Senator Clinton Doesn't Really Oppose the Colombian Trade Agreement

Just look at Her Senior Staff, Including Bill Clinton


I recently detailed how Mark Penn’s visit with the Colombian ambassador to the U.S. about the proposed free trade agreement with that nation, where union leaders are regularly assassinated, was in all likelihood carried out as part of his dual roles as then top Clinton campaign strategist and on behalf of Burson-Marsteller, which he also represented since he never stepped down as CEO – and that was fine with Senator Clinton.

The key evidence in this theory is that the President of Colombia, as I detailed, denounced Barack Obama for his opposition -- primarily on behalf of union rights (particularly the right not to be murdered) – to the Colombia trade agreement two days after the meeting with Penn, and then again two days later. So twice in one week the Colombian President lacerated Obama but didn’t utter a word about Hillary Clinton’s claimed opposition to the trade agreement.

It’s extremely unusual for a foreign country to become officially and vocally -- at the presidential level -- involved in taking sides in a presidential primary race in the United States, to say the least. But it is even more remarkable that the leader of Colombia would only launch an attack on one of the candidates, even though the other candidate is holding out to Pennsylvania union voters that she also opposes the pact.

Mark Penn, as we said, wasn’t "officially" demoted because he met with the Colombian ambassador. As we observed, his title was "officially" taken away because he got caught, allegedly by Republican dirty trickster, Roger Stone, about whom BuzzFlash has written. (If true, then Stone leaked the story to the Wall Street Journal.)

In what is likely a campaign ruse by the Clinton campaign to pretend to be against the Colombia agreement, they even mislead the press into posting headlines and stories that Penn was fired. But that was a lie. He is still, according to published reports, daily on press phone calls and also directly advising Hillary Clinton – and speaks regularly with Bill, who, in turn, advises Hillary. In short, nothing much has changed except that the Clinton campaign was panicking because union leaders were calling and asking for Penn’s head. So Senator Clinton, who along with Bill, allegedly loves Penn’s loyalty since 1996 (Penn was brought into the Clinton inner circle by Dick Morris, by the way, in ’96, and Morris was brought into the White House by – well – Hillary Clinton, and she brags about it in her memoir) decided to simply change Penn’s nameplate, but keep him as a key adviser on her campaign. Penn was, and this is undisputed, was not fired, not by a long shot.

The New Republic recently published an analysis about why the Clintons are so fond of Penn, and here is one of the reasons that the New Republic notes:

Others in the party object to, if not Penn's disdain for liberals, then his chronic inability to hide that disdain. "One of his favorite things is the 'double-push off,'" chuckles the colleague from a past race. "On the one hand, he's attacking Bush and pushing off of him. On the other hand, he's attacking and pushing off the excesses of the left." And while this tendency risks alienating many within the party's base, Penn's rough handling of liberals rarely upset the Clintons too severely, considering Bill's historical success with triangulation.

But back to why Hillary Clinton is probably lying about her opposition to the Colombian free trade pact. The answer is simple, very key people on her staff – and her political partner, Bill – support it. In fact, Bill has financially benefited from the relationship to at least the tune of $600,000.
It’s not just Mark Penn. Howard Wolfson, who is now the new "co-key-strategist" of Clinton’s campaign has a large (perhaps million dollar) equity interest in a firm doing work on behalf of passing the pact.

The New York Times reported on just some of the Clinton team connections to passing the Columbia free trade act:

To help make its case, Colombia had already hired at least three firms on Capitol Hill, in addition to the work by Mr. Penn’s firm, Burson-Marsteller, paying out from $15,000 to $40,000 a month. Collectively the Colombian government has paid more than $1 million to firms that have negotiated or lobbied on behalf of the deal.

They include the Glover Park Group, the fast-growing firm set up by former Clinton White House aides including Joe Lockhart, who was chief spokesman for the president. (Howard Wolfson, Mrs. Clinton’s campaign communications director, was a partner at the firm but has taken a leave of absence.)

The ties between the lobbying firms and the Clinton campaign illustrate the complexity of Washington’s political world, where players are often switching positions or playing multiple roles. While Mr. Wolfson has taken a leave from Glover Park, for example, he still has equity in the firm valued at $500,000 to $1 million, according to a disclosure form.

A long list of former Clinton administration aides, including Mack McLarty, the former counsel to the president; Donna E. Shalala, the health and human services secretary; and Leon E. Panetta, the onetime chief of staff, also have come out in support of the deal. It puts them in alliance with Mr. Bush and Republican leaders.

