Hillary Clinton
  • Hillary Clinton
  • from Wikipedia
  • Story alerts
  • Letter to Editor
  • Pin it

In a recent debate, Bernie Sanders chided Hillary Clinton for taking big money from Wall Street for speeches she gave. Hillary asked Bernie to name one time when her payoffs for speeches resulted in her helping Wall Street as a quid pro quo. Bernie didn't cite a specific example.

Bernie Sanders

San Diego attorneys Mike Aguirre and Maria Severson point to an example of Hillary throwing her weight around Wall Street, although it was not as a result of her getting paid for a speech.

The attorneys are appealing a suit against the big insurer American International Group (best known as AIG) that they lost several years ago.

They stumbled across a damning paragraph in a suit that Maurice (Hank) Greenberg, former head of AIG, filed against the federal government. Greenberg claimed the government had no right to bail out AIG in the Great Recession. Greenberg won the suit but received no compensation.

Famed attorney David Boies handled the case for Greenberg. Buried in the suit is this statement: "On September 17, 2008, United States Senator Hillary Clinton called [then-Treasury secretary Hank] Paulson on behalf of Mickey Kantor, who had served as Commerce secretary in the Clinton administration and now represented a group of Middle Eastern investors." (Kantor, a close friend of Clinton since the 1970s, was a member of Friends of Hillary and the Hillary Rodham Clinton for U.S. Senate Committee.)

The paragraph continued, "These investors, Hillary said, wanted to buy AIG. 'Maybe the government doesn't have to do anything,' she said to Paulson. Paulson told Senator Clinton, 'this was impossible unless the investors had a big balance sheet and the wherewithal to guarantee AIG's liabilities.'"

Shortly, Paulson met with Clinton and later wrote about their personal meetings and phone conversations in his book about the bailout.

In a ProPublica story last November, Kantor said he was representing AIG shareholders, not Middle East investors. "Kantor told Pro Publica something that was in conflict with the report," says Aguirre.

Clearly, Clinton was snug with Wall Street, as well as with government officials supposedly trying to rescue the financial system. In her debates with Sanders, she has portrayed herself as an innocent regarding the financial system. Not so.

  • Story alerts
  • Letter to Editor
  • Pin it

Comments

CaptD April 21, 2016 @ 4:13 p.m.

Don — Clinton as President is $CARY because she is far too connected to Big Money.

We would end up even more beholding to the Ultra Wealthy than we are now.

I'm hopeful that San Diego voters wake up to the fact that they better get motivated else they will get GOP'd into having San Diego sold out from under them.

How bad could it get, think what is happening in Hawaii, where locals and especially their children can no longer afford to live there.

0

Don Bauder April 21, 2016 @ 7:34 p.m.

CaptD: As soon as they left the White House, Bill and Hillary Clinton went out to get exceedingly rich. They may not have broken some laws in the process, but they clearly shattered ethical standards. Hillary Clinton is completely beholden to Wall Street. While in office, Bill Clinton permitted Glass Steagall to be reversed. He got paid off for doing so.

Barack Obama followed through on many of his promises -- at least tried to do so. I will be very disappointed if he just goes out to get rich upon leaving. While in office, he did next to nothing about Wall Street abuses. He knew what had to be done, but he didn't follow through. His early appointments showed that he had no interest in cleaning up Wall Street. Best, Don Bauder

0

Psycholizard April 21, 2016 @ 5:25 p.m.

Sanders knows these abuses, he contents himself with outlining her horrific breaches of ethics, and stops short of accusing her of crime. He's serious, and the fact that one can gain $150.000.000 for speaking fees LEGALLY after leaving office is the real issue.

0

Don Bauder April 21, 2016 @ 7:36 p.m.

Psycholizard; Taking huge amounts for giving a speech after leaving office is not a crime, to my knowledge. It stinks, yes. Remember the millions Reagan got for speeches after he left office? Best, Don Bauder

0

shirleyberan April 21, 2016 @ 5:48 p.m.

Poop pic Don. Geeez us, do you really want to split the vote so bad that Trump wins??Aarghh and Hell NO!!! It could happen because under 50% vote!!! And when women work the system to make same money, same way men do, you don't like it. Not everybody is gonna bend for y'all.

