The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewPhilip Giraldi Archive
Show Me the Money, Hillary!
Clintonesque entitlement should be shunned
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

There is a Monty Python sketch in which a hopelessly aristocratic gentleman played by Graham Chapman says that his surname is spelled “Throat-warbler-mangrove” but that it is pronounced “Luxury yacht.” Similarly, when I see the name “Clinton” in print I immediately think it should be pronounced “Show-me-the-money.”

To be sure there were a lot of rolled eyes and grimaces inside the beltway when Hillary declared somewhat hyperbolically in June of last year that she and her husband were dead broke and deeply in debt when they left the White House in January 2001. Even then the Clinton avarice was well known to observers, including pre-departure debates about what “gifts” to the presidency they could take with them. The impending division of the spoils of office spawned jokes about the First Family exiting with the White House silver tucked into its suitcases. In reality, most of the alleged Clinton debt was due to legal expenses connected to lawsuits relating to Whitewater, Paula Jones and the attempted impeachment of Bill for perjury. Many of the legal fees were actually covered by a defense fund set up by current Virginia Governor Terry McAuliffe and it is doubtful whether the lawyers really expected to get paid fully since defending the president was then and still is now good publicity.

Since those dark days, the Clintons have certainly made sure that they will enjoy a comfortable retirement. One does not expect former senior politicians to forego gorging on the spoils available through revealing inside accounts of their time in office, but the Clinton’s are singular in terms of both their greed and their hubristic sense of entitlement. Bill’s post-presidential memoir produced a publisher’s advance of $15 million and Hillary’s two books added $21 million more. Bill has made at least $136.5 million, mostly from speaking engagements, between 2001 and 2012 and Hillary, having left the Obama Administration in 2012, is now earning even more than he is per speech on the circuit. It is estimated that she has made at least $12 million since her leaving the State Department at the end of 2012. Even the Clinton son-in-law hedge fund manager Marc Mezvinsky is reportedly cashing in on Bill and Hillary’s ability to network with the wealthy.

The Clinton family fortune is conservatively estimated to be $55 million, making Bill the wealthiest ex-president. The Clinton Foundation, administered separately from their private wealth, had assets totaling nearly $278 million at the end of 2013. Bill also receives a federal government pension currently set at $221,000 per annum which presumably is supplemented by an Arkansas state pension from his time as governor and Hillary’s pension as both a former Senator and Secretary of States is also substantial.

Now bear in mind that no one gives in excess of $100 million to anyone just to listen to a boilerplate twenty minute speech while chewing on some rubbery hotel chicken. There is a quid pro quo. Power brokers in the United States and elsewhere, who forked over all the cash, do so with the clear understanding that the Clintons are far from finished politically. Hillary could well be the next president of the United States and Bill would presumably be the First Philanderer. Both would be well positioned to return favors. That makes Bill and Hillary money magnets and neither has ever been known to turn down a buck. Or rather 300,000 bucks which is reported to be Hillary’s current rate as a speaker, plus travel on a private gulfstream jet to include her speech “team,” luxury hotel accommodations for all, and very specific instructions on chairs, cushions, podia, sound and teleprompter systems, snacks backstage and even the supply of water and lemon wedges for onstage.

Given all of the above, it was particularly unpleasant to read recently about the extent to which the Clintons have been tapping the U.S. taxpayer. The Former Presidents Act provides taxpayer support for the offices maintained by ex-presidents but characteristically the Clintons have abused the largesse by mingling their personal finances with the accountings for their Bill, Hillary & Chelsea Clinton Foundation, which is a global non-profit that includes both charitable elements and initiatives for investors. Media reports indicate that the Clintons have been using taxpayer provided money to cover pensions, travel and office expenses as well as the salaries and benefits of the employees working for the foundation. The bill will come to $16 million, which might include as much as $1 million for infrastructure relating to the private internet server system that Hillary used while at the State Department and another $873,000 for the Clinton penthouse office in Manhattan.

To be sure there is much about the Clintons to give one pause apart from their greed, mostly in the area of foreign policy. Bill signed on to a bloody air war directed against Serbia and attacked non-existent “enemy” targets in Afghanistan and Sudan using cruise missiles to divert attention from his affair with Monica Lewinsky. He also appointed completely unqualified cronies to important senior positions at State Department and the National Security Council.

