Category Archives: Hypocrisy

Headline of the day: Pay to play with Hillary


From the Washington Post:

Emails reveal how foundation donors got access to Clinton and her close aides at State Dept.

  • A sports executive who was a major donor to the Clinton Foundation and whose firm paid Bill Clinton millions of dollars in consulting fees wanted help getting a visa for a British soccer player with a criminal past.
  • The crown prince of Bahrain, whose government gave more than $50,000 to the Clintons’ charity and who participated in its glitzy annual conference, wanted a last-minute meeting with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
  • U2 rocker and philanthropist Bono, also a regular at foundation events, wanted high-level help broadcasting a live link to the International Space Station during concerts.

Quote of the day: Opulance-shrouded corruption


Once again, the Bard of Avon nails it, the Time in King Lear, Act IV Scene VI:

Through tatter’d clothes small vices do appear;
Robes and furr’d gowns hide all. Plate sin with gold,
And the strong lance of justice hurtless breaks:
Arm it in rags, a pigmy’s straw does pierce it.
None does offend, none, I say, none; I’ll able ’em:
Take that of me, my friend, who have the power
To seal the accuser’s lips. Get thee glass eyes;
And like a scurvy politician, seem
To see the things thou dost not.

Corporations pay no Olympic taxes; winners do


If the Olympics were portrayed as they really are, its corporations who would be the gold medal winners.

As for the athletes, well, they’re the losers — especially the ones who won.

First, the corporate winners, via teleSUR English [emphasis added]:

The exemption, which lasts until Dec. 31, 2017, excludes from taxes revenue generated by advertising, product sales, imports and any other activity related to the organization of the games.

“It is yet another manifestation of the privileges that multinationals worldwide have today,” said Antonio Martins, director of the alternative Brazilian news outlet Outras Palavras. “And it’s not an isolated event, which is limited to a sports mega event,” he told the BBC.

Brazil has 37 million people living in extreme poverty, its economy is currently in recession and the interim government of Senate-imposed President Michel Temer has approved a fiscal austerity program. Meanwhile, the country is expected to lose about a billion dollars in tax revenue thanks to the exemption, according to BBC.

According to Naomi Fowler of the Tax Justice Network, the tax exemption on corporations is a precondition forced on any candidate to host a world sport event.

And the losers are. . .the winners

At least that’s the case for American athletes

From BBC News:

American Olympians are subject to a so-called “victory tax” – a tax on both the money they receive from the Olympic committee for winning and on the value of the Olympic medal.

What are they taxed on?

US athletes who win a medal at the Rio games will take home the hardware and a cash bonus from the US Olympic Committee.

Gold medallists will receive $25,000, silver medallists get $15,000, and bronze winners earn $10,000.

Those winnings are taxed as income, the same way Americans are taxed on other prize money, like lottery winnings. Most countries exempt their athletes from these taxes.

So, let’s see if we’ve got this right.

Corporations, who get to use the Olympics to peddle their wares and make huge profits from sales at the events, get off without paying taxes, while the athletes, the very reason for the Olympics, are thoroughly taxed.

Anyone see anything wrong with this?

Graphic Representation: Foundational Clintonism


The recent release of Clinton Foundation emails [through a Freedom of Information Act request, not a hack] proves that big donors to the Clinton family foundation got special treatment at Hillary Clinton’s State Department.

Our first editorial cartoon comes from the Indianapolis Star:

Gary Varvel: The Clinton Foundation drive-thru

BLOG Foundation Varvel
And the second from the Arizona Republic:

Steve Benson: Rodham’s ‘Kiss’ with the State Department

BLOG Foundation Bensobn
For more on the foundation and the Clinton brand of play to pay we turn to a video report from Democracy Now!, featuring an interview with Pulitzer Prize-winning Wall Street Journal reporter James Grimaldi, who’s be digging into the foundation for years.

From Democracy Now!:

Did Companies & Countries Buy State Dept. Access by Donating to Clinton Foundation?

From the transcript:

AMY GOODMAN: One of the newly released email exchanges is about billionaire Nigerian-Lebanese developer Gilbert Chagoury, who contributed between $1 [million] and $5 million to the Clinton Foundation. The emails show a top Clinton Foundation executive writing to Abedin and Mills, asking for help putting Chagoury in touch with the U.S. ambassador to Lebanon. Abedin responds, “I’ll talk to jeff,” referring to then-U.S. Ambassador Jeffrey Feltman. On Wednesday, Gilbert Chagoury’s spokesman said Chagoury, quote, “was simply passing along his observations and insights about the dire political situation in Lebanon at the time,” unquote.

For more, we go to Santa Barbara, where we’re joined by Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist James Grimaldi. He’s a senior writer at The Wall Street Journal and has covered the Clinton Foundation since 2014.