1

Don Bauder April 21, 2016 @ 7:40 p.m.

shirleyberan: Revelations about Hilllary's shady past shouldn't split the vote. Look at her likely opponents: Trump is a loose cannon and very dangerous. Cruz is unstable. People will vote for Hillary while holding their noses. Best, Don Bauder

0

Psycholizard April 21, 2016 @ 6:01 p.m.

There are those who think Sanders and supporters are hard on Hillary, they will learn how soft they are when they face Republicans. They might actually find a provable crime, there certainly is a pile of loot, and nothing sold except for influence.

0

Don Bauder April 21, 2016 @ 7:42 p.m.

Psycholizard: You may be right. Provable crime? Doubtful but possible. Best, Don Bauder

0

shirleyberan April 21, 2016 @ 6:19 p.m.

Don - better to find a buyer than give a bailout, right?!

0

Don Bauder April 21, 2016 @ 7:45 p.m.

shirleyberan: No. Mickey Kantor would have received a monstrous fee if he would have been able to sell AIG to Arab moneybags. If Hillary was doing Kantor's work, she was breaching ethical standards. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder April 21, 2016 @ 7:48 p.m.

Stephen Merrill: To accuse a political opponent of a crime is dangerous strategy. Best, Don Bauder

0

AlexClarke April 22, 2016 @ 7:12 a.m.

All politicians are corrupt to the core as it takes money to get elected to anything. If you get money from anyone then you are morally beholding to them, In Bernie's case the money comes from the people). No matter what Hillary or Cruz or anyone says they are getting big money and that money has many strings attached. The only criteria for a politician to vote for/against a bill or to introduce a bill should be is it in the best interest of the people. Lobbyist work for corporations and wealthy people. Their only job is to influence the politician to do something they want. The public always loses. Bernie my be the only exception. Politicians who are not corrupt never last long. I wish we had a third party a party of the people for the people.

1

Don Bauder April 22, 2016 @ 8:56 a.m.

AlexClarke: I can't disagree with your thesis. Just think of an election pitting Hillary versus Trump. There is so much dirt on both of them. How about Trump versus Bernie? Bernie may be clean, but the opposition will shout "Socialist! Socialist!" in every ad. Some will shout "Communist! Communist!" Joe McCarthy, from his special place in hell, will love it. Best, Don Bauder

3

MichaelValentine April 22, 2016 @ 11:39 a.m.

"Hillary .... portrayed herself as innocent in regarding the financial system." I almost spit coffee out of my nose. What a hoot.

0

Don Bauder April 22, 2016 @ 12:45 p.m.

MichaelValentine: I don't drink coffee, but if I did, I would have spit it out, too. Hillary saying she knows nothing about the financial community is like Bill saying he knows nothing about philandering. Best, Don Bauder

0

Flapper April 22, 2016 @ 12:50 p.m.

Bernie was a fool to paint himself as a socialist. But the GOP is very highly socialist too, just within a very narrow sphere.

0

Don Bauder April 22, 2016 @ 2:31 p.m.

Flapper: Most politicians, particularly Republicans, are corporate socialists. They oppose welfare for indigent people who need welfare, but are enthusiastically for welfare for corporations and billionaires. Just look at the San Diego establishment wanting taxpayers to bail out the Spanos family billionaires. Best, Don Bauder

0

HonestGovernment April 22, 2016 @ 6:34 p.m.

Don, I know you can do better than this. Of course Clinton is not "innocent regarding the financial system." Are you saying that in a pejorative sense, suggesting that she should be innocent of how things can be manipulated? Seriously?? No American President can afford to be hazy on Wall Street and its machinations. Clinton is definitely financially savvy (and so are her allies), and very intelligent about finance and markets, which is requisite when it comes to Wall Street. Have you read "The Big Short" by Michael Lewis? If so, you'll know that not even many people at the big institutions fully understood how to make the various moves that led to the series of crashes from 1997 to 2008. Having someone who knows the players and understands the games - Clinton - is hugely important going forward.

And for once, I agree with Beran: your choice of photo (one of the worst) of a normally very nice looking Hillary Clinton speaks volumes.

And Clinton vs. Aguirre? And Paulson? Seriously? Hillary Clinton is miles out of their league.

0

Don Bauder April 23, 2016 @ 7:39 a.m.

