Shuster Made a Mistake. Now a REAL issue: Why Won't Clintons RELEASE THEIR FINANCIALS?

[mod mom]

Please enough of David Shuster's admitted mistake. He apologized.

Let's get back to important issues LIKE WHY THE CLINTONS WILL NOT DISCLOSE THEIR PERSONAL FINANCES. This is important especially since they loaned their campaign $ 5 Million. Should we know where their income is coming from? It's standard practice, afterall. I wont to know if their is foreign influence when just recently this article appeared in the NYT:

After Mining Deal, Financier Donated to Clinton

By JO BECKER and DON VAN NATTA Jr.
Published: January 31, 2008
Late on Sept. 6, 2005, a private plane carrying the Canadian mining financier Frank Giustra touched down in Almaty, a ruggedly picturesque city in southeast Kazakhstan. Several hundred miles to the west a fortune awaited: highly coveted deposits of uranium that could fuel nuclear reactors around the world. And Mr. Giustra was in hot pursuit of an exclusive deal to tap them.

Unlike more established competitors, 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.

-snip


"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."

-snip
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/31/us/politics/31donor.html

DOESN'T IT BOTHER FOLKS THAT CLINTON WOULD SUPPORT A SUPPRESSIVE TYRANT TO HEAD AN INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION THAT MONITORS ELECTIONS? WHAT ABOUT THE KNOWN CHINESE INFLUENCE OF THE PAST?


White House Had Ended System of Checking Foreign Guests

By TIM WEINER
Published: February 3, 1997

Ten years ago the Reagan White House adopted a rule about foreign businessmen, lobbyists and consultants who wanted to get in to see the President without the blessing of their embassies: they shouldn't.

But President Clinton's aides did not follow that rule. In their eagerness to raise campaign money, they invited friends of the President's fund-raisers -- including China's biggest arms merchant, favor-seeking Indonesian businessmen, a reputed Russian mobster and other dubiously credentialed dealmakers -- to meet with Mr. Clinton. Nor did the White House check the suitability of Americans invited by the Democratic National Committee to meet the President, allowing, among others, a twice-convicted felon to sip coffee with Mr. Clinton.

-snip

And that is why nobody on the White House political team saw fit to ask the National Security Council staff a year ago about a man named Wang Jun, who showed up on a guest list for a White House coffee with the President. The question of exactly how Mr. Wang got into the White House has a simple answer: ''Nobody ever asked anybody,'' a National Security Council official said.

So, at the behest of a tireless political fund-raiser from Arkansas, Charlie Yah Lin Trie, Mr. Clinton wound up sipping coffee with Mr. Wang, who runs the Chinese Government's weapons manufacturing and procuring agency, which is involved in secret arms deals around the world. These coffees for fund-raisers and donors began as a way to raise morale among party loyalists after the Democrats' disastrous showing in the 1994 election. By 1995, they became a way to reward big donors and prospect for new ones, according to Democratic fund-raisers.

-snip

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C01E2DC103DF930A35751C0A961958260&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all


A federal grand jury has indicted 14 people and a Georgia company in a scheme to smuggle several million dollars worth of automatic weapons into the United States from China. The indictment came after federal agents smashed an arms smuggling ring that they said involved two government-run Chinese munitions firms. The following press release and affidavit outline the building of the government's case.

U.S. Department of Justice

United States Attorney
Northern District of California

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

MAY 23, 1996

MASSIVE SEIZURE OF NEW AUTOMATIC WEAPONS
ILLEGALLY SMUGGLED BY PRC WEAPONS PRODUCERS

SAN FRANCISCO - Michael J. Yamaguchi, United States Attorney
for the Northern District of California; Rollin B. Klink, Special
Agent in Charge, United States Customs Service, San Francisco; and
Paul Snabel, Special Agent in Charge, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco,
and Firearms, announced today the largest seizure of fully
operational automatic weapons in the history of U. S. law
enforcement. The weapons were illegally smuggled into the United
States from the People's Republic of China (PRC) during the course
of a federal investigation of an alleged arms trafficking conspiracy
involving Chinese nationals, Chinese resident aliens, and U. S.
citizens, a number of whom represented PRC owned and controlled
munitions manufacturing facilities. The illegal importation of the
weapons into the United States is in violation of the Presidential
Embargo on the importation of weapons and munitions designated on
the United States Munitions List, and U. S. law regarding the
importation, possession, and sale of illegal weapons.

On March 18, 1996, agents of the United States Customs Service
and Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms seized 2000 AK-47
type fully automatic 7.62mm machine guns. These are military
assault weapons commonly used by the military around the world.
The weapons, which had both Chinese (Norinco) and Korean
markings, had been smuggled into the United States in a container on
board the COSCO ship, Empress Phoenix. Included with the
weapons were approximately 4000 30-40 round ammunition
magazines. It is estimated that the weapons had a street value of more
than four million dollars.

The seizure of the weapons was the culmination of a sixteen month
investigation of high ranking officials, based in both the United
States and the PRC, of POLYTECH and NORINCO, PRC
controlled munitions manufacturing corporations. Hammond KU,
age 49, a Taiwanese resident alien, residing in Soquel, California,
first came under suspicion when information was developed that he
had several thousand Chinese manufactured weapons, in crate.
labelled POLYTECH and NORINCO, stored in his warehouse in
Soquel, California. KU paid federal agent-, acting in an undercover
capacity, to illegally import into the United States, more than 20,000
AK 47 rifle bipods.

-snip
http://www.courttv.com/archive/legaldocs/misc/smuggle.html


New York Times, May 17, 1998



How Chinese Won Rights to Launch Satellites for U.S.

(BY JEFF GERTH AND DAVID E. SANGER)
On Oct. 9, 1995, Secretary of State Warren Christopher ended a lengthy debate within the Clinton Administration by initialing a classified order that preserved the State Department's sharp limits on China's ability to launch American-made satellites aboard Chinese rockets.

Both American industry and state-owned Chinese companies had been lobbying for years to get the satellites off what is known as the `munitions list,' the inventory of America's most sensitive military and intelligence-gathering technology. But Mr. Christopher sided with the Defense Department, the intelligence agencies and some of his own advisers, who noted that commercial satellites held technological secrets that could jeopardize `significant military and intelligence interests.'

There was one more reason not to ease the controls, they wrote in a classified memorandum. Doing so would `raise suspicions that we are trying to evade China sanctions' imposed when the country was caught shipping weapons technology abroad--which is what happened in 1991 and 1993 for missile sales to Pakistan.

-snip

Other powerful Chinese state enterprises also had multibillion-dollar stakes in getting access to American satellites. Among them was the China International Trade and Investment Corporation, whose chairman, Wang Jun, gained unwanted attention in the United States last year when it was revealed that he attended one of Mr. Clinton's campaign coffee meetings in the White House. The day of Mr. Wang's visit, Mr. Clinton, in what Mr. Rubin said was a coincidence, signed waivers allowing the Chinese to launch four American satellites--though they were unrelated to the business interests of China International Trade.

-snip

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/china/1998/h980618-prc5.htm

ANYONE ELSE CONCERNED WITH THIS?

[flyarm]

1. has Obama ..with the Rezko money??????????

[thunder rising]

4. You can only run over a dead cat so many times before it quits being fun

[ray of light]

5. go to opensecrets.org. Yes. that info is out there.

We asked a spokesman for Exelon if they've spent "millions" promoting Yucca Mountain. We were told they don't track their spending by project. Public records, though, indicate the company has spent more than $10-million on lobbyists between 2002 and 2007, with Yucca Mountain listed among its top issues. That doesn't count previous years; the Yucca Mountain project has been debated for more than 20 years.

Meanwhile, campaign finance records confirm Exelon is one of Obama's top contributors. The Center for Responsive Politics found that Exelon employees were his sixth-largest corporate donor group. (No. 1 was Goldman Sachs.)

The Obama campaign points to several mitigating factors: Obama opposes Yucca Mountain. Exelon is one of the largest companies and employers in Obama's hometown of Chicago. Obama has sponsored legislation specifically targeting Exelon after unplanned waste releases in Illinois. Obama has not accepted any money from Exelon lobbyists or Exelon's political action committee; rather, the contributions are from people who work at Exelon.

