Clinton, Husband's Donors Interests Overlap: AP

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS

SHARON THEIMER | January 13, 2009 06:54 PM EST | AP

Compare other versions »
I Like ItI Don’t Like It
Secretary of State-designate Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y., right, is greeted by Senate Foreign Relations Committee member Sen. Christopher Dodd, D-Conn., left, as the committee's chairman Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., looks on center, prior to the start of the committee's hearing on her nomination, Tuesday, Jan. 13, 2009, on Capitol Hill in Washington. (AP Photo/Susan Walsh)

WASHINGTON — Hillary Rodham Clinton, President-elect Barack Obama's choice for secretary of state, rejected calls Tuesday for more details about donors to her husband's foundation, saying she has revealed enough to avoid even the hint of conflicts. An Associated Press review found that Clinton stepped in at least a half-dozen times on issues involving businesses and others who later gave to the charity.

Clinton said as secretary of state she will not be influenced to act on behalf of her husband's contributors, which include foreign governments.

"It will not be in the atmosphere," Clinton said.

Richard Lugar of Indiana was among GOP senators on the Foreign Relations Committee pressing for full transparency about contributors to the William J. Clinton Foundation and one of its main projects, the Clinton Global Initiative.

Under an agreement with Obama, Bill Clinton recently released the names of donors to his foundation, a nonprofit that has raised at least $492 million _ including millions from Saudi Arabia and other foreign governments _ to fund his library in Arkansas and charitable efforts worldwide on such issues as AIDS, poverty and climate change. He pledged to release similar information annually. The donor list doesn't provide exact amounts, background on donors such as their employers, or the dates of donations.

Lugar, the committee's top Republican, urged Hillary Clinton to immediately disclose donations of $50,000 or more; alert ethics officials when any gift of that size is pledged or given by a foreign entity, whether an overseas government, individual or business; and reveal the year a donation was made and the amount, or at least the range, of a donor's giving in that year.

Revealing pledges is particularly important, Lugar said: "So if we're going to have an argument it happens right then, and therefore if it's not a good idea, that it's stopped and the compromise for the State Department, for foreign policy, for you is prevented as rapidly as possible, within days rather than in months or in years."

Clinton noted that under the agreement, foreign government pledges will be submitted to the State Department for review. She said it was unprecedented for a former president to agree to the disclosure her husband has, and that she was confident the current arrangement would avoid even the appearance of conflicts of interest.

Story continues below
advertisement

"I don't know who will be giving money. That will not influence," Clinton said. "When the disclosure occurs, obviously it will be after the fact, so it would be hard to make an argument that it influenced anybody because we didn't know about it."

Clinton intervened at least six times in government issues directly affecting companies and others that later contributed to her husband's foundation, the AP found. The AP obtained three pieces of the correspondence under the Freedom of Information Act.

The letters and donations involve pharmaceutical companies and telecommunications and energy interests. An aide to the senator said she made no secret of her involvement in many of the issues. Bill Clinton's foundation declined to say when it received the donations or precisely how much was contributed.

"Throughout her tenure, Senator Clinton has proven that she acts solely based on what she believes is best for the state and people she represents, without consideration to any other factor," said spokesman Philippe Reines. "In these instances, she was doing what the people of New York elected her to do: Work hard on the issues of importance to them."

Hillary Clinton and the Clinton Foundation both declined to answer questions about whether the senator tried to step away from issues directly affecting donors to her husband's charity, and whether the foundation tried to screen out money from those on whose issues the senator had intervened.

Hillary Clinton wrote to the Federal Communications Commission in February 2004 expressing concern that changes to competitive local exchange carrier access rates could hurt carriers such as New York-based PAETEC Communications. PAETEC's chief executive is Arunas Chesonis, whose family and charity later contributed to the Clinton foundation.

Sarah Wood, executive director of the Chesonis Family Foundation, was invited by a part of the Clinton Foundation _ the Clinton Global Initiative _ to join the initiative after it was established in 2005, Wood said Monday. The Chesonis family personally paid $15,000 for Wood's membership in CGI in September 2007, and the Chesonis foundation paid $20,000 for it in March 2008, Wood said.

The Chesonis Family Foundation made a $10 million pledge last May to the Massachusetts Institute of Technology for solar energy research, meeting Wood's commitment to the Clinton Global Initiative to act on a project, Wood said.

Wood said the Chesonis foundation was unaware of the senator's letter to the FCC on the PAETEC issue and didn't have any contact with her office.

PAETEC spokesman Christopher Muller said PAETEC had no involvement in the Chesonis donations to the Clinton foundation. PAETEC asked Hillary Clinton to intervene with the FCC on its behalf, he said.

"Yes, PAETEC feels strongly that a competitive telecom environment is in the best interests of New York businesses and consumers," Muller wrote in an e-mail to the AP. "PAETEC has petitioned numerous elected officials in the markets which we serve in an effort to retain the spirit of the Telecom Act of 1996." The issue is still pending at the FCC, and PAETEC remains involved in it, Muller said.

Pharmaceutical company Merck & Co. is also a member of the Clinton Global Initiative, company spokeswoman Amy Rose said. Merck has been a member of CGI since 2006, when dues were $15,000. In 2008 membership dues rose to $20,000. As part of its commitment to CGI, Merck sponsors public health initiatives around the world, Rose said. Merck joined CGI on its own initiative, she said.

Hillary Clinton wrote a November 2005 letter to Health and Human Services Secretary Mike Leavitt urging approval of the human papillomavirus vaccine. Merck applied in December 2005 for approval of its HPV vaccine, Gardasil, and the vaccine was approved for use in females ages 9 to 26. Merck is still seeking approval for use in older women, Rose said.

Rose said Merck's participation in the Clinton Global Initiative was unrelated to Hillary Clinton's letter. Merck didn't communicate with Hillary Clinton or her office about its HPV vaccine and was unaware of her letter before it was sent, Rose said.

Another letter involved an issue important to Barr Laboratories. Sens. Clinton and Patty Murray, D-Wash., wrote to Leavitt in August 2005 urging that "science, not politics" guide the agency and "that a decision be brought swiftly on Plan B's application." Leavitt's office described the Clinton letter as pertaining to Barr's application for Plan B, the emergency contraceptive also called the morning-after pill.

Barr Laboratories gave $10,001 to $25,000 to the Clinton foundation, the charity's donor list shows. Barr joined the Clinton Global Initiative in April 2007, Barr spokeswoman Carol Cox said. Cox didn't comment on Clinton's letter.

Several of the letters involve issues directly affecting KeySpan Corp., the energy company now known as National Grid. KeySpan didn't ask the senator to intervene and had no communication with her office about its later donations to the Clinton foundation, said company spokesman Chris Mostyn.

KeySpan joined the Clinton Global Initiative in 2007 because it wanted to become involved in the climate change issue, Mostyn said. KeySpan paid $15,000 for its membership in 2007 and $20,000 for 2008, Mostyn said.

Clinton joined several other members of Congress from New York in February 2003 asking the Commerce Department to consider an appeal by Islander East, a limited liability company formed by subsidiaries of KeySpan Energy and another company, to build a natural gas pipeline to serve Connecticut, New York City and Long Island, N.Y.

Clinton and the other lawmakers wanted the Commerce Department to overturn the Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection's determination that Islander East's pipeline plan was inconsistent with the state's coastal zone management program. Democratic Sen. Christopher Dodd and other Connecticut lawmakers wrote to Commerce urging denial of Islander East's appeal.

Clinton earlier wrote to the Long Island Power Authority and to KeySpan urging them to consider the modernization of KeySpan's New York power plants. Her letter in June 2002 offered her help on the issue. Also in 2002, Clinton wrote the federal government letters on the natural gas Millennium Pipeline Project in which KeySpan was involved, urging an extension of a deadline for public comment and forwarding information on route alternatives.

Mostyn said KeySpan didn't ask Clinton to get involved in the issues. The Millennium Pipeline began commercial operations in December, the Islander East project is on hold due to Connecticut's rejection of permits, and the company is working with the Long Island Power Authority to study power plant modernization, he said.

___

On the Net:

Senate Foreign Relations Committee: http://www.senate.gov/foreign/

Clinton Foundation donors: http://clintonfoundation.org/contributors/

___

Associated Press writer Anne Flaherty in Washington contributed to this report.

WASHINGTON — Hillary Rodham Clinton, President-elect Barack Obama's choice for secretary of state, rejected calls Tuesday for more details about donors to her husband's foundation, saying she ha...
WASHINGTON — Hillary Rodham Clinton, President-elect Barack Obama's choice for secretary of state, rejected calls Tuesday for more details about donors to her husband's foundation, saying she ha...
 
