The Hillary corruption straw man.

[Admiral Loinpresser]

Hillary and her backers keep asking for a specific instance where accepting tons of cash from bankers and other criminals has influenced her voting record. This is artful obfuscation. Corrupt politicians and lobbyists are evil, not stupid. In the rare case of an actual quid pro quo, they would cover their tracks very carefully.

Today's system of legalized bribery is more inchoate, what pundits refer to as "access." So you don't purchase every vote with a constant stream of cash, just the ones you need.

More importantly at the Executive Branch level, campaign contributions mean you, as a filthy corporation, may write legislation and regulations. After you type it up, your errand boy or girl will get it enacted. Better yet, these purchased politicians will even appoint one of your lobbyists or executives as the head regulator in a given agency.

This is why both parties routinely fill up the Treasury Department and other finance-related federal agencies with Goldman Sachs execs. It's a great system which works out swell for all but 99% of us. And remember all you unicorn lovers: there is no quid pro quo!

[Jackie Wilson Said]

1. The simple truth is most (99%) of American politicians do nothing to help corporate

corruption, they just dont do anything to stop it.

Bernie is different and why I am voting for him.

[GreatGazoo]

3. The Clinton Foundation is where the sales take place

Judicial Watch also points out that this Freedom of Information Lawsuit that elicited these 276 previously unseen emails “had previously forced the disclosure of documents that provided a road map for over 200 conflict-of-interest rulings that led to at least $48 million in speaking fees for the Clintons during Hillary Clinton’s tenure as Secretary of State. Previously disclosed documents in this lawsuit, for example, raise questions about funds Clinton accepted from entities linked to Saudi Arabia, China and Iran, among others.”

Even The Washington Post acknowledged last year that the Clinton Foundation violated the ethics agreement it reached with the State Department governing potential conflicts of interest between the Clinton Foundation and Mrs. Clinton’s work as secretary of state, with the foundation hauling in millions of dollars from seven countries during her tenure.

http://www.aim.org/aim-column/more-evidence-of-clinton-corruption-yields-little-interest-from-the-media/

[nichomachus]

4. I would consider

$250,000 plus a lot of other perks -- private jet, presidential suite, etc -- for a 20-minute speech a "ton of cash."

Anyone who thinks these speeches were anything other than money laundering is not paying attention.

[99th_Monkey]

19. +100 - Thank you. Money laundering is exactly this it is about. nt

[WDIM]

5. How about Boeing and The Saudi's Donations to the Clinton Foundation?

Cash for murder machines. quid pro quo.

[Admiral Loinpresser]

7. I agree.

The Clinton Foundation is a whole new level of corruption in American weapons deals. The Clinton Foundation stuff appears to be quid pro quo in many instances. Good point.

[think]

8. The UBS bank IRS intervention while SoS is another. Bill then got $1.5 million to speak to UBS

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/07/hillary-helps-a-bankand-then-it-pays-bill-15-million-in-speaking-fees/400067/

[WDIM]

10. There seems to be many instances

That the media and Clinton supporters just ignore ignore ignore.

[Skwmom]

6. It's also not the only question. She DID NOT vote as SOS. But she had power OVER a lot of other

things, including the distribution of taxpayer monies.

In addition, look at the funding of the two-for-one couple the first go round. The trade agreements, financial deregulation, and media bills were SO BAD for America (and MANY pointed it out at the time) and we are told the Clintons are stupid. Thus, it begs WHY would they have done what they did? Answer: Follow the money (during and after they left office).

[reformist2]

9. Your use of the term "straw man" is sexist. ;)

[Admiral Loinpresser]

11. LOL, good one. n/t

[Thinkingabout]

12. The question remains, what bill or bills can you point to has influenced Hillary's

Voting? We know NRA donated money to help defeat Sanders opponent when he was elected to the House.

[Admiral Loinpresser]

13. Elizabeth Warren answered your question on Bill Moyers years ago. n/t

[Thinkingabout]

14. Are you referring to the bankruptcy bill?

[Admiral Loinpresser]

15. Elizabeth has her version, Hillary has hers:

http://billmoyers.com/2015/11/18/flashback-elizabeth-warren-tells-a-story-about-hillary-clinton-wall-street-and-lobbying/

[Thinkingabout]

16. Again, are you referring to the bankruptcy bill?

[Octafish]

17. UBS

UBS is a Swiss bank that is enjoying better days, thanks to the US taxpayer and a number of key US political leaders.

