Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

FreakinDJ

(17,644 posts)
Sun Jan 31, 2016, 08:20 AM Jan 2016

Lets meet Hillary's Biggest donor

An extensive New Yorker profile of Saban recalls how Saban publicly described his “three ways to be influential in American politics” in 2009. One was political donations. Another was establishing think tanks (he founded the Saban Center for Middle East Policy at the Brookings Institution in 2002). And the third was controlling media outlets.


Saban is not shy about throwing his weight around. In 2001, when Brazilian regulatory approval became a roadblock to the sale of Fox Family, the company he founded with Rupert Murdoch, he asked Bill Clinton to call the president of Brazil to push for a quick approval. When the deal went through, Saban personally made $1.5 billion; the next year he gave a “record-breaking” $7 million to the Democratic Party for a new national headquarters and $5 million to Clinton’s presidential library.

The New York Times reported in 2009 that Saban was apparently part of a scheme before the 2006 Democratic takeover of Congress in which Saban would threaten then-Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi that he would withhold donations if Pelosi didn’t make then-Rep. Jane Harman, D-Calif., chair of the House Intelligence Committee. (In return, according to the Times report, which was based on telephone calls intercepted by the National Security Agency, Harman would lobby the Bush administration for leniency for two pro-Israel lobbyists under investigation for espionage. Harman denied ever speaking to the Justice Department about the case, but did not address whether she contacted any White House officials.)

And according to a high-ranking official of the Young Democrats of America, during the 2008 Democratic presidential primary Saban offered to donate $1 million to the YDA if the organization’s two super delegates committed to Hillary Clinton.


https://theintercept.com/2016/01/26/ha-ha-hillary-clintons-top-financial-supporter-now-controls-the-onion/
24 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Lets meet Hillary's Biggest donor (Original Post) FreakinDJ Jan 2016 OP
Corruption cali Jan 2016 #1
Rather, ownership has it's privileges nolabels Jan 2016 #8
Hollywood Mogul Haim Saban Calls for ‘More Scrutiny’ of Muslims FreakinDJ Jan 2016 #2
I'd go for more scrutiny for Haim Saban. longship Jan 2016 #6
You saw it here, folks, Hillary is backed by FASCISTS. Odin2005 Feb 2016 #24
Establishment politics. SamKnause Jan 2016 #3
Where Hillary is concerned Establishment politics = Corruption FreakinDJ Jan 2016 #11
Hoo boy! nt longship Jan 2016 #4
Another one of her huge donors/bundlers EdwardBernays Jan 2016 #5
Her campaign staff is packed with lobbiest FreakinDJ Jan 2016 #7
Yep EdwardBernays Jan 2016 #9
KnR nt chknltl Jan 2016 #10
Lessons on How To Buy A Country. RiverLover Jan 2016 #12
+1 beam me up scottie Jan 2016 #15
Saban personally made $1.5 billion; the next year he gave a “record-breaking” $7 million to the Demo SoLeftIAmRight Jan 2016 #13
America's Presidencts are becoming cheaper - sadly FreakinDJ Jan 2016 #21
We need a new type of politics, where the term "biggest donor" is a thing of the past. reformist2 Jan 2016 #14
This Hillary hate is just too much for me ejbr Jan 2016 #16
+1 Mbrow Jan 2016 #17
Thank.you ejbr Jan 2016 #19
You notice that in past elections the media would always breathlessly report on how Dustlawyer Jan 2016 #18
The whole country is against the "Payola for President" scheme now FreakinDJ Jan 2016 #20
of and for the billionaires.... amborin Feb 2016 #22
That outright bribery of YDA is disgusting. Odin2005 Feb 2016 #23

nolabels

(13,133 posts)
8. Rather, ownership has it's privileges
Sun Jan 31, 2016, 08:39 AM
Jan 2016

The idea is no longer to drown the baby in the bathwater. The new idea for them, that now that government (and a lot of other institutions) are small and docile enough that they can be influenced easy enough with just a few levers to do the bidding of the ownership class why make any drastic changes. And after all, you should not complain because you do understand the future of your employment is very dependent on how you do for the Ownership.