Of all these points, it's the last we find most compelling. Obama is not taking money from Exelon as a corporate entity or PAC, rather he's accepting contributions from Exelon executives and employees. (Clinton, by contrast, accepts federal PAC money, though she hasn't accepted any from Exelon.) It's a small but real difference, so we rate her claim on Obama's ties to Exelon to be Mostly True.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/290/

[flyarm]

10. thanks for answering with decorum..i have been in Edwards camp and i don't

know the answer to the question i asked..but i surely don't seem to get any answers from Obama people but nastiness.

seems they don't want to answer questions from people looking for answers to serious questions, i guess it is only they, who are allowed to ask questions .

fly

[ray of light]

19. tempers are short from everyone's perspective. For me,

my 'issue' is the Michigan and Florida loss of delagates and a fair election and now they want to count it?

I'm sure you'll have seen a few nasty replies from me today on that issue because today was the day we could have voted without losing our delegates.

[Nexus7]

24. Oh, I see! Clinton is held to a different standard!

So Obama can take money from Excelon, but that can be justified based upon his statements. But Clinton has to be judged solely upon whose money she took (which is why she has to release her financials). Why not look at her record, see it is progressive enough, and say that it's OK. Because that is the argumetn made for Obama in your posting.

[mod mom]

25. Look at posts 23 & 24 Obama did release his tax returns, which is customary.

Why is she only willing to release them IF she wins the nomination? Shouldn't Democratic voters know where their candidates funding is coming from? Looking at past history some of us would like to be reassured there isn't foreign influence funding the Democratic candidate.

[blm]

11. Rezko didn't fund terror networks, BCCI did. Dubai $ staked BCCI. Dubai putting MILLIONS

into Bill Clinton's bank accounts recently. Same Dubai $ who Bill advocated to get our ports deal two years ago. Same Dubai who was protected throughout the 90s by the deep-sixing of the BCCI report and all its outstanding matters by the Dem president handed that report when he took office.

But - no link, eh?

[Cha]

12. Your candidate represents himself

a lot better than you represent him or yourself.

[mod mom]

26. Fly, I've been in Edwards camp as well, but unfortunately that didn't work out.

We are left with 2 candidates in the Democratic Party. Obama HAS RELEASED HIS TAX RETURNS (SEE POSTS 23 & 24) but Clinton hasn't , she has only released what is required in the Senate which is not detailed. It is customary to release tax returns. HRC says she will only release them IF she is the nominee. I find this troubling.

[flyarm]

27. thank you for the reply..that is all i wanted to know..and thanks for answering without

smearing me for asking!!

thank you Mod Mom..i don't seem to recognise this place any longer!!

and i think i am leaving for a while..till the Obama ugliness dissapears!

who would think it..i am now leaning toward Hillary and i don't even like her..just because of the obama ugliness here and everywhere!

fly

[mod mom]

28. Me either, sorry for the delay but I am a real mom. I can't believe the posts on H20Man's

thread condemning him for his Nixon references. Any regular DUer know how much integrity H20Man has and how he always attempts to use historical references. This thread was not to make any "RW" talking point, but because I have serious qualms about corporate (especially foreign but all corporate) influence.

[mmonk]

2. Sssshhhhh. You're supposed to stay with the distractions.

[mtnsnake]

3. What's the problem. Are they breaking any laws or something?

Or are they just stringing you, Obama, and the press along...only to make fools out of all the doubters in the end?

[juajen]

6. Because they do not have to, that's why.

NT

[spanone]

7. she has....it's the law

House and Senate members must file annual financial disclosure reports with the Clerk of the House and the Secretary of the Senate, respectively, that describe the sources, types and amounts of income they earn. The reports are due May 15 and typically are made available to the public in early June. washingtonpost.com will be posting annual reports as it obtains and scans them.

[KittyWampus]

20. No, the Clintons did not release their 2006 tax returns.

[rodeodance]

8. lots of ink wasted when no rules are being broken.

[Red Zelda]

9. Because they're shameless crooks?

Tied to the BFEE? Cuddling with George HW? Just asking.

