General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsHuffPost: Clinton Foundation Donors Got Weapons Deals From Hillary Clinton's State Department
HuffPost link: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/05/26/clinton-foundation-donors_0_n_7441486.html
David J. Sirota is an American political commentator and radio host based in Denver. He is a nationally syndicated newspaper columnist, Democratic political spokesperson, and blogger.
Full story is from International Business Times:
By David Sirota @davidsirota [email protected], Andrew Perez @AndrewPerezDC [email protected] on May 26 2015 8:44 AM EDT

Under Hillary Clinton, the State Department approved $165 billion worth of commercial arms sales to 20 nations whose governments had given millions to the Clinton Foundation. Yana Paskova/Getty Images
Even by the standards of arms deals between the United States and Saudi Arabia, this one was enormous. A consortium of American defense contractors led by Boeing would deliver $29 billion worth of advanced fighter jets to the United States' oil-rich ally in the Middle East.
Israeli officials were agitated, reportedly complaining to the Obama administration that this substantial enhancement to Saudi air power risked disrupting the region's fragile balance of power. The deal appeared to collide with the State Departments documented concerns about the repressive policies of the Saudi royal family.
But now, in late 2011, Hillary Clintons State Department was formally clearing the sale, asserting that it was in the national interest. At a press conference in Washington to announce the departments approval, an assistant secretary of state, Andrew Shapiro, declared that the deal had been a top priority for Clinton personally. Shapiro, a longtime aide to Clinton since her Senate days, added that the U.S. Air Force and U.S. Army have excellent relationships in Saudi Arabia.
These were not the only relationships bridging leaders of the two nations. In the years before Hillary Clinton became secretary of state, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia contributed at least $10 million to the Clinton Foundation, the philanthropic enterprise she has overseen with her husband, former president Bill Clinton. Just two months before the deal was finalized, Boeing -- the defense contractor that manufactures one of the fighter jets the Saudis were especially keen to acquire, the F-15 -- contributed $900,000 to the Clinton Foundation, according to a company press release.
http://www.ibtimes.com/clinton-foundation-donors-got-weapons-deals-hillary-clintons-state-department-1934187
David J. Sirota is an American political commentator and radio host based in Denver. He is a nationally syndicated newspaper columnist, Democratic political spokesperson, and blogger.

Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)Uh-huh.
Response to NYC_SKP (Original post)
1000words This message was self-deleted by its author.
KoKo
(84,711 posts)Published on Oct 20, 2011
Speaking between network interviews, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton jokes with reporter on early, unconfirmed reports that deposed Libyan leader Muammar Qaddafi had been killed.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)Good to know.
B2G
(9,766 posts)Stellar.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)Most people would find it laughable that Clinton doesn't get a shit ton of money from pro-Israel donors.
NYC_SKP
(68,644 posts)We look at the policies of the Reagan administration in the Middle East, specifically during the Iran-Iraq war, one of the bloodiest conflicts in modern times in which more than a million people were killed. Chemical weapons were used and two of the most ancient societies on earth were devastated. We speak with Iranian human rights lawyer and 2003 Nobel Peace Prize winner Shirin Ebadi and journalist Alan Friedman about how the Reagan administration armed Iran and normalized relations with Iraq, selling weapons to both sides of the conflict.
http://www.democracynow.org/2004/6/9/remembering_the_dead_reagan_armed_iraq
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)Also, does this indicate to you that we have no need to worry about Clinton being unduly influenced by the likes of Haim Saban?
Maybe this decision just reflected the foreign policy priorities of the administration?
NYC_SKP
(68,644 posts)That is by their own admission.
Now, I'm not saying that Obama did or did not approve or direct Clinton in this matter.
It may well have reflected on Obama's policies, I don't at this point care, I'm consumed by the decisions we all have to make about the primary and following general election.
If we select Hillary as our nominee, we will lose the general and if we win, then we are fucked.
We need to do better and we need to start soon.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)if Clinton has Choice A or Choice B to make,
and
Choice A will piss of Donor Group Y but please Donor Group Z
Choice B will piss off Donor Group Z but please Donor Group Y
seems that there's not any story there. Certainly not the quid pro quo insinuated in the story.
The Saudi's contribution to the Clinton foundation is piddling compared to the donations she's gotten from Team Israel.
Haim Saban alone contributed $25 Million to the Clinton Foundation.
zeemike
(18,998 posts)But never the less it is play to play even if it is never spoken.