Comments
75
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: 1 2 Next › Last » (2 pages total)
- dgscol I'm a Fan of dgscol 4 fans permalink
photo

She still panders to the financial district's greed, and after the collapse of Russia in 97, and the collapse of the unstable Chinese trade, she is poised to go headlong (as we face fianancial ruination) into new global ventures in Africa.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:40 AM on 01/14/2009
- dgscol I'm a Fan of dgscol 4 fans permalink
photo

I repudiate all the debt Congress signs onto in my name. I will exercise tax avoidance in everyway possible, as a citizen who is concerned for his country.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:49 AM on 01/14/2009
- partyofone I'm a Fan of partyofone 45 fans permalink

I don't understand. The Clintons have committed to total transparency on Bill Clinton's international business deals and philanthropy. Although the Clinton Foundation released names of donors it refused to give amounts and dates. Why? Are they afraid that the donations and Hillary's actions on behalf of the donors will be too transparent, clear evidence of Clinton Quid Pro Quo, Inc.?

The standard is no real or appearence of conflict of interest. The AP report show three strong appearences, and notes: "Hillary Rodham Clinton and the Clinton Foundation both declined to answer questions about whether the senator tried to step away from issues directly affecting donors to her husband's charity, and whether the foundation tried to screen out money from those on whose issues the senator had intervened."

There's a solution. Hillary as SoS can recuse herself from negotiations or policy development related to any nation or international interest that has paid Bill Clinton big fees and made big contributions to his "Foundation." Oops. If you can't perform without a conflict of interest cloud as SoS, why seek the post?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:52 PM on 01/13/2009
    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:28 PM on 01/13/2009
- BosieO I'm a Fan of BosieO 2 fans permalink

U know... Mostly the people trashing her ARE sexists or just plain idiots....so their opinions don't matter....To questions her loyalty to our country when she has done plenty for us....SERIOUSLY?? nothing else to write about...? just give it a rest! IF YOU QUESTION HER LOYALTY TO OUR COUNTRY...THEN QUESTION OBAMA'S LOYALTY too...after all HE APPOINTED HER SEC OF STATE :)

GET OVER IT...SHE IS A WOMAN OF POWER...unless you live under a rock women can do and be just like men.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:52 PM on 01/13/2009
photo

I agree with you but I still hate that b

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:31 PM on 01/13/2009
- partyofone I'm a Fan of partyofone 45 fans permalink

The Clintons have sold influence to the highest bidders to become mega millionaires, Hillary voted for WAR in Iraq to bolster her chances to be elected presiddent and launched the meanest, most dishonest divisive primary campaign most Democrats can ever remember. The Clintons have served themselves. ENOUGH OF IT

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:56 PM on 01/13/2009

ENOUGH of your shallow characterizations. The primaries are over. As Donna Brazile would say, "Get over it."

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:20 PM on 01/13/2009

Lets be clear, she will be ready to take that 3 am call especially if it comes from the PM of Israel who demands she take his call. The US President will have to wait until morning.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:17 PM on 01/13/2009

For those who are so opposed to Clinton and her judgment. What do you think about Obama's judgment for choosing her as Sec. of State?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:58 AM on 01/13/2009
photo

I was not freaking pleased do I thinik she will do a great job...YES. She is intelligent and ruthless. As for Obama's judgement I have to think its better than mine because I think I would be petty and try to run her over with my car...

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:33 PM on 01/13/2009
- partyofone I'm a Fan of partyofone 45 fans permalink

I think Obama feared the Clintons as a power base opposing him, knowing how bitter they were after the humilating collapse of her flawed campaign, and decided to appoint her in hoping to defuse her and keep Bill on a leash.

I understand why he did it, but I don't respect him for comproising his commitment to high standards of ethics in order to nominate Hillary.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:59 PM on 01/13/2009
photo

Note to others in this folder: My recent comments have all been held for modding. No reason for it--certainly no trigger words or hate speech.

This has been a problem lately in certain folders. It is done to ensure that opinions they don't like, if they are released, will appear on older pages which don't get as much public viewing.

This is the same as Bush Jr's "Free-Speech Zones."

I think consideation has to be given to the reality of coapting a Bush strategy for use here. As S u n T z u wrote, "When you be come li ke your e n e m y, your e n e my has won."

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:57 AM on 01/13/2009

Who cares about her loyalty? What I am worried about is her sincerity! This woman is a c*r*o*o*k* inn and out... You know the typical politician...!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:28 AM on 01/13/2009
photo

You have a very highly developed level of cynicism about "politicians," and you seem to know what constitutes a "typical," politician. Have you ever run for office or held public office? You can hold public office with a high degree of integrity, but you will have to compromise from time to time and you will never please everyone. So, will you be running for office soon?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:39 PM on 01/13/2009

Let me put it this way... I know a lot of politicians, and I have actually partied with some... I have yet to meet a decent one! I don't want to run for any office. But it doesn't mean that I should put up with the BS! What a lame argument!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:42 PM on 01/13/2009
photo

She says she's going to use a mix of smarts and diplomacy. Someone may want to hand her a dictionary or try to find out what dimension she's using to define those words because her approach even as recent as her abysmal campaign was anything BUT.

