Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Bill Endorsed the Kazakhstan Dictator, Won Giustra a $3.1 BILLION Deal; So Giustra Gave Bill $131MIL

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Stephanie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 12:03 AM
Original message
Bill Endorsed the Kazakhstan Dictator, Won Giustra a $3.1 BILLION Deal; So Giustra Gave Bill $131MIL

Is that clear enough? Quid Pro Quo.

And they are attacking Obama for purchasing a strip of LAWN from Rezcko?

Why won't the Clintons release the complete record of donations to his library?




http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/31/us/politics/31donor.h...

Unlike more established competitors, Mr. Giustra was a newcomer to uranium mining in Kazakhstan, a former Soviet republic. But what his fledgling company lacked in experience, it made up for in connections. Accompanying Mr. Giustra on his luxuriously appointed MD-87 jet that day was a former president of the United States, Bill Clinton.

Upon landing on the first stop of a three-country philanthropic tour, the two men were whisked off to share a sumptuous midnight banquet with Kazakhstans president, Nursultan A. Nazarbayev, whose 19-year stranglehold on the country has all but quashed political dissent.

Mr. Nazarbayev walked away from the table with a propaganda coup, after Mr. Clinton expressed enthusiastic support for the Kazakh leaders bid to head an international organization that monitors elections and supports democracy. Mr. Clintons public declaration undercut both American foreign policy and sharp criticism of Kazakhstans poor human rights record by, among others, Mr. Clintons wife, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York.


***

He was either going off his brief or he was sadly mistaken, Mr. Herman said. There was nothing in the record to suggest that they really wanted to move forward on democratic reform.

Indeed, in December 2005, Mr. Nazarbayev won another election, which the security organization itself said was marred by an atmosphere of intimidation and ballot-box stuffing.

***

Within 48 hours of Mr. Clintons departure from Almaty on Sept. 7, Mr. Giustra got his deal. UrAsia signed two memorandums of understanding that paved the way for the company to become partners with Kazatomprom in three mines.

***

The monster deal stunned the mining industry, turning an unknown shell company into one of the worlds largest uranium producers in a transaction ultimately worth tens of millions of dollars to Mr. Giustra, analysts said.

Just months after the Kazakh pact was finalized, Mr. Clintons charitable foundation received its own windfall: a $31.3 million donation from Mr. Giustra that had remained a secret until he acknowledged it last month. The gift, combined with Mr. Giustras more recent and public pledge to give the William J. Clinton Foundation an additional $100 million, secured Mr. Giustra a place in Mr. Clintons inner circle, an exclusive club of wealthy entrepreneurs in which friendship with the former president has its privileges.

Mr. Giustra was invited to accompany the former president to Almaty just as the financier was trying to seal a deal he had been negotiating for months.

***

In February 2007, a company called Uranium One agreed to pay $3.1 billion to acquire UrAsia. Mr. Giustra, a director and major shareholder in UrAsia, would be paid $7.05 per share for a company that just two years earlier was trading at 10 cents per share.




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BeyondGeography Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 12:06 AM
Response to Original message
1. Seems Team Restoration needs more vetting
Who knew? :sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ursi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 03:05 AM
Response to Reply #1
42. here's co-presidential candidate Clinton with the human rights abuser
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stephanie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 08:46 AM
Response to Reply #42
49. So when Bill & Bush Sr. are co-roving ambassadors, will this stuff play into it?
When he goes to say, Saudi Arabia, Dubai, etc., also big donors to his library, will that affect his mission in any way?

Yes, I know Bush Sr. turned down the job.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jasmine621 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 07:11 PM
Response to Reply #42
78. Money went to Bill foundation...for AIDS I think. Also, the parties
involved have said that Clinton played no role in the mine deal. Just reported by Andrea Mitchell but who cares about facts. Bill is one of the worst persons to walk the earth. :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 12:11 AM
Response to Original message
2. And Sant Singh Chatwal
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sant_Singh_Chatwal

A Foundation trustee.

