Bill's shady ethical dealings in Kazakstan: uranium problems for Hill: The Nation

[amborin]

"It's worth remembering the nearly-forgotten story we could call "Bill Clinton and the Kazakh uranium." As Jo Becker and Don Van Natta Jr. of the New York Times reported in January, 2008, Bill Clinton was part of a corrupt three-way deal in 2005 involving the president of Kazakhstan, Nursultan Nazarbayev, whose human rights record has been criticized by many, including the Bush White House -- and Senator Hillary Clinton.

Kazakhstan has uranium--one fifth of the world's reserves. The president of Kazakhstan wanted to be named head of an international election-monitoring organization--the same one that had ruled his election fraudulent. What to do?

Bill Clinton had the solution: it centered on a Canadian financier named Frank Giustra who wanted to get in on the Kazakh uranium projects. Clinton and Giustra flew to Kazakhstan in September 2005 on Giustra's private jet and met with President Nazarabayev. According to the New York Times, Bill "expressed enthusiastic support for the Kazakh leader's bid to head an international organization that monitors elections," despite official opposition from the US as well as from his own wife.

Two days later, Giustra got the uranium deal he wanted. And shortly after that, the Clinton Foundation got its single largest contribution -- from a foundation controlled by Giustra -- $31 million. The contribution was secret, of course. ..."

<http://www.thenation.com/blogs/notion/385654>


sure wish Hillary was not SOS

I was a huge Hill supporter during the primaries....

once Obama got the nom, I worked very hard for his election

now, I think O's making a HUGE mistake choosing Hill for SOS, for many reasons

[truthisfreedom]

1. Ouch. Bill was my first vote for President, way back when.

If this is true, and I'm guessing by the source that it is, I'm sorely disappointed.

[jbnow]

30. NY Times printed big story on it 1/31

After Mining Deal, Financier Donated to Clinton

It was also part of Newsweek's 2/4 story about "Friends of Bill"
Here an F.O.B., There an F.O.B.

It was not the first big story about Bill's post-presidency finances or connections, I'd been reading them with worry since spring 2007 in major print media. I kept worrying about when they would break, how they would be used. We are a TV nation though, not readers, and evidently TV doesn't like complex stories.
But the right wing is very good at taking ugly words from a complex story and making it sound horrible and since Obama never brought these up I shuddered at thought of what right would do with them if she was nominee.

I was mad at Bill. He KNEW she would run for president some day, he should have been so much more careful and transparent. No use to go into all the other scandals from the time...
but Secretary is State? Obama knew about this syuff...do problems count a lot less when it is the spouse? Now I worry what the republicans might do in her confirmation hearings although many republicans spoke positively of her selection. Maybe they won't go bat shit about her husbands connections

[LittleBlue]

2. That kind of stuff looks bad

Really bad. Hobnobbing with banana republic types and exploitative tycoons is not what I had in mind.

[EFerrari]

3. Bill Clinton and the Colombian Free Trade Agreement, speaking fees.

Bill Clinton's Ties To Colombia Trade Deal Stronger Than Even Penn's
RSS stumble digg reddit del.ico.us news trust mixx.com Share this on Facebook

April 8, 2008 12:59 PM


On Sunday evening, Sen. Hillary Clinton's chief campaign strategist, Mark Penn, resigned from his post after it was revealed he was working (on the side) for the passage of a Colombia Free Trade Agreement that his candidate opposed.

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.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/04/08/bill-clintons-ties-to-col_n_95651.html?page=3

[KittyWampus]

8. Then we can start wondering who Hillary would staff the State Dept with.

This all has nothing to do with any emotional reaction to either Clinton.

So much of what they've done in and out of public life really doesn't "look good".

[EFerrari]

9. There's a little too much of the "quick and dirty" style to both of them

which on one hand makes them nimble but on the other hand tends to pile up long term consequences.

[AtomicKitten]

12. I'm wondering how Obama is going reconcile this screaming conflict of interest.

It seems the Clintons' numerous foreign entanglements would preclude her from serving as SoS, seems being the operative word. With all the hoopla going on, it's odd that Obama still hasn't made a formal offer.

