Hillary should have never spoke at Citibank. Criminal banksters should be shunned, not legitimized.
Last edited Tue Dec 8, 2015, 12:46 PM - Edit history (1)
Some of you may recall that Hillary Clinton recently spoke at Citigroup (as well as many other financial institutions), a speech for which Citigroup paid $250,000.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/clinton-foundation-reveals-up-to-26million-in-additional-payments/2015/05/21/e49da740-0009-11e5-833c-a2de05b6b2a4_story.html
The disclosure came as the foundation faced questions over whether it fully complied with a 2008 ethics agreement to reveal its donors and whether any of its funding sources present conflicts of interest for Hillary Rodham Clinton as she begins her presidential campaign.
The money was paid as fees for speeches by Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton. Foundation officials said the funds were tallied internally as “revenue” rather than donations, which is why they had not been included in the public listings of its contributors published as part of the 2008 agreement.
(...)
Citibank paid at least $250,000 for a speech by Hillary Rodham Clinton.
http://wallstreetonparade.com/2015/08/citigroups-unchecked-crime-wave-proves-that-america-is-headed-in-the-wrong-direction/
On August 3, Citigroup filed its quarterly report (10Q) with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). Instead of reporting a pristine slate free of transgressions as one would expect from a felon on probation, Citigroup reported that it had settled allegations of money laundering with the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and the Commissioner of the California Department of Business Oversight involving its Banamex USA unit. The bank was, as typical, able to pay a penalty of $140 million and avoid an admission of guilt.
What Citigroup did not report on its 10Q is that it is also under another criminal money laundering probe by the Justice Department for its Mexican-based Banamex unit, according to a Bloomberg Business report. On July 24, Bloomberg reported the following:
“The U.S. Justice Department is investigating whether Citigroup Inc. let customers move illicit cash through its Mexico unit, setting the bank’s biggest international operation in the path of an expanding money-laundering probe.”
http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-10-02/hillary-clinton-lets-big-banks-off-the-hook-for-financial-crisis
Throughout the 2016 presidential primary campaign, Clinton has taken a markedly less critical view of large financial institutions like Citigroup Inc. than Democrats like Elizabeth Warren and presidential rival Bernie Sanders. Instead, Clinton has placed the blame on “shadow banking,” a term she has used to describe hedge funds and high-frequency traders.
“Her comments on their face are wrong,” said Christopher Whalen, senior managing director at Kroll Bond Rating Agency and author of Inflated: How Money and Debt Built the American Dream. “It is incorrect to blame the crisis on shadow banks. You can’t really differentiate between what they were doing and what Citi was doing.”
(...)
Deflecting blame from the banks also raises the question for Clinton: What about the crisis woes of firms such as Citigroup Inc., which has long been among her banking supporters? The lender and its employees have been the No. 1 contributor to her political career, giving more than $800,000—even during the period she told Dunham she “took on Wall Street” as a senator from New York. And two of Citigroup’s fellows in finance have stepped in as top-10 donors to the Democrat’s presidential run: Morgan Stanley and JPMorgan.
“If you don’t think Citibank was center to this crisis, it’s hard to imagine why we spent billions bailing them out,” said Robert Borosage, co-director of the liberal Campaign For America’s Future, who referred to Clinton as “Wall Street’s favorite Democrat.”
= new reply since forum marked as read
Just asking...
patting herself on the back for her wisdom, her ability to "compromise" (READ:"Sell Out"
and her courage in fighting the Special Interests to get the $10.00 bump.
It will then be added to her list of "accomplishments",
while in the back rooms she will be laughing with the other 1%ers, "THERE. THAT should hold the peasants for another 20 years!"
Hahahahahahahaha!
...she should have given the a "time out" instead?
Another addition to the say-any-damned-thing-to-win list even to her BFFs AND you KNOW she cares about these folks. I can so imagine how this works for the rest of us.
Trust her?
I don't even thinks she cares how slimey these Clintonian activities make her look.
Bernie - because Fuck This Shit!
That person got it wrong, but I didn't want to even bother dealing with a Hillarian.
Sanders supporters are a lot more edumacable 
...I almost inserted a (sic) in my headline.
ungrammatical post (which does seem to occur more frequently from the HRC crowd, IME.)
I would put the (sic) in the headline here.
I was wondering what all these threads were about! Good to know there's still good reason to have that one on ignore. 
you must be a right winger double agent or something..... 
when so many do not want to learn