Hillary Helps a Bank—and Then It Funnels Millions to the Clintons

The Wall Street Journal’s eyebrow-raising story of how the presidential candidate and her husband accepted cash from UBS without any regard for the appearance of impropriety that it created.

by CONOR FRIEDERSDORF, The Atlantic, JUL 31, 2015

The Swiss bank UBS is one of the biggest, most powerful financial institutions in the world. As secretary of state, Hillary Clinton intervened to help it out with the IRS. And after that, the Swiss bank paid Bill Clinton $1.5 million for speaking gigs. The Wall Street Journal reported all that and more Thursday in an article that highlights huge conflicts of interest that the Clintons have created in the recent past.

The piece begins by detailing how Clinton helped the global bank.

“A few weeks after Hillary Clinton was sworn in as secretary of state in early 2009, she was summoned to Geneva by her Swiss counterpart to discuss an urgent matter. The Internal Revenue Service was suing UBS AG to get the identities of Americans with secret accounts,” the newspaper reports. “If the case proceeded, Switzerland’s largest bank would face an impossible choice: Violate Swiss secrecy laws by handing over the names, or refuse and face criminal charges in U.S. federal court. Within months, Mrs. Clinton announced a tentative legal settlement—an unusual intervention by the top U.S. diplomat. UBS ultimately turned over information on 4,450 accounts, a fraction of the 52,000 sought by the IRS.”

Then reporters James V. Grimaldi and Rebecca Ballhaus lay out how UBS helped the Clintons. “Total donations by UBS to the Clinton Foundation grew from less than $60,000 through 2008 to a cumulative total of about $600,000 by the end of 2014, according to the foundation and the bank,” they report. “The bank also joined the Clinton Foundation to launch entrepreneurship and inner-city loan programs, through which it lent $32 million. And it paid former president Bill Clinton $1.5 million to participate in a series of question-and-answer sessions with UBS Wealth Management Chief Executive Bob McCann, making UBS his biggest single corporate source of speech income disclosed since he left the White House.”

The article adds that “there is no evidence of any link between Mrs. Clinton’s involvement in the case and the bank’s donations to the Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton Foundation, or its hiring of Mr. Clinton.” Maybe it’s all a mere coincidence, and when UBS agreed to pay Bill Clinton $1.5 million the relevant decision-maker wasn’t even aware of the vast sum his wife may have saved the bank or the power that she will potentially wield after the 2016 presidential election.

SNIP...

As McClatchy noted last month in a more broadly focused article that also mentions UBS, “Ten of the world’s biggest financial institutions––including UBS, Bank of America, JP Morgan Chase, Citigroup and Goldman Sachs––have hired Bill Clinton numerous times since 2004 to speak for fees totaling more than $6.4 million. Hillary Clinton also has accepted speaking fees from at least one bank. And along with an 11th bank, the French giant BNP Paribas, the financial goliaths also donated as much as $24.9 million to the Clinton Foundation––the family’s global charity set up to tackle causes from the AIDS epidemic in Africa to climate change.”

CONTINUED...

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/07/hillary-helps-a-bankand-then-it-pays-bill-15-million-in-speaking-fees/400067/

About UBS Wealth Management

It's Buy Partisan

After his exit from the US Senate, Phil Gramm found a job at Swiss bank UBS as vice chairman. He later brought on former President Bill Clinton. What a coincidence, they are the two key figures in repealing Glass-Steagal. Since the New Deal it was the financial regulation that protected the US taxpayer from the Wall Street casino. Oh well, what's a $16 trillion bailout among friends?



It's a Buy-Partisan Who's Who:

President William J. Clinton
President George W. Bush Heh heh heh.
Robert J. McCann
James Carville
John V. Miller
Paula D. Polito
Anthony Roth
Mike Ryan
John Savercool

SOURCE: http://financialservicesinc.ubs.com/revitalizingamerica/SenatorPhilGramm.html

One of my attorney chums doesn't like to see his name on any committees, event letterhead or political campaign literature. These folks, it seems to me, are past caring.

