Had the MSM been doing their jobs, we would have known that the Colombia trade deal extended deeper than Penn's doorstop. Unfortunately with Petraeus's testimony today filling up the airwaves (and rightly so) Prez. Bill Clinton's complicity in the Colombian deal will likely make nothing but a small blip on the MSM radar.
Sam Stein just posted an eye-opening piece on Huffpost about the extent of Prez. Bill Clinton's involvement in shepherding Colombian trade interests up the corridors of power. If that is what they stand for, why not own the issue about free trade deals, instead of the hair-splitting flip flop about being both for and against these trade deals? My question is why the hypocrisy, particularly the arm-waving angry outbust "Shame on you Barack, Shame on you" in Ohio, and the lie about Golsbee's statements to the Canadian government?
Sam Stein pointed out that:
But within the Clinton campaign, Penn is not the highest-ranking adviser with financial ties to groups and individuals supporting the passage of the measure.
Former President Bill Clinton has earned hundreds of thousands of dollars speaking on behalf of a Colombia-based group pushing the trade pact, and representatives of that organization tell The Huffington Post that the former president shared their sentiment.
In June 2005, Clinton was paid $800,000 by the Colombia-based Gold Service International to give four speeches throughout Latin America. The organization is, ostensibly, a development group tasked with bringing investment to the country and educating world leaders about the Colombia's business opportunities.
The group's chief operating officer, Andres Franco, said in an interview that the group supports the congressional ratification of the free trade agreement and that, when Clinton was on his speaking tour, he expressed similar opinions.
"He was supportive of the trade agreement at the time that he came, but that was several years ago. In the present context, I don't know what his position would be. It is not only about union trade rights. It is about what benefit or damage it can do to the US economy," said Franco. "Events with the Clinton campaign [concerning Mark Penn] are not good at all for the trade agreement... Right now it became a campaign issues and that is sad, because it needs to go through."
The issue calls into question the true nature of those speaking fees that constituted the Clintons' earnings as reported in the tax returns.
Yet this morning on CNN Sen. Hillary Clinton had a free pass from John Roberts, repeated the untruth about NAFTA gate without being challenged on it, evaded further questions about Mark Penn..and now this.
© Kos Media, LLC
Site content may be used for any purpose without
explicit permission unless otherwise specified.
Privacy Policy
Powered by Scoop.
Permalink | 31 comments