Foundations are set up for that reason...to shelter the money. That is how the elite play the game.
bvar22
(39,909 posts)You might be on to something,
but it will just get Hillary more Republican Warmonger votes.
NYC_SKP
(68,644 posts)Two different situations.
I don't know of another Secretary of State who stood go gain personally, or on behalf of any foundation, for and of the decisions they made while serving.
"Serving", that's a hoot.
razorman
(1,644 posts)I am more concerned that her share of progressive votes will not diminish, even if this all proves to be true. To me, that would simply be showing an attitude of "To hell with principles. Winning is everything." The accusations have to be proven first, though. Let's wait and see.
Marr
(20,317 posts)C'mon-- this doesn't look good at all. Even if there's nothing actually to it and it's only an appearance of impropriety, it speaks to a certain tone deafness to potential political scandal.
But I'd say there's a hell of a lot to it, no matter how you slice it. I mean, this sums up our MIC problem perfectly.
tridim
(45,358 posts)
Everything about her is negative. We must do better.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)nashville_brook
(20,958 posts)let's get this over with now and find the candidate who can win. not the candidate who's going to bring the whole party down.
bvar22
(39,909 posts)Does the Truth make you puke?
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)
BrotherIvan
(9,126 posts)With all these questions, this makes her extremely vulnerable in the general. I'm shocked at what he is asserting. Even if it is not true, it looks very, very bad.
The Clinton-led State Department also authorized $151 billion of separate Pentagon-brokered deals for 16 of the countries that donated to the Clinton Foundation, resulting in a 143 percent increase in completed sales to those nations over the same time frame during the Bush administration. These extra sales were part of a broad increase in American military exports that accompanied Obamas arrival in the White House.
American defense contractors also donated to the Clinton Foundation while Hillary Clinton was secretary of state and in some cases made personal payments to Bill Clinton for speaking engagements. Such firms and their subsidiaries were listed as contractors in $163 billion worth of Pentagon-negotiated deals that were authorized by the Clinton State Department between 2009 and 2012.
National security experts assert that the overlap between the list of Clinton Foundation donors and those with business before the the State Department presents a troubling conflict of interest.
NYC_SKP
(68,644 posts)Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)Arrgh. So discouraging. I suppose if he wasn't corruptible he would have never been elected.
BrotherIvan
(9,126 posts)I wonder what they are saving. This is a story that won't go away no matter how many times we are told it is verboten to even mention it. It's a ticking time bomb.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/clintons-raised-nearly-2-billion-for-foundation-since-2001/2015/02/18/b8425d88-a7cd-11e4-a7c2-03d37af98440_story.html
The Post review of foundation data, updated this month on the groups Web site to reflect giving through 2014, found substantial overlap between the Clinton political machinery and the foundation.
Nearly half of the major donors who are backing Ready for Hillary, a group promoting her 2016 presidential bid, as well as nearly half of the bundlers from her 2008 campaign, have given at least $10,000 to the foundation, either on their own or through foundations or companies they run.
KoKo
(84,711 posts)Last edited Wed May 27, 2015, 09:15 PM - Edit history (1)
That seems to be the Strategy from the CORPORATE DONOR FUNDS funding the Campaign Managers of both Hillary and the Repub's "Clown Car."
The Clintons and Bushies can use their vast International & Local Corporate Access to suck the GAZILLIONS of DOLLARS Available from BOTH "Nefarious & Legitimate" sources on their way to the White House. "CITIZENS UNITED" RULES!
WILL IT WORK THIS TIME.... That's the Question....???
BrotherIvan
(9,126 posts)Unless they're saving the real stuff for later or they think they can't beat her but can beat the socialist. We'll see.
he's a corporate dem.he has sold us out already on
Geting out of iraq
expanding NSA programs
social justice by saying nothing as young black men are killed
TPP
I can see this as one who supported obama over hillary and who supported him in 2008 and 2012 general elections.
Hillary couldn't do this if true for clinton foundation donors without his approval.
AtomicKitten
(46,585 posts)Source: Reuters
link: http://news.yahoo.com/state-dept-not-review-clinton-ethics-pledge-breaches-204846487.html
(Reuters) - The U.S. State Department will not review the breaches of the 2008 ethics agreement Hillary Clinton signed in order to become secretary of state after her family's charities admitted in March that they had not complied, a spokesman said on Thursday.