[Yael]

13. Because they have nothing to hide

or maybe the opposite?

Let the voters decide!

[H2O Man]

14. Nominated

Thank you.

[Cooley Hurd]

15. Recomended, as well...

I find nothing wrong with asking for simple disclosure. If one has nothing to hide, then why the stonewall?:shrug:

[ursi]

16. ah, good point, diversionary tactic! Out with the statements Hillary!

[WilyWondr]

17. $$Cha-Ching$$

The release of candidates' tax forms has become common practice in presidential campaigns since the Watergate era of the early '70s.

Since 1984, only one major-party presidential candidate -- Bill Clinton in 1992 -- has refused to release the tax forms he sent to the Internal Revenue Service.

In 1996, Clinton did release his forms, and Republican nominee Bob Dole released his tax returns going back 30 years.

Candidates, including 2004 Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry in 2004, and Democratic vice presidential candidate Geraldine Ferraro in 1984, were criticized for not releasing their spouses' returns but offered no resistance to releasing their own.

So all of you people saying "What's the big deal?" need to understand that the Clintons have made it a big deal.

[druidity33]

18. good question. k&r. nt.

[OzarkDem]

21. She has, its required of every Congressperson

so why are you making up this kind of right wing BS?

[mod mom]

22. According to ABC Clinton released financial disclosure forms which are far less detailed than tax

forms:

Obama to Clinton: Release Your Tax Returns

February 07, 2008 5:24 PM

ABC News' David Wright Sen. Barack Obama called on his rival Sen. Hillary Clinton to release her recent income tax returns -  a move the Clintons have long resisted.

Strapped for campaign cash, Clinton announced this week that she loaned her presidential committee $5 million of her own personal funds, but it was not immediately clear how she came by that much money.

"I've released my tax returns," Obama said today on his campaign plane, noting that Presidential candidates have a duty to be transparent and accountable.

He said, "The American people deserve to know where you get your income from."

-snip
Clinton does file annual financial disclosure forms in connection with her job at the US Senate, but they are far less detailed than a joint tax return.
-snip

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/02/obama-to-clinto.html

[mod mom]

23. More on what's not included from Wa Po and NYT (Clinton says she'll release IF she wins nomination)

Obama Camp to Clinton: Show Us Your Taxes

By Matthew Mosk
Sen. Barack Obama's presidential campaign aides stepped up their effort to force Democrat Hillary Clinton to release her tax returns yesterday, to shed light on the sources of income that enabled her to loan $5 million of her own money to her presidential bid.

While Obama made public his tax return last year, Clinton's top advisers have maintained that they will only release the tax returns she filed jointly with husband Bill Clinton if she can secure her party's nomination.

"Why should Democratic voters have to wait until after the primary campaign is over to find out important information about Senator Clinton's finances that Senator Obama has already disclosed?" asked Obama spokesman Bill Burton. "For someone who claims to be fully vetted, hiding a campaign loan from voters until after Super Tuesday and refusing to release your tax returns until after the primary doesn't seem like the best way to prove that there are no surprises for the Republicans to find once they start digging."


Yesterday, Obama stopped short of calling on Clinton to release her tax return when asked the question by reporters traveling with him. "I'll just say that I've released my tax returns. That's been a policy I've maintained consistently. I think the American people deserve to know where you get your income from. But I'll leave it up to you guys to chase it down."

-snip
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/02/08/obama_camp_to_clinton_show_us.html

-snip

Clinton campaign officials said she would release her returns if she won the nomination. The officials said there was enough information in her public Senate financial disclosures to assess her personal finances.

Her Senate forms do not list exact deductible expenses like interest or medical costs. The tax returns would show exact interest and dividends from investments, not just the ranges on the disclosure forms.

Mrs. Clinton has been an advocate for transparency in campaign finance, as has Mr. Obama.

For all the confidence expressed by the Clinton campaign, the onus remains on Mrs. Clinton to show fund-raising muscle, in view of her raising less and relying on the loan as well as a $10 million transfer last year from her Senate campaign account to her presidential account.

-snip
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/08/us/politics/08clinton.html?_r=1&ref=politics&oref=slogin