Some of why DUers and ALL voters should care about Phil Gramm.



Just because the nation's "news media" aren't doing their job should also be of great concern for the 99-percent and anyone who cares about Democracy.

[Admiral Loinpresser]

33. That is quite a rogue's gallery. n't

[leveymg]

38. The deal let the other 47k Swiss acc't holders off the hook.

That was one of Secretary Clinton's major accomplishments in office. Earned her lots of enduring gratitude from Wall Street.

[rhett o rick]

22. Why don't you make it even simpler. "Have you personally ever seen cash being transferred

from Goldman-Sachs to Clinton for a written agreement to accomplish anything? If not, that proves that everything is on the up and up."

You guys pretend that you don't know how corruption works. Pretend that quid pro qo might exist for everyone but your candidate.

Those among us that are struggling will pay the price for the greedy pursuit of wealth of those currently running our country.

[basselope]

25. Several come to mind.

The Bankruptcy bill is the most glaring.

Her support of fracking also shows a dependency on the money from related industries.

[Thinkingabout]

31. Ah, the claim Hillary voted for the bankruptcy bill. On the day the bankruptcy Bill was

Was voted is the same day Bill Clinton has his heart surgery. She was not there to vote so we can put that one to bed, didn't happen.

[basselope]

32. False.

You are talking about the 2005 bankruptcy bill.

I am talking about the 2001 bankruptcy bill which was substantially similar and she voted yes on.

[Thinkingabout]

34. That Bill did not pass.

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/08/08/clinton-and-the-bankruptcy-law/?_r=0

[basselope]

36. So?

Explain to me how her voting on something that she was supposedly against (that did not pass due to no intervention of her own) has ANYTHING to do with the fact that she voted for it?

Dear god... come on.. try and stick with reality here.

[pat_k]

18. Inside the beltway sphincter, the cash and the access...

...that cash buys is just one aspect of the problem.

Another aspect, which is much harder to counter, is the extent to which politicians, journalists, and other "powerbrokers" (folks with money) are deeply ensconced in the DC social scene. "Bad-mouthing" your "friends" is impolite. God forbid you might get dirty looks from across the room at a cocktail party.

Refraining from action that would "rock the boat" has become a survival instinct. Refraining from rocking the boat out fear of losing the cash needed for re-election is part of it. But another part is social. If you don't get re-elected, you'll lose your position in this little bubble social world. You'll become an outsider, adrift without "your friends." We are social creatures. This is a powerful force.

Beltway "groupthink" is spread to people "out here" because pundits remain embedded in the political culture for year, after year, after year. It's a vicious and damaging feedback loop.

We've got to reform the financing system, but we also need to find creative ways to inject ourselves and shake it up their world. The difficultly is not getting co-opted in the process. (How many times have we seen good people get sucked in and transformed.

[Armstead]

20. Excellent point

[Hassin Bin Sober]

21. This is a classic for the ages:

https://m.

[rhett o rick]

24. Thanks Hassin. nm

[Uncle Joe]

23. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, Admiral Loinpresser.

[CajunBlazer]

26. Translation: I have absolutely no evidence that Hillary was...

in any way influenced by any money contributed to her campaigns or by fees from her speeches to corporations like Goldman Sachs.

[Admiral Loinpresser]

29. Why do they give the money? Patriotism? n/t

[CajunBlazer]

35. Consideration

$100,000 or $200,000 is chump change to a multi-billion corporation. Less than one hundredth of one percent of their yearly revenue. Somewhat equivalent me contributing $30 or $50 to a political campaign. Many contribute much the same to both candidates. They don't expect much, but what the hell, it might help some day.

Look, I am all for getting big money out of politics, but it is foolish to unilaterally disarm. The Republicans are damn well going to take the money.

Yea, I know Sanders unilaterally disarmed and that is okay for the primaries, but it would be stupid for the general election race. No candidate should expect small donors to pay for the half billion dollar cost of that kind of campaign. I can almost guarantee even Trump won't self fund that coats if he is the campaign.

