The Clintons: A Case Study In Money And Politics

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - The Clintons: A Case Study In Money And Politics stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS


First Posted: 02- 9-08 10:31 PM   |   Updated: 03-28-08 02:45 AM

I Like ItI Don’t Like It
Clinton Cash

Hillary Clinton's ability to loan her presidential campaign $5 million demonstrates how extraordinarily lucrative the post-White House years have been for the former First Lady and her husband.

While Clinton campaign aides are quick to point out that Mrs. Clinton could easily cover the loan from the $9.2 million she made in royalties from her bestselling book Living History, she made the loan by writing a check on a joint banking account she and her husband maintain, according to her staff.

Living History
contributed less than a fifth of the money that the Clintons have earned over the seven years between 2001 and 2006, as documented in Mrs. Clinton's United States Senate and presidential financial disclosure reports -- a sum in excess of $45 million, not including the couple's earnings in 2007 or 2008.

The Clintons have become a case study in the interrelationship of money and politics, a relationship steadily strengthening in scope and magnitude.

A look at Hillary Clinton's financial disclosure reports over the last six years reveals the benefits available to those who hold high public office. Bill Clinton, for example, has become a political ATM, pumping as much as or more than $10 million a year into their joint account.

Some of the cash flow is fully documented in the disclosure reports, including payments of $150,000 to $400,000 for each of the 30 or so speeches Bill Clinton gives annually, for a six-year total of $39.1 million. In 2006 alone, Bill Clinton gave 57 paid speeches for a total of $10.15 million in a wide range of cities - including New York, Chicago, Cleveland, Las Vegas and Denver - and in several countries, among them Denmark, England, Germany, Ireland, Finland, New Zealand and Australia.

Other of the Clinton's income sources are far more difficult to ascertain -- for instance, the flow of cash from billionaire investor Ron Burkle and his Yucaipa companies.

In each of Senator Clinton's past four disclosure statements - 2003-2006 -- there is a line item that reveals only that Bill Clinton received "guaranteed payments to partner" of "over $1,000" from Burkle's Yucaipa.

The disclosure forms do not explain what the guarantee is, and they leave to the imagination how much over $1,000 the annual amounts are. President Clinton, according to news accounts, has helped Burkle in his business dealings.

Story continues below
advertisement

In her financial disclosure statements, Hillary Clinton lists two seemingly modest investments in Burkle companies, under the category of "Non-Publicly Traded Assets and Unearned Income Sources." One investment in Yucaipa Global Holding is described as worth less than $1,000, while producing interest income of $200 to $1,000 annually. The other, in the Yucaipa Global Partnership Fund, is also listed as being worth less than $1,000, while producing interest payments of $1,000 to $2,500 a year.

Except for honoraria, which must be described in detail, federal disclosure requirements are much more stringent for the elected official than for his or her spouse. The forms declare: "For your spouse, report the source (name and address) and the type of earned income which aggregate $1,000 or more during the reporting period. No amount needs to be specified for your spouse."

Bill Clinton's financial ties to the Yucaipa Companies were first made public on April 11, 2002, when the firm issued a press release announcing that Clinton "will provide counsel to Yucaipa and its investment funds including the Yucaipa American Fund (YAF) and the Yucaipa Corporate Initiative Fund (YCIF). Mr. Clinton will participate in events related to the funds and provide advice in the development of potential investments....Ron Burkle, managing partner of The Yucaipa Companies, said, 'We are proud that President Clinton will serve as a Senior Advisor to our firm.'"

In April 2008, the New York Times reported that


"After leaving the White House in 2001, former President Bill Clinton was inundated with business and job offers, from investment-bank partnerships to seats on corporate boards. He turned them all down, with one exception: He agreed to be an adviser to a family of funds run by the Yucaipa Companies, a California private equity firm controlled by one of his best friends, the billionaire Ronald W. Burkle."

Neither the campaign nor aides to Bill Clinton would provide specific information as to how Bill Clinton is compensated for services he provides to Burkle. Frank Quintero, a Yucaipa spokesman, referred questions to the Clinton campaign.

"The Senator reports all disclosable financial information," Howard Wolfson, Hillary Clinton's communications director, responded in an emailed reply to a series of questions from The Huffington Post.

