Options
The Podesta Emails
JC29856
Posts: 9,617
Today WikiLeaks begins its series on deals involving Hillary Clinton campaign Chairman John Podesta. Mr Podesta is a long-term associate of the Clintons and was President Bill Clinton's Chief of Staff from 1998 until 2001. Mr Podesta also controls the Podesta Group, a major lobbying firm and is the Chair of the Center for American Progress (CAP), a Washington DC-based think tank. Part 1 of the Podesta Emails comprises 2,060 emails and 170 attachments and focuses on Mr Podesta's communications relating to nuclear energy, and media handling over donations to the Clinton Foundation from mining and nuclear interests; 1,244 of the emails reference nuclear energy. The full collection includes emails to and from Hillary Clinton.
https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/
https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
The main reason behind successful immigration should be painfully obvious to even the most dimwitted of observers: Some groups of people are almost always highly successful given only half a chance (Jews, Hindus/Sikhs and Chinese people, for example), while others (Muslims, blacks* and Roma***, for instance) fare badly almost irrespective of circumstances. The biggest group of humanity can be found somewhere between those two extremes – the perennial overachievers and the professional never-do-wells.
Paid Speeches
"I mean, politics is like sausage being made. It is unsavory, and it always has been that way, but we usually end up where we need to be. But if everybody's watching, you know, all of the back room discussions and the deals, you know, then people get a little nervous, to say the least. So, you need both a public and a private position. " - HILLARY R. CLINTON
8. He spent a good deal of time discussing Saudi Arabia. He said since his first days in office he has sought a dialogue, but Iranian overtures have been rebuffed. He was told by the Saudis, "leave the Arabs to ourselves". He recounted that he left the World Economic Forum immediately and made the long trip to Saudi Arabia for the funeral of King Abdullah. But he received barely a handshake for his efforts. Saudi Arabia also sees relations with Iran as a zero sum game. The Saudis think ISIS can help them against Iran. Iran has sent a new Ambassador to Saudi Arabia who they trust, and he hopes this will help the relationship.
9. I asked him about the use of the unfrozen assets, and I said that people here will be looking to see if Iran spends its new-found funds on its people and investments, of if substantial amounts go to Hezbollah. He gave a tough response. "The money is our money and it was illegally blocked by the U.S., and what we do with our money is purely our business." He further said, "You spend 10 times more in the Middle East than we do, and what has it gotten you?" He contended Iran would only get $40 billion and we will spend it for our people.
10. If we give funds to Hezbollah, they are a positive force in Lebanon, and have kept ISIS out of Lebanon.
https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/248
"It's out there"
Admission that "it's" true?
Hillary Clinton Said One Of The Problems With A No Fly Zone Would Be The Need To Take Out Syria’s Air Defense, And “You’re Going To Kill A Lot Of Syrians.”
“So we’re not as good as we used to be, but we still—we can still deliver, and we should have in my view been trying to do that so we would have better insight. But the idea that we would have like a no fly zone—Syria, of course, did have when it started the fourth biggest Army in the world. It had very sophisticated air defense systems. They’re getting more sophisticated thanks to Russian imports. To have a no fly zone you have to take out all of the air defense, many of which are located in populated areas. So our missiles, even if they are standoff missiles so we’re not putting our pilots at risk—you’re going to kill a lot of Syrians. So all of a sudden this intervention that people talk about so glibly becomes an American and NATO involvement where you take a lot of civilians.” [ Speech to Goldman Sachs, 2013 IBD Ceo Annual Conference, 6/4/13]
Netanyahu's speech to Congress was brilliantly deceitful because it played to the fantasies that Israeli propaganda and right wing militarists in the US have been popularizing for the past thirty years.
* The biggest fantasy: that we can coerce others through power over them to do what we consider in the best interests of the U.S. or Israel.
Netanyahu is a master of manipulating the fantasies that the right-wing discourse advances. For example, the view of the world that sees "our side" (whether that 'our' be the U.S. or Israel) as always innocent and good, and "the other" as intrinsically evil.
