Olivier Sarkozy works for the Carlyle Group, by the way. So I suppose his opinions do matter, at least more than, say, if Bill Clinton’s loose-cannon half brother, Roger, had been quoted, last-name-only, making drastic predictions in the 1990s.
The Carlyle Group is infamous for their political connections, Red and Blue. Olivier's access to the global power structure, the very group that attends Bill's Clinton Global Initiative every year, is a huge bonus for Carlyle. Implying he is a mere cut above doltish Roger Clinton is ignorance or a script. The WSJ would have to say which characterization fits, because the Roger label is laughable. Does the journal really know the half of it?
