Clintons need to explain their stance on Colombia

Mark Penn is not the only person in the Hillary campaign with ties to Colombian government.  No, this goes all the way to the top.  I was alerted to this by Thom Hartmann today who made reference to Bill Clinton being paid $800,000 by the Colombian government for negotiating favors--I've yet to find the details, but he did help broker an oil deal with them a la the Kazakhstan deal :

http://www.thefirstpost.co.uk/...

I did find an article that mentions some of the history of the relationship between the Clintons and the Colombian government:

More important, though, the Clintons have long been supporters and enablers of Uribe, overlooking his dubious record of human-rights abuses, including long-whispered ties to right-wing death squads. . . .

But Uribe's methods have been questionable, to say the least. Last year former vice-president Gore refused to participate in an environmental conference in Miami lest he share the stage with Uribe, who had been accused of letting paramilitary groups use his family's farms to kill opponents during the 1990s. US senator Patrick Leahy cut off $55m in military aid to Colombia over the allegations.

All the while, Giordano notes, the Clintons have both tolerated and promoted the Uribe government. Last year the Uribe government presented Bill Clinton with an award for his efforts on behalf of Colombia. Uribe, in turn, was honoured as a "featured attendee" at the annual meeting of the Clinton Global Initiative. Less than two months ago, Hillary Clinton voiced her support for a Colombian military excursion into Ecuador to root out FARC fighters - an attack of ambiguous legality at best.

The Clintons' support for the Uribe government - their maybe-they-do, maybe-they-don't stand on the free-trade agreement and their tolerance of Uribe's human-rights abuses - makes a shambles of their criticism of Obama for his stand on Nafta and Canada.

http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/...

All this makes me wonder, are the Clintons both in their private and public lives putting the lives of Americans and Colombians first, or are they putting their own pockets first?  This whole story smells funny and needs greater attention.

•  The Clinton's stance on Columbia? Wide.

  They're playing footsies with union-busters while pretending to be pro-labor.

  by chicago jeff on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 11:55:17 AM PDT

  •  Check out Sam Stein on HuffPo

    He's got the good on this one.

    by Michael Lawrence Gallagher on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 11:59:17 AM PDT

    •  Linky is

      here.

      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.

      by peraspera on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 12:10:36 PM PDT

      •  Great link, peraspera...

        The last three paragraphs are tantalizing, too.  Just what is this Guistra fellow doing for Hillary and Bill?

        This was not the only time Clinton and Uribe met. According to the Wall Street Journal, the former president hosted a "philanthropic event" with the Colombian leaders in September 2005. The purpose, the paper reported, was to introduce Uribe to Frank Giustra, a Canadian mining tycoon who was interested both in mineral rights and Colombian oil, a position that lent itself to a more open-trade environment.

        Months earlier, Bloomberg News reported, Giustra had lent Clinton his private jet for Clinton's four day peaking tour in Latin America - the same tour in which Clinton received $800,000 from Gold Service International. And at some point in time, Giustra - who, the New York Times reported, won a Kazakh uranium deal with Clinton's help (again putting the former president at odds with his wife's positions) - donated more than $31 million to Clinton's charitable fund.

        According to The Wall Street Journal, Uribe and Giustra "sat in the hallway speaking for about ten minutes. A Clinton aide later told Giustra the meeting had gone well." And indeed, last year a Canadian company that Giustra's investment firm advised successfully acquired oil fields in Colombia.

        And here's an excerpt from that New York Times article on the Kazakhstan uranium deal.

        Mr. Giustra was a newcomer to uranium mining in Kazakhstan, a former Soviet republic. But what his fledgling company lacked in experience, it made up for in connections. Accompanying Mr. Giustra on his luxuriously appointed MD-87 jet that day was a former president of the United States, Bill Clinton.

        Upon landing on the first stop of a three-country philanthropic tour, the two men were whisked off to share a sumptuous midnight banquet with Kazakhstan’s president, Nursultan A. Nazarbayev, whose 19-year stranglehold on the country has all but quashed political dissent.

        Mr. Nazarbayev walked away from the table with a propaganda coup, after Mr. Clinton expressed enthusiastic support for the Kazakh leader’s bid to head an international organization that monitors elections and supports democracy. Mr. Clinton’s public declaration undercut both American foreign policy and sharp criticism of Kazakhstan’s poor human rights record by, among others, Mr. Clinton’s wife, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York.

        Within two days, corporate records show that Mr. Giustra also came up a winner when his company signed preliminary agreements giving it the right to buy into three uranium projects controlled by Kazakhstan’s state-owned uranium agency, Kazatomprom.