A Hillraiser

Chatwal was arrested in 2001 in India and was charged with defrauding the New York City branch of the Bank of India out of $9 million. While out on bond, Chatwal was observed traveling with Ex-President Bill Clinton. Chatwals associates claim he has tried to make good on his tax debts and already has settled up with the FDIC.

http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/dc/2007/11/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 12:20 AM
Response to Reply #2
7. "Making good" "Settled up" Think it was Bill's influence that made him go straight?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ursi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 10:06 AM
Response to Reply #2
55. I still wonder what the Clintons have promised their supporters with money ...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Duke Newcombe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 12:13 AM
Response to Original message
3. okay...
what exactly does this have to do with HRC and her candidacy, again?

Duke

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 12:18 AM
Response to Reply #3
6. Guilt by six degrees of association.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bread and Circus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 12:23 AM
Response to Reply #6
10. I'm sorry but Bill and Hillary have said it's 2 for 1 and a marriage
Edited on Thu Jan-31-08 12:23 AM by Bread and Circus
is not 6 degrees...

nice try...

oh here..... almost forgot this gem....



enjoy...

just another face in a long string of nasty people the Clinton's do business with.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 12:39 AM
Response to Reply #10
16. Hillary married Hsu??? When? Is it legal?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bread and Circus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 12:40 AM
Response to Reply #16
17. flustered much?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ursi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 02:36 AM
Response to Reply #10
41. oh that's hsu ugly
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KittyWampus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 12:42 AM
Response to Reply #6
19. no, we haven't seen the Clintons tax return. Let's see it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bread and Circus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 12:21 AM
Response to Reply #3
8. Just about everything b/c as soon as she's re-elected it's back to business as usual...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Big Blue Marble Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 12:41 AM
Response to Reply #3
18. Sweating a little? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Duke Newcombe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 01:16 AM
Response to Reply #18
24. Noooo...
Just being intellectually honest. I'm not a HRC fan, but the "her hubby had such and such relationship with person X, therefore, she's automatically tainted" isn't flying with me, and I wanted someone to connect the dots for me.

Duke
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Big Blue Marble Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 01:51 AM
Response to Reply #24
29. It is seriously hard to separate the Clintons.
She is running on his record as president. He would be in the Whitehouse.

His ethics would matter in her administration. If not to you, to most of us as voters.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Duke Newcombe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 01:58 AM
Response to Reply #29
31. But why would she..
run on her husband's record? She...oh, nevermind ;)

Duke
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stephanie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 10:03 AM
Response to Reply #29
54. He would be roving ambassador!
She says so repeatedly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Big Blue Marble Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 01:10 PM
Response to Reply #54
58. That is hilarious! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
suston96 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 12:13 AM
Response to Original message
4. So the Clinton Foundation makes out? Aids meds make out? And that's bad because...? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alcibiades_mystery Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 12:31 AM
Response to Reply #4
12. Because he softens pressure on a brutal dictator to end human rights abuses?
I mean, you're joking, right?

Nazarbayev wasn't handing out 3.1 billion contracts for free. The quid pro quo is to lend legitimacy to his despotic regime in return for the uranium contracts. You don't see how that might be a wee problem for the PEOPLE OF FUCKING KAZAKHSTAN???

And Clinton supporters accuse the Obamites of justifying everything!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bread and Circus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 12:39 AM
Response to Reply #4
15. ahhh classic Clintonian - "ends justify the means"...
let's just forget Bill Clinton is:

1.) promoting a dictator
2.) promoting strip mining of uranium which has a lot of health and environmental costs...

But as long as it makes Bill Clinton look good and grow more powerful then it's AOK... :patriot:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 12:16 AM
Response to Original message
5. Money for AIDS drugs vs. Money for own personal house.
And the fact that one isn't illegal and the other...well, we'll see if Rezko gets desperate enough to talk.

It isn't the quantity that counts, you know.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alcibiades_mystery Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 12:34 AM
Response to Reply #5
14. I don't know why you're pretending not to understand this
If true, he legitimized Nazarbayev's despotic regime in return for uranium contracts for an associate. The AIDS money is literally blood money at that point: the blood of the people who have to live in Nazarbayev's brutal police state. Maybe that's not a problem for you. I don't know.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 12:49 AM
Response to Reply #14
21. Oh. And saying nothing would have stopped the flow of blood?
Oh, let's go all out. Complaining loudly would have stopped the flow of blood? Better to let the blood flow and NOT get money for AIDS drugs? Better to save NO lives than SOME lives? I do not hope to achieve your zero tolerance moral purity. Nor will ANY president of the United States.