[EFerrari]

13. It's not just the Clintons, though, although they have a higher profile.

I don't think our whole pool of politicos has been this "conflicted" in many, many years.

And perhaps Axelrod is pacing the process for maximum control of the media cycle. I hope so!

[AtomicKitten]

Globalism has multiplied the problem exponentially.

Oh what a tangled web they weave.

[Barack_America]

4. How much more will we find out?

We knew about Bill's relationship with Giustra. What will we find out when the names of other Clinton donors are released?

Bill's business dealings have "disaster" written all over them. This was the #1 reason I don't support Hillary as SOS. Let us not forget that she financed her campaign in part with money from Giustra and the like.

[Upton]

5. What a great choice Hillary is for SoS!...........

NOT......this is going to turn into a Clinton soap opera.

[Tarc]

6. Funny how the DU and the FR share headlines sometimes

[Cosmic Charlie]

15. I guess you're one of those who think the Clintons can do no wrong?

If all Bill's dealings are on the level, then why does it bother you to have them looked into?

[Tarc]

17. i.e. "if you're innocent, then you don't mind if we spy on you"

Just keep em rolling, chief.

[Beacool]

20. Because they are the reverse side of the same coin.

Not much difference between the two, they represent the extreme left and right respectively.

:eyes:

[amborin]

21. you're kidding, right?

i mean, to say DU represents the extreme left is ludicrous

do you know what extreme left even means?

i'd be glad to see more folks on here even supporting or representing slightly left of center

just as one example, the number of folks who are anti-union here is scary

doubt many Du-ers know what extreme left is or you'd all be screaming over some of the appointments

[Forkboy]

31. It's funny. These chowderheads wouldn't know the far left if it bit them on the ass.

:crazy:

[Alexander]

29. Funny how people on both sides mock any questioning of their chosen idols.

FR = Palin

DU = Clinton

[Skwmom]

7. Trust is an important issue, especially after the last 8 years.

When Obama tells America that the Clintons passed the vetting, which includes an ethics review, I think it will taint Obama and make people wonder if he is really as honest and forthright as he seems. Trust in our government is at an all time low. I just don't understand why you'd want to risk tarnishing your own image by bringing the Clintons on board (unless of course this is a result of a brokered deal). On so many fronts this makes no sense. The Clinton gang are really a mean group. They remind me of the Bush group in that respect. This is the face we want to put on our foreign policy? I thought we were going the tough, but diplomatic route.

[asjr]

10. Here we go again.

[1corona4u]

16. What do ya mean, here we go again...

did you read the fucking article? This allegedly happened in 2005!

PS. Bill Clinton's not going to be the SOS. I think of all things, Hillary does have a mind of her own, and knows how to use it.

[jefferson_dem]

11. I might be concerned...

If Bill was the one nominated to be SoS. However, it's a bit of a red herring stretch to saddle Hillary with any questionable baggage that Bill may (or may not) be carrying.

It seems The Nation and The American Spectator have much more in common than one could imagine...

[amborin]

18. smears are unnecessary

[jefferson_dem]

23. Isn't that the point of the article?

n/t

[amborin]

28. so digging up the truth == smears, for you? n/t

[LostinVA]

14. WHY would a Primary Hillary "supporter" not think Senator Clinton should be SOS???

You seem very, very concerned about this.

[amborin]

19. why the quotes around 'supporter'?

want to see my credit card receipts for all the $$$$ i donated to her primary campaign and to O's prez campaign???

i don't think she's right for SOS

and I think it's hard to rein in Bill

2005 was a mere 3 yrs ago, but for those who dwell mostly in the present (and heaven knows there's plenty of those folks around), it probably seems an eternity

[Marrah_G]

22. But she would have been right for President??

Okayyyyyy..............

:crazy:

[jefferson_dem]

24. Something just ain't right about that train of "thought"...

n/t

[LostinVA]

26. My point exactly!

[LostinVA]

27. Yes, show me your cc receipts

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

25. Keep the Clintonite away from SuperObama.

[Lucky 13]

32. This is jacked up.

I am SO not comfortable with Hillary being SoS. Bill's wheeling and dealings pose not just the POTENTIAL, but the near CERTAINTY of conflicts of interest. Isn't that something we should be avoiding?