Making their own claims of media bias, the Clinton Foundation has lashed out at the millennial news site Fusion for running a sharply critical investigative story about Bill Clinton's lackluster efforts in Colombia, charging that the reporter doesn't like the Clintons.

But in an unexpected rebuff, the website backed by pro-Clinton Univision and one that features Donald Trump critic Jorge Ramos as a columnist, refused to back down and kill the Monday story headlined, "The Clinton Foundation left a toxic legacy in Colombia."



In a letter to Fusion and Univision executives, provided to Secrets, the Foundation slapped reporter Ken Silverstein as anti-Clinton and demanded the story be pulled down.

"We're asking Fusion to remove this story, at least until your own editors have had a chance to fact check it, or make it clear that this is an opinion piece and provide us the opportunity to respond with our own opinion piece," wrote Craig Minassian of the Foundation.

The investigation into Clinton's dealings in Colombia was funded by the American Media Institute. It documented how the Foundation's promises to help small businesses and the poor fell far short.

It also detailed how Bill Clinton opened doors for a Foundation mega-donor in the country where he and Hillary Clinton knew many leaders.

One of the charges in the story about the Clinton Foundation's efforts in Colombia was that workers died as Clinton played golf in Bogota. AP Photo

The letter charged inaccuracies, but gave few examples. Instead, it criticized Silverstein and his social media hits on the Clintons and support for Trump in a bid to shame Fusion to back down.

"As you may know, Ken Silverstein, the author of this story has a long, public record of anti-Clinton bias, vulgar tweets, unfounded attacks against the Clinton Foundation and the Clinton family that violate the most basic standards of unbiased journalism," wrote Minassian, who attacked some of the reporter's tweets.

After the letter was received, Fusion kept the story up and added a simple line at the beginning: "This article is being updated to include comments that Fusion received from the Clinton Foundation after it was first published."

The letter is below:

Today, Fusion published a factually erroneous story in your "Naked Truth," Politics and World sections, entitled, "The Clinton Foundation left a toxic legacy in Colombia."

As you may know, Ken Silverstein, the author of this story has a long, public record of anti-Clinton bias, vulgar tweets, unfounded attacks against the Clinton Foundation and the Clinton family that violate the most basic standards of unbiased journalism.

For example, in recent Tweets (posted below) he encouraged his social media followers to "vote Trump," and identified himself as someone "who hates Hillary Clinton." We assume Fusion has a disclosure policy when published as "news" material by an author who has a very public bias against a candidate or organization they are writing about.

Neither Ken nor anyone else on behalf of Fusion reached out to us. While Silverstein has contacted us in the past, he has misled us about who about being on assignment. For example, the last time we heard from him was in early August of this year when he claimed he was writing a story about Columbia for POLITICO, which rejected it. Now, it seems that same story has appeared in Fusion without giving us the opportunity to respond. Also, the story suggests that he reached out to Secretary Clinton's office and the Clinton campaign, which, while we don't speak for them, doesn't appear to be accurate either but I encourage you to contact the campaign directly. This lack of fact checking is a concern particularly given the timing of the story.

I'm not sure if you've had a chance to read the story, but here's just one example of a totally erroneous, unsourced assertion presented as a fact: "Formally known as the Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton Foundation, the family's nonprofit was formed in the early days of the Monica Lewinsky scandal. (Initially, it was going to pay for the president's legal defense as well as fund good works in a post-presidency, modelled on Jimmy Carter's sterling efforts.)"

There are many other erroneous parts of the story and conjecture presented as reported fact. Had a fact-checker from Fusion reached out, we would have been happy to provide facts about our work in Columbia. Therefore we're asking Fusion to remove this story, at least until your own editors have had a chance to fact check it, or make it clear that this is an opinion piece and provide us the opportunity to respond with our own opinion piece.

We have always valued our opportunities to work with Fusion and the role you play in journalism, which is why we are making you aware of this issue.

Thank you for considering our request and we would welcome a discussion about how to remedy this situation.

Best,

Craig Minassian

Chief Communications Officer

Clinton Foundation

Paul Bedard, the Washington Examiner's "Washington Secrets" columnist, can be contacted at pbedard@washingtonexaminer.com