Clinton, now the Democratic front-runner in the 2016 presidential election, had promised the federal government that the Clinton Foundation and its associated charities would name all donors annually while she was the nation's top diplomat.
She also promised that the charities would let the State Department's ethics office review beforehand any proposed new foreign governments donations.
In March, the charities confirmed to Reuters for the first time that they had not complied with those pledges for most of Clinton's four years at the State Department.
The State Department "regrets" that it did not get to review the new foreign government funding, but does not plan to look into the matter further, spokesman Jeff Rathke said on Thursday.
bvar22
(39,909 posts)Two Americas.
I'm not in Hillary's America where the "State Department "regrets" that it did not get to review..
I'm in the other America where they take my property and throw my ass in jail for a lot less.
AtomicKitten
(46,585 posts)Really really sorry. And regretful. Plus they're sorry. Mostly regretful. And sorry.
Double-plus ungood.
The Clintons have an army of skeletons in their closet.
BrotherIvan
(9,126 posts)These are two smart, motivated people who could have done massive amounts of good for this country and the world. President Carter chose the path that did not lead to personal riches and look at what he has done. I'm sad to see this happen to the Clinton legacy, but the choice was their own. The idea that they were naive of any of this, or even that she was duped by Bush into voting for the Iraq War, when they are this connected and powerful produces a look on my face of such puzzlement and incredulity I fear if I look in the mirror I might turn to stone.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)you have to expect to be called on it. Were she not running for president few would care, but the arrogance of doing all this double-dealing and self-dealing and pretending it's irrelevant when you are seeking the presidency is just pathetic. This is almost at a Bush-like level of arrogance.
BrotherIvan
(9,126 posts)and for her supporters to demand that people unsee everything is a bridge too far.
Orsino
(37,428 posts)Divernan
(15,480 posts)The Clinton Foundation accepted donations from six companies benefiting from U.S. State Department arms export approvals.
Defense Contractor/Donation Min. ($)
Boeing 5,000,000
General Electric 1,000,000
Goldman Sachs
(Hawker Beechcraft) 500,000
Honeywell 50,000
Lockheed Martin 250,000
United Technologies 50,000
In April 2011, Goldman Sachs paid Bill Clinton $200,000 to speak to approximately 250 high level clients and investors in New York, according to State Department records obtained by Judicial Watch. Two months later, the State Department approved a $675 million foreign military sale involving Hawker Beechcraft -- a company that was then part-owned by Goldman Sachs. As part of the deal, Hawker Beechcraft would provide support to the government of Iraq to maintain a fleet of aircraft used for intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance missions. Goldman Sachs has also contributed at least $250,000 to the Clinton Foundation, according to donation records.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/05/26/clinton-foundation-donors_0_n_7441486.html
Clinton Foundation Donors Get Big Weapons Deals
17 out of 20 countries that have donated to the Clinton Foundation saw increases in arms exports authorized by Hillary Clinton's State Department.
Country Donation/Min.- ($)FY06-08/ ($)FY10-12 ($) / Difference (%)
Algeria250,000 /$649,943,709 /$2,431,535,005 /+274
Australia 10 mil. /$8,030,754,085 /$23,953,849,391 /+198
Bahrain50,000 /$219,718,802 /$ 630,586,020 /+187
Brunei1/4 mil. /$101,239,902 /$19,256,846 / -81
Canada 1/4 mil. 20,975,621,915 24,844,128,294 /+18
Germany 100,000 9,147,637,319 9,839,619,231 /+8
Ireland 5 mil 144,929,678 107,064,341 /-26
Italy 100,000 6,195,891,571 12,274,692,168 /+98
Jamaica 50,000 18,572,209 11,360,582 /-39
Kuwait 5 mil. /$1,895,298,212 /$2,109,893,611 /+11
Morocco2 mil /$250,045,824 /$253,096,156 /+ 1
Netherlands 5 mil - 3,069,131,994 - 4,655,490,802 /+ 52
Norway 10 mil. - 2,718,237,833- 3,351,140,380 /+ 23
Oman 1 mil. - 170,597,237 /$547,003,781 /+221
Qatar 1 mil. /$271,325,915 /$4,291,824,236 /+1,482
SaudiArabia10mil /$4,105,561,815 /$8,094,719,012 /+97
Taiwan 500,000 /$2,612,251,394 /$3,811,233,565 /+46
Thailand 250,000 /$656,266,680 /$1,113,283,489 /+70
UAE 1 mil /$2,261,801,903 /$24,998,754,760 /+1,005
UK 1mil /$26,225,307,395 /$38,015,933,065 /+45
Source: U.S. State Department and Clinton Foundation donor data
http://www.ibtimes.com/clinton-foundation-donors-got-weapons-deals-hillary-clintons-state-department-1934187
NYC_SKP
(68,644 posts)It will be the Clinton Legacy, no prison time will be served, however.