And going back farther, Hillary’s connection with the life and death of Vince Foster continues to intrigue some as does her difficulty in keeping records and maintaining accountability in general, going back to her vanishing law office papers in her Arkansas days but continuing into the present with her email problems at State Department.

More recently, Hillary was the driving force behind the ill-conceived national health insurance scheme promoted during her husband’s first term in office. She also failed to disclose large contributions to the Clinton Foundation made by foreign governments while she was Secretary of State. Emulating Bill in the area of foreign aggression, she was the principal proponent of the war against Libya which has brought chaos to the Libyans and proliferating terrorism throughout North Africa and her possible role in the subsequent deaths of four American diplomats has yet to be resolved. It has also been noted that Hillary is hawkish by nearly every metric, including her expressed desire to bomb Syria and be suspicious of any agreement made with Iran over its nuclear program. Victoria Nuland, currently agitating for a war with Russia, is a Hillary protege. If she is in fact elected her major financial supporter will undoubtedly have been Israeli Haim Saban who has said he will spend whatever it takes to elect her and has also declared that he is a one issue guy and that issue is Israel.

There is surely a touch of sleaze and self-righteous entitlement that surrounds the Clintons, though one might argue that it also applies as well to the Bushes, who hide it better since they have had serious money for at least three generations. And for those who argue that every ex-President and First Lady behave the same, the answer is no, they don’t. Harry Truman had to sell the family farm to make ends meet after he left office, which led to the passing of the Former Presidents Act. Dwight Eisenhower lived modestly on a farm in Pennsylvania. Jimmy Carter, a terrible president but an exemplary ex-president, has devoted himself to humanitarian projects and charities and Ronald Reagan likewise did not scramble for money after he left office. Indeed, most former Presidents have considered it unseemly to personally profit from their time in office and a relatively impecunious Jerry Ford was on the receiving end of unfavorable commentary when he made speeches for money after he was defeated by Jimmy Carter in 1976. The only other former head of government to rival the Clintons in terms of exploiting high office for cash is ex-British Prime Minister Tony Blair, a politician often compared to Bill Clinton, who is now reported to be worth seventy million pounds, nearly 105 million dollars.

Most important, because when you take money from someone they will expect something in return, the American public has to ask to what extent that will apply to President Hillary Clinton, being awash with cash from foreign sources with political agendas as well as domestic contributors who have their own axes to grind. It is all too reminiscent of the Bush family with its ties to Saudi Arabia, which clearly impacted on the after-the-fact investigation of the events surrounding 9/11. The Horatio Alger story of single mother raised poor boy from Arkansas William Jefferson Clinton making good through hard work is fine as far as it goes, but American government has already been far too corrupted through the buying of influence, so much so that it threatens our republic. Do we really want to vote for someone in 2016 who accepts the principle that there is nothing wrong in exploiting high office to make money and who has already proceeded far down that road?

 
Hide 27 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Neither “Blow Job Bill” nor The Pantsuited One needs to worry about where their next catered dinner is coming from. These bought-and-paid-for hacks are thoroughly enjoying the good life. And, of course, it’s partly on the taxpayers’ dime.

    Given Hillary Clinton’s megalomaniac pursuit of power, it’s virtually certain she’ll throw her pantsuit into the ring for 2016. And if–God forbid–she’s elected, everyone who owns a piece of her will present their promissory notes. . . .

  2. Clyde says:

    All you got is Haim Saban for your usual demented Israel-AIPAC kvetching? I am so disappointed. I demand to know why Hillary and John Kerry are not blatant AIPAC stooges! You must love Obama and Valerie Jarette who will help Iran get nuclear weapons and even bypass the US Senate to do this. I mean, if those arrogant Jews have nukes its only fair that the loony-toon, hidden 12th imam worshiping Mullahs have them too.

    • Replies: @bingo
    , @Stranger Is Danger
  3. yonni says:

    Top contributing foreign entity to Clinton fund, Ukraine. Pinchuk, one of the warring oligarchs is hitting the Clinton sweet spot. My suspicions say the Ukie thing is an examplpe of Polish/Canadian black OPS(with training wheels) launched by the necrotic breath of ZBIG. Hilary still has to explain the relationship between Mike RogersR-MI(retired) and his wife’s employer AEGIS, and the subcontractor, Blue Mountain Group (WALES-UK).

  4. Kiza says:

    Excellent article Mr Giraldi. I most liked the reality joke about “the First Family exiting the White House with silver tucked into its suitcases”.

