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)
- YcCoSQ I'm a Fan of YcCoSQ 2 fans permalink

sometimes "journalists" do research.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:48 AM on 02/10/2008
- Alvin4NY I'm a Fan of Alvin4NY 24 fans permalink
photo

If that were the case, Bush and Cheney's financials would have been all over the papers, BEFORE they took office, and then never would have been elected in the first place. Has anyone ever S-P-E-L-L-E-D out in detail what the Bush ties to all of those Saudi's are-and done a complete accounting of their financials? The entire Bush Dynasty?

The Clinton's were practically broke when they left office, had it not been for the book deals. President Clinton was very much in demand (and still is) and was paid for his speeches.

I personally would like to see some type of rebate given to Tax Payers, for footing the bill on the $140 Million paid to "investigate" the Clinton's for the eight years they were in office. I'll pay for the dry cleaning bill on the dress, but the rest-you assholes that supported the witch hunt, can pay for.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:19 AM on 02/10/2008
- Puller58 I'm a Fan of Puller58 11 fans permalink

All you have to do to understand the role of money in politics is go back to the Keating 5 scandal. The only senator to get blamed was the retiring Alan Cranston. Cranston responded that of course he paid more attention to those who contributed to his campaigns. The Clintons are no different than the rest of the herd in DC. The bottom line is that the three main activities in DC are posturing, pandering and influence peddling.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:38 AM on 02/10/2008

She would take the last dime off of a little old woman if it would get her elected.

No more drama ~ we want OBAMA!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:28 AM on 02/10/2008

Where were all you guys in 2004? Where was your candidate? I don't recall him pontificating for change back then!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:46 AM on 02/10/2008
photo

Where was your candidate back in 04, when we needed someone who could "stand up" to the Republican attack machine?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:10 AM on 02/10/2008
- ayc I'm a Fan of ayc 14 fans permalink

Umm..how is that relevant?

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

But! But! Just Think! We would all get "Two For The Price of One" Right! , Uh, I mean, Uh! That's a real bargain! Right? Like we get two really rich people! for the price of one really rich person! Right? Damn, I can hardly wait!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:23 AM on 02/10/2008
- cseper I'm a Fan of cseper 5 fans permalink

It's amazing how much the media is pushing Obama. Michelle Obama just recently said she'd have to think about it whether she'd vote for Hillary if she is the nominee. Can you imagain if Bill Clinton said he'd have to think about it whether to vote for Obama if he's the nominee. The media would have crusified him for being a racist or a race baitor, or Hillary's hitman, or whatever. If Hillary becomes the nominee with the full force of the media against her she will have earned it without question.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:19 AM on 02/10/2008
- mageduley I'm a Fan of mageduley 4 fans permalink

Bush administration does favors for friends, gives preferences in contracts and laws for cronies, keeps the government secret

Bill and Hillary?
More of the same

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:27 AM on 02/10/2008
- misterbone I'm a Fan of misterbone 18 fans permalink

Heh! For once, the news media is doing its job. Journalism. If you want "fair and balanced", watch FoxNews and nothing else.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:50 AM on 02/10/2008

The question was not would she "vote" for Hillary, but would be "work" for Hillary. So stop spinning. Hillary spent 2006 raising tons of money and spending it lavishly for her Senate re-election -- an election she could have won sitting at her kitchen table. She was able to then transfer the money left to her presidential campaign. She took no time to help the Democrats get back Congress. And if you honestly see Bill Clinton stumping for Obama -- oh, come on. The Clintons seem to think they are the only Democrats of any worth -- how dare they show such arrogance. They only care about their political prizes to which they think they are entitled. I loved them both for years, and now I am totally disgusted.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:52 AM on 02/10/2008
- cseper I'm a Fan of cseper 5 fans permalink

Why Obama does well in caucuses?

