Clinton Campaign Money Machine
Here’s the headline from Drudge.
CLINTONS MAY NOW BE USING THEIR OWN MONEY TO FINANCE HILLARY’S RUN… When asked if Clintons were dipping into their personal wealth, communications director Howard Wolfson said: ‘I don’t know’...Developing…
A reader reminded me of this post from 2006 a now defunct blog.
Why isn’t anyone talking about the tidy little scheme former President Bill Clinton, U.S. Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, and the gaggle of corporations and foreign governments have to clean money and park it into Hillary’s campaign for President?
Here’s how it works (in case some young, entrepreneuing reporter would like to do the leg-work):
1. Bill Clinton signs onto a speaker’s bureau and commands $100k per speaking engagement from companies like Oracle and Morgan Stanley. He also serves as an advisor to Dubai Ports World. I assure you, he’s not working with the state-owned DPW pro-bono.
2. Hillary Clinton runs for - and wins - a Senate seat and immediately the speculation on her presidential candidacy begins. She also sits on the influential Senate Armed Services Committee and the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor & Pensions, where she sits on the Retirement Security and Aging Subcommittee (note Bill’s speaking engagement at Morgan Stanley, a brokerage and investment firm).
3. New York is an Equitable Distribution state. In short, what is Hillary’s is Bill’s and what is Bill’s is Hillary’s.
4. In addition to the $25m that Hillary has in the bank, she can also self-finance based on the precedent that John Kerry set in 2004 by borrowing against the Heinz fortune of his wife.
Is this clear yet? Bill Clinton is serving as a pass-through for corporate and foreign dollars into Hillary’s presidential campaign. If anyone believes that people are paying for Clinton’s insight into politics while his wife is sitting in the U.S. Senate and mulling a bid for president is dillusional. This is about ACCESS. And do I need to remind anyone on the illegality of corporate and foreign donations to campaigns?
Here’s a good story:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/31/us/politics/31donor.html
January 31, 2008
After Mining Deal, Financier Donated to Clinton.......................
Unlike more established competitors, Mr. Giustra was a newcomer to uranium mining in Kazakhstan, a former Soviet republic. But what his fledgling company lacked in experience, it made up for in connections. Accompanying Mr. Giustra on his luxuriously appointed MD-87 jet that day was a former president of the United States, Bill Clinton.
............................
The monster deal stunned the mining industry, turning an unknown shell company into one of the world’s largest uranium producers in a transaction ultimately worth tens of millions of dollars to Mr. Giustra, analysts said.
Just months after the Kazakh pact was finalized, Mr. Clinton’s charitable foundation received its own windfall: a $31.3 million donation from Mr. Giustra that had remained a secret until he acknowledged it last month. The gift, combined with Mr. Giustra’s more recent and public pledge to give the William J. Clinton Foundation an additional $100 million, secured Mr. Giustra a place in Mr. Clinton’s inner circle, an exclusive club of wealthy entrepreneurs in which friendship with the former president has its privileges
...................................
I suppose money donated to the Foundation has nothing to do with Campaign funds, but then again, who knows?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 06, 2008 at 1349 hrs
They aren’t doing anything illegal but it certainly raises questions about their character and what they will do to win.
People are now looking for a candidate that will “inspire” them. I look for someone who is honest and follows a moral compass.
Character is what you do when noone is looking…Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 06, 2008 at 1537 hrs
Holy Chinese takeout!
Posted by james wigderson on February 06, 2008 at 1659 hrs
Oh, for fuck’s sake. This is why I don’t want a Clinton nomination. The accusations and investigations of the 90s will come back again.
Why not just debate the merits of her policy proposals instead of digging for dirt?
Posted by scott on February 06, 2008 at 1858 hrs
This isn’t a legitimate concern?
You’ve never bemoaned Halliburton or clamored for publicly-financed campaigns?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 06, 2008 at 1902 hrs
Why not just debate the merits of her policy proposals instead of digging for dirt?
Posted by scott on February 06, 2008 at 1858 hrsYou don’t have to dig for dirt on the Clinton’s.
As far as policy just lick your finger and see which way the winds blowing on any given day.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 06, 2008 at 1913 hrs
Oh, for fuck’s sake.
Don’t get mad at the GOP or active observers… they’re aren’t the ones with ethical lapses as transparent as the Clinton’s.
She’s on your team, not mine.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 06, 2008 at 1918 hrs
So I’m taking that as a no. Nice. Just what we need for the next few years.
Posted by scott on February 06, 2008 at 1934 hrs
I’m more than happy to debate her policy proposals, but a candidate is more than just a bunch of policy proposals.
Again, don’t blame us for her ethical lapses.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 06, 2008 at 1938 hrs
What’s bullshit here is that a) some of it is speculation, b) there’s nothing illegal or even c) unusual being reported here. You just write it up with the correct tone, add a dash of innuendo and bang. We’re back to 1995 just like that.
The only reason Drudge is spewing about it and the only reason we’re discussing it here is because it’s “Clinton dirt.” It’s not an indictment of the campaign finance system, per se, and you know it.
Fuck this.
Posted by scott on February 06, 2008 at 1952 hrs
Because if John McCain or any other candidate did it, no one would say a thing.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 06, 2008 at 1956 hrs
Yeah, if there was rumor, innuendo and suggestion to the effect that a Republican candidate might be doing something unsavory, it’d be alll over this blog, that’s for sure.
Posted by scott on February 06, 2008 at 2044 hrs
I’ll be the first to admit: if I was running a campaign, I would definitely take advantage of this… politics is a contact sport after all.
And I’ve already criticised McCain elsewhere on this blog re: Keating 5, his “gook” remarks, etc… I’ve even got into Allen re: his macaca remarks. Were you looking for some sort of hypocrisy from me?
Yeah, if there was rumor, innuendo and suggestion to the effect that a Republican candidate might be doing something unsavory, it’d be alll over this blog, that’s for sure.
If John McCain had his way, this blog wouldn’t be allowed to criticize elected officials…
The best part of your remarks, Scott? This:
We’re back to 1995 just like that.
Yes. It is. It’s awesome. The Clinton’s are the gift that keeps giving.Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 06, 2008 at 2052 hrs
If he will be using their personal wealth for Hillary’s candidacy, the question is what will be in return?
Posted by Georgina on February 07, 2008 at 0331 hrs
There are times that candidates really dip their hands into their own pockets for additional campaign funds. But if we’re talking about big bucks, then we’re in trouble. They’d sure want repayment afterwards, especially if they win. Where to get the money? Your guess is as good as mine.
Posted by Humus on February 07, 2008 at 1305 hrs
dkqgutou xrsuuige anlcdarx http://gfwjbgyw.com efuulahp ongudtxd
Posted by xhrmrkds on May 19, 2008 at 1203 hrs
I bet Clinton uses no fee balance transfers so he can save money for this campaign.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on May 21, 2008 at 1918 hrs
Total Entries: 19656
Total Comments: 129831
Most Recent Entry: 02/11/2012 09:52 pm
Most Recent Comment on: 02/11/2012 04:55 pm
Total Members: 9751
Total Logged in members: 0
Total guests: 102
Total anonymous users: 0
Most Recent Visitor on: 02/12/2012 01:11 am
The most visitors ever was 538 on 12/01/2007 02:11 pm
Protected and licensed under a Creative Commons License (some rights reserved).