    I would just like to add that Hilary would never be able to honor all the “promissory notes” she has written, because she has been taking money from any and every side. Only those who can pay more and more and more, their wishes may be granted when she becomes the President. Only Haim Saban is guaranteed to have his one issue satisfied.

  5. Sociopaths frequently end up in politics.

  6. @Clyde

    All you got is Haim Saban for your usual demented Israel-AIPAC kvetching?

    Nope. It is actually the world-wide Jewish community in general and American Jewish community in particular. Mr. Giraldi is too PC to say it.

    I am so disappointed.

    You should be. Check out Michael Scheuer for a change. Unlike Phil, he doesn’t mince words.

    I demand to know why Hillary and John Kerry are not blatant AIPAC stooges!

    Because if Mr. Giraldi went any further and called a spade a spade, someone would go batshit crazy on him

    You must love Obama and Valerie Jarette who will help Iran get nuclear weapons and even bypass the US Senate to do this.

    Give me a break man, Obama already wrecked Libya, Syria and Ukraine for Judah. How many more countries must a man destroy before he isn’t called an anti-Semite?

    I mean, if those arrogant Jews have nukes….

    You’re understating the problem here. We’re talking about a reckless, Sicilian Mafia style vindictive, tikkun olam seeking messianic tribal cult with their hands on nukes and heads saturated with phoney victimhood, megalomania and paranoid psychosis.

    …its only fair that the loony-toon, hidden 12th imam worshiping Mullahs have them too.

    The ideal situation would be none of them having nukes. But the world is hardly ideal. If Iran gets nuclear, perhaps the rare sensible Jews would pull the leash on their Maccabean brethren; after all another SIX MIILLION Jews are huddled together in an area the size of Massachussets…

  7. USA’s failed and exceedingly dangerous policy toward Russia began with Bill Clinton, says Stephen Cohen in this recent discussion — http://russia-insider.com/en/2015/03/20/4761

    The possibility of premeditated war with Russia is real; this was never a possibility during Soviet times.

    ~This problem did not begin in November 2013 or in 2008, this problem began in 1990’s when the Clinton administration adopted a “winner-takes-all” policy towards post-Soviet Russia.

    ~Next to NATO expansion, the US adopted a form of a negotiation policy called “selective cooperation” – Russia gives, the US takes.

    ~There is not a single example of any major concession or reciprocal agreement that the US offered Russia in return for what it has received since the 90s.

    ~This policy has been pursued by every president and every US Congress, from President Clinton to President Obama.

  8. @Stranger Is Danger

    The ideal situation would be none of them having nukes. But the world is hardly ideal.

    In the negotiation for extension of Nonproliferation Treaty in 1995, the Arab and Muslim states in Middle East, including Iran, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, agreed to the extension on the promise that a conference would be convened and creation of a Nuclear-Free Zone in the region would be discussed. Israel’s nukes would be very much on the table.

    That conference has not yet been held.

    http://armscontrollaw.com/2013/04/30/egyptian-delegation-walks-out-of-npt-prepcom-meeting-over-failure-to-convene-middle-east-wmd-summit/

    I think that Egypt and the rest of the Arab league are perfectly justified in feeling that an important deal they made in 1995 has been broken by the West, and as Ambassador Badr was quoted as saying in the GSN piece: “We cannot continue to attend meetings and agree on outcomes that do not get implemented, yet be expected to abide by the concessions we gave for this outcome.”

    I’ll just put in a couple of cents worth of thoughts on the underlying issues. As we all know, the whole ME WMD FZ issue is about Israel. The fact that Israel has nuclear weapons, and hasnt signed the NPT, nor will they even admit to having nuclear weapons. The Arab League is tired of the double standard of treatment that they receive from the West in the nuclear area, as compared to how Israel’s nuclear program is treated by the West. The ME WMD FZ project is a way to put the spotlight of the international community squarely on Israel’s nuclear weapons stockpile, and put Israel and its backer, the US, in the uncomfortable position of having to explain why Israel won’t come to the meeting and won’t meaningfully engage with the program.

    • Replies: @Stranger Is Danger
  9. Bill says:

    So, now that Chelsea is all growed up, do we still think Webster Hubble is her real daddy? Mostly she looks like mom. But in some pictures, she does look a lot like ole’ Web. No?