I'm praying she gets FIRED!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:58 AM on 01/13/2009

Abysmal campaign? She got half the vote. You can call her campaign many things.. I don't think abysmal is one of them.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:52 AM on 01/13/2009
- partyofone I'm a Fan of partyofone 45 fans permalink

Hillary began her campaign with thelargest war chest in history, the well oiled invincible Clinton machine behind her, a hand-picked, dream-team staff that was the best that money could buy, the unprecedented resource of a popular former president campaiging full time for her. She could not project coherent message, resorted to Rove-style attacks and whispers, divisive wedges of gender, age, race, a flat out lies (dodging bullets in Bosnia). She drove her well financed campaign into a ditch, lost the election and ended up DEEPLY in debt.

looks pretty abysmal to me. Hillary's 18 million voters wouldn't even help her retire her big debt. Not very loyal.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:12 PM on 01/13/2009
photo

Smart power basically boils down to doing whatever needs to be done to get what you want. Hillary is telling us that she will define the approach America will take in its interaction with foreign countries.

If Obama finds he cannot control the Clintons--which, IMO, will be the case--by the time he is willing to admit he made a mistake (something that seems almost impossible for him to do) and actually gets rid of her as SOS, the damage will be done, at least to the Obama administration and his chances for reelection in 2012. The Clintons will have also already provided significant distraction to Obama in his attempts to fix the economic diaper load he received from Bush/Cheney. Since fixes for the economy must be strong and occur quickly, the Clintons distracting Obama may sabotage the recovery of our economy.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:52 AM on 01/13/2009
- kevinw I'm a Fan of kevinw 12 fans permalink

You Clinton haters are truly pathetic. No one asked Papa Bush about who contributed to his library. I am sure a large number of the same contributors could be found there. Nobody asked Cindy McCain about her financial empire and global dealings. Or John Kerry's spouse. She has international exposure with the family fortune. Petty petty petty.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:31 PM on 01/13/2009

Why Obama picked her? You know the old saying about keeping your enemies close? He can control her, and if he can't..guess what..he gets to fire her and both the Clinton's will be out of politcs..I think he's banking on her stumbling and having to ask for her resignation..

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:03 AM on 01/13/2009

So Obama is just as conniving and politically-calculated as she is?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:02 PM on 01/13/2009

He's a politician

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:27 PM on 01/13/2009
photo

hmmmm maybe...but he does it with out making you hate his guts maybe?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:34 PM on 01/13/2009
- partyofone I'm a Fan of partyofone 45 fans permalink

He may be as calculating as Hllary..... the difference is he has good judgement, is honest, and wants to unite the nation for the benefit of everyone, which is not like the self-centered Clintons at all.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:18 PM on 01/13/2009
- kevinw I'm a Fan of kevinw 12 fans permalink

Watch the hearings. Her grasp of the complexities of the job of SOS is so strong that the questioners have only been able to challenge her on the foundation contributions.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:32 PM on 01/13/2009
- partyofone I'm a Fan of partyofone 45 fans permalink

It's not just the foundation contributions, it's the shady business deals and personal financial gain tied to many of them. HIllary lis a policy wonk, no one denies it. Bu she is severely lacking in integrity, good judgment, and capacity to subordinate her own self interest to anything else.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:16 PM on 01/13/2009
- StillAmused I'm a Fan of StillAmused 271 fans permalink

IMPORTANT NOTICE
=================

Do not donate to any politicians who have supported initiatives you favor. You'll only encourage them.

Do note donate to any legitimate or deserving charitable foundations with any family connection to politicians who have supported initiatives you favor. You'll only encourage them.

Donate only to politicians who do nothing, accomplish nothing and raise no eyebrows.

Play it safe.

Support mediocrity and arouse no suspicions.

Keep your head down.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:43 AM on 01/13/2009
- newsmctado I'm a Fan of newsmctado 16 fans permalink

Hear hear!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:47 AM on 01/13/2009

Did they mention the Rich pardon? Tell me how, even prior to Clinton leaving office, did the Clintons get so rich when they have lived off the hardworking taxpayer all their lives..Clinton's salaries over the years wouldn't have allowed them to buy TWO multimillion dollar residences simultaneously, right after leaving office....

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:50 AM on 01/13/2009
- StillAmused I'm a Fan of StillAmused 271 fans permalink

Use The Google, find out and report back to us. It's all out there.

If you work fast, you can block the confirmation.

