Stassen Group cited in list of donors to Bill Clinton
The Stassen Group of Companies headed by tycoon Harry Jayawardene has donated between US$ 100,000 to 250,000 to the William J. Clinton Foundation, it is revealed.
Former US President Clinton last week released a list of donors to his charity, The William J. Clinton Foundation following an assurance given he would do so on the nomination of his wife Senator Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State designate in President Elect Barack Obama's new Administration.
The 'Stassen Group' is named in the list of donors having contributed between US$ 100,001 to US$ 250,000.
Jayawardene is currently embroiled in a legal battle with fellow directors of the Stassen Group which is expected to turn nasty.
It is learned,Clintons detractors will trace the source of all monies received by the Foundation including whether they have come through the proper financial channels of the respective countries.
“This is slavery, not to speak one's thought.” ― Euripides, The Phoenician Women
Sunday, December 21, 2008
More International Problems From Clinton Donor List
The mainstream American media may be turning a blind eye to the smoking guns in the Clinton donor list--but they are paying attention in Sri Lanka (formerly Ceylon). Here's a report from the Sunday Leader about problems at The Stassen Group:
Who's Lying About Clinton Donor List?
Indian mogul Amar Singh or Bill Clinton? According to Indian website Livemint.com, somebody is not telling the truth:
New Delhi: Samajwadi Party general secretary Amar Singh on Friday denied contributing any money to the William Jefferson Clinton Foundation, which has listed him as one of the top donors on Thursday.This story has already caused controversy in India, according to the Economic Times of India:
“I am denying it,” he told Mint in an interview. “I cannot react to media speculations. Anything can be written about anybody and I do not think I should react to it.”
“Let me add that I feel privileged to be on the list of friends (former US president Bill and wife Hillary) Clintons have,” Singh added. “It is a matter of happiness that I am friends with the Clintons.”
As part of a deal that cleared the way for Hillary Clinton to be nominated by US President-elect Barack Obama as the next secretary of state, Bill Clinton released a list of 205,000 donors on the foundation’s website. A list of top donors, those who gave $100,000 (about Rs47 lakh today) or more, reported by The Wall Street Journal shows Singh as having given between $1 million and $5 million."
Impressive, indeed! But also as intriguing, as Mr Singh's total declared assets, as per the affidavit filed along with his nomination papers for election to the Rajya Sabha, are no more than Rs 37 crore. So, did the SP leader bring alive the Mahabharata hero Daanveer Karna when he decided to donate up to more than two-thirds of his wealth to the Clinton Foundation?Imagine, if this is how Hillary Clinton begins a term as Secretary of State...how do you think it would end?
Saturday, December 20, 2008
Washington Post: Clinton List Means "Heap of Potential Trouble"
The paper pulls its punches by suggesting that there is a way out for the Clintons with a revised agreement with Obama--but in fact the logic of the case dictates that there isn't any possible agreement that a convicted perjurer and impeached former President may reasonably be trusted to follow. The Clinton list should signal the end of Hillary's bid for Secretary of State. If not, Obama's promise to change the culture of Washington should prove D.O.A. on January 20th, 2009. A self-inflicted wound that would haunt his entire administration.
From Sunday's Washington Post editorial:
From Sunday's Washington Post editorial:
But however worthy the cause or uncontroversial the foreign government, it strikes us that such fundraising by the former president presents an unavoidable conflict. What is the standard for the ethics official to apply? Doesn't spurning a proffered donation from a foreign government risk creating its own diplomatic problems? What happens when Secretary Clinton, visiting Country X to press for, say, a climate change agreement, is informed by the prime minister that he's just written her husband a $10 million check for that cause? What about gifts from foreign governments seeking trade concessions or approval to purchase military equipment? Even if Ms. Clinton is not influenced by gifts to her husband's charity, the appearance of a conflict is unavoidable. The better approach would be to allow existing commitments to go forward but to forswear any new ones.
Moreover, the memorandum of understanding does not appear to contemplate any prior review of contributions by foreign individuals or corporations, or by U.S. companies or individuals with overseas entanglements. So consider -- because it already happened -- the case of a wealthy investor who is seeking business opportunities in, say, Kazakhstan. He gives millions to the Clinton foundation, visits the country with the former president and obtains the sought-after contract. No one in the Obama administration will vet such a gift in advance; the public will learn of it only with the yearly disclosure. The new administration is buying itself a heap of potential trouble with this arrangement.
Wall Street Journal: More Dirt From Clinton Foundation List
This sort of story would compromise Hillary from the get-go, were she to be confirmed as Secretary of State. From today's Wall Street Journal:
The Nigerian-born Mr. [Gilbert] Chagoury, whose family is Lebanese, has also been a financial supporter of Christian politicians and religious leaders in Lebanon, another potential diplomatic hot spot, say people familiar with that nation's political scene.
Mr. Chagoury and representatives for Mr. Clinton have repeatedly declined to comment on the two men's relationship. Following Thursday's disclosures by the Clinton Foundation, a spokesman for President-elect Barack Obama said Mr. Obama wouldn't be commenting on any of the donors.
Mr. Chagoury's ties to Mr. Clinton apparently began in the mid-1990s. The Clinton administration was being urged by human rights-activists and others to put severe sanctions on Nigeria because of the Abacha regime's practice of jailing and executing political opponents.
In August 1996, President Clinton dispatched then-Rep. Bill Richardson to Nigeria to lay out the U.S. government's concerns. In an interview earlier this year, Mr. Richardson, currently New Mexico's governor and President-elect Obama's nominee for commerce secretary, said that after a meeting with the dictator, he was taken to see Mr. Chagoury, who supposedly "had a lot of influence with Abacha." During an hour-and-a-half discussion over pizza at Mr. Chagoury's home, the businessman seemed sympathetic to U.S. complaints but noncommittal, Mr. Richardson said.
A few weeks later, prior to the 1996 U.S. presidential election, Mr. Chagoury contributed $460,000 to a tax-exempt voter-registration group connected to the Democratic National Committee. A 1997 Washington Post article said that Mr. Chagoury subsequently received an invitation to a White House dinner for Democratic Party supporters. He also met with Clinton administration officials on Nigeria and later talked privately about his efforts to influence U.S. policy toward that country, says a person familiar with the matter.
Over the years, business deals Mr. Chagoury has been involved with have been the subject of government investigations into suspected bribery by Western companies that do business in Nigeria, according to news reports. In 2004, Mr. Chagoury was among those whom Nigerian investigators sought to question about a gas-terminal deal, according to news reports. He hasn't been accused of wrongdoing in any of the investigations.
Despite any controversies, Mr. Chagoury has steadily built ties to Mr. Clinton. In 2003, he helped organize a Caribbean trip where the former president was paid $100,000 for a speech. Mr. Clinton has made over $40 million giving speeches around the world. According to news reports, Mr. Chagoury attended Mr. Clinton's 60th birthday bash two years ago in New York. He also joined the former president at the gala wedding celebration in France last year of Mr. Clinton's top aide, Douglas Band, say people who were there.
During the just-completed election campaign, a Chagoury relative, Michel Chaghouri of Los Angeles, was listed in campaign records as someone who raised at least $100,000 for Mrs. Clinton's presidential campaign. Campaign records also show that Mr. Chaghouri raised money from a number of individuals named "Chagoury" or "Chaghouri" or "Chamchoum" -- Chamchoum is the maiden name of Gilbert Chagoury's wife. Several gave the federally allowed maximum of $4,600 each. Mr. Chagoury's name doesn't appear as a donor. As an apparent foreign national, Mr. Chagoury would generally be barred from giving to a U.S. presidential campaign.
Friday, December 19, 2008
Georgetown Journalism Students Sue CIA, FBI Over Daniel Pearl Death Documents
So much news that I almost forgot to post this item from yesterday's Washington Post about another FOIA case against the CIA --and FBI, among eight government agencies named-- to access documents relating to the death of Daniel Pearl in Pakistan. Inquiring minds want to know: Why isn't the Wall Street Journal also on this case? I'm not holding my breath for Mssrs. Gigot, McGurn and Taranto... Anyway, here's an excerpt from the Post:
For more than a year, a group of Georgetown University students has been poring over documents, searching for cellphone numbers of suspected terrorists and calling Pakistani police in the middle of the night. Now their class project has come to this: They're suing the CIA and the FBI.More on the Pearl Project can be found at the Center for Public Integrity website.
The students' assignment was to find out who killed Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl and why. Although the class ended last spring and many of the students graduated, they're still trying to write that last paper.
Pearl disappeared while reporting in Pakistan in 2002. A video delivered to the FBI showed him being beheaded.
Yesterday, the group, known as the Pearl Project and now attached to the nonprofit Center for Public Integrity, filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court asking for the release of records by the CIA, FBI, Defense Department and five other federal agencies.