  10. re

    Even the Clinton son-in-law hedge fund manager Marc Mezvinsky is reportedly cashing in on Bill and Hillary’s ability to network with the wealthy.

    Marc Mezvinsky wasn’t going to make it cashing in on his father’s connections — Papa Ed Mezvinsky is a convicted fraudster, an ex-con who served a multiple-year prison term. Not the best rec. in the world of high finance. Or maybe it is.

    The fact that Hillary’s Sabanite connections could only come up with the son of an ex-con to link her to the Tribe is an indication of the disdain with which the Clintons must be held by her handlers and users. They pour money & position on her because she is useful to them, but she seems blissfully unaware of the utter lack of respect, maybe even contempt, they feel toward her and her only daughter.

    This is the stuff of tragedy.

  11. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    I wish the author had included the bit about how the Clinton’s force the Secret Service to “rent” a small office on their property in NY for $10K per month which is right about what their mortgage payment for the whole place is. Or the $200K of illegal Communist Chinese donations to Bill’s 1996 campaign. I guess there’s just too many examples of their greed to include in one article.

  12. @Anonymous

    Thanks Barrister for mentioning some of their other peccadilloes. The Secret Service rent is particularly disgraceful but symptomatic of the sense of entitlement that they radiate.

  13. @Stranger Is Danger

    Hey Stranger, Well put together response.

    • Replies: @SolontoCroesus
  14. @Aaron Klein

    agree mostly, but is it necessary to slur Sicilians?
    zionism is sui generis, it’s own brand of evil.

    • Replies: @Stranger Is Danger
  15. Renoman says:

    Of course they’re crooked, aren’t they all? At least they kept the train on the tracks as opposed to their GOP brethren who ran the Country into the ground financially. That’s all anyone will remember in 50 years.

    • Replies: @rod1963
  16. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Can you imagine what would have been the situation had she gotten her way and Syria were attacked and bombed, collapsing the state? That whole region would have become one huge slaughterhouse, even more than what it is now, ushering in groups that would make the Khmer Rouge look mild by comparison. Her Libyan adventure was another example of nation wrecking.
    Her and her husband are getting up in age and have gotten everything they can. What more do they want? Please, just go away.

  17. rod1963 says:
    @Renoman

    No they didn’t, they just handed the flaming bag of dog s**t to the Texas Bumbler which then blew up in his hands.

    Now lets look at Clinton’s economic accomplishments.

    He came into office as the Dot.Com bubble grew like crazy which generated a massive tax windfall for the Feds and state. It collapsed as Dubya took office.

    That’s it.

    Now for the damage he caused.

    1) He signed NAFTA into law which sent 8 million factory jobs to Mexico and Asia. He was the principal architect of making the Democrats the party of the welfare class and the white upper classes. The white working class got shafted by him.

    In a way he’s the one responsible for making the Democratic party anti-white.

    2) He signed China PNTR, which made us China’s bitch and further devastated our economy and loss of jobs and accelerated loss of our high tech sector.

    3) He killed Glass-Stegall which set the stage for the massive real-estate bubble under Bush and the TARP bail out and endless QE’s to the rich. And there is a bubble being blown again.

    These three things have wrecked the United States economically and technologically. We went from a industrial and tech powerhouse to a crippled service economy in little over a decade. Clinton did far damage than Bin Laden ever in his most wildest dreams could ever hope to achieve.

    Then there’s his transfer of military aerospace to Communist China. That’s a whole nother kettle of fish.

    • Replies: @Ivy
  18. Ivy says:
    @rod1963

    Triangulation was the pet term for the Arkansas cult’s approach to problem solving.

    It has turned into strangulation for the majority of Americans, largely due to the three points that you discuss.

    If Bubba had been able to maintain self control, then the Lewinsky matter wouldn’t have arisen. That sad episode disgraced the Office of the President and the country. The loyal opposition’s reaction was a precipitated rightward lurch and manic fundraising for W, with his AIPAC and PNAC choir leading the charge.

    The Clinton era will be recalled with disgust. The W era, too. God help us if the 2016 vote is between two of their ilk

  19. All agreed, seems unbelievable that we are now subjected to retread dynasties like some decadent oligarchy.

    One possible correction, though, I do recall that ex-President Reagan took in some large foreign speaking fees (Japan?) that seemed excessive at the time and were seen as breaking new ground.