Here's a question: WHAT WAS THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION POLICY WITH WHICH CLINTON AND GIUSTRA INTERFERED????

I can't believe nobody here is asking about that.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alcibiades_mystery Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 12:56 AM
Response to Reply #21
22. I'm a fanatic for moral purity because
I don't think you should publicly praise the human rights record of a human rights abuser in exchange for uranium contracts for your associate?

Now I've truly heard it all.

Do you have any idea what happens when Bill Clinton signs off on your human rights record? Do you have any idea how difficult that makes international efforts to curb human rights abuses in that country? You say, well, for the AIDS money, it was a good trade-off. Anything else would be fanatical moral purity. That's fucking insane.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MonkeyFunk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 02:36 AM
Response to Reply #22
40. If you're a fanatic for moral purity
politics probably shouldn't be your hobby.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alcibiades_mystery Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 07:39 AM
Response to Reply #40
45. I'm not...far from it...unless you follow aquart's absurd criteria
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 12:22 AM
Response to Original message
9. Recommending.....just like the Hillbots do....
Let's let the press know we are paying attention!

K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KittyWampus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 12:28 AM
Response to Reply #9
11. Hillbots? grow up with the stupid name calling. PLEASE Frenchie. Just stop it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 04:10 AM
Response to Reply #11
44. That was my first time.......I've done that.
OK....I'm sorry! :blush:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Big Blue Marble Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 12:46 AM
Response to Reply #9
20. No, don't you know the convention around here?
Obama "handshake scandal" 257 threads for two days. On second thought,,
I have so many of them on ignore. I probably missed a few.

Bill Clinton human rights scandal, no problem.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Whisp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 05:22 PM
Response to Reply #9
68. Cafferty mentioned this on CNN.
I was pleasantly surprised.

Let's start talkin' here. sunlight, please.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 12:32 AM
Response to Original message
13. I'll bet they are sorry for opening up THAT can of worms, eh?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
milkyway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 01:07 AM
Response to Original message
23. That's a lot of fucking money!
I think you've got the number wrong. You have $131 million, but I think it's $31 million. But it's still a whole lot of money!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stephanie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 01:27 AM
Response to Reply #23
27. Altogether he has given $131.3 MILLION
Read the bolded section above. It is an INCREDIBLE AMOUNT OF MONEY.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
milkyway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 01:51 AM
Response to Reply #27
30. woops, I didn't read carefully enough. The Clintons seem so wrapped up in the pursuit
of money and power it's hard to believe sometimes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ursi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 01:19 AM
Response to Original message
25. Kazakastan is the only country over there that Cheney didn't want to have democracy
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Yossariant Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 01:21 AM
Response to Original message
26. Uh... Don Van Atta?! At it again Whitewater. "Her Way"
What happens to an investigative reporter best known for his role "breaking" three "scandals," each of which fell apart upon government investigation?

If he's Jeff Gerth, and the Clintons are the subjects of one of those stories, he gets to share a million-dollar book deal to recycle his own flawed reporting and rehash ages-old anecdotes.

And what did Jeff Gerth produce in exchange for his newfound riches? In Her Way*, GERTH and his co-author, DON VAN ATTA, compiled a laundry list of previously reported anecdotes -- some true, some almost certainly false, some "preposterous" -- and repackaged them for sale for $29.99...
http://mediamatters.org/items/200705260003

...Much of the criticism of Gerth's (and the Times') Whitewater reporting focused on a pattern of over-hyping innocuous facts. It is important to note that this criticism has come not only from those close to the Clintons, but from working journalists as well...

The first reporter to fall for the tale was The New York Times' Jeff Gerth, an investigative reporter. He produced an almost incomprehensible report on the Clintons' Whitewater land investments in early 1992. But incomprehensible or not, the fact that it appeared in so prestigious a paper as The New York Times insinuated that something must have been wrong. And that meant that every other baying hound in the pack had to give chase. ..

The tale of the resulting journalistic feeding frenzy is artfully told in a new book titled Fools for Scandal, by Gene Lyons...