Hell yea, work like hell to get rid of the big money, but until then...

[Admiral Loinpresser]

39. Unilateral disarmament??

Bernie's small donor strategy is outperforming Hillary's conventional dark money strategy. She is cash strapped and he is outspending her in states of his choosing. Hillary's money advantage is a false stereotype.

[CajunBlazer]

40. Yes, Sanders unilaterially disarmed - and you are misinfrormed.

Thus fare Sanders has raised %182,923,991 and Hillary has raised $182,242,497 so they have raised almost exactly the same money. The Sanders campaign has spent 91% of the money available while the Clinton campaign has spent 84% of their available cash, so it is Sanders not Hillary which is cash strapped.

While several of Bernie's biggest donors exceeded their $2,500 limited long ago, his donations averaged only $27 which means that most of his donation were quite small. That indicates the most of those donating can't afford to give much and if they continue to give they are going to reach their limits.

The problem is that the $183 K which Sanders raised is but a drop in the bucket compared to what he would need in the general election. In 2012, $2 Billion dollars was spent on the Presidential election and the majority was spent during the general election and this year even more money is likely to be spent. That's when TV commercial have to run nationwide, not just one state at a time. Where is Sanders going to raise. The Koch brothers and friends alone are planning to spend almost $1 Billion dollars backing Republican candidates in 2016 through their PAC. How could Sanders counter all all of that money without a pack of his own?

However, that isn't all of Hillary's fund raising; there is also the Hillary Victory fund:

CNN: $182 million: Bernie Sanders equals Hillary Clinton's campaign fundraising

Clinton also raises money for the "Hillary Victory Fund," a federal joint fundraising committee operated between the Clinton campaign, the Democratic National Committee, and a number of state parties. The fund has raised $60 million through the end of March and has transferred $12.7 million to the Clinton campaign. Any funds raised by a joint fundraising committee are divided among the sponsoring campaigns and parties using a predetermined allocation formula.

Sanders has his own joint fundraising committee with the DNC, the "Bernie Victory Fund," but as of March that account remained essentially inactive.

And Hillary also has her Super PAC to which rich Democratic donors can contributed an unlimited amount of money.

Clinton also has the support of outside groups known as "Super PACs," which can raise and spend unlimited amounts of money in support or opposition to a candidate but may not coordinate directly with a campaign. The primary Super PAC supporting Clinton is Priorities USA, which has raised more than $55 million in 2015 and 2016.

So Bernie Sanders unilaterally disarmed. But not to worry, he only has to fund his campaign through the convention because after that he's done.

[Admiral Loinpresser]

41. The unprecedented Hillary Victory Fund is an ongoing criminal conspiracy.

It is designed to engage in extortion and money laundering in 32 states. Podesta, Brock and both Clintons need to be behind bars, just like any other gangsters.

[Romulox]

27. After all, big banks often give money to just about anybody, without thinking of asking for anything

in return!

[amborin]

28. true; but in HRC's case, there are some fairly blatant examples; someone

will hopefully organize a chronological account of the donations, and her favors, weapons sales, pardons, lobbying, etc.

[Admiral Loinpresser]

30. As I conceded upthread, her SOS tenure apparently included foreign government pay to play.

I agree a chronology would be helpful. If she is the nominee, we will undoubtedly get that chronology from a GOP counterpart of David Brock. I assume you mean a progressive analysis and chronology. I would love to see that. This might be a start:

While at State, Clinton was particularly generous with sales approvals for weapons manufacturers. David Sirota and Andrew Perez have shown she oversaw an 80% increase in weapons sales approvals compared to Secretary Condoleeza Rice, including a special 143% increase for her Foundation’s donors. Thailand and the United Arab Emirates are two donors who received gun purchase approvals from Clinton’s State Department in 2011 after they donated upwards of $1,250,000 to the Clinton Foundation.

https://medium.com/@JeanetteJing/secretary-clinton-approved-millions-in-global-sales-for-the-sandy-hook-gun-maker-9e8b0e78c58d#.8o5i2yqb9

[mhatrw]

37. LOL. It's such a stupid question. The whole system is pay-to-play.

Every single bill is affected.