Submitted by Tyler Durden on 04/19/2016 13:40 -0400
It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness, it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity, it was the season of Light, it was the season of Darkness, it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair, we had everything before us, we had nothing before us, we were all going direct to Heaven, we were all going direct the other way – in short, the period was so far like the present period, that some of its noisiest authorities insisted on its being received, for good or for evil, in the superlative degree of comparison only.
– Charles Dickens, A Tale of Two Cities
By now, most of you will have heard about political oligarch Hillary Clinton’s pair of “obscene” California fundraisers hosted by George Clooney this past weekend. For those of you who aren’t up to speed, here’s a quick recap from Variety:
Clinton is attending a $33,400-per-person event hosted by the Clooneys in San Francisco on Friday evening. It is being held at the home of venture capitalist Shervin Pishevar, and a group of Sanders supporters have said that they plan to demonstrate outside the event. According to Politico, that is the sum that those who want to sit at the head table at the event are being asked to raise — or contribute $353,400. The money is being raised for the Hillary Victory Fund, which includes contributions to the Clinton campaign, the Democratic National Committee and state party committees.
On Saturday night, Clinton will attend another event hosted by the Clooneys at their Studio City home, with tickets priced at $33,400 per person. The L.A. event is co-hosted by Jeffrey and Marilyn Katzenberg, Steven Spielberg and Kate Capshaw and Haim and Cheryl Saban. The campaign also has been holding a contest in which participants can win tickets to attend.
Haim Saban, that name rings a bell doesn’t it? Recall the following civil liberties lesson from the post, “You Want to Be Free and Dead?” – Billionaire Hillary Clinton Donor Says to Sacrifice Civil Liberties for “Safety”:
What are people in Hollywood saying about the Paris terror attacks?
Many members of the Hollywood community are very liberal and they value their civil liberties more than they value life. I disagree with that. You want to be free and dead? I’d rather be not free and alive.
This is the sort of attitude toward freedom you see from the typical billionaire bankrolling Hillary.
Interestingly enough, Clooney’s Los Angeles millionaire neighbor, Howard Gold, decided to host a simultaneous fundraiser for Bernie.
The cost of admission: 27 bucks.
Sanders supporters in Los Angeles are planning to hold a $27-per-person “99% Party” at the nearby home of Howard Gold of the 99 Cents Only store family, according to a copy of the invite. “Humping Hillary’s visit at millionaire George Clooney’s. Next door, his millionaire neighbor simultaneously presents,” the invite reads.
The Hill adds…
Howard Gold, whose family founded the 99 Cents Only store chain, called his bash the “99% Party,” with tickets selling for $27 per person.
The invite also notes that “no-one (will be) turned away for a lack of funds.”
So I take it no static noise cannons then?
Gold’s event turned into a pool party, pro-Sanders event and Clinton protest. As Clinton’s motorcade arrived on the street headed to the Clooneys,’ protesters showered her car with $1 bills.
Here’s a video of the protest. Pretty genius:
Finally, while we’re on the topic of Hillary’s monetary shadiness, let’s turn to some excerpts from yesterday’s Forbes article, Why Did Congo Offer Clinton $650,000 For Two Pics And A Speech?
Congo, one of the poorest nations on Earth, offered former President Bill Clinton a speaking fee of $650,000–a sum equal to annual per-capita income of 2,813 Congolese. Indeed, the International Monetary Fund ranks the Democratic Republic of the Congo dead last in its global income rankings. What did it expect in return for its investment?
In the proposed 2012 contract, the organizers expected a speech and at least one photograph each with the leaders of the Democratic Republic of the Congo and the Congo, which appeared to be splitting the princely honorarium. (Since there are two nations known as Congo, in this article, unless otherwise specified, I am referring to the Democratic Republic of the Congo whenever I write “Congo” alone.) That doesn’t seem like much of a return, two snaps and a chat. So the question is: What else did Congo want for its money?
While Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State, America’s top official dealing with foreign leaders, former President Bill Clinton travelled the world giving speeches to world leaders and overseas interests–earning at least $48 million while his wife was America’s top diplomat. Why weren’t the payments to one Clinton not considered a bribe to the other Clinton?
Apparently Foggy Bottom nixed Clinton’s plans to travel to Congo as well as his request to give a paid speech in North Korea. In any event, he didn’t go. But the offer itself is the issue.
What could Congo President Joseph Kabila want?…
Consider the case of Lundin Mining. Lukas Lundin, a Swedish investor who founded the company, donated between $1 million and $5 million to the Clinton Foundation between 2007 and 2013. (The foundation only reports ranges, not exact amounts, for some of its donors.) Lundin Group pledged another $100 million to the Clinton Foundation, according to a 2007 Clinton Foundation press release. Lundin Mining has substantial operations in the Congo. A partner of Lundin in its Congo operations, Freeport-McMoran Copper & Gold, gave the Clinton Foundation as much as $500,000, according documents released by the foundation that present its contributions in the $250,000-$500,000 range. What did the mining giants get in return?
The State department, under Clinton’s leadership, entered into talks with the Congo in 2010 over its dispute with Lundin and Freeport-McMoran in what The Financial Times characterizes as “in support of Freeport.” Clinton Cash author Peter Schweizer tells a similar tale. The result speaks for itself. Congo gave up its efforts to seize some of the world’s most lucrative copper mines from Lundin and his partners in exchange for increasing its share of the profits by less than 3%.
So what did Kabila expect in return for his proffered gift to the Clinton Foundation? Clearly, he had seen other businessmen in his country (like Lundin) prosper after their generosity with the Clinton Foundation. Perhaps it is a coincidence that one event followed the other? Either way, Kabila knew that a donation might be a good way to hedge his bets. After all, he knew about the allegations, during the Clinton presidency, that Clinton had traded overnight stays in the Lincoln bedroom for campaign cash. Is the Clinton Foundation simply the same idea on a larger scale? One can see why Kabila, accustomed to the ways of a corrupt continent, might think so.
The only question is, who doesn’t Hillary Clinton owe favors to? I’ll give you a hint: The American people.
Vote wisely, New York.
For related articles, see: