deal. During his appearance on "This Week," Schweizer also acknowledged that he hadn't found any direct evidence that Clinton had intervened to help those who backed the foundation.

Despite the lack of a smoking gun, the Clinton Foundation released a statement on Sunday describing its relationship with Frank Giustra, one of the individuals who had a financial interest in the uranium deal.

The post, written by Maura Pally, the acting CEO of the foundation, also offered an explanation of one aspect of the organization's tax filings that had raised eyebrows:

I also want to address questions regarding our 990 tax forms. We have said that after a voluntary external review is completed we will likely refile forms for some years. While some have suggested that this indicates a failure to accurately report our total revenue, that is not the case. Our total revenue was accurately reported on each year's form – our error was that government grants were mistakenly combined with other donations. Those same grants have always been properly listed and broken out and available for anyone to see on our audited financial statements, posted on our website.

So yes, we made mistakes, as many organizations of our size do, but we are acting quickly to remedy them, and have taken steps to ensure they don't happen in the future. We are committed to operating the Foundation responsibly and effectively to continue the life-changing work that this philanthropy is doing every day.



Hillary Clinton