Lyons begins by showing how Gerth was duped by Clinton's GOP enemies and how Gerth's original stories were so error-filled, intentionally or otherwise, that one of the key figures, former Arkansas state securities director Lee Thalheimer, called them "unmitigated horseshit."
http://mediamatters.org/items/200705250001

Lots more at links --- caps mine.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stephanie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 01:30 AM
Response to Reply #26
28. What does that have to do with this story?
Are there any factual errors? Any unsupported allegations?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DiamondJay Donating Member (484 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 05:12 PM
Response to Reply #28
66. how bout you prove it true?
instead of getting us to try to prove uncredible people false
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stephanie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-01-08 10:51 PM
Response to Reply #66
91. It's the New York Times
What source would you find more credible?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DiamondJay Donating Member (484 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 02:05 AM
Response to Original message
32. do some research on the writers of the article
and then see if you convince yourself of the objectivity. They are clearly Clinton haters
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stephanie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 02:06 AM
Response to Reply #32
33. Is the article factually incorrect?
I don't care which way they lean if all the facts are verified. Is there anything in the article that is not correct?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DiamondJay Donating Member (484 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 02:10 AM
Response to Reply #33
34. look at the history of other anti-clinton stories
Edited on Thu Jan-31-08 02:10 AM by DiamondJay
whitewater, "travelgate", "filgate", "china donors" "paula jones" and we saw how true all of those things were (sarcasm). This is BAD for the party. Because if Hillary does win, or run in the future, by us peddling this, we give our enemies (repubs) ammo. and im pretty sure it will be debunked soon like every other clinton "scandal"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stephanie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 02:12 AM
Response to Reply #34
36. How might it be debunked? Is there anything in the story that is inaccurate?
Please point me to a factual error in the article or something that is not sourced.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DiamondJay Donating Member (484 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 05:11 PM
Response to Reply #36
65. use history as your guide
as I'm pretty sure this will be debunked like every other clinton "scandal", just look at the articles the hack who wrote this published when he was president http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/peo... and that is page 30 of links to his articles, most about the clintons. face it HE WAS THE MOST RECENT DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENT SHOW HIM SOME DAMN HONOR
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stephanie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 05:29 PM
Response to Reply #65
71. But what part of the story do you think is untrue?
Edited on Thu Jan-31-08 05:29 PM by Stephanie
Do you think Bill didn't go on the trip? Did he not make the statement praising the dictator? Did Giustra not get the contracts? Did Bill not get the $131,000,000? Did Giustra not sell what before the trip was a worthless shell company for $3.1 billion? If you think the story is going to be debunked, I'd like to know on what basis. It appears to me that all of the relevant facts are a matter of public record. Clinton attempted to hide the source of the $31,000,000 donation but eventually made it public. So when you say it will be debunked, what do you mean?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stephanie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 05:27 PM
Response to Reply #34
69. .
Edited on Thu Jan-31-08 05:28 PM by Stephanie
replied to wrong post
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AngryAmish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 05:34 PM
Response to Reply #34
72. And look what happened to Paula Jones
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bicoastal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 02:11 AM
Response to Original message
35. Well, the Clintons just won THIS guy's vote:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ursi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 02:15 AM
Response to Reply #35
37. lol
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AngryAmish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 05:35 PM
Response to Reply #35
73. sexytime!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gateley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 02:31 AM
Response to Original message
38. Whether or not this story is as scandalous as it sounds, or if it's indeed written
by "Clinton haters" and will be shown to be no big deal, there are too many such Clinton stories that have been exposed and verified. I think their quest for power and wealth colors their sincere desire to do good...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
loveangelc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 02:32 AM
Response to Original message
39. UH OH.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
VotesForWomen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 03:31 AM
Response to Original message
43. what did bill do to get this deal through? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MethuenProgressive Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 07:44 AM
Response to Reply #43
46. Nothing. But that won't stop the Swiftboaters For Obama.
Sad.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beachmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 07:53 AM
Response to Original message
47. The case against the Clintons: It's the corruption, stupid!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 08:29 AM
Response to Reply #47
48. Exactly! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KittyWampus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 09:14 AM
Response to Reply #47
50. Let's see their freaking tax return.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joanne98 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 09:18 AM
Response to Original message
51. I told everyone they must read The Shock Doctrine!
Lots of nasty, high level dealings! NK missed this one though!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tom Rinaldo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 09:20 AM
Response to Original message
52. I read the story
Overall it doesn't reflect well on Bill in my opinion, but it's not scandalous either. Personally I prefer Jimmy Carter in ex-Presidents. Bottom line the only thing that really bothers me is that Clinton gave a specific form of praise to Nazarbayev that helped him pursue an international political goal that human rights groups were actively campaigning against (and I single out human rights groups because they are my gold standard for an issue like this). That was uncalled for and showed bad judgment in my eyes.