 

FreakinDJ

(17,644 posts)
2. Hollywood Mogul Haim Saban Calls for ‘More Scrutiny’ of Muslims
Sun Jan 31, 2016, 08:23 AM
Jan 2016

“You want to be free and dead? I’d rather be not free and alive,” billionaire and Hillary Clinton supporter tells TheWrap

Media mogul Haim Saban, one of Hillary Clinton’s biggest backers in Hollywood, said that the U.S. should step up its scrutiny of Muslims in the wake of the deadly ISIS attacks in Paris.

http://www.thewrap.com/hollywood-mogul-haim-saban-more-scrutiny-muslims-profiling-hillary-clinton/

EdwardBernays

(3,343 posts)
5. Another one of her huge donors/bundlers
Sun Jan 31, 2016, 08:27 AM
Jan 2016

Is Tony Podesta... Considered to be one of the few Super Lobbiests. And one of DC's most influential power brokers.

He owns a lobbying firm - with his brother - that represents weapons manufacturers, Saudi Arabia and big pharma.

His brother, John, is Clinton's campaign chairman.

Go figure.

EdwardBernays

(3,343 posts)
9. Yep
Sun Jan 31, 2016, 08:39 AM
Jan 2016

But none is worse than who she chose for the top of her campaign staff. IMO.

But it's definitely bears saying that she's surrounded by lobbyists. By choice.

It's her milieu.

 

SoLeftIAmRight

(4,883 posts)
13. Saban personally made $1.5 billion; the next year he gave a “record-breaking” $7 million to the Demo
Sun Jan 31, 2016, 10:38 AM
Jan 2016

one half of one percent

wow - good deal for someone

 

FreakinDJ

(17,644 posts)
21. America's Presidencts are becoming cheaper - sadly
Sun Jan 31, 2016, 02:29 PM
Jan 2016

Until Americans stand up and take notice the Presidency will become cheaper to buy

reformist2

(9,841 posts)
14. We need a new type of politics, where the term "biggest donor" is a thing of the past.
Sun Jan 31, 2016, 10:43 AM
Jan 2016

I think it's awful that people still can and do buy access to our political candidates. I mean we're supposed to be a democracy. And it's 2016. We all deserve to be heard. And yet some voices get to be heard a lot more than others. It's just so WRONG.

ejbr

(5,856 posts)
16. This Hillary hate is just too much for me
Sun Jan 31, 2016, 10:51 AM
Jan 2016

I mean, you never said you hate her; and if you did, you explain why with supporting documentation. But I just find the hate for her more troublesome than any corruption. If the right hates her, then we have to love her. It's just that simple or we will be perceived as mysoginistic, wanting to hand the Supreme Court choices over to Donald Trump. I'm just grateful that most of her supporters are ignorant of or indifferent to this level of nefarious behavior.

thingy just to be clear

Mbrow

(1,090 posts)
17. +1
Sun Jan 31, 2016, 11:03 AM
Jan 2016

Good point and all, we get called on the carpet for ANY criticism of any other Dem but Bernie, Him? You can bash all you want and how dare you point out the lying Bull shit.

ejbr

(5,856 posts)
19. Thank.you
Sun Jan 31, 2016, 11:13 AM
Jan 2016

Another consistent difference is that we speak to the concerns leveled against him; they seem to attack anyone who points out her issues. To be fair, this is not always the case, but given her history, I can't see how else they can "defend" her other than attacking the messengers.

Dustlawyer

(10,495 posts)
18. You notice that in past elections the media would always breathlessly report on how
Sun Jan 31, 2016, 11:12 AM
Jan 2016

much money has be raised by the candidates each reporting period. Then they would rank the chances of those politicians based on how much "bribe" campaign donations were collected. We used to rank our politicians on who was better at selling us out. Since Bernie's run they aren't quite as vocal about it now.

How messed up is that where we judge our candidates on who the big money supported? It's like we were in denial that Big Donor giving money to a politician resulted in Big Donor getting access and huge amounts of our tax dollars. Big Donors were having customized laws written to benefit themselves and our media reported it like it was a good thing!

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Lets meet Hillary's Bigge...