Welcome to Democracy Now!, James. You’ve been covering the Clinton Foundation for years. Can you talk about what this latest group of emails suggests, and how significant it is, about the relationship between the Clinton Foundation under Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and—between the State Department under Clinton and the Clinton Foundation?

JAMES GRIMALDI: Well, I think this confirms what we sort of knew. There are obvious ties and relationships. The key tie here would be Douglas Band, who was a top aide to Bill Clinton. He helped Bill Clinton create the Clinton Foundation, and sort of devised how he would spend his days in retirement. He was very close, of course, to Cheryl Mills and Huma Abedin. At one point he was employing, as a contractor, Huma Abedin, as Huma was working at the State Department. And during this time of the Lebanese elections, Mr. Band sent an email, as you described just now, regarding one of their greatest benefactors, Mr. Chagoury, and suggested that the State Department have the person who was a lead—the ambassador to Lebanon speak to Mr. Chagoury.

It shows how donations to the Clinton Foundation win access to, you know, state diplomatic—State Department diplomatic officials. It sort of begs the question, if he hadn’t given that money to the Clinton Foundation, whether he would have had that kind of easy access. I would say it would probably be unlikely. It certainly would not happen as swiftly. Possibly, that State Department ambassador might have consulted with this person regarding that issue, but it sure shows or seems to create an appearance of a conflict of interest, that perhaps he bought access by making those donations to the Clinton Foundation.

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: Well, speaking of that issue of conflict of interest, you’ve noted that during her confirmation hearings as secretary of state, Secretary Clinton specifically said that she would take, quote, “extraordinary steps … to avoid even the appearance of a conflict of interest.” How well do you think she has followed through on that, on that promise?

JAMES GRIMALDI: Well, over the past year, we have looked at that issue. And what I did was I went into the lobbying records to see which companies and other entities were lobbying the State Department, and also looking to see how many of them had given to the Clinton Foundation. And one of our findings was that at least 60 companies had lobbied the State Department, had given as much as $26 million, and many of those companies, 44 of those 60, had participated in what they call commitments, or philanthropic projects, that were valued by the Clinton Foundation at $3.2 billion.

So then we went to look and see if Mrs. Clinton had done anything for these companies at the time that they were making these gifts. And we looked at several companies—UBS, Boeing, General Electric and Microsoft and others, Wal-Mart—who seemed to have been getting favors from Mrs. Clinton, perhaps for good reason—promoting American companies and American jobs—but also coming at the same time that there were donations going to the Clinton Foundation.

Headline of the day: Now that Bernie’s gone. . .


From the New York Times:

Issue Where 2 Candidates Line Up: Not Talking About the Poor

  • Hillary Clinton and Donald J. Trump each promise to create jobs, but neither has said much about helping people while they are not working.
  • The silence is particularly striking because the problem is growing, a sociologist says

UC Davis Chancellor resigns after ethics probe


The chancellor of the University of California, Davis [previously], has quit her job in the wake of a scathing ethics investigation report.

In addition to enriching herself while serving on the public payroll, Linda Katehi was also the campus boss when one of her police officers, subsequently dubbed the “Pepper Spraying Cop,” unloaded an industrial sized can of pepper spray on peaceful; protestors during the Occupy movement days, earning her endless ridicule in the media.

From the Los Angeles Times:

UC Davis Chancellor Linda Katehi resigned Tuesday after a three-month investigation into whether she violated University of California rules on nepotism, misused student fees and lied about her role in social media contracts.

Her attorney, Melinda Guzman, announced the resignation, which UC President Janet Napolitano has accepted. Katehi will stay on as chancellor emeritus and a university faculty member.

Guzman said the investigation cleared Katehi of all charges.

“Linda Katehi and her family have been exonerated from baseless accusations of nepotism, conflicts of interest, financial management and personal gain, just as we predicted and as the UC Davis Academic Senate found within days of this leave,” Guzman said.

But a UC spokeswoman said the investigation found the chancellor had “exercised poor judgment, not been candid with university leadership, and violated multiple university policies.”

As the Times reported last month, “Katehi had taken paid board positions with the DeVry Education Group, which is under federal investigation for allegedly defrauding students, and John Wiley & Sons, a college-textbook publisher. Katehi had received permission for the textbook company position but not the DeVry board seat from the former and current UC presidents.”

UC Davis Police Lt. John Pike resigned after another scathing investigation, headed by William Bratton, the former police chief of both New York City and Los Angeles, but not before becoming a meme, complete with his own website, Pepper Spraying Cop.

Here’s one of our favorite offerings from the site:

BLOG Pepper

Headline of the day II: This is news? Really?


From the New York Times:

Researchers or Business Allies? Think Tanks Blur the Line

  • Think tanks are seen as independent, but their scholars often push donors’ agendas, amplifying a culture of corporate influence in Washington.
  • And they reap the benefits of tax-exempt status, sometimes without disclosing connections to corporate interests.