        The monster deal stunned the mining industry, turning an unknown shell company into one of the world’s largest uranium producers in a transaction ultimately worth tens of millions of dollars to Mr. Giustra, analysts said.

        by Mogolori on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 12:35:31 PM PDT

        •  This is just not right

          This limbo between public and private service where Bill seems to be hanging out is very suspicious.  I'm trying not to be biased about it but I can't help feeling like if this were my candidate I would be worried.

          by oscarsmom on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 12:52:28 PM PDT

          •  Jimmy Carter hates it.

            I agree, it is grotesque, and prone to corruption.

            by Mogolori on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 12:57:20 PM PDT

            •  Al Gore too

              From the Guardian link above:

              But Uribe's methods have been questionable, to say the least. Last year former vice-president Gore refused to participate in an environmental conference in Miami lest he share the stage with Uribe, who had been accused of letting paramilitary groups use his family's farms to kill opponents during the 1990s. US senator Patrick Leahy cut off $55m in military aid to Colombia over the allegations.

              by oscarsmom on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:00:21 PM PDT

  •  Should make an impact in PA

    if MSM picks up on it.

    by leawood on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 12:03:31 PM PDT

  •  He's always peering through that stall crack nt

    by 1 20 2009 on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 12:06:10 PM PDT

  •  I've got nothing to base this on, but there is

    a considerable amount of US money sloshing around in Colombia's banks, and that flow of funds commenced under Bill Clinton, not George W. Bush.  If Hillary's chief campaign strategist is down there doing business in the heat of the campaign, one must wonder whether there is some type of pipeline being laid from Colombia to the campaign.

    The highest single year of Colombian aid was in Clinton's last year in office, 2000.  GWB slashed it by 75% in 2001, but has let it climb again.  The massive outlay of aid to Colombia was Bill Clinton's policy, one that was orginally rejected by Bush but resumed later.

    The Clinton/Colombia relationship deserves the fullest investigation.

    Military and Police Assistance Programs and Economic and Social Assistance Programs to Colombia by US.

    1997 --    $86.6
    1998 --  $114.8
    1999 --  $315.4
    2000 --  $975.0
    2001  -- $240.2
    2002  -- $516.2
    2003  -- $760.7
    2004  --  $690.1
    2005  --  $777.2
    2006  --  $733.8
    2007  --  $756.5
    2008 est. $751.3

         
    Grand Total

    by Mogolori on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 12:23:54 PM PDT

    •  Thanks for looking this up!

      Follow the money, certainly.

      by oscarsmom on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 12:53:07 PM PDT

•  leave Clinton alone!

  It was just a simple misspoke! Why do people have to claim Clinton lied?

  by AHiddenSaint on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 11:59:20 AM PDT

  •  I have some of those misspokes on my bike

    They make the wheels veer to the right so it tends to go in circles instead of forward so you constantly keep revisiting the same old piece of ground.

    by marketgeek on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 12:17:16 PM PDT

•  completely OT

  oscarsmom, I'm sorry that you didn't make the cut for delegate or alternate to the CD.

  I didn't have a vote (only one alternate from my precinct was seated), but I probably could have done something to plant your name in the ears of a few LD delegates.

  by N in Seattle on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 12:01:30 PM PDT

  •  Oh I'm not too disappointed

    I have plenty of other stuff to do and I know the odds were long!  Plus the process was so weird, I can't possibly take it personally :)

    Thanks for your kind words though!

    by oscarsmom on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 12:54:27 PM PDT

    •  how many of the dels/alts do you know?

      Not exactly "party insiders", are they?  

      I count exactly one of the 79 Obama delegates and alternates who has ever been on the E-Board of the 43rd.  On the Clinton side, it's four out of 22 (should be 21 ... there's an extra alternate for some reason); even that isn't exactly a strong showing for the insiders.

      by N in Seattle on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:02:32 PM PDT

      •  Only two!!

        Another reason I wasn't too disappointed!

        by oscarsmom on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:31:20 PM PDT

        •  I'm thinking about writing a diary on the subject

          That is, if I had any free time.  I'm utterly swamped at the moment.

          by N in Seattle on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:53:12 PM PDT

          •  In the 46th our organizers pushed hard

            to get CLC's and Obama precinct captains elected.  I made it... was surprised.  I was shaking speaking in front of all those peeps.

            by tecampbell on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 02:08:22 PM PDT

            •  understood

              It was much more organized, I think, than we were on the Dean campaign in 2004.  I'm still bummed that I wasn't elected a delegate then, even though I'd been working my ass off for the good doctor since January 2003.  Especially when people I'd never seen before were getting elected.

              Oh well, I was an alternate and ended up getting seated at the CD caucus anyway.

              by N in Seattle on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 02:51:19 PM PDT

            •  LOL!