Members of the group are seeking, among other things, FBI files on convicted terrorist Richard Reid. Pearl was reporting a story about Reid and his Pakistani handler when he disappeared. They hope the lawsuit will unearth documents or new sources in time for them to finish their final paper late this spring.
"It's not only a really personal story . . . but a story really pertinent to current events and, well, to humanity," said Rebecca Tapscott, a 2008 graduate.
The idea for the class began in summer 2002, after four men were convicted in Pakistan in connection with Pearl's death. Pearl's longtime friend, Asra Nomani, with whom Pearl was staying when he disappeared, suspected that more people were involved. She knew, for example, that a man who led police to Pearl's body, which was found outside Karachi, was allegedly one of the guards who had held him. But he was never charged.
Nomani, a former Wall Street Journal reporter, and Barbara Feinman Todd, an associate dean at Georgetown, created a journalism seminar in 2007 to investigate Pearl's death and write the story that he was reporting when he was kidnapped. They also wanted to learn more about terrorist cells, counterterrorism efforts and the complicated relationship between the United States and Pakistan.
FOIABlog comments on the case:
This Washington Post article discusses a FOIA lawsuit filed this week by students in a Georgetown University journalism class. The suit is related to records various government agencies have about those involved in the death of Danny Pearl, including shoe bomber, Richard Reid, who Pearl was trying to interview before his kidnapping.
I believe Richard Reid, and others like him, have very limited privacy rights. They are not U.S. Citizens or Legal Permanent Residents, thus they have no rights under the Privacy Act. There is a huge public interest in these records and as such, agencies should not send out letters asking for these people's signatures before they will process records relating to them. This is not a new issue as years ago, the DEA turned down a request by Terry Anderson for information on those who kept him hostage--and didn't relent until Anderson was forced to sue. Hopefully, the new administration will find compentent people to oversee FOIA Offices at these agencies so that the courts are not clogged with these types of matters.
Wonkette on Clinton Foundation Donor List
THE SAUDIS OWN EVERYTHING: Clinton Foundation’s List Of Foreign Influence-Buyers Is Quite Long And Sinister
Approximately 1400 million years ago in the Paleozoic era, when Hillary Clinton was running for President instead of Secretary of State, she was asked repeatedly if the Clinton Foundation would release its donor list. She always said, “Well, you’ll have to talk to my husband about that,” which was liberal doublespeak for “Fuck no.” Now after repeated threats from the Chicago mobster Barack Obama, the Foundation has released its donor list, which is over TWO THOUSAND NINE HUNDRED PAGES LONG. (Maybe that is why the Web page takes so frigging long to load?) Let’s see how many foreign governments were extorted by Bill Clinton to buy him blow jobs on Ron Burkle’s jet!
Holy zowie wow!
Saudi Arabia … the Cheneyite breakaway republic of Blackwater … also the notorious rogue nations of Norway, Italy, and Jamaica … plus the Dutch national lottery. This explains why Bill Clinton is always talking, in Dutch, about how a lottery “isn’t really gambling.”
Madoff Bad for Jewish Charities and Investors, Not Bad for the Jews...
The Jewish Telegraphic Agency published a roundup of losses reported so far in the Bernard Madoff scandal...including an interesting graphic showing charity victims. But IMHO, while this may be bad for Madoff's investors, it is not so bad for the Jews. Madoff showed that Jews are just like everybody else--not at all stereotypical "Yids" who cheat "Goyim," instead as rather trusting and gullible American investors who could fall for a con man as easily as anyone...
Paul Weyrich, 66
The Washington Post ran an interesting and surprisingly respectful obituary of Paul Weyrich on the front page this morning. He certainly deserved the coverage. Weyrich was a real Washington "character," like someone out of a fifties Otto Preminger film, the first actually pear-shaped person I'd ever met. He was an obvious train buff, and for a while had his own television network, on which I appeared a couple of times on TV shows hosted by him and Newt Gingrich to talk about the National Endowment for the Arts. This controversy was important enough to him to have been mentioned in his Post obituary:
"Look at the National Endowment for the Arts as a prototype," he told the Los Angeles Times. "Here's a piddling little organization -- about $100 million budget out of a $2 trillion budget -- and rather inconsequential in national significance. Republicans surely could have been able to shut that down given the fact that it had offended many, many people with the kind of art it had subsidized.Actually, he was pretty successful by Washington standards. Congress voted to zero out the NEA...and even George Bush hasn't dared try to restore NEA appropriations to the high levels of the 1990s. That's thanks to Weyrich, I'm sure.