Tomorrow or so you should make an OP out of that data:
Source: U.S. State Department and Clinton Foundation donor data
http://www.ibtimes.com/clinton-foundation-donors-got-weapons-deals-hillary-clintons-state-department-1934187
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)Why folks supporting Sanders feel this addictive need to bash Clinton to support their own choice speaks volumes about their own decision making process.
The armed camp mentality is just sad.
"Clinton Attacks Sanders"......NEVER. No need, the debate for Clinton is on the issues of today, not the
fishing expeditions from yesterday.
BrotherIvan
(9,126 posts)Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)BrotherIvan
(9,126 posts)This IS an issue that Repulicans can attack her with. She and the foundation should have been squeaky clean if she wanted to run again. This is an unforced error of epic proportions and makes her easy to beat in the general. That's straight logic.
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)irrelevant.
How many scandals has it been now...should we make a list....and like dust in the wind were they all gone.
Support Sanders, fine, attack Clinton because folks think it helps...it does not. As Sanders said.
BrotherIvan
(9,126 posts)I am saying with all these controversies right out of the gate of her campaign she is an extremely weak candidate. There is a difference, though you may refuse to see it. She is a politician asking people to vote for her. That means she is opening herself to lots of public scrutiny as it should be.
workinclasszero
(28,270 posts)Apparently Bernie's vision for America is to trash, smear and condemn with innuendo, because there are no illegalities, Hillary and, what the hell President Obama and any other democrat that doesn't worship at his fantasy socialist altar.
And here I though Bernie was above all that. LOL
Fumesucker
(45,851 posts)zeemike
(18,998 posts)And the foreign governments contribute to it?
Link please.
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)Foundation Charity.
A foreign government gave to a recognized, admired and established charity not from their own country.....what an outrage! What a scandal! Burn the witch!
Folks are so silly sometimes, aren't they?
Quid pro quo. Where is it? No evidence required, the media accepts speculation as news.
zeemike
(18,998 posts)Who runs these foundations and what are they paid?...do they do it for nothing out of charity?
And who gets contracts for the Programs?
I am a skeptic for sure, because I don't believe...and cynical too.
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)Creating Partnerships of Purpose
We convene businesses, governments, NGOs, and individuals to improve global health and wellness, increase opportunity for women and girls, reduce childhood obesity, create economic opportunity and growth, and help communities address the effects of climate change.
Learn more and take action with us today.
- See more at: https://www.clintonfoundation.org/#sthash.g1S2OZUX.dpuf
zeemike
(18,998 posts)But it is like going to a Monsanto web site and expecting to lear what they do...you know it is going to say it is all good...Or Exxon to hear how they are protecting the environment.
The devil is in the details.
How much do they pay their BODs...and when they create a program to help the poor who actually gets what?
http://www.wsj.com/articles/mary-anastasia-ogrady-the-clinton-foundation-and-haiti-contracts-1425855083
http://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/2013/07/clintons-pushed-most-wasteful-of-u-s-funded-haiti-projects/
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)Did you not know that?
zeemike
(18,998 posts)But are the facts correct or not?
But pardon me I don't have your list of approved news sources...just Google.
dsc
(52,870 posts)so yeah, it is pretty frickin right wing.
bvar22
(39,909 posts)Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)Bengazhi is for Republicans, everything else looks like it is for Democrats to attack Clinton with.
The more the faulty and impotent attacks, the more the stature of Clinton grows, so please proceed.
AtomicKitten
(46,585 posts)nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)going back to the Reagan WH... this is just continuity in policy. I do not know what scares me more, the alleged quid pro quo, or the autopilot nature of these transfers?
NYC_SKP
(68,644 posts)And additional funds flowed into their family foundation.
Nothing like this happened during Reagan, or Bush, or any other administrations which were selling to both sides in a conflict.
That practice goes back for generations.