NO VOTING MACHINES!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:16 AM on 02/10/2008

I'll have to admit this has crossed my mind also! I certainly do not buy the lame argument that guilty whites shuffle over to the Obama side of the room when they see all the blacks there. I watched the Iowa caucuses (note: the news media is not showing us any more caucuses in action since Iowa)and what I saw was mainly white people and a few people of color. There were a lot of young people on the Obama side of the room. So mainly white people and a new influx of young people were responsible for that victory. This flies in the face of those who want to continue to divide us along racial lines, like the Clintons and their operatives. This is why Obama is gaining ground. So many of us are sick of the old divide and conquer politics and back room dealing (note: the superdelegates & Clinton wheeling and dealing with these superdelegates). It all stinks!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:51 AM on 02/10/2008
- lastams I'm a Fan of lastams 54 fans permalink

David Sirota posted some very interesting comments on the Clinton appeal amongst the middle class on "Truthout" this morning.

"In most states, polls show Hillary Clinton is beating Barack Obama among voters making $50,000 a year or less - many of whom say the economy is their top concern. Yes, the New York senator who appeared on the cover of Fortune magazine as Big Business's candidate is winning economically insecure, lower-income communities over the Illinois senator who grew up as an organizer helping those communities combat unemployment. This absurd phenomenon is a product of both message and bias.

Obama has let Clinton characterize the 1990s as a nirvana, rather than a time that sowed the seeds of our current troubles. He barely criticizes the Clinton administration for championing job-killing trade agreements. He does not question that same administration's role in deregulating the financial industry and thereby intensifying today's boom-bust catastrophes. And he rarely points out what McClatchy Newspapers reported this week: that Clinton spent most of her career at a law firm "where she represented big companies and served on corporate boards," including Wal-Mart's."

As to the reasons why Obama doesn't attack the Clinton Camelot, Sirota has this to say,
" That's because once Obama parroted Edwards' attacks on greed and inequality, he would "be stigmatized as a candidate mobilizing race," That is, the media would immediately portray him as another Jesse Jackson - a figure whose progressivism has been (unfairly) depicted as racial politics anathema to white swing voters."

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/020908E.shtml

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:11 AM on 02/10/2008

I totally agree. Obama has been downright polite to the Clintons. The Republicans will drag all of this out and more come fall.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:09 AM on 02/10/2008
- pfc1369 I'm a Fan of pfc1369 106 fans permalink
photo

The Right is forever yapping about values and standards, while never seeming to notice those responsible for their decline.

What was unacceptable yesterday, becomes, insensibly, standard practice today.

When the Basque town of Guernica was bombed in the 30s during the Spanish Civl War, the world was outraged that death from the sky could be visited on civilians.

Now, this is a daily ocurrence, and is hardly noticed.

When Ronald Reagan accepted payment for speeches after his presidency, it seemed somehow odd, but is now standard paractice.

When Harry Truman left the White House, he went down to Union Station, got aboard the train, and went home to Missouri. He would never have dreamed of delivering a speech for cash after that.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:04 AM on 02/10/2008
- Lalo I'm a Fan of Lalo 2 fans permalink

The author is a foot soldier of "audiacity of hope", "change" and Obama Revolution. In other words - hitman and hack. This article is disgusting because it is one-sided without any comparison between Clinton and Obama's own financial issues.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:51 AM on 02/10/2008
- LarBear I'm a Fan of LarBear 30 fans permalink
photo

I agree LALO:
Hope is NOT a Reality...
Reality is Obama has raised far more money and spent far more money than the Clinton's... The authors implied evil of money should actually apply to Obama... How does a basically un-known First Term Senator outraise and outspend the, according to Obama, "the well oiled Clinton's Political Machine"??? Other than Exelon, the Nuclear Power Company he got $275,000 in Campaign Funds for assisting, and Rezko, who are his other Big Money suppliers?
The implication is Presidents should simply fade quietly into the background??? People should not pay to have them speak? Presidents should NOT invest their money wisely???
The Blog Author says: "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."
Maybe because it is none of your, nor our business? ( Mr Edsall, do you intend to make full disclosure of your finances, investments and compensations???)

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:18 AM on 02/10/2008
- Alvin4NY I'm a Fan of Alvin4NY 24 fans permalink
photo

Why didn't we see a front page story in The New York Times about the Bush Family Dynasty and their ties to Saudi Arabia, before Bush 43 took office? What did Dick Cheney do with the $36 Million he got from Haliburton? How was it invested? Is he still getting kickbacks, now that Haliburton has had all of those "No Bid" contracts for six years?