The fact that powerful U.S. leaders inside and outside of government are dealing with Nazarbayev, given the strategic geographic area that he controls and the resources it has, reminds me of Africa during the cold war, but it is always an element of U.S. foreign policy. There is oil in Kazakhstan, the Europeans are active there seeking energy contracts, and strategic oil pipelines are being built through it.

Without being an expert on him, Nazarbayev seems to already be what Russian President Putin is rapidly becoming. Economic development in Kazakhstan has grown rapidly since he took power, like in Russia, which gives him some popular support even though the Democracy in his nation is backtracking from the initial changes in that direction that were introduced when Independence from the Soviet Union was won.

Ex Presidents tend to get rich in America. We live in a capitalist society that sees no problem with some people earning hundreds of millions while others get evicted from their homes. Bill Clinton's charity appears to be doing some honestly good work internationally, combating AIDs in particular. There is no indication that Bill Clinton illegally profited personally or politically from this episode.

It will be interesting to see how Hillary handles this if it comes up in the debate tonight. I have always liked Hillary better than Bill. I know I am in a minority of Democrats who would say that. She has rarely broken ranks with him in public but the reports I read indicate they have had their political differences in private. I just heard Carl Bernstein (who is by no means a Hillary Shill) remark on CNN this morning that Hillary Clinton argued with Bill against NAFTA when Bill was President, and unfortunately to my mind, lost that fight. He was the one who had been elected that time, not her. I look forward to those tables being reversed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stephanie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 11:08 AM
Response to Reply #52
56. I am still waiting for him to disclose the library donors list.
A gift to him is a gift to her, but they decline to reveal the givers. Why is that?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jai4WKC08 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 02:45 PM
Response to Reply #56
64. How so?
They are gifts to the library.

Other than some positive publicity (and mostly just to the people of Arkansas), how does it benefit her?

She can't use it for her political campaigning. She can't use it to entertain lobbyists or throw parties for donors. Hell, she can't even buy a pizza and a sixpack with it.

Let's be real, shall we?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stephanie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 05:12 PM
Response to Reply #64
67. He's trading his influence for donations, she's tapping the same donors.
That's one thing that's wrong with it.



http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/20/us/politics/20clinton...

In raising record sums for her campaign, Mrs. Clinton has tapped many of the foundations donors. At least two dozen have become Hillraisers, each bundling $100,000 or more for her presidential bid. The early library donors, combined with their families and political action committees, have contributed at least $784,000 to Mrs. Clintons Senate and presidential coffers.

The foundation and Mrs. Clintons political campaigns have been intertwined in other ways. Terry McAuliffe, who led the foundations fund-raising and sits on its board, is now Mrs. Clintons campaign chairman and chief fund-raiser. Cheryl Mills plays a similar dual role, sitting on the foundation board and serving as the general counsel to Mrs. Clintons campaign. And Jay Carson recently traded a communications position at the foundation for a job as her campaigns press secretary.

***

But Mrs. Clintons effort to distance herself understates the extent to which the foundation was a joint enterprise from the start.

Shortly after the Clintons left the White House, close advisers convened meetings at the couples Washington home to map out Mr. Clintons future as a philanthropist.

Mrs. Clinton played an important role in shaping both the foundations organization and the scope of its work, said Karen A. Tramontano, a senior adviser in the Clinton White House and the foundations first chief of staff.

Advisers also were acutely aware that the foundations operations and any perception of a conflict could harm Mrs. Clinton politically. She and I would speak frequently, Ms. Tramontano said. She had a lot of ideas. All the papers that went to him went to her.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jai4WKC08 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 06:56 PM
Response to Reply #67
77. Ok, but that's not what you said
You said, "a gift to him is a gift to her." That's not at all the same thing.