The personal gain from it, measured in tens of millions of dollars, is new to this administration.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)and if true, it is quid pro quo
But I do not know what is more scary, autopilot or quid pro quo
KoKo
(84,711 posts)
ChisolmTrailDem
(9,463 posts)from the Twin Towers and millions more killed or maimed in the resulting bush contrived conflagration, for which she voted.
YEA! That's our Democratic candidate!!!
DesMoinesDem
(1,569 posts)No surprise that Hillary is a supporter of corporate welfare through the ExIm Bank.
Robbins
(5,066 posts)I have the wonder on the smarts of clintons.Are they so stupid as not to prepare for her run.
What liberals will say are mild compared to what GOP will say with help from MSM.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)In fact it does all the time.
johnnyreb
(915 posts)The good Senator Bob Graham (retired) has been sticking his neck way over the line to tell us:
This is not a narrow issue of withholding information at one place, in one time. This is a pervasive pattern of covering up the role of Saudi Arabia in 9/11, by all of the agencies of the federal government which have access to information that might illuminate Saudi Arabias role in 9/11."
http://28pages.org/2015/01/11/must-read-quotes-from-last-weeks-28-pages-press-conference/
NYC Liberal
(20,400 posts)But now because a Clinton is involved, it's suddenly outrageous.
NYC_SKP
(68,644 posts)I'll be right here.
Your candidate is the only one living.
And, she her candidacy is, therefore, dead on arrival.
Come over to the light.
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)NYC Liberal
(20,400 posts)Clinton's candidacy is DoA? Sorry, no. She is one of the most popular leaders in the country and is overwhelmingly supported by Democrats -- and the liberal base of the party is her strongest base of support.
It's Sanders who is "dead on arrival" -- because barely anyone outside of DU and likeminded blogs wants him.
KoKo
(84,711 posts)The "Endless Wars" draining our Domestic Resources causing Income Inequality along with Wall Street Banker Theives/Criminals and the rest of the MIC that Profits off of ENDLESS WARS & ENGAGEMENTS?
upaloopa
(11,417 posts)I don't think you are afraid she will be elected Predident.
You work at it as if you are a repub fighting her. Not saying you are a repub just that your non stop bashing her has another motive. I have a good guess and since you banned me I think you know what it is.
NYC_SKP
(68,644 posts)If we get a good candidate out of this, I figure the payback for me will come out to something in that neighborhood for every hour I spend pointing out her flaws.
Having Obama win and benefiting from his insurance reform saved me over a million dollars in head surgeries last year and this spring, all at Stanford.
Getting a real progressive pays well.
upaloopa
(11,417 posts)bashing her is not going to get Bernie or someone else elected.
It is ok if you state actual negative thigs that would harm us if she were elected but bashing for bashing sake is not productive
azureblue
(2,399 posts)based upon huge leaps of logic and assumptions not proven. I read it- there is no direct connection between one and the other - no cause and effect, and there is certainly not a shred of evidence, other than innuendo, that Ms. Clinton had anything to do with this. The truth of this is this: all this does is prove how stupid and desperate people are to find anything to smear Ms. Clinton with. Pathetic. Just pathetic.
Those assholes can't talk about the issues and qualifications -all they want is drama and smears and character assassinations. How much did America Rising pay this guy?
LittleBlue
(10,362 posts)MaggieD
(7,393 posts)But you already knew that, didn't you?
NYC_SKP
(68,644 posts)MaggieD
(7,393 posts)polly7
(20,582 posts)realistic?
They Profit, Wall Street Profits, MIC Profits and all is GOOD to THEM!
What about the REST OF US?
L0oniX
(31,493 posts)
DemocratSinceBirth
(100,893 posts)antigop
(12,778 posts)A month later, Clinton was in China, where she jubilantly announced that the aerospace giant would be writing a generous check to help resuscitate floundering U.S. efforts to host a pavilion at the upcoming Worlds Fair.
Boeing, she said, has just agreed to double its contribution to $2 million.
Clinton did not point out that, to secure the donation, the State Department had set aside ethics guidelines that first prohibited solicitations of Boeing and then later permitted only a $1 million gift from the company. Boeing had been included on a list of firms to be avoided because of its frequent reliance on the government for help negotiating overseas business and concern that a donation could be seen as an attempt to curry favor with U.S. officials.
The November 2009 episode was an indicator of a mutually beneficial relationship between one of the worlds major corporations and a potential future president. Clinton functioned as a powerful ally for Boeings business interests at home and abroad, while Boeing has invested resources in causes beneficial to Clintons public and political image.