  20. @solontoCroesus

    Solon,

    There’s nothing to be surprised here.

    The Jewish character has essentially remained unchanged since Tacitus wrote his account of Jews 2000 years ago.

    I would also recommend you to read Wilhelm Marr’s “The Triumph of Judaism over Germanism” – you’ll notice a frightening similarity to what you see around yourself today.

  21. @SolontoCroesus

    Agreed. Sicilians are mostly a fun lot – and macho.

    Your characterization of Zionism as sui generis, I believe, misses the larger picture.

    Zionism is one among many strains of Jewish misanthropy.

    An Israeli/Israel-firster believes Zion is in, well, Israel.

    A Satmar Hasid would say that Zion is in the ghettos of pre-modern Warsaw or modern New York.

    For Bernie Madoff, Zion was in America, Wall Street and his cousins in SEC who turned a blind eye to his criminal enterprise.

    Every other Jew has his own Zion, the difference between them is where they think it is.

    All internal conflicts betwen Jews stems from this simple fact that they cannot seem to decide what is good for the Jews.

    So while Alan Dershowitz thinks it is a good idea to browbeat their American host to destroy the Arab world, Norman Finkelstein thinks Zionist chutzpah would lead to a backlash against Jews.

    Again, what is good for the Jews?

    Consider one rabbi Elmer Berger – a supposed “anti-Zionist” and darling of the Philip Weiss crowd – who enthusiastically supported the Bolshevik hell because it set the Jews free at the cost of millions of Russian lives.

    Again, what is good for the Jews? The Goyim be damned.

  22. Only USA president: Jimmy Carter never invaded one country!
    I wish authors would stop bad mouthing a good person.
    Interest rates 21% oil barrel prices sky rocketed. After Bush/Reagan took over–dropped instantly like lead. Man was set up to fail.

  23. @Anonymous

    There is no question that Hillary has sold her soul to avarice. All those illegal gifts she accumulated while she was a taxpayer paid Secretary of State came with a “quid pro quo.” Of course, even if every dollar went to her so-called tax-exempt foundations, she still had the ability to buy support and gain power via dictating the recipients of foreign munificence. Being lawyers, she and Bill most likely found cover to divert much of that money to their won benefit.

    And, then, there are all of those “quid pro quos” hanging out there! How will she fulfill those obligations to foreign “gift givers” if she gains the office of the Presidency and how will she hide these favors in response to foreign bribes?

    Since many of these so-called donors are not friends or allies of the USA, will her responses be treasonous in scale! I see little to trust in her patterns of ethics. She has already sold us out to the highest bidders. She will probably look at her Presidential powers as an opportunity for the world’s largest garage sale of USA assets.

  24. Well done. To Clintons credit, he was blackmailed into bombing Yugoslavia. Lewinsky was a setup- 12 Jewish Senators threatened to impeach him if he refused to grant authorization for the bombing of the Serbs and the dismantling of Yugoslavia. Initially, he was reluctant, unlike Broomstick Hillary who can’t wait to open the bomb doors. Of course, she must be handsomely compensated. A broomstick Hillary presidency will lead to the destruction of the country as we know it. A war with Russia is un-winnable and plainly insane. We gain nothing and loss all (perhaps that is the plan). We stand to gain everything as partners with Russia; look at China, but we are being led deliberately down a dark and untenable path by Clinton, by inference Israel, her and his handlers. Why? A weakened America puts the neocons firmly in control. Israel has always considered Russia and Germany as their historical and Biblical foes and is hellbent on their destruction, even at the expense of Americas destruction. History repeats itself, there is nothing new under the sun, but if you don’t know your history, you don’t know your future. We need a good house cleaning- we need to rid Washington of the neocons. Presently, with Washingtons cold shoulder to Israel, Israel is making a serious bid to realter its alliance with the East; unfortunately for them, the East does learn from history. I would expect a considerable terrorist event in 2016 as Cheney averred.

  25. […] 31, 2015 “ICH” – “Unz” –  There is a Monty Python sketch in which a hopelessly aristocratic gentleman played by […]

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Philip Giraldi Comments via RSS
Personal Classics
A Modern Guernica Enabled by Washington
Pressuring Candidates Even Before They Are Nominated
But is it even a friend?
The gagged whistleblower goes on the record.
Today’s CIA serves contractors and bureaucrats—not the nation.
Pay no mind to the Mossad agent on the line.