Rebuilding America Now, a super-PAC affiliated with Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump, is running an anti-Hillary Clinton ad. It's election season, this is what campaigns do. But, according to the New York Post, the Clinton camp is so worked up over the spot that it's reportedly pressuring TV stations to not run the spot.
According to the ad, Ms. Clinton went to India to give a pro-outsourcing talk and then in 2008 received a $5 million donation from Indian politician Amar Singh. And according to the Post, the Clinton camp claims the ad is false, not because the donation didn't happen, but because the donation didn't happen in 2008.
Now, I'm all for battling false claims in advertising, but this strikes me as -- how do I put this politely? -- stupid. If you're going to make a false-advertising claim, especially in politics, it should be something truly and clearly false, something that allows you to point and scream, "Liar, liar, pants on fire." Not something that is basically a legal argument based on a technicality.
What the Clinton camp has actually done here is draw attention to an ad that people will now seek out and watch on YouTube, thus giving Rebuilding America Now much more bang for its buck.
Who knows? Maybe Team Clinton stole the idea from Donald Trump, who last year threatened to sue the conservative Club for Growth over an anti-Trump ad.