I'm not sure I agree with your assessment anyway. I tend to think that the big-money donors to the library and foundation would mostly likely be giving big-money to her anyway. It's not like she wouldn't still be married to Bill and have most of his political contacts, even if he weren't collecting for anything.

Bottom line is that any money she receives will be accounted for, both in and out, in the FEC reports.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stephanie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 07:52 PM
Response to Reply #77
79. Not exactly.
We already know the library got donations from the governments/royal families of Saudi Arabia, Dubai, Qatar, etc. They are forbidden from donating to her campaign. It's compromising.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jai4WKC08 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 09:29 PM
Response to Reply #79
80. Well sure, but that goes back to my original point then
You're trying to have it both ways. You say it's wrong because he could trade influence to bring her money (actually, you say he is doing so, but that's not true), then as evidence you point to people who can't give her any money no matter how much influence he might have with them.

I think you're just trying to make this into something it isn't.

I will grant you that since we've never had a first "spouse" who is a former President, there will probably be many situations where we don't really know how it should work, and perhaps legislation will be needed to curb any potential abuse of power or influence.

Butcha know, whenever we get our the first woman president, no matter who it is, odds are that her husband will be someone of power and influence, with contacts thru out the business and/or political community. Women of ambition generally marry men of ambition. Maybe not "leader of the Free World," but quite likely with contacts and relationships around the world. And like as not, those relationships will not all be completely transparent and pure of motive for all parties concerned, because that's not the way the world works. And what's more, not all first ladies will be Laura Bushes or Nancy Reagans. In fact, I daresay that Hillary Clinton was demonized so badly precisely because she dared do more than serve tea to the wives of foreign dignitaries. We had better get used to the idea that future first spouses of either gender will not be stay-at-home, look-pretty-and-keep-their-mouth-shut types that we've expected them to be in the past.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zulchzulu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 09:21 AM
Response to Original message
53. Yeah...but, but, but Rezko is a ... he, um, but, but /nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nimrod2005 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 11:08 AM
Response to Original message
57. The Clintons = Corruption
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Carni Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 01:32 PM
Response to Original message
59. OMFG!!!! Check out Giustra's WIFE!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alison_Lawton

"Being a social philanthropist, Lawton sought help from other people who are passionate about exposing the crisis occurring in Northern Uganda. For example, Lawton has worked with Lloyd Axworthy, former Minister of Foreign Affairs for the Canadian Government, inspired Lawton to generate awareness of the situation in Northern Uganda. She has also toured Africa with Bill Clinton and representatives from The Clinton Foundation. Lawton has also held private audiences with other global stewards such as, the Dali Lama, Bill Gates and Nelson Mandela.

In 2004, Lawton founded Mindset Media, a socially-conscious, non-partisan media company dedicated to identifying, producing and presenting stories and issues that express opinions and perspectives rarely featured in current mainstream media outlets. One of Mindset Medias first initiatives was the Act for Stolen Children campaign which acted as a catalyst for change to facilitate increased awareness of the humanitarian crisis in Northern Uganda. Lawton was nominated for a 2007 Leo Awards for Best Documentary Program or Series (History/Biography/Social/Political) for producing Uganda Rising which chronicles the 20-year civil war raging in Northern Uganda between the Lords Resistance Army and the Ugandan government.<1>

Lawton is currently the Chair of the Unite for Children Unite Against Aids Campaign for Unicef Canada. She has set a fundraising goal of $25 million in 5 years to help the campaign address HIV/AIDS issues for mothers and children. In 2007, she announced Avril Lavigne would headline the first of a series of annual concerts to UNICEF's Unite for Children, Unite Against AIDS campaign. Lawton credited her friend, musician Sarah McLachlan, with convincing her to launch a concert series rather than a smaller event.<2>

Recently, Lawton has been appointed as a chairperson of the John F. Kennedy School of Government Womens Leadership Board at Harvard University. The board is an external group that advises the Dean and supports womens initiatives at the school, including the Women and Public Policy Program."

THIS IS HUGH!!!! VERY SERIES!!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Carni Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 01:33 PM
Response to Original message
60. OMFG!!!! Check out Giustra's WIFE!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alison_Lawton

"Being a social philanthropist, Lawton sought help from other people who are passionate about exposing the crisis occurring in Northern Uganda. For example, Lawton has worked with Lloyd Axworthy, former Minister of Foreign Affairs for the Canadian Government, inspired Lawton to generate awareness of the situation in Northern Uganda. She has also toured Africa with Bill Clinton and representatives from The Clinton Foundation. Lawton has also held private audiences with other global stewards such as, the Dali Lama, Bill Gates and Nelson Mandela.

In 2004, Lawton founded Mindset Media, a socially-conscious, non-partisan media company dedicated to identifying, producing and presenting stories and issues that express opinions and perspectives rarely featured in current mainstream media outlets. One of Mindset Medias first initiatives was the Act for Stolen Children campaign which acted as a catalyst for change to facilitate increased awareness of the humanitarian crisis in Northern Uganda. Lawton was nominated for a 2007 Leo Awards for Best Documentary Program or Series (History/Biography/Social/Political) for producing Uganda Rising which chronicles the 20-year civil war raging in Northern Uganda between the Lords Resistance Army and the Ugandan government.<1>

Lawton is currently the Chair of the Unite for Children Unite Against Aids Campaign for Unicef Canada. She has set a fundraising goal of $25 million in 5 years to help the campaign address HIV/AIDS issues for mothers and children. In 2007, she announced Avril Lavigne would headline the first of a series of annual concerts to UNICEF's Unite for Children, Unite Against AIDS campaign. Lawton credited her friend, musician Sarah McLachlan, with convincing her to launch a concert series rather than a smaller event.<2>

Recently, Lawton has been appointed as a chairperson of the John F. Kennedy School of Government Womens Leadership Board at Harvard University. The board is an external group that advises the Dean and supports womens initiatives at the school, including the Women and Public Policy Program."

THIS IS HUGH!!!! VERY SERIES!!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mojowork_n Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 02:29 PM
Response to Reply #60
61. There is one totally disgusting -- and consistent -- reference.
Edited on Thu Jan-31-08 02:29 PM by mojowork_n
On her own website, it says,

http://www.alisonlawton.com/bio.html

"...She proudly contributed to the success of the 1992 Earth Day International Awards in New York City. Chaired by Maurice Strong, the Under-Secretary-General of the United Nations, the event honored the environmental work of Al Gore, human rights defender Bianca Jagger, American Barrick CEO Peter Munk and others..."

Google "Barrick mining", George H.W. Bush and Greg Palast and you get an even more disgusting mining story featuring Bill's buddy George, Senior. The story ends with 50 small-time African "jewelry minors" buried alive by bulldozers, as billions of dollars in assets are transferred to the wealthiest of the wealthy.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/articles/03/07/09_...

edit--forget to paste in the 2nd link







Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Carni Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 02:40 PM
Response to Reply #61
62. You're kidding right?
So wait let me get this straight...she contributed to earth day which honored Al Gore, Bianca Jagger... but the other guy it honored is some sleazy mining type and therefore she must be some "in bed with George HW type of a persona"

That is REALLY a freaking stretch.

So tell me? Is Al Gore also some kind of a crook because he would allow himself to be honored along with such a person?

Sorry--I just don't see the logic here.

This is just a basic case of a couple of right winged hit piece artists writing a hyped article, so it can be spiked to Drudge and run up the flag pole by the right wingers (and now apparently SOME Obama supporters)

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mojowork_n Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-01-08 01:35 AM
Response to Reply #62
84. I wasn't implying "guilt by association", for that environmental event.
That would be obtuse.

What begs comparison is Bill Clinton's uranium mining bonanza, after he left office ('long-time observers of the mining industry were stunned that this paper shell corporation scored this coup', paraphrasing the Newspaper of Record), with his good buddy, H.W.'s, breakthrough gold mine windfall. (Read Greg Palast's report, in the second link. A big chunk of the Barrick Mining jackpot millions went straight into the coffers of George the Least's 2000 campaign.)

I'd also beg to differ on the 'right-winged hit piece' Drudge fodder characterization. Although it is kind of surprising to see that the Gray Lady is still capable of investigative reporting, Greg Palast is anything but a flack for wing nut "hype."

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Carni Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-01-08 12:42 PM
Response to Reply #84
85. George Soros has Barrick stock
He's heavy into moveon.org--so what does this all prove?