Matt McKenna, Bill Clinton's press secretary, wrote: "My understanding is Howard answered your Qs. Hope you got everything you needed. Please direct follow-ups on this issue to him."

The former president is said to be currently negotiating an end to his financial relationship with Burkle, in order to avoid conflicts of interest if his wife should become president. The settlement will result in the payment of a substantial sum - the Wall Street Journal reported on January 22 that the figure will be in the $20 million range - but aides to both Bill and Hillary Clinton are unwilling to shed any light on this matter.

Wolfson, referring to the WSJ story, said, "Contrary to published reports, neither the level of President Clinton's compensation for his advisory role, nor the value of his partnership share in the Yucaipa global fund upon his exit, has been determined."

In December, Douglas J. Band, a spokesman for Bill Clinton, told The Huffington Post that the former president "anticipates continuing his business relationships as long as they permit him to devote time to his highest priorities - the work of his foundation and supporting his wife's candidacy. He of course is taking steps now to ensure that should she receive the nomination, there will be an appropriate transition for those relationships."

There are a number of reasons the Yucaipa ties could prove embarrassing to the Clintons.

Bloomberg News on December 17 reported that three of the Yucaipa funds are registered in the Cayman Islands. Senator Clinton, in 2004, declared that she intended to close tax loopholes for "people who create a mailbox, or a drop, or send one person to sit on the beach in some island paradise and claim that it is their offshore headquarters."

Along similar lines, the WSJ's January 22 story pointed out that Clinton has an interest in Yucaipa Global Partnership Fund, making him a partner with the Dubai Investment Group, "an entity connected to the ruler of Dubai, Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid al-Maktoum." Senator Clinton, according to the WSJ, had separately raised questions about investment funds controlled by foreign governments, because the funds "could be used by foreign governments as 'instruments of foreign policy."

On a much broader scale, Bill Clinton's involvement with the Yucaipa funds raises a basic ethical question for Hillary Clinton, both in connection with her presidential bid and in connection with her service in the U.S. Senate: The purpose in hiring Bill Clinton is to use the connections he had made as President to gain access and to make lucrative deals -- a commonplace but controversial practice regarding former officeholders, a practice with little or no public support - and the money made from these activities in the Clintons' case becomes part of Bill and Hillary's jointly held assets, according to Senator Clinton's communications director.

In other words, money from Yucaipa and the interests it deals with - running the gamut from public employee pension funds to supermarket chains to the Dubai Investment Group - is directly benefiting Hillary Clinton, an incumbent politician charged with voting on issues crucially important to the profits of Yucaipa, its clients, partners and investors.

Hillary Clinton's ability to loan her presidential campaign $5 million demonstrates how extraordinarily lucrative the post-White House years have been for the former First Lady and her husband. While...
Hillary Clinton's ability to loan her presidential campaign $5 million demonstrates how extraordinarily lucrative the post-White House years have been for the former First Lady and her husband. While...
Report Corrections
 
Comments
476
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
Page: « First ‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next › Last » (8 pages total)
- illinoisan I'm a Fan of illinoisan 25 fans permalink
photo

I looked all over Hillary's website to find out where I could loan her campaign some money.

No luck.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:30 PM on 02/10/2008

I assume that the "loan" will be repaid from future donations. What is the interest rate she is charging her campaign?
Sounds like another Clinton scam to put cash in the Clinton bank account.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:42 PM on 02/10/2008
- illinoisan I'm a Fan of illinoisan 25 fans permalink
photo

Well, now we at least know Hillary's rationale for not leaving him. $$$$$$$$$$$

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:23 PM on 02/10/2008
- argeec I'm a Fan of argeec 7 fans permalink

If HuffPost were really interested in informing the voters, it would publish an analysis of major contributions to both candidates, side by side, with special attention to the financial interests of the donors.
If that were done, I think we would discover that both candidates are beholden to special interests.
Why do you think plutocrats didn't give money to John Edwards? Or why the media pretended he didn't exist?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:22 PM on 02/10/2008

They have argeec... and so have most media sources. Just look

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:51 PM on 02/10/2008
- argeec I'm a Fan of argeec 7 fans permalink

Well, if that is true, I would appreciate a link. Because I can't find it.
And, with all due respect, I don't think you have either.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:02 PM on 02/10/2008
- nellie I'm a Fan of nellie 502 fans permalink
photo

Good comment.