"But the culture overwhelmed the political process," he added. "Why? Because upper-crust, suburban Republican women in the districts of Republican congressmen defended the filth."
His TV network began on satellite, then some cable channels--until Republicans drove him out of business due to his on-air criticism of them. He kept going, regardless. Weyrich had an old-fashioned stick-to-his guns quality, and an obvious eccentricity, that was unusual in button-down, carefully worded, and too-often cowardly Washington, DC. As the obits mentioned, he was one of the founders of the Heritage Foundation and the Moral Majority. He set up the Free Congress Foundation as his own bailiwick. More recently, he helped nurture Jihad Watch, where Robert Spencer has posted a tribute:
Paul Weyrich's impact on the national stage is well known. In 2007 when I was doing research on the so-called "Christianists" for my book Religion of Peace?, I found paranoid Leftist writers referring to him as the "most powerful man in America." He wasn't, but his influence in advancing the wisdom of protecting individual freedom and limited government in an age of encroaching statism and collectivism cannot be calculated.I think one reason the Post gave Weyrich good play was that he was what he was...he was also good copy. Washington will miss him.
Paul Weyrich was also one of the first and foremost American public figures to see through the "Islam is a Religion of Peace" deception that spread through the nation from President Bush and others after 9/11. In 2002 he named me an Adjunct Fellow of the Free Congress Foundation and asked me to write a series of monographs on Islam: An Introduction to the Qur'an; Women and Islam; An Islamic Primer; Islam and the West; The Islamic Disinformation Lobby; Islam vs. Christianity; and Jihad in Context. The perspective I expounded in them was just as unpopular with the conservative (and of course liberal) mainstream then as it is now, but Paul was undeterred by that; he was determined to defend the West and present the truth. He even arranged for me to address the Council for National Policy in New York, where fantasies and deceptions arising from political correctness and realpolitik usually rule the day.
Paul Weyrich taught me a great deal, by word and by example -- about how to deal both personally and professionally with the slanders and smears that are a daily aspect of this work (although I've not always lived up to his example in this); about how to avoid discouragement and keep on fighting no matter what the odds are, and about much more. He was an extraordinarily kind and genial man, a stark contrast in person to the vicious caricatures of him purveyed by those who feared and hated him.
Clinton Donor List Disqualifies Hillary for State Department Post
It's like putting a "For Sale" sign on the Secretary of State. The disclosed 2000-plus name Clinton Foundation donor list is one big appearance of conflict-of-interest...not to mention appearance of corruption, bribery, and influence-peddling. It is an invitation for prosecution, not a recommendation for disinterested public service.
Just one example, this item from Bloomberg News:
Dec. 19 (Bloomberg) -- Canadian investor Victor Dahdaleh, facing a U.S. federal probe of allegations that he helped Alcoa Inc. defraud a Bahrain government-controlled metals company, is among donors who gave as much as $5 million to former President Bill Clinton’s charitable foundation.
The U.S. Justice Department in March said it was investigating claims in a lawsuit by Aluminum Bahrain BSC, which said Dahdaleh acted as a middleman for bribes that helped Alcoa overcharge the Bahrain company by as much as $975 million for alumina, used in aluminum manufacturing.
Dahdaleh’s dispute with Bahrain -- home of the U.S. Navy’s Fifth Fleet and an anti-terrorism ally -- shows how entanglements by Bill Clinton’s financial backers may pose headaches for Hillary Clinton as the New York senator seeks confirmation as President-elect Barack Obama’s secretary of state.
“It certainly creates a couple of extra hurdles for the Obama administration,” said Joel Rosenthal, president of New York’s Carnegie Council for Ethics in International Affairs.
Mark Helprin on Bush's Ghastly Legacy
From today's Wall Street Journal:
The administrations of George W. Bush have virtually assured such a displacement by catastrophically throwing the country off balance, both politically and financially, while breaking the nation's sword in an inconclusive seven-year struggle against a ragtag enemy in two small bankrupt states. Their one great accomplishment -- no subsequent attacks on American soil thus far -- has been offset by the stunningly incompetent prosecution of the war. It could be no other way, with war aims that inexplicably danced up and down the scale, from "ending tyranny in the world," to reforging in a matter of months (with 130,000 troops) the political culture of the Arabs, to establishing a democracy in Iraq, to only reducing violence, to merely holding on in our cantonments until we withdraw.
This confusion has come at the price of transforming the military into a light and hollow semi-gendarmerie focused on irregular warfare and ill-equipped to deter the development and resurgence of the conventional and strategic forces of China and Russia, while begging challenges from rivals or enemies no longer constrained by our former reserves of strength. For seven years we failed to devise effective policy or make intelligent arguments for policies that were worth pursuing. Thus we capriciously forfeited the domestic and international political equilibrium without which alliances break apart and wars are seldom won.
The pity is that the war could have been successful and this equilibrium sustained had we struck immediately, preserving the link with September 11th; had we disciplined our objective to forcing upon regimes that nurture terrorism the choice of routing it out with their ruthless secret services or suffering the destruction of the means to power for which they live; had we husbanded our forces in the highly developed military areas of northern Saudi Arabia after deposing Saddam Hussein, where as a fleet in being they would suffer no casualties and remain at the ready to reach Baghdad, Damascus, or Riyadh in three days; and had we taken strong and effective measures for our domestic protection while striving to stay within constitutional limits and eloquently explaining the necessity -- as has always been the case in war -- for sometimes exceeding them. Today's progressives apologize to the world for America's treatment of terrorists (not a single one of whom has been executed). Franklin Roosevelt, when faced with German saboteurs (who had caused not a single casualty), had them electrocuted and buried in numbered graves next to a sewage plant.
Thursday, December 18, 2008
Austin Powers Shoe-Throwing Prefigured Iraqi Incident
(ht Joe Garofoli, sfgate.com)
Cheney Misses Meaning of Iraqi Shoe-Throwing
In an interview with Jonathan Karl of ABC News, the Vice President provided evidence that the Bush administration simply does not understand how to conduct public diplomacy:
KARL: What did you think when you saw that shoe flying at the President?Here's a link to some recent significance in Latin America: Latin Leaders Joke About Bush Shoe Attack:
CHENEY: I thought the President handled it rather well. He had some good moves, the way he ducked and avoided the shoe. And then what was his response -- that it was a size 10. I guess he could see that as it went by. No, I think it was an incident where an Iraqi reporter threw shoes at the President -- I don’t attribute any special significance to it.
COSTA DO SAUIPE, Brazil (Reuters) - Latin American leaders meeting in Brazil this week couldn't resist poking fun at U.S. President George W. Bush over his recent shoe-throwing incident in Iraq.
"Please, nobody take off your shoes," Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva joked to reporters at the start of a news conference on Wednesday.
An Iraqi journalist had hurled his shoes at Bush at a news conference in Baghdad on Sunday, calling him a dog.
Wednesday, December 17, 2008
VOA Promotes Iraqi Shoe-Thrower, Saudi Offer of $10 Million, Anti-US Website
Here's some incredible VOA coverage. Instead of demanding that the Saudi government arrest the millionaire as an accomplice to an assault on the President of the United States (btw, where is the Secret Service in all this?), VOA treats the story as a joke--and then plugs a website where viewers can throw shoes at a virtual President.
Shame on the VOA, shame on James Glassman, author of Dow 36,000 and America's Top Propagandist, and shame on President Bush for letting things come to this low state. Maybe they should change the name of the broadcaster to the Voice of Anti-America?
I hope Obama will be more on the ball when it comes to anti-Americanism:
Shame on the VOA, shame on James Glassman, author of Dow 36,000 and America's Top Propagandist, and shame on President Bush for letting things come to this low state. Maybe they should change the name of the broadcaster to the Voice of Anti-America?
I hope Obama will be more on the ball when it comes to anti-Americanism:
A Saudi Arabian man has offered $10 million for the shoes of an Iraqi journalist hurled at U.S. President George Bush in Baghdad Sunday.
Middle Eastern news agencies reported on Mohamed Makhafa's offer Wednesday. He is quoted telling Cairo's al-Safwa Television that the footwear hurled at the U.S. president's head is the "shoe of dignity" with high "moral value."
Meanwhile, Reuters news agency reports that an Egyptian man is offering his 20-year-old daughter in marriage to the shoe-thrower, Muntazer al-Zaidi.
Reuters reports the young woman Amal Saad Gumaa said she likes the idea of being attached to a man she finds so honorable.
Thousands of Iraqis have taken to the streets in support of Zaidi, who has achieved something of a folk hero status since the incident.
The shoe-tossing has also inspired an online game (www.SockAndAwe.com) that lets players throw brown laced-loafers at Mr. Bush. The site says more than 17 million cyber-shoes have struck the president's virtual head as of Wednesday.