Both sides are crooked? (well duh)

http://www.gurufocus.com/StockBuy.php?symbol=ABX

Ticker Company Picked By ValueRank
(sort) Date (?) Action
AllNew/addNew buysAdd onlyAll sellsSold outReduce Impact to Portfolio (?) Price Range
(Average)* (?) Current Price Change from Average Comment Current Shares
ABX Barrick ... George Soros Log In 2007-09-30 Reduce
(history) -0.12% $30.52 - $40.28
($34.4) $ 53.23 55% Reduce -27.31% 107,618






Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mojowork_n Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-01-08 04:35 PM
Response to Reply #85
88. As Ralph Nickleby said to his nephew, Nicholas,
...in the finely appointed confines of his law offices:

'Young man, you don't know how the world works.'

(As Smike was gnawing on a leathery crust, in the garret.)

I'm not trying to point out that there are inequalities on the planet, or that a whole lot depends on which social circles you travel in.

Al Gore was honored at the same event Mrs. Kazakhstan Uranium Mining was at, along with the Barrick CEO. There's not necessarily any guilt by association there. Her web page suggests that she's an accomplished, responsible person, with an admirable social conscience.

But -- the point that the original poster of this thread was making was that $131 million dollars, to broker a billion dollar Central Asian mining deal, that's one *FAT WAD* of pay back.

If someone's trying to suggest Barack Obama profited unreasonably from his (fully aware, or completely clueless?) association with the indicted Chicago businessperson, how do thousands of dollars stack up against:

$ One Hundred and Thirty One Million dollars. To get on a jet and fly to Central Asia with the husband, and sweet talk a President for Life.

That's all I was trying to say.

The Barrick Mining angle is just frosting on the cake, recalling Bill's good buddy's (George, Sr.) incomparably *worse* gold mine windfall.

One ex-president setting an example for another?

Maybe that's just the way the world works, as the senior Dickens' character in my subject line would undoubtedly insist.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stephanie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 02:42 PM
Response to Reply #61
63. Oh god, I remember that story!
They bulldozed right over the striking miners and buried them alive. Awful story. And Bush handed them the rights to a Utah gold mine worth billions. Gee, sound familiar?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thoughtcrime1984 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 05:28 PM
Response to Original message
70. Sounds like a 2 for 1 corruption deal
Get it while it's hot!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
workinclasszero Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 05:37 PM
Response to Original message
74. So do we want change?
Or the same old culture of corruption in Washington DC?

GO OBAMA!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HamdenRice Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 06:32 PM
Response to Original message
75. Think of all the deals Bill and Hedge Fund Chelsea will be able to do
if Hillary is in the White House! One stop shopping for corporate crooks, corrupt third world dictators and sleezy lobbyists!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
in_cog_ni_to Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-01-08 04:48 PM
Response to Reply #75
90. Now Chelsea is fair game? What has she ever done to you? Leave Chelsea out of your hatefest. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
adabfree Donating Member (802 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 06:36 PM
Response to Original message
76. It's the selling of the Office
Slimy. Slippery. Slick.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
creeksneakers2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 10:10 PM
Response to Original message
81. You have it completely wrong
The uranium deal was nearly completed before Bill even got there. Bill played no significant role in the deal. Giustra didn't give Bill a cent. All the money went to charity. Many if Africa got AIDS medication because of Bill's successful recruitment of the large donor Giustra.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kaygore Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 11:47 PM
Response to Original message
82. And you wonder why people can't support Hillary!!!!!
Ethics are not situational. The end does not justify the means. Just because everyone does it doesn't make it right!

The Clintons are very good at rationalizing!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 11:48 PM
Response to Original message
83. More:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bernicewilliams Donating Member (101 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-01-08 12:44 PM
Response to Original message
86. Article written by Don Von Natta, lmao
The guy who co-wrote the hit-book against Hillary.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Carni Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-01-08 02:48 PM
Response to Reply #86
87. Yeah that also caught my eye NT
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
in_cog_ni_to Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-01-08 04:47 PM
Response to Reply #86
89. Shhhh.
Edited on Fri Feb-01-08 04:47 PM by in_cog_ni_to
That's a secret. Use can use any info, from any RW source as long as it's against Hillary. Shhhh.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stephanie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-02-08 01:46 AM
Response to Original message
92. It's a Two For One Deal
Whether you like it or not.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun Sep 24th 2017, 12:27 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC