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
 

silvershadow

(10,336 posts)
Fri Apr 22, 2016, 08:48 AM Apr 2016

Clinton gave paid speeches to firms that lobbied, contracted with government

Published April 22, 2016 Associated Press
Facebook328 Twitter66 livefyre412 Email Print

It's not just Wall Street banks. Most companies and groups that paid Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton to speak between 2013 and 2015 have lobbied federal agencies in recent years, and more than one-third are government contractors, an Associated Press review has found. Their interests are sprawling and would follow Clinton to the White House should she win election this fall.

The AP's review of federal records, regulatory filings and correspondence showed that almost all the 82 corporations, trade associations and other groups that paid for or sponsored Clinton's speeches have actively sought to sway the government — lobbying, bidding for contracts, commenting on federal policy and in some cases contacting State Department officials or Clinton herself during her tenure as secretary of state.

Presidents are not generally bound by many of the ethics and conflict-of-interest regulations that apply to non-elected executive branch officials, although they are subject to laws covering related conduct, such as bribery and illegal gratuities. Clinton's 94 paid appearances over two years on the speech circuit leave her open to scrutiny over decisions she would make in the White House or influence that may affect the interests of her speech sponsors.

Rival presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders and Republican critics have mocked Clinton over her closed-door talks to banks and investment firms, saying she is too closely aligned to Wall Street to curb its abuses. Sanders said in a speech in New York that Clinton earned an average of about $225,000 for each speech and goaded her for declining to release transcripts.

more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/04/22/clinton-gave-paid-speeches-to-firms-who-lobbied-contracted-with-us-government.html

15 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

apcalc

(4,465 posts)
1. To move the meter
Fri Apr 22, 2016, 08:52 AM
Apr 2016

In the direction you want it to go, you need to talk to people.

Pope, speeches, taxes

STRAW MEN

 

Buzz Clik

(38,437 posts)
4. She already did, or the wouldn't have paid her to speak.
Fri Apr 22, 2016, 08:58 AM
Apr 2016

Pretty simple. They only bring in speakers they want to hear.

 

Buzz Clik

(38,437 posts)
3. Did you get tired of talking about the FBI investigation and upcoming indictment?
Fri Apr 22, 2016, 08:56 AM
Apr 2016

Moving on the Daily Mantra Part II: The paid speeches.

Yurovsky

(2,064 posts)
6. Indicted or not, she's cozy with the very forces destroying working-class Americans...
Fri Apr 22, 2016, 09:07 AM
Apr 2016

pay-to-play, quid pro quo, rent seeking, influence peddling... However you frame it, it's morally repugnant and serves the 1% at the expense of the rest of us. The reason the email server issue remains important is that anyone not drinking the HRC kool-aid can see the reason why she wanted her communications exempt from government oversight. Bullshit all you want, but there has NEVER been a legit reason for her suspicious behavior other than the obvious: she's a crook. Unidicted and unconvicted, but a crook nonetheless.

And her victims are everyone outside of her cozy corporate 1% world.

 

think

(11,641 posts)
9. 60 companies that lobbied the govt. paid millions to a person likely to run for prez
Fri Apr 22, 2016, 09:24 AM
Apr 2016

and you tacitly dismiss it.

Many are concerned about the influence of all that money on Hillary's ability to be objective as a leader. It's more than a legitimate concern. It's a huge problem...

 

Buzz Clik

(38,437 posts)
10. I don't dismiss it all. I simply cannot take it to the extreme result that comes so easily for you.
Fri Apr 22, 2016, 09:26 AM
Apr 2016
 

think

(11,641 posts)
11. Do you think objective people will see it so clearly as you do yourself?
Fri Apr 22, 2016, 09:31 AM
Apr 2016

Seriously. I've spent years arguing with right wings about the influence of money on their candidates and didn't have as much information as there is on Clinton's financial collusion with corporations.

They always claimed their candidate was above being influenced by the money. That's the same response I now get as a defense for Clinton. It just doesn't wash...

 

Buzz Clik

(38,437 posts)
14. I have learned that nothing is as it seems.
Fri Apr 22, 2016, 09:44 AM
Apr 2016

Bernie is not a sweet old man with the best interests of the people in his heart. That's not to say he has bad ideas or that I hate him. We just learn to watch carefully.

Hillary's fun and game with big money bothers me a lot. Will she be beholden to them? To a degree. Completely and totally sold out? No.

As I said, I see what you're seeing, but I cannot take it to the extremes that come so easily for you.

It is so bizarre that all you Berners have convinced yourselves that millions of hard core, lifelong Dems have suddenly become Neocons. Really bizarre.

 

IdaBriggs

(10,559 posts)
7. "I'm shocked, shocked to find that gambling is going on here!"
Fri Apr 22, 2016, 09:11 AM
Apr 2016

Always followed by "Your winnings, sir."

Octafish

(55,745 posts)
13. It's not just Wall Street banks. It's like family.
Fri Apr 22, 2016, 09:43 AM
Apr 2016

Take UBS. Lots of friends who are like family work together in the "Weath Management" department.



Before UBS, they all worked together in Washington, where Sen. Phil Gramm (R-Texas) shepherded financial deregulation of the banks through Congress and President Bill Clinton (D-USA) signed it into law, the repeal of New Deal protections that kept Wall Street from using the taxpayers for their tab at the casino. President Bush was there, too, making sure the Banksters got away in 2008.

Forensic economist and former Fed regulator William K. Black wrote it reminds him of what happened during the Savings and Loans Crisis of the late 80s and early 90s. At the time, that was the greatest heist in history.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Clinton gave paid speeche...