Bernard Madoff's Political Contributions
From the FEC Website:
Presented by the Federal Election Commission
Individual Contributions Arranged By Type, Giver, Then Recipient
Contributions to Political Committees
MADOFF, BERNARD
NEW YORK, NY 10021
SCHUMER, CHARLES E
VIA SCHUMER '98
06/29/1998 -300.00 20020161719
MADOFF, BERNARD
NEW YORK, NY 10021
BERNARD MADOFF INVESTMENTS
LAUTENBERG, FRANK R
VIA LAUTENBERG FOR SENATE
02/18/2004 1000.00 24020260913
WYDEN, RONALD LEE
VIA WYDEN FOR SENATE
03/25/2003 2000.00 23020191985
03/25/2003 2000.00 23020191985
MADOFF, BERNARD
NEW YORK, NY 10021
MADOFF INVESTMENTS/CHAIRMAN
MATHESON, JAMES
VIA MATHESON FOR CONGRESS
10/18/2004 250.00 24991330031
MADOFF, BERNARD
NEW YORK, NY 10021
MADOFF SECURITIES
CORZINE, JON S
VIA CORZINE 2000 INC
08/24/1999 1000.00 20020031614
MADOFF, BERNARD
NEW YORK, NY 10021
SELF-EMPLOYED/BANKER
HOOLEY, DARLENE
VIA HOOLEY FOR CONGRESS
10/15/2004 250.00 24981483366
MADOFF, BERNARD
NEW YORK, NY 10022
CROWLEY, JOSEPH
VIA CROWLEY FOR CONGRESS
08/26/1998 -500.00 98033513368
MADOFF, BERNARD
NEW YORK, NY 10022
BERNARD L MADOFF INVESTMENT SECUR
SCHUMER, CHARLES E
VIA SCHUMER '98
03/31/1998 300.00 98020080361
SECURITIES INDUSTRY AND FINANCIAL MARKETS ASSOCIATION FUND A
12/20/1999 2000.00 20035043217
12/20/1999 2000.00 20035342406
11/03/2000 2000.00 20036554275
MADOFF, BERNARD
NEW YORK, NY 10022
BOND BROKER
CROWLEY, JOSEPH
VIA CROWLEY FOR CONGRESS
08/04/1998 500.00 98033513348
MADOFF, BERNARD
NEW YORK, NY 10022
CHAIRMAN
CLINTON, HILLARY RODHAM
VIA HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON FOR US SENATE COMMITTEE INC
01/13/2000 1000.00 20020140293
MADOFF, BERNARD
NEW YORK, NY 10022
SELF EMPLOYED/INVESTOR
MERKLEY, JEFFREY ALAN
VIA JEFF MERKLEY FOR OREGON
04/24/2008 2300.00 28020233434
MADOFF, BERNARD L
NEW YORK, NY 10021
FROST, MARTIN
VIA MARTIN FROST CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE
10/15/2004 250.00 24981593976
MADOFF, BERNARD L
NEW YORK, NY 10021
BERNARD L MADOFF INVEST SEC
DEMOCRATIC SENATORIAL CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE
05/09/2005 25000.00 25020223064
MADOFF, BERNARD L
NEW YORK, NY 10021
BERNARD L MADOFF INVESTMENTS
SCHUMER, CHARLES E
VIA FRIENDS OF SCHUMER
04/08/2002 1000.00 22020572030
04/08/2002 1000.00 22020572029
08/18/2004 1000.00 24020682386
08/18/2004 1000.00 24020682387
MADOFF, BERNARD L
NEW YORK, NY 10021
BERNARD L MADOFF/CHAIRMAN
GEPHARDT, RICHARD A
VIA GEPHARDT FOR PRESIDENT INC.
09/23/2003 2000.00 23992120817
MADOFF, BERNARD L
NEW YORK, NY 10021
BERNARD MADOFF INC
OBEY, DAVID R
VIA A LOT OF PEOPLE FOR DAVE OBEY
03/10/2000 1000.00 20035482353
MADOFF, BERNARD L
NEW YORK, NY 10021
BERNARD MADOFF INVESTMENT SEC
FOSSELLA, VITO
VIA COMMITTEE TO RE-ELECT VITO FOSSELLA
04/20/2000 1000.00 20035843717
MADOFF, BERNARD L
NEW YORK, NY 10021
MADOFF INVESTMENTS
MARKEY, EDWARD J MR.
VIA MARKEY COMMITTEE, THE
05