              I could not believe how hard I was shaking after my 30 second speech.  I've done plenty of performing in my time but for some reason that really got to me!

              Congrats on being elected!  :)

              by oscarsmom on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 06:35:30 PM PDT

              •  Thank you.

                I'm sorry you didn't make it though... so many good people didn't.

                by tecampbell on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 07:17:01 PM PDT

•  Public Service Announcement

  We interrupt your regularly scheduled reading for this important community announcement.
  
  

  Thursday, April 10th has been unofficially designated, jotter Appreciation Day.

  As most of you know, day in and day out, whether he is at home or away on business, jotter publishes a list of the previous day's High Impact Diaries which includes "One Year Ago In Daily Kos."  Once a week he also pubishes the Week's High Impact Diaries with tables of diary readers awarding the most recommendations and diary authors receiving the most recommendations.  There isn't a team that shares this work - just jotter.

  So, on Thursday, April 10th, we would like to invite you to join us in a Party of Appreciation which will go on all day long.  Drop by jotter's diary and hit the Recommend button, then leave at least one comment of thanks.  Feel free to stay for some conversation or a dance or two.  We will have some music and refreshments on hand but this is a HUGE crowd and a long day, so do feel free to make up your favorite recipe or pick up your favorite beverage and bring along.

  Put Thursday the 10th on your calendar, grab your dancing shoes and plan to join us for a moment or more.  

  If you publish a diary that day, please include a note about this and urge your readers to join in.  

  See you there!

  

  by SarahLee on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 12:02:17 PM PDT

•  at risk of sounding curmudgeonly

  what do the clintons need to explain?

  is there any explanation that'd do, short of bowing out from the campaign?

  i don't want to seem like a stick in the mud, but any attempt at rationalizing this fiasco would seem like a ... uh ... you know ...

  and, not that the diarist blows it, but it's ColOmbia, people ...

  by wystler on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 12:14:47 PM PDT

  •  Agreed. Everything Has Been Explained.

    Thanks to our "media", we'll have to get the word out about this...

    by bincbom on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 12:19:39 PM PDT

  •  In the very least I'd like

    Hillary to be questioned more closely about her stance on free trade.  There are clear contradictions here--maybe not within her own statements but between her and people very close to her like Penn and Bill.

    Also, I'd like to know more about the sort of work that Bill does that leads him into these sorts of deals with foreign governments.

    by oscarsmom on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 12:56:40 PM PDT

•  Same stance Clinton has for everything

  1. Poll for the best response and give that publicly.

  2. Do whatever you want privately, usually the most self-serving option.

  3. Thow anyone under the bus as necessary to pursue public and private goals simultaneously.

  4. ??????

  5. PROFIT!!!

  by 1 20 2009 on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 12:15:37 PM PDT

•  As a Colombian born

  I am frustrated that the effects of the "war on drugs"  are not included in these discussions. What about the "plan Colombia" or just the fact that the US is funding both sides of the war between the Colombian military and the FARC.

  Is my first time voting in an  US election, and I want to know my choice for President will address this very REAL issues and not only use it to get at the Clintons. There is a lot at stake and a colombian population that has suffered immeasurably.

  This is my first comment on a blog ever, be kind please.

  Obama 08

  by goldnata on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 12:19:40 PM PDT

  •  Welcome to DKos!

    And thanks for your comment!  :)

    by oscarsmom on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 12:57:22 PM PDT

  •  kudos

    and don't wait so long to make your next contribution

    surely you have something else to share

    by wystler on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 12:57:59 PM PDT

  •  Welcome to DKos

    and congratulations on your first experience voting.

    Obama's foreign policy is based on the concept of promoting dignity which doesn't square with Bush foreign policy of promoting needless violence in Colombia nor anywhere else.

    by peraspera on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:04:51 PM PDT

•  The Clintons Already Have Over $100 Million

  They are set for life, and so is Chelsea.

  WHY do they need to continue to sell America out, even after they've achieved such incredible wealth?  Could the Clintons' greed ever be sated?

  by bincbom on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 12:21:40 PM PDT

•  the Clintons will never explain

  but the rationale is that you take the money from a foreign government because it is financially expedient, and support that government in policy goals regardless of their effect on US policy until it is politically expedient to disavow the policy of the foreign government.

  by jfromga on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 12:43:22 PM PDT

  •  Well said n/t

    by oscarsmom on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 12:58:15 PM PDT

•  Bill's Mercenaries

  the deployment of Dyhnecorp mercs in colombia in the '90s legitimized blackwater.

  by ben masel on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:16:53 PM PDT

•  Thanks for keeping attention on this.. n/t

  by audiored on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:43:14 PM PDT