Peter Schweizer’s new book, Clinton Cash, due out May 5, is getting the sort of treatment from the New York Times and Washington Post usually reserved for leftist takedowns of conservative icons. The book, whose subtitle is “The Untold Story of How and Why Foreign Governments and Businesses Helped Make Bill and Hillary Rich,” could very well threaten Hillary Clinton’s inevitability as the Democrats’ nominee, since it is being taken seriously and given ample respectful coverage more than two weeks prior to its publication date.

Drudge’s headline this morning is spot on:

A growing nightmare for Hillary over her extraordinary accumulation of wealth ($136.5 million in income from 2001 – 12, according to Schweizer) from influence peddling is being exposed:

New York Times highly respected political reporter Amy Chozick writes:

“Clinton Cash” is potentially more unsettling [than previous critical books about the Clintons], both because of its focused reporting and because major news organizations including The Times, The Washington Post and Fox News have exclusive agreements with the author  to pursue the story lines found in the book.

Members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, which includes Mr. Paul and Senator Marco Rubio of Florida, have been briefed on the book’s findings, and its contents have already made their way into several of the Republican presidential candidates’ campaigns.

Peter Schweizer has played his cards very skillfully by offering exclusive information, prior to publication, to MSM outlets.

Alexander Marlow of Breitbart notes that this is not a new strategy on his part:

Schweizer is President of the non-partisan Government Accountability Institute (GAI) and a Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News.  (snip)

The GAI, which has quickly established itself as one of the nation’s most respected—and feared—Washington watchdog organizations, has gained notoriety for vigorously investigating both Republicans and Democrats, as well as releasing its investigative findings through major national mainstream media partners, such as CBS News’ 60 Minutes, New York Times, Politico, ABC News, and Fox News. 

Indeed, GAI and Schweizer have already left their investigative mark on Capitol Hill. Schweizer, whom Newsweek dubbed “The Wonk Who Slays Washington,” was responsible for the ouster of former Republican Rep. Spencer Bachus (R-AL), then-chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, after his book, Throw Them All Out, exposed insider trading by members of Congress. 

I have to bow my head to Schweizer for doing his spadework so skillfully. His timing is impeccable:

Mr. Schweizer’s book will be released the same day former President Bill Clinton and the Clintons’ daughter, Chelsea, will host the Clinton Global Initiative gathering with donors in Morocco, the culmination of a foundation trip to several African nations. (A chapter in the book is titled “Warlord Economics: The Clintons Do Africa.”)

Despite being identified with conservative groups like Stanford’s Hoover Institution and Breitbart, he has developed credibility by meticulous research and documentation, and by understanding that media outlets are driven by exclusive stories, and that by supplying them with what they need for scoops, he can be on the receiving end of respectful attention.

The Clinton campaign has always been based on the premise that the media would not push stories critical of her very hard. This assumption was reasonable, based on the way in which her husband was able to overcome scandal in his presidency, with the media gladly making Ken Starr more of an issue than the scandal he was investigating as special prosecutor, for example. But that was then, and the Clinton presidency was at risk, and the focus was the likable Bill.

My reading of the current situation is that Hillary is not personally liked by much of the media. She treats them imperiously. But more than that, as Rosslyn Smith notes this morning, as with LBJ in 1968, they would rather someone else be the Democrat standard-bearer, and secretly pine for Elizabeth Warren,  much as they pined for Robert Kennedy in 68.

The Hillary campaign is doing the only thing it can do in response:

A campaign spokesman, Brian Fallon, called the book part of the Republicans’ coordinated attack strategy on Mrs. Clinton “twisting previously known facts into absurd conspiracy theories,” and he said “it will not be the first work of partisan-fueled fiction about the Clintons’ record, and we know it will not be the last.”

The mainstream media in the past has ignored or discredited muckraking about the Clintons, but this time is different, as we are seeing. But if Hillary’s clout within the party is sufficient to carry her to the nomination, rest assured that by summer 2016 after the convention, this will be dismissed as “old news.”