So consider his claim that it is Iran that has been making war against countries in the Middle East. No...actually it is the U.S. that has been making war against those countries in the past 12 years. You will have to look very hard to find any Iranian troops in Iraq, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Jordan, or Egypt in the past 12 years. But you will find tens of thousands of American troops in Afghanistan and Iraq in the past twelve years. Similarly, it is Israel that has been decimating Gaza, not Iran decimating a neighboring city or province or country. From a global perspective, and based on the behavior of these countries in the past two decades ever since the peace-oriented prime minister of Israely Yitzhak Rabin was murdered by a right wing religious Zionist, the world has more to fear from the US and Israel and our indomitable sense of self-righteousness than it does from Iran.
https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/546
Clinton Talked About “Phony Environmental Groups” Funded By The Russians To Stand Against Pipelines And Fracking.
“We were up against Russia pushing oligarchs and others to buy media. We were even up against phony environmental groups, and I'm a big environmentalist, but these were funded by the Russians to stand against any effort, oh that pipeline, that fracking, that whatever will be a problem for you, and a lot of the money supporting that message was coming from Russia.” [Remarks at tinePublic, 6/18/14]
https://wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/emailid/1334
What do you know Real Networks CEO Rob Glaser started a Putin Trump website in an attempt to connect Putin with Trump: http://putintrump.org/
In April 2015 the New York Times published a story about a company called “Uranium One” which was sold to Russian government-controlled interests, giving Russia effective control of one-fifth of all uranium production capacity in the United States. Since uranium is considered a strategic asset, with implications for the production of nuclear weapons, the deal had to be approved by a committee composed of representatives from a number of US government agencies. Among the agencies that eventually signed off the deal was the State Department, then headed by Secretary Clinton. The Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) comprises, among others, the secretaries of the Treasury, Defense, Homeland Security, Commerce and Energy.
As Russian interests gradually took control of Uranium One millions of dollars were donated to the Clinton Foundation between 2009 and 2013 from individuals directly connected to the deal including the Chairman of Uranium One, Ian Telfer. Although Mrs Clinton had an agreement with the Obama White House to publicly identify all donors to the Clinton Foundation, the contributions from the Chairman of Uranium One were not publicly disclosed by the Clintons.
When the New York Times article was published the Clinton campaign spokesman, Brian Fallon, strongly rejected the possibility that then-Secretary Clinton exerted any influence in the US goverment’s review of the sale of Uranium One, describing this possibility as “baseless”.
In this memo, Mr Fallon argued: “Apart from the fact that the State Department was one of just nine agencies involved in CFIUS, it is also true that within the State Department, the CFIUS approval process historically does not trigger the personal involvement of the Secretary of State. The State Department’s principal representative to CFIUS was the Assistant Secretary of State for Economic, Energy and Business Affairs. During the time period in question, that position was held by Jose Fernandez. As you are aware, Mr Fernandez has personally attested that “Secretary Clinton never intervened with me on any CFIUS matter.”
What the Clinton campaign spokesman failed to disclose, however, was the fact that a few days before sending his rebuttal to the New York Times, Jose Fernandez wrote on the evening of the 17 April 2015 to John Podesta following a phone call from Mr Podesta (Email ID 2053): “John, It was good to talk to you this afternoon, and I appreciate your taking the time to call. As I mentioned, I would like to do all I can to support Secretary Clinton, and would welcome your advice and help in steering me to the right persons in the campaign”.
Five days after this email (22 April 2015), Clinton spokesman Brian Fallon wrote a memo to the New York Times, declaring that “Jose Fernandez has personally attested that ‘Secretary Clinton never intervened with me on any CFIUS matter’,” but Fallon failed to mention that Fernandez was hardly a neutral witness in this case, considering that he had agreed with John Podesta to play a role in the Clinton campaign.