This article is a case for public finance reform, but as far as being a case for one versus another particular candidate, I don't buy it. Money is corrupting our political system through and through, and it touches every candidate. Anyone who thinks their candidate has clean hands is sadly naive. And I'm an Obama supporter.

Until we pass public campaign financing, articles like this—although excellent reporting and investigative work, Mr. Edsall, as I've said before—really do nothing to shed light on the real problem.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:05 PM on 02/10/2008
- larry278 I'm a Fan of larry278 49 fans permalink

It isn't difficult to say that both HRC & BHO are getting big money from what is called the establishment, power elite & so on. Big money hedges its bets. Neither HRC nor BHO will make any changes which will harm the establishment. That is a given. HRC must have been dumped by the establishment. Their money is going to BHO for now.
I hope that the establishment has decided that they/it can't afford to have the GOP in the White House after 1/20/09. W & Co have been much more expensive than the establishment can afford to pay. The expenses have involved more than money. Perhaps we will find out what the establishment will do to cut its extremely large losses from 8 years of W & Co as time passes.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:36 PM on 02/10/2008
photo

It's not the only reason Edwards was ignored by the media. The MSM wanted to flog the whole historic "black man running against a white woman/ex-first lady" story. Edwards had also been covered in the 2004 election run up and failed bid with Kerry by the MSM, so they assume his story is already well known to the public, and that was another reason Edwards was ignored.

There are significant differences between Obama and Clinton, in their voting record -

http://politicalmaelstrom.blogspot.com/2008/01/actual-differences-between-barack-and.html

and also Clinton has unashamedly taken money from Federal lobbyists, and Obama has not -

http://lessig.org/blog/2007/08/on_clinton_and_lobbyists.html

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:51 PM on 02/10/2008
- mageduley I'm a Fan of mageduley 4 fans permalink

That is right!!! Lets give John Edwards a voice!
From the John Edwards youtube page
Hear what he has to say about the current state of our candidates:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qggO5yY7RAo

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:40 PM on 02/10/2008
- partyofone I'm a Fan of partyofone 45 fans permalink

Agreec, your suggestion would help. I do not believe, however, that candidates other than the Clintons would have ties to foreign governments, internatioal businesses conflicted with U.S. security and foreign policy interests, and a "philanthropic" quagmire deeply inbreed with profit-making and politics.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:36 PM on 02/10/2008
- YRM I'm a Fan of YRM 9 fans permalink

Independent prosecutor Kevin Starr spent $6 million of US taxpayer money to find dirt on both Clintons and uncovered nothing. Why aren't more journalists looking at where Obama got his millions to start running for president just one year after arriving in Washington? His meteoric rise makes no sense unless you factor in Karl Rove and the G.O.P. For more on Obama's funders and the Rove strategy, check out the article I've posted at thecityedition.com, which links to other sources.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:20 PM on 02/10/2008

Sorry, the demoractic party thwarted him at every turn, hand-cuffed attorney Dale Schippers, would not let subpoenas be served on all substantive scandals. This was Republican and Democratic Senators closing ranks against the American people, it was a travesty of justice. You should get the facts straight. See my post below.

Karl Rove may have nothing to do with the Democratic campaign, I do not know, but I know he is hoping it disintegrates.

Frankly, I don't care one iota for the Democratic Party. I was a life long Republican until Bush morphed into a dictator along with Cheney.


But getting back to you main point, Starr was handcuffed by well known Senators many of whom when on to their own sleezy scandals (DeLay,
Rick Santorum).

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:55 PM on 02/10/2008
- naturesway I'm a Fan of naturesway 12 fans permalink

Oh Please, that whole witch hunt was financed by outside money who was hamstrung by NO ONE. Can you say the Straife millions and media?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:14 PM on 02/10/2008
- partyofone I'm a Fan of partyofone 45 fans permalink

YRM, the only defense of the Clintons and their dishonesty from their supporters is always to attack someone else.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:42 PM on 02/10/2008
- jubo I'm a Fan of jubo 8 fans permalink
photo

Who will repay the loan?

Cheap-ass ...

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:19 PM on 02/10/2008
- horacekent I'm a Fan of horacekent 10 fans permalink

I do my laundry on Sundays - so that makes today laundry day, which got me thinking metaphorically.

For the democrats, it's like changing the bedding. The sheets & pillow cases on the bed, sorely need to be removed & replaced (the Bush/Chenney administration). So you take them off - thank god!! Perhaps even burn them.

But instead of replacing them with fresh, clean new bedding (Obama), you see down in the hamper, the sheets from the previous Clinton administartion, & start considering putting them on instead. However, once you pull them out, & see all the stains, & get a good wiff of the smell - plus other abhorrent defilements I need not mention - you'd be a fool to want to put them on your bed. However, should you decide to do so - you'll be sleeping in that crap for another 4+ years!

Lets start fresh & new!!
Go Obama!!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:07 PM on 02/10/2008
- cblcar I'm a Fan of cblcar 6 fans permalink

At 60 years old, I've seen a lot of political maneuvering in my time, so trust me when I say, none of this matters people. The ticket is going to be brokered by the DNC and it will be Clinton/Obama. Neither one of them will like it and the Obama people will whine as usual but that will be the deal and together they will beat McCain. On the up side for Obama supporters, eight years as VP will erase all the very valid inexperience arguments against him. Plus, remember, his wife has said she will not allow him to run for the presidency again, however if he's coming from the VP slot, I don't think she'll have much to say about it. In 2016, he will probably win, which gives the Democrats 16 years. I know it's hard for some of you to look past the ends of your noses, but try just this once and you just might see the wisdom and greater good of this approach.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:06 PM on 02/10/2008

See my earlier post last evening when I asked what would happen if Obama won the state count, the pre-convention delegate count and the popular count, AND the party pushed Clinton to the top of the ticket. With our without Obama? What would the American people say, feel, think, do? Imagine.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:29 PM on 02/10/2008
- mageduley I'm a Fan of mageduley 4 fans permalink

Great article by Frank Rich in the NYT that addresses this very issue:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/10/opinion/10rich.html?ref=opinion

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:24 PM on 02/10/2008

While Obama was allegedly dealing drugs, the super delegates were working for the Dem party. The super delegates should have their say as Obama agreed to. Obama wants to "hang on" to the Dem "brand." He needs to take the "good" with the "bad." That is hard for the whiner Obama and his followers to do, but those are the rules. If he doesn't like the rules, he and Oprah could simply start their own party.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:15 PM on 02/10/2008

As a 62 years old, I can tell you not this time and not this Bitch. Obama and his loyal supporters will not settle for tired cynical political maneuvering by the Hillbillies and their sycophants. The Clintons are not acceptable, period. You keep scheming in your political cesspool, ain't happening this time.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:38 PM on 02/10/2008
- naturesway I'm a Fan of naturesway 12 fans permalink

OOPS, your bigotry and hatred is showing!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:45 PM on 02/10/2008

truthbrigage... you misread my intent, I believe Obama will be the next President and support him, I would write in Obama if Clinton got the nomination. We are on the same side ;)

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:57 PM on 02/10/2008

... and I'm even older and ask why Obama would want to be relegated to VP2 under WJC? Why would he want to be painted by the same brush that will undoubtedly cover a third term for that team of unscrupulous power mongers? No, if the Clintons claw their way to a win, I hope Obama will distance himself from their brand and do what he can to work with a McCain administration that will no doubt be inaugurated in Nov.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:25 PM on 02/10/2008
- naturesway I'm a Fan of naturesway 12 fans permalink

good gawd, the two candidates are nearly identical in voting, in policy, in money raised and in special interest group support.
They are BOTH clawing ...
get real.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:56 PM on 02/10/2008
- partyofone I'm a Fan of partyofone 45 fans permalink

cbicar,

Much of the nation will never vote for or accept Mrs. Bill Clinton as president. This election is not about Democrats or Republicans. It is about ending the deep, mean divisions for the Bush-Clinton era, which has prevented national consensus on any issue and protected rampant corporate profiteering to the detriment of most Americans and the nations economy and security.

Hillary supporters who think they can defeat Obama and stave off change in America by suggesting that he be Hillary's VP, are badly out of touch.

The Clintons represent everything that is wrong with American politics. The nation cannot move forward with the Clintons in the White House again. PERIOD

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:48 PM on 02/10/2008
- ltfcrazy I'm a Fan of ltfcrazy 8 fans permalink
photo

It doesn't even matter if the money's dirty or not. What matters is how much they've got. People with that kind of wealth can't possibly understand what a working American is going through day to day.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:06 PM on 02/10/2008
- naturesway I'm a Fan of naturesway 12 fans permalink

If you spoke to the poorest citizens and ask them which policy has helped them the most, you will find that the Clinton administration has done to most to help. Hillary biggest demographic are people who make less than $50,000.
The Clinton's have spent their lives helping the poor and disenfranchised.
Obama has too, but he hasn't been around as long to help as many.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:58 PM on 02/10/2008
- mutron I'm a Fan of mutron 3 fans permalink

I asked a Clinton supporter if it bothered her that if Hillary was to be elected to the White House would she use the Lincoln bedroom as a fund raising device like they did back in the 90's and her response to me was that it was a stupid question and why would I even ask such a thing.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:53 AM on 02/10/2008
- Colmore I'm a Fan of Colmore 45 fans permalink

Would it bother you if she uses the taxpayer money as her own personal piggy-bank, like Georgie has done? Would it bother you if Bill has a Jeff Gannon type staying over at the WH, for no apparent reason that could be explained? How about if she lets the taxpayer money be used to bail out all her relatives who make lousy business decisions, like the ENTIRE Bush family? You should check on your own party before you criticise Hillary. Let's see Georgie make millions giving speeches (if he isn't being tried at the Hague) after he leaves office. I would pay to keep him off the stage, rather than listen to him hemming and hawing, trying to put a decent sentence together.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:18 PM on 02/10/2008
- partyofone I'm a Fan of partyofone 45 fans permalink

There is no difference in the Bushes and the Clintons except for the technicality of party registration.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:50 PM on 02/10/2008
- Clarabell I'm a Fan of Clarabell 65 fans permalink
photo

You have a smart friend -- it was a stupid question.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:39 PM on 02/10/2008
- naturesway I'm a Fan of naturesway 12 fans permalink

She's right, that's a pretty idiotic question.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:46 PM on 02/10/2008
- smzzzz I'm a Fan of smzzzz 2 fans permalink

For all the people thinking about voting for Clinton, ask yourself this: do you really want another four years of these kind of stories, along with the inevitable personal issues, coming up? And now they are not disclosing their tax returns and not disclosing papers from the Presidential Library; who knows what else is going to come up. Do you really want to go into the November election waiting for another bomb to drop, thereby ensuring McCain's election. Or, if through some miracle she did win, knowing that every positive gain from a second Clinton administration came with a price of sleazy headlines and investigations and another Congress lost to the Republicans?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:52 AM on 02/10/2008
- naturesway I'm a Fan of naturesway 12 fans permalink

I just love the people who whine and moan about the sleaze as they are spilling gas on the embers of devisiveness.
YOU ARE THE PROBLEM. Just say "no" to spin.

TROLL

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:49 PM on 02/10/2008
- RightBrain I'm a Fan of RightBrain 2 fans permalink

Do the Clintons really want to go down in history as the couple who prevented our first African-American president?

Obama polls 8 points over McCain, Hillary is even.

Any questions?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:48 AM on 02/10/2008

Does Obama want to go down in history as the one who prevented the first woman president. This is an absurd comment and just another hit job by the Obama Post

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:53 AM on 02/10/2008

It's not Obama's fault that his supporters Outnumber Hillary's people by almost 3-1 on the Internet, its called the educated people, the group Obama dominates Hillary in..

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:17 PM on 02/10/2008

Why is it a hit job? Can't people just voice their opinion. It goes both ways. I'm tired of people saying Hillary-ites this or Obama-ites that. Why do we need to label people's opinions?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:35 PM on 02/10/2008
- Clarabell I'm a Fan of Clarabell 65 fans permalink
photo

AZDemocrat 500 -- yes, thank you, RightBrain did make an absurd comment -- and I think this has been said before -- where is his/her left brain?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:41 PM on 02/10/2008
- partyofone I'm a Fan of partyofone 45 fans permalink

If Obama prevents Mrs. Bill Clinton from becoming president he has done the nation and history a great service. She is mean, dishonest, power hungry and totally self-interested. Her only qualification is her husband. We've had a presidency for 7 years built on lies, family ties and corporate cronyism. It's the worst in history. Why would we want another one?

Can we prevent the continuation of the deep political divisions and corporate dominiation of the Bush-Clinton-Clinton-Bush-Bush-Clinton era? YES WE CAN!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:36 PM on 02/10/2008
- naturesway I'm a Fan of naturesway 12 fans permalink

Ah, if Hillary becomes the next President it will be by gaining the majority of Vote. What do you have against Democracy?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:50 PM on 02/10/2008
- partyofone I'm a Fan of partyofone 45 fans permalink

naturesway, were you asleep in 2000. Gore won the majority of the vote, and the Supreme Court made Bush president. American democarcy is deeply threatened by the continuation of the Bush-Clinton-Clinton-Bush-Bush-Clinton dynasty. End it now.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:52 PM on 02/10/2008

Please name me ONE piece of Progressive legislation that Bill Clinton signed while in office!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:13 PM on 02/10/2008
- mageduley I'm a Fan of mageduley 4 fans permalink

Great article in the NYT about this very subject
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/10/opinion/10rich.html?ref=opinion

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:25 PM on 02/10/2008
- Richard729 I'm a Fan of Richard729 51 fans permalink
photo

Let's face it, Bill Clinton had his day and I don't think the voters are ready for another 4 years of divisive, hateful politics which is exactly what we'll get if Hillary & Bill get back in the White House.

Bill Clinton did nothing for the Democratic Party except make it mostly irrelevant during his last 6 years in the White House after he aided in their loss of both houses of congress in 1994.

It's time to make a clean sweep. We either get real change or go back to the rancor, sniping and name-calling which will result in the Democrats once again losing both houses of congress to a reckless spending, war-minded Republican Party.

If McCain gets in, it will be an affirmation of Bush policies and simply an extension of a Bush third term. It's Barack Obama or nothing.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:46 AM on 02/10/2008
- naturesway I'm a Fan of naturesway 12 fans permalink

You seem to have forgotten that Bill Clinton was the only Democratic who won against the republican machine in over 40 years. The only Dem...
Please let that sink in for awhile.
Yes, Carter was in there but I think Perot had a bit to do about it.
The Clintons have been successful before against this powerful and entrenched machine.No one else has beat them.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:56 PM on 02/10/2008
- mageduley I'm a Fan of mageduley 4 fans permalink

You are absolutely right about the Bushes. They are as corrupt as they come.
Bill does do a lot of philanthropic work. Especially with Daddy Bush:
http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/PersonOfWeek/story?id=1446477

Clinton and the elder Bush, rivals in the 1992 presidential election, have grown chummy in recent years, often traveling and appearing at public events together. In 2005, they started a charity to help victims of Hurricane Katrina.

They are happy together
http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2006/11/13/100701.shtml

Bill even said his old friend would help hillary get elected - though the screaming from the right stopped it
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2007/12/18/bill-clinton-george-hw-bush-will-help-president-hillary/

So I ask you. WHO IS GOING TO HOLD DUBYA ACCOUNTABLE FOR WAR CRIMES?????????

It would be kind of hard to indict your best friends son, wouldn't it. I smell obstruction of investigations and pardons on the horizon.

Oooh I forgot this one. Besides the close friendship the Clintons have with the sheriff that blocked poor katrina refugees from crossing over into a more affluent parish "citing criminal concerns" the end of this article mentions how much George HW values Bills friendship, saying he'd like more time to play golf

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/20/us/politics/20commence.html?_r=1&scp=2&sq=Milestones%3A+Hillary+Clinton&st=nyt&oref=slogin

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:26 PM on 02/10/2008
- partyofone I'm a Fan of partyofone 45 fans permalink

naturesway, the Clintons are Democrats in party registration only. They are very Republican in their policies.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:55 PM on 02/10/2008

Dirty money, dirty politics.

That pretty well sums up the clintons.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:38 AM on 02/10/2008
- naturesway I'm a Fan of naturesway 12 fans permalink

Politics and money are always dirty.
Didn't your mom ever tell you to never put money in your mouth? You never know where it's been.