HonestGovernment: I wrote that Hillary has "portrayed herself" as innocent in the financial game. Of course she isn't. She is financially savvy, as is her husband. But both are good at concealing the games they have played with Wall Street. Best, Don Bauderder

0

HonestGovernment April 23, 2016 @ 11:14 a.m.

I don't agree that she feigns finance-industry innocence. By no means does she portray herself as uninformed. She can and does discuss Dodd-Frank, the Volcker Rule, Glass-Steagall, high-frequency trading, securities, financial regulation/reform, the IMF, the SEC, the CFTC, subprime lending, insurance, bonds, derivatives, credit swaps, etc.

Help me see what you mean by describing a "game" she has played with Wall Street, and how she concealed it (but not from you!).

1

Psycholizard April 23, 2016 @ 2 p.m.

She's playing "hide and go seek with" transcripts of her talks, "spin the bottle" with multiple banking firms, and has "hit the jackpot" with gambling proceeds from the rigged game that has U.S. taxpayers backing derivatives gambling. Her feigned ignorance reminds of the famous lines from Casablanca. "I was shocked, SHOCKED to learn that gambling was allowed on Wall Street."...."Take your winnings Ma'am"...."Round up the usual suspects.".

1

Don Bauder April 23, 2016 @ 7:45 p.m.

Psycholizard: She will not reveal what she said inn those speeches. You might have had to read between the lines to see that she was promising protection to Wall Street, but she still doesn't want to release them, because savvy people will know exactly what she was doing. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder April 23, 2016 @ 2:36 p.m.

HonestGovernment: It appears i did not word my response as clearly as I should have. At numerous times, Sanders has sketched out how she has given speeches for enormous sums for the likes of Goldman Sachs. She claims this is an innocent activity because in no case has she helped Wall Street as a quid pro quo for getting so much money for a speech. She asked Sanders for examples. He didn't name one.

In this sense, she was claiming to be an innocent in her relations with Wall Street. She claims she can take their money (allegedly for speeches) but does nothing in return. There is no doubt she has knowledge of Wall Street.

Incidentally, she keeps saying how she has supported Dodd-Frank, and that bill is reining in Wall Street. Dodd-Frankk is very weak tea. Wall Street had figured out how to get around it before it ever became law. But Sanders feels he cannot blast Dodd-Frank because she will come right back, as she always does, disingenuously,claiming that Sanders is criticizing Obama.Best, Don Bauder

1

Javajoe25 April 23, 2016 @ 10:59 a.m.

Don, I hope you don't mind my forwarding your article to the Sanders campaign. I know everyone says they know about this already but you would be surprised how a campaign can get so crazy they lose sight of certain details. I could not agree more about holding our noses while we vote for Hillary (if she is our only choice), but considering how the Democratic party has failed their constituents so miserably, why shouldn't we prefer to vote for a socialist? If the Republicans yell Socialist, we can always yell Fascist. Even our great black hope, Barack Obama, let us down and gave up his ideals, failing to get even minimal control over the mad dogs of corporate greed. It is a sad day to see our only choice a shill for Wall St. Bernie is the only one speaking for working people. We blow this, then I guess we deserve another eight years of nothing or worse. Elizabeth Warren seems to be the only one to have the cajones to slip a leash on these insatiable mutts.

1

Don Bauder April 23, 2016 @ 3:01 p.m.

Javajoe25. I agree for the most part. I would be hesitant, however, to encourage Sanders's advisors to call his opponents fascists. It isa loaded word -- much more loaded than socialist. If Bernie wins the nomination -- a long shot, it appears -- the Republican smear specialists will jump Bernie for being a socialist. That is one of the strikes against him on the topic of electability. Best, Don Bauder

0

Flapper April 23, 2016 @ 4:32 p.m.

Disingenuous, dissembling, and of doubtful intellectual integrity.

"Socialist," like so many labels, is a lazy-minded way of pigeon-holing--it is a straw-man fallacy, but it works. An excursion into the etymology of the word might be interesting, especially when one ventures into the Indo-European roots, which, simplified, simply means to cooperate rather than compete.

0

Flapper April 23, 2016 @ 6:31 p.m.

Agree that yelling "fascist" would backfire, and is not as good as taking the high road.

But agree that Warren has the cojones. I wonder what her strategy is.

0

Javajoe25 April 23, 2016 @ 6:52 p.m.

Flapper, Not sure what Warren's strategy is. She seems to be happy doing what she is doing in the Senate: going after the banks and other bad guys and trying to do good for working folk. If Sanders campaign had really caught fire, she might have not been able to resist a draft movement to get her on board as his running mate. The problem is Warren is reluctant to step on her big sister's toes and like too many others, believes that perhaps it is Hillary's "turn." IMHO, a huuuuuuge wasted opportunity. Everyone needs to remember what The Who said: Don't be fooled again!

0

Flapper April 23, 2016 @ 9:35 p.m.

I just wonder how Warren would wiggle out of a VP request. I suspect she is truly more interested in getting one thing done right than trying to pull a multitude of rabbits out of too many hats. She is too real to be a "real" campaigner like Hillary, whom she would not want to go up against. Hillary might like to take Warren out of the action as VP.

0

Don Bauder April 24, 2016 @ 6:16 a.m.

Flapper: If Hillary gets the nomination, she would not name another female as her vice presidential candidate. If Sanders wins, naming a female would be a good idea for the sake of politics, but it should be a female closer to the center than Warren is. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder April 24, 2016 @ 6:13 a.m.

Javajoe25: I think Sanders and Warren are the two best politicians in Washington, but a Sanders/Warren ticket would not be balanced. Best, Don Bauder

0

Ponzi April 23, 2016 @ 9:07 p.m.

"It's 'Possible' Hillary Clinton Could Be Better President than GOP Pick, Charles Koch Says"

It's a nightmare scenario for Republicans, but conservative billionaire Charles Koch says "it's possible" Hillary Clinton could make a better president than the remaining candidates in the GOP primary.

Koch, one of the most influential and controversial forces in Republican politics, said in an exclusive interview with ABC News to air Sunday on "This Week" that he believed Bill Clinton was a better president "in some ways" than George W. Bush.

"In other ways, I mean [Clinton] wasn't an exemplar. But as far as the growth of government, the increase in spending," Koch said. "It was 2.5 times [more] under Bush than it was under Clinton."

================================================== What strange times we now live in. A Koch saying nice things about the Clinton's. Perhaps, because his own party has become so impossibly divided and hateful? Clinton's are big money politicians too. They support the lopsided free trade agreements that have fast-tracked the demise of the American middle-class and have permitted large corporations to abuse the H-1B and other "front of the line" immigration scams to proliferate. Neither party has a plan to resuscitate the middle-class. Both parties are beholden to Wall Street and favors to those that put up the money to get them elected.

Citizens United has just made matters worse because the politicians don't have to bother with the small contributors, unions, or grass roots.... because they are all bought and paid for by a mix of corporations seeking favors once they get their puppet in office.

Are Americans the frogs in boiling water or are we going to someday see a revolution, not an occupy the park spectacle, but an uprising that is going to take on the establishment and challenge to government to change or pay for it with blood in the streets. The signs are things are breaking down; more suicides, more mass shootings, more hate and discontent (i.e. Donald Trump popularity). The police state in America may make the 1% and the public servants feel safe, but Americans have too many guns. Something to think about.

1

Don Bauder April 25, 2016 @ 7:50 p.m.

Ponzi: From Koch's perspective, Bill Clinton might have been a better president than George W. Bush. Bush will always have the Iraq war, the worst war in our history, hanging over him. Best, Don Bauder

0

Flapper April 23, 2016 @ 9:38 p.m.

Ponzi, thou art a prophet without sufficient honor.

0

Don Bauder April 24, 2016 @ 6:21 a.m.

Ponzi: Ah, those words, "It's possible." Koch is an ideologue, but he does know how to play politics, apparently. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder April 24, 2016 @ 6:22 a.m.

Flapper: Ponzi is indeed a prophet. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder April 25, 2016 @ 7:52 p.m.

Flapper: The punster a work again. Best, Don Bauder

0

Flapper April 24, 2016 @ 11:16 a.m.

Oops! I didn't mean that Ponzi lacked honor; I meant that he was not sufficiently appreciated.

0

Don Bauder April 25, 2016 @ 7:53 p.m.

Flapper: Ponzi has many admirers. Best, Don Bauder

0

Flapper April 24, 2016 @ 6:38 p.m.

Well, he does have a citadel in the mountains, but I don't think he has a Rolls--yet. He certainly has a lot of female fans. He hasn't been to Guru school though . . .

0

Don Bauder April 25, 2016 @ 7:55 p.m.

Flapper: And there will NOT be a Rolls-- ever. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder April 25, 2016 @ 7:54 p.m.

shirleyberan: Indeed NOT. Best, Don Bauder

0

monaghan April 25, 2016 @ 3:55 p.m.

I think that photo was a perfect representation of Mrs. Clinton. Did you see her face harden during the Brooklyn debate when the topic became Israeli/Palestinian relations? Get used to seeing it: the woman is a tool of the wealthy pro-Israel lobby AIPAC and a total hawk.

New York Times correspondent Mark Landler has just published a new book called "Alter Egos," contrasting the style of aggressive militarist Clinton -- Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Ukraine, Syria -- with President Obama's critical skeptical restraint about "regime change" via unilateral U.S. military action around the world.

As for Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders is standing in for her, doing a better job than she ever could as a truth-telling candidate for President. However it all turns out, we owe a debt to Sanders who has so bravely defined the twilight of America's promise over the last 40 years and clearly described a democratic way out of the gathering darkness.

0

Don Bauder April 26, 2016 @ 7:15 a.m.

monaghan: "Alter Egos" sounds like a very good book. Best, Don Bauder

0

HonestGovernment April 25, 2016 @ 5:16 p.m.

Don, In 1976, Reagan, campaigning, employed the term "welfare queen," sketching (as you put it) the idea that the greedy black woman was the typical beneficiary of social welfare programs (in 1976, however, African-Americans were not the majority of welfare recipients). The "savvy people [knew] exactly what she was doing" and believed that Reagan would end government giveaway programs.

In 2016, Bernie Sanders sketches Clinton as the beneficiary of "greedy billionaires" and condemns in toto Wall Street, without proof, but "savvy people will know exactly what she was doing" and believe that Sanders will end a corrupt system.

I don't like sketchers, especially those who use synecdoches to condemn entire groups and systems. It is veering into fanaticism. And I don't care for anyone who believes the worst with no proof.

1

Don Bauder April 25, 2016 @ 8 p.m.

HonesGovernment: I think Sanders has put forth much evidence -- enough to show the corruption of the Clintons. Best, Don Bauder

0

shirleyberan April 25, 2016 @ 8:03 p.m.

That photo is the image of a woman who has withstood personal and professional tests over and over and still stands ready to defend an imperfect country. I couldn't do it no matter how much I love my country.

0

Don Bauder April 25, 2016 @ 8:13 p.m.

shifleyberan: Surely you know enough to distinguish between a politician and a public servant. Best, Don Bauder

0

shirleyberan April 25, 2016 @ 8:18 p.m.

Don - surely you know she can't hurt your stock value.

0

Don Bauder April 26, 2016 @ 7:19 a.m.

shirleyberan: My portfolio should do well under Hillary, Trump or Kasich. Only Sanders would hurt it -- and in that case I wouldn't mind, because he would be creating a better world for my sons and grandsons. Best, Don Bauder

0

shirleyberan April 26, 2016 @ 2:41 a.m.

Sorry Don. Maybe she can use that frightening face when she goes up against Putin.

0

Don Bauder April 26, 2016 @ 7:20 a.m.

shirleyberan: Would Putin be frightened? Best, Don Bauder

0

shirleyberan April 26, 2016 @ 3:21 a.m.

U.S. Rep Jolly (not kidding about his name) has introduced the "Stop Act" to reduce the 30 hours per week of phone donation solicitation that's requested from Congress persons of both parties. Reported on 60 Minutes and 60minutesovertime.com

0

Don Bauder April 26, 2016 @ 7:21 a.m.

shirleyberan: How about the email pitches? Best, Don Bauder

0

shirleyberan April 26, 2016 @ 9:32 a.m.

OK smartypants. Maybe they have partner swap the party partys.

0

Don Bauder April 26, 2016 @ 11:59 a.m.

shirleyberan: "Partner swap" is a game I have never played. So I can't help you with information. Best, Don Bauder

0

MURPHYJUNK April 27, 2016 @ 7:43 a.m.

the prospect of 4 years of hearing Hillary screeching would be enough to turn off a lot of voters.

0

Sign in to comment

Win a $25 Gift Card to
The Broken Yolk Cafe

Join our newsletter list

Each newsletter subscription means another chance to win!

Close