We'll be waiting.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:54 AM on 01/13/2009

No, don't get back to us - Break through the barrier of Obama handlers - He must learn the TRUTH - He is being used - Save our nation, save the planet - Save your fantasies!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:32 AM on 01/13/2009

I dunno... but I remember a few multi-million dollar book deals that went through. And.. oh yeah... Bill makes a few hundred thousand for each speech he gives. But that can't possibly explain it! The Clintons must be conspiring to swindle us somehow!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:00 PM on 01/13/2009
- Poboy I'm a Fan of Poboy 21 fans permalink

This is one of the most STUPID comments I have read.

You assume there is no such thing as BRIBERY.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:24 AM on 01/13/2009
- StillAmused I'm a Fan of StillAmused 271 fans permalink

... while you, on the other hand assume it's everywhere.

Probably, right at this moment, the Postal Service is paying off your mailman to show up at your house.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:34 AM on 01/13/2009
photo

Jolly good, old fellow!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:42 PM on 01/13/2009
- partyofone I'm a Fan of partyofone 45 fans permalink

Do not believe ANYTHING Bill Clinton tells you.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:19 PM on 01/13/2009
- StillAmused I'm a Fan of StillAmused 271 fans permalink

Remember that if he knocks on your door to warn you that your house is on fire.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:37 AM on 01/14/2009
photo

Since the AP has become another wholly owned subsidiary of the RNC, why is anything they say news any more than Fixed News?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:40 AM on 01/13/2009
photo

Even a stopped clock is correct twice a day.

The AP is no different than other news publications. We have to do our own research to verify and augment what they print.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:52 AM on 01/13/2009
photo

Perhaps, but A.P. ( Always Pizzy ), has moved to the dark side.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:44 PM on 01/13/2009
- partyofone I'm a Fan of partyofone 45 fans permalink

get over the partisa warfare mentality. All the evil in the world doesn't have a Republcan behind it. Very Clinton-Bush-Rove divisive, us and them thinking. No consensus means no progress.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:27 PM on 01/13/2009
- Grunty1 I'm a Fan of Grunty1 227 fans permalink

Its the AP, the print version of Faux News.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:38 AM on 01/13/2009
- Teri I'm a Fan of Teri 10 fans permalink

bill and hillary clinton care only about bill and hillary clinton! obama is going to have to keep her in check and watch his back because she is one cold and calculating woman--just not as cool and calculating as our man president elect barack obama!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:37 AM on 01/13/2009
photo

The problem with Obama "keeping her in check" is that, in my estimation, once the Clintons latch onto a goal, they become so obsessive and goal-driven by it, that they will do anything to achieve it.

It's clear that the Clintons' obsessive goal is President Hillary. If she's going to run for president, she almost has to do it in 2012 because her chances of getting elected fall off markedly as she ages.

Obama has put her in a position where she can cause considerable problems for his administration and his chances for reelection.

1. She will have the opportunity to polish to a fine sheen her foreign policy credentials, making her a stronger opponent for Obama in 2012.

2. She has considerable ethical problems she brings with her to Obama's administration, including sending American jobs to other countries. The GOP will be relentless in trying to find issues to criticize Obama. I can see no reason for him to provide them their job half-done already.

3. WJC's propensity for extramarital affairs did not stop when he left the presidency. This will become an issue, and it will impact Obama's administration.

4. The Clintons were not above pandering to b i g o t s in the Dem primary. I think its clear they will do anything to get what they want. Hillary will be in a perfect place to discover information about Obama and his administration she can use to undermine his administration and his 2012 candidacy.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:50 AM on 01/13/2009

You haVe said it all and done it well. I would only add one thing.

Check this out from the AP story -- which by the way is considered a highly reputable source by every newspaper in America. That's why my editors and publishers at newspapers well known for their integrity subscribe to AP.

"Hillary Rodham Clinton and the Clinton Foundation both declined to answer questions about whether the senator attempted to step away from issues directly affecting donors to her husband's charity, and whether the foundation tried to screen out money from those on whose issues the senator had intervened.":

Declined to answer? That is a polite way of saying, : "They stonewalled us." The "us" Being all of America.

Obama who is too in love with his own press these days, has got a couple of tigers by the tail. And they WILL eat him alive. Silly Man.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:38 AM on 01/13/2009
photo

Say, didn't you say this (word for word) somewhere else, yesterday?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:46 PM on 01/13/2009
photo

Yesterdays news today for tomorrow....cool.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:33 AM on 01/13/2009
Page: 1 2 Next › Last » (2 pages total)
Comments are closed for this entry

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

Connect