Hillary and Bill were practically broke when they left the White House, had it not been for their book deals, and the white-hot status of President Clinton being signed up to give speeches all over the world.

I am much more curious about Obama moving up through the ranks so quickly....and his Republican friendly remarks, all throughout his campaign.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:07 AM on 02/10/2008
- ayc I'm a Fan of ayc 14 fans permalink

Mr Edsall is not financing a campaign for the most powerful political office in this country with his own money. The Clintons have said they will release their tax returns if they win the nomination for the GE. Do you really want to go into a general election with that unknown? If there is nothing there, why don't the trust their party with the information?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:42 AM on 02/10/2008

You Clinton supporters demonstrate the same kind of blind loyalty to Hillary that Bushbots show for W. Facts just can't seem to penetrate.

Have you seen this?

http://youtube.com/watch?v=xq8aopATYyw&feature=related

You can be sure that the Republicans will make sure everyone in America has seen it.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:32 AM on 02/10/2008

Wow! And the most Wow! part is watching Fox News cover Senator Clinton's tracks!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:11 AM on 02/10/2008
- mageduley I'm a Fan of mageduley 4 fans permalink

Actually it has been Obama's practice to have all of his financial statements available for scrutiny. As a matter of fact he called out hillary on this subject. He said his tax returns are available to the public and asked hillary to do the same. She replied she would make them available after the nomination.

Why Hide it? We are electing them to represent us, we need to know if there is conflict of interest income in there. This is important.
With all of the corruption the current administration, we need to know if our candidate is on the up and up and will actually clean up washington as opposed to giving preference to cronies.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:47 AM on 02/10/2008
- mrqcguy I'm a Fan of mrqcguy 3 fans permalink

Maybe if Shrillary would release her tax returns as Obama has they could do a better comparison. Ah...wait thats right she refuses to do so uless she wins the nomination. Hmmm...smells like someone has something to hide, like the 31 Million her hubby got for getting his buddy a mining contract.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:15 AM on 02/10/2008
- justmeinAz I'm a Fan of justmeinAz 19 fans permalink
photo

Te question is whether it's accurate. You are noticeably quiet on this point.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:27 AM on 02/10/2008
- nunzia I'm a Fan of nunzia 31 fans permalink

This guy always post anti-Clinton screeds.
Of no value to me.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:43 AM on 02/10/2008
- mageduley I'm a Fan of mageduley 4 fans permalink

It is of no value if you don't care that this country has been taken over by corporate cronyism. Abramoff, The justice dept staffed by unqualified cronies. Hell GWB basically tried to get his cleaning lady on the supreme court. After all we have been through, the Clinton's have to prove that they are as clean as a whistle before they can ask people to vote them into office. Old pat on the back politics is not going to solve our corruption problems.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:50 AM on 02/10/2008
- SUNRAI I'm a Fan of SUNRAI 2 fans permalink
photo

She "says" she wants a transparent government, yet she does not truly practice what she preaches.

The Clintons are hiding some of their assets. The more they DO NOT tell the public about their dealings the MORE it casts a doubt on HRC's campaign to be an effective POTUS.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:40 AM on 02/10/2008
- Nancyann I'm a Fan of Nancyann 6 fans permalink

The Clintons are very dishonest people who can't be trusted. Her windfall with hog futures, his Dubai deals and oil deals, her White Water lies where she was judged as being an unindicted co-conspirator are examples of their lawlessness. They won't release their White House papers that involve her and I wonder why. Is there more fodder there also?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:25 AM on 02/10/2008
- partyofone I'm a Fan of partyofone 45 fans permalink

Its not only tax returns. How about the records of Hillary's secretive health care commission in the early 1990s, her records as First Lady, the donors to the Clinton Foundation and library, her availability to reporters' questions, an explanation of precisely how she educated herself for her Iraq war vote.

The Clintons are withholding information citizens in a Democracy need to make a decision about who should be president. They want to keep it underwraps until Hillary is nominated, assuming that most Democrats will support her against a Republican irrespective of what damaging information comes out.

