Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumOil Companies Donated To Clinton Foundation While Lobbying State Department
Clintons family foundation has accepted millions of dollars directly from major fossil fuel companies including from those that lobbied her State Department just before the agency approved a controversial pipeline delivering what environmentalists call one of the worlds dirtiest sources of energy. The Clinton Foundation did not respond to International Business Times request for comment.
In 2009, the Clinton-led State Department approved a permit for the 400-mile Alberta Clipper pipeline, which is designed to pump up to 450,000 barrels of oil per day from the Canadian oil sands to Wisconsin (where recent polls show Democratic primary voters are concerned about its impact). According to federal lobbying records reviewed by the IBT, Chevron and ConocoPhillips both lobbied the State Department specifically on the issue of oil sands in the immediate months prior to the department's approval, as did a trade association funded by ExxonMobil.
Those three oil companies have delivered between between $2.5 million and $3 million to the Clinton Foundation. That is on top of money their executives and lobbyists delivered to Clintons campaign and super PAC in her 2008 presidential bid the year before she approved the pipeline.
http://www.ibtimes.com/political-capital/oil-companies-donated-clinton-foundation-while-lobbying-state-department-2348832
In 2009, the Clinton-led State Department approved a permit for the 400-mile Alberta Clipper pipeline, which is designed to pump up to 450,000 barrels of oil per day from the Canadian oil sands to Wisconsin (where recent polls show Democratic primary voters are concerned about its impact). According to federal lobbying records reviewed by the IBT, Chevron and ConocoPhillips both lobbied the State Department specifically on the issue of oil sands in the immediate months prior to the department's approval, as did a trade association funded by ExxonMobil.
Those three oil companies have delivered between between $2.5 million and $3 million to the Clinton Foundation. That is on top of money their executives and lobbyists delivered to Clintons campaign and super PAC in her 2008 presidential bid the year before she approved the pipeline.
http://www.ibtimes.com/political-capital/oil-companies-donated-clinton-foundation-while-lobbying-state-department-2348832
Trading votes for gold is apparently a very lucrative endeavor. Don't you just love the smell of graft and political corruption in the morning?
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
6 replies, 652 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (13)
ReplyReply to this post
6 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Oil Companies Donated To Clinton Foundation While Lobbying State Department (Original Post)
NorthCarolina
Apr 2016
OP
Even if the Clinton Foundation is legit charity....Hooooo Boy is the GOP going to have fun
Armstead
Apr 2016
#1
Oh, I think there are going to be some elected Democrats squirming when they are asked to defend and
Skwmom
Apr 2016
#3
Armstead
(47,803 posts)1. Even if the Clinton Foundation is legit charity....Hooooo Boy is the GOP going to have fun
Just "vetting"
Skwmom
(12,685 posts)3. Oh, I think there are going to be some elected Democrats squirming when they are asked to defend and
explain their endorsement of the Clinton way of doing business.
Skwmom
(12,685 posts)2. A mere coincidence though some may argue it's a new way of doing govt business in America.n/t
Else You Are Mad
(3,040 posts)4. Stop pointing out facts..
Facts are not fair towards Hillary.
cosmicone
(11,014 posts)5. So what? That doesn't create an impropriety. n/t
whatchamacallit
(15,558 posts)6. So?
Cutting straight to the standard Hillteam response
Edit: Lol, look what was posted above while I wrote this.
Edit: Lol, look what was posted above while I wrote this.