Either Senator Clinton has very poor judgment about how the perception of who you employ is perceived by foreign governments, or she is basically lying about her opposition to the Colombian Free Trade agreement in order to placate the union vote in PA, which she desperately needs.

Either way she is not a good match for a presidency that has to deal with both perception and action when dealing with sensitive issues like the proposed Colombian Free Trade Agreement and the challenge of the Colombian political mess in general. Senator Clinton hired all these people knowing that their multiple conflicts of interest not just on the Colombian trade proposal, but also on unions, big tobacco, big oil, and so on. In short, she was sending out a signal in her choice of key campaign staff that business would be conducted as usual in D.C. with the K Street lobbyists -- and against the public interest. Otherwise, she would have picked a different staff.

As for Bill, no one, especially Hillary, denies that they have a political partnership. She also benefits from his earnings, as in the case with Colombia. This is an inherent conflict of interest, given that Bill Clinton is her chief surrogate and former President of the United States. Lobbying is all about influence, and no one has more influence on Hillary Clinton than Bill Clinton, and vice versa, by their own accounts.

When Penn went to the Colombian embassy, a spokesperson claimed not to know whether Penn was representing the Clinton campaign or Burson-Marsteller:

A spokesman for Colombia's President Álvaro Uribe said the ambassador met with Mr. Penn to discuss the bilateral agenda. "There have also been meetings with the advisers to the campaigns of Sen. Barack Obama and Sen. John McCain," he said. "It's the embassy's job to explain Colombia's reality."

"The spokesman said he didn't know if Mr. Penn was representing Sen. Clinton or Burson-Marsteller, which signed a $300,000, one-year contract with the Colombian Embassy in March 2007 to work on behalf of the trade deal and anti-drug-trafficking initiatives, according to the Justice Department filings."

That is an astonishing statement, but it reveals that either Senator Clinton is utterly naïve in terms of the game of perception and foreign policy, or knew all along what Penn was up to, her reported feigned outrage aside.

How can you hire as your key strategist a liberal hating guy who insists on not taking a leave of absence from a firm that represents the lead line-up of bad boy corporations and then claim ignorance about what he is up to?

The very act of letting Penn remain CEO of Burson-Marsteller, while paying his own firm (another one, yes) more than $10 million (and currently owing him an estimated $2.5 to $3 million), sends a signal to the dark side of the corporate world (Blackwater was one of Burson-Marsteller’s clients).

It is quite worthy of note that when Senator Clinton finished questioning Crocker and Petraeus on April 8th, "…reporters spilled out to follow her down the hallway and stairwell…Shortly afterward, she was asked, twice, why she was keeping Mr. Penn on the campaign and whether his influence had waned. She had nothing to say, and walked out the door."

Nothing to say, indeed.

THE BUZZFLASH EDITOR'S BLOG


http://www.buzzflash.com/articles/editorblog/078

I'm not surprised one bit that Clinton supports it all the way. Anything they can do to fuck the normal person, just like the Republicans, they are for.

Like somebody else said on here the other day, the trade policies of this country are at fault for destroying the economy.

"the trade policies of this country are at fault for destroying the economy." The "Fair" trade agreements are really not what they imply. Our companies have to compete with one arm and one leg tied behind their backs because we don't allow unsafe working conditions and require tough quality inspections, etc. It can be so frustrating to not be able to find American made items if you want to know something is safe. In China I read about a guy getting his hand cut off in the factory and when he went back to try to get some compensation, the factory owner locked him up and held him hostage for about a month, until some friends were able to get him a lawyer who managed to get him out. (Lawyers aren't too plentiful in China, either.)

Read here:

http://www.ontheissues.org/2008/Barack_Obama_Free_Trade.htm

Kucinch was really against this shit.

If somebody doesn't believe that Obama says the stuff in that link with a wink and a nod, then they are being naive.

(if illusional) distance between Clinton's campaign and Mark Penn. Too many out here are too aware of who Penn is, and his connections with the RW and with Republicans. Enough so that it is shaking the carefully manufactured image of her being a progressive. Therefore, they create a public dust-up to show "See, she really IS a progressive after all!" as Penn quietly steps back to the shadows he prefers.

If you object to the word bribe then at least he is influence peddling. 800K for 4 speeches and an agreement to push the trade deal? All the while Hillary pretends to be against it as she is stuffing her bank account with pro trade deal money. What f'in hypocrites.