The emails show that the contacts between John Podesta and Jose Fernandez go back to the time of internal Clinton campaign concern about the then-forthcoming book and movie “Clinton Cash” by Peter Schweizer on the financial dealings of the Clinton Foundation.
In an email dated 29 March 2015 (Email ID 2059), Jose Fernandez writes to Podesta: “Hi John, I trust you are getting a brief rest after a job well done. Thanks no doubt to your recommendation I have joined the CAP [Center for American Progress] board of trustees, which I’m finding extremely rewarding.”
Julian Assange”
*** Update 8:50 PM ***
American public: we we were notified by a walk-in informant
Private speech donors: we caught Bin Laden by massive surveillance on his security team, we intercepted a cell phone call, it wasn't by wall-in.
He should do stand up.
Where's germ and Russ to clear things up for us? Was this on C-span? Because if it wasn't it's just the media making money off of you stupid fools.
At the end of the day she's a genuine progressive and there's no way in hell we can elect a sexist pig like Trump.
Bernie is a loser. Get over it. He lost!
Clearly her supporters don't have backbones or principles, she's basically a neo-con aside from some social issues, and on those she flip flops depending on which way the wind is blowing.
Is it just the pure hatred of the nevertrump crowd? I just don't see any redeeming qualities.
You should call your people, unsung.
Lemme turn on the Bat Signal and call in Ron Paul.
I blame democrats and I blame the so-called progressives around here.
Democrats it's time to bring out the big guns! Taco Trucks Across the Nation!!!
I agree with Rob Mook Clinton foundation event probably shouldn't he held at GSs.
"I flagged for Tina and Cheryl as well but it's a little troubling that Goldman Sachs was selected for the foundation event"
Some other good tidbits too...about Biden potentially running against Hilliary.
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Chicago; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
BDS
(1) They will shortly expose the funding base for the main BDS group on campus, Students for Justice in Palestine, which tie it with terrorist funding.
(2) He agrees there should be a "big tent" to combat BDS of all pro-Israel, anti-BDS groups. But he distinguishes between liberal groups like Peace Now, which he supports, and JStreet, which he does not. The reason, he said, is that although they are officially anti-BDS, they actively lobby against Israeli positions supported by a democratically elected government in Israel, and are constantly critical of Israel, rather than the Palestinians. By lobbying Congress and the Administration against Israeli positions they are "denying Israel's right to self-determination." They are lobbying to change what the popularly elected government of Israel supports.
(3) He is doubtful the position Dennis and I took before the Cabinet, that not expanding settlements outside the established blocs would have much effect on BDS followers.
(4) The key is to expose BDS as anti-Semitic and anti-Israel. There is no other country where there is a BDS campaign to change their policy. Israel is being held to a double standard. If those who supported BDS also supported against other countries (Saudi Arabia, China, et al) then at least there is some consistent principle. But by singling out Israel, it exposes an anti-Semitic basis for their efforts.
https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/272
Hillary Clinton Said Her Dream Is A Hemispheric Common Market, With Open Trade And Open Markets. “My dream is a hemispheric common market, with open trade and open borders, some time in the future with energy that is as green and sustainable as we can get it, powering growth and opportunity for every person in the hemisphere.” [05162013 Remarks to Banco Itau.doc, p. 28]
From Hillary Clinton campaign website: "Factchecks The False Claim That Hillary Clinton Supports “Open Borders” In an attempt to distract voters from his own divisive immigration policies, Donald Trump and his allies have falsely said Hillary Clinton wants to “create totally open borders.” Politifact: “This is a huge distortion of Clinton’s proposals. Clinton has praised work already done to secure the border, and she said she supported a 2013 bill that would have invested billions more in border security while creating a path to citizenship for some undocumented immigrants. Her plan calls for protecting the border and targeting deportation to criminals and security threats. Her plan would make it easier for many undocumented immigrants to avoid deportation, but that’s not the same as ending all enforcement. We rate this claim False.”