Newsflash for the Clintons: because of the Clinton presidency and the Bush presidency, this election must be about INTEGRITY.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:34 AM on 02/10/2008

About the Iraq War vote: I read Senator Clinton's speech about why she supported the resolution and I was amazed that someone in her position seemingly knows less about the basics of Iraq and the connections between Saddam and Bin Laden than your average WELL-READ American. Not only that but she aggressively supported the whole notion of an illegal pre-emptive war. Then she refused to support the Levin amendment that would have stopped the President from illegally getting us into this war. She is wiling to KILL people to be seen as strong on defense and get elected. I find this abhorrent and the Clinton backers must be the most duplicitous types to be able to overlook this. Here's the link to the speech, it really is a must read: http://clinton.senate.gov/speeches/iraq_101002.html

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:22 AM on 02/10/2008
- mageduley I'm a Fan of mageduley 4 fans permalink

They hide a lot of things. They are constantly reliving the 90's in their "I'm a victim of the media" stance.

You really think they are going to have a transparent government? Do you really think they will open the people's government up for scrutiny by the people?

I like Obama because he is a straight shooter who will make sure the sunshine (the best disinfectant for corruption) to rein in his administration.

You can bet that will not be case in a Clinton Administration.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:53 AM on 02/10/2008

Oh, but they're going to release their tax returns AFTER the primaries. Obviously, they are fearful that they won't win the primaries if the Dems see their tax returns. What other reason could there be????

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:11 AM on 02/10/2008
- RealistDem I'm a Fan of RealistDem 2 fans permalink

There isnt a better politcal analyst in this country than Frank Rich, a must read. Thanks for the link.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:26 AM on 02/10/2008

Great add to the discussion, Rich is incredibly well spoken.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:18 PM on 02/10/2008
- malrubius I'm a Fan of malrubius 3 fans permalink

Just look at the two candidates' web front pages. His is about his message; hers is about her money.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:09 AM on 02/10/2008
- Dari I'm a Fan of Dari 15 fans permalink
photo

Give US a break, former Pres. Clinton! As one of the MOST astute politicans to come along, we know that you do NOT say or do anything WITHOUT calculating its outcome!

THIS is the BIGGEST fairy tale yet!

After reading the newer post here on Huffington about YET AGAIN another Follow the Money $$$$,
AND your wife's refusal to SHOW her tax returns until AFTER she wins the nomination, I am awaiting the music that we're off to see the Wizard of Oz!

Unlike former Pres. Carter, who has written books, made speeches, built up Habitat for Humanity and been a GOOD will ambassador in many troublespots in the world, you former Pres. Clinton have been busy ADDING TO YOUR OWN COFFERS! The 131 million dollar DONATION to your "Foundation", is just the beginning of the scrutiny that will AGAIN bring shame & embarrassment to the Presidency & to the White House!

Clinton motto: IF it WORKS, then it is RIGHT.

Carter motto: IF it is RIGHT, then it WORKS.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:58 AM on 02/10/2008
- maggieb I'm a Fan of maggieb 4 fans permalink

I read somewhere that by law candidates for President are required to release their tax returns but only if they have won the primary.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:24 AM on 02/10/2008

AND US!!!!!
Anyone who seeks public office should be willing to sacrific relationships that are Conflict of Interest!!
And who else Hugs, kissses and holds hands with these "Royal 'Families in the ME? Bush
Who controls Bush ..Cheney
And Cheney works for them..
Hillary is Dick in Drag
I've had enough of this shit- at least 40 yrs of Corp'ist screwing US and Blowing Them.
I hate Binny for 9/11, but I also hate him because families like his are the reason the World is fucked up- Greed, by Gov'ts or Monarchies- suit & tie or Robe & Turbin - Same Assholes who've been killing US for Decades.
Binny wears the Destruction His family has brought to the World too - there are intricatley involved with the Corp'ists!He doesn't wear just the blood of 9/11- he has the blood and oppresion of his 'own' people on his hands.
Yep I just equated Binny ,with Dick with Hill...Same shit different exteriors.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:55 AM 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