Democracy is a messy process.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:18 PM on 02/10/2008

More money, more resources and more hearings were spent investigating the Clintons on those fake partisan scandals during the 90's than was spent on the 911 commission. If that doesn't shame, embarrass and damn the GOP and the media in the eyes of history nothing will.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:29 AM on 02/10/2008
- dawlishgal I'm a Fan of dawlishgal 220 fans permalink
photo

Hendrik Herzberg in his excellent piece about the Clinton/Obama race in the current New Yorker commented about this...an issue that I haven't seen mentioned before....here goes: When in office, the Clintons were vulnerable to CONSTANT investigations (admittedly most by the far-right extremists who were hell-bent on bringing them down). The truth is that during 3/4 of the time in their previous terms, they were virtually paralyzed from accomplishing anything subtantial by these investigation. Why weren't they able to "quash" them (the word that Herzberg used)? He is sure that if she is elected, there will be more of the same.

BC, knowing full well he was under minute scrutiny, still messed around with a bimbo with a big mouth. It was an act of absolute defiance against his scrutinizers, but it was also a betrayal of those who had trusted him enough to vote for him twice. I don't care who he fools around with (why should I when his wife doesn't seem to care?), but I do care about the consequences of his recklessness.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:00 PM on 02/10/2008
- naturesway I'm a Fan of naturesway 12 fans permalink

Good points. However, remember the powerful part that Richard Mellon Scaife played in that 90's scenereo, and please recall that Bill and Richard have made nice recently. I think the Clintons definitely do not underestimate the machine on the right and I know they are prepared for it.

Also, please recall Bill's approval rate when he left office was over 65%. I bet it's higher now after all the global charity work he has done since he left office.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:00 PM on 02/10/2008
- Colmore I'm a Fan of Colmore 45 fans permalink

Amen. Putting uncle James Baker on the committe should have been the first warning light. He has spent many, many years cleaning up after Georgie, so why would he be forthcoming about the 9/11 attacks? His friendship with GHW gets in the way of any honest assessment.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:22 PM on 02/10/2008

Yeuxdisis "more money... spent investigating Clintons [over "fake partisan scandals"];

Well as I've posted earlier last evening, the Bi-Partisan Clintonian Senate leaders prevented the prosecutor, Mr. Schippers, from investigating the scandals except for the Lewinski matter and even argued about whether the prosecutor could use the word "sex"in his prosecution efforts. The democratic party prevented the subpoenas from being served to the Clintons and others on these matters... it was not for lack of corruption it was for an abundance of CYA by DeLay and others...

Now we all know the litany by now, and remember there is no statute of limitations on murder.

Mena Airport Cocaine Billion Dollar Trafficing
Lassiter
Whitewater
McDougal (and his strange death)
FileGate
FosterGate
RonBrown Gate
Ex-LadiesGate
ChinaGate (campaign contributions that resulted in USA technology ending up in the hands of the Chinese)
The lives for 4 12ish young boys in Mena who made the fatal mistake of being on the railroad tracks or learning of the cocaine drops and were murdered, or ended up missing after warning their families.

The group from AK followed the Clinton's to the White House. There was a scandal because many of them could not originally get clearance to work there. After appointments and switching people's jobs around that all got cleared up too.

But what is so interesting is the document released to Judical Watch in January from Hillary's "health insurance" secret initiative in which Jay writes a confidential memo to Hillary outrightly suggesting they use pressure tactics on their "opposition" find out their names, addresses, likes, dislikes etc."

What for? Politics, old style politics, bullying, silence, fear.

History is bound to repeat itself unless you dig for the truth.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:37 PM on 02/10/2008

Jay is "Rockerfeller".

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:39 PM on 02/10/2008
- naturesway I'm a Fan of naturesway 12 fans permalink

The Clinton Administration was the most investigated of any administration in recent history. Over 17 ,million of our taxe dollars was spent looking and probing and years of testamony.
RESULT: No evidence of any (repeat)ANY wrong doing.
CONCLUSION: The Clinton administration was proven to be the cleanest Administration in recent history.
That's been proven!
Are you shocked yet?
The cleanest....proven

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:06 PM on 02/10/2008
Page: « First ‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next › Last » (8 pages total)
Comments are closed for this entry

 You must be logged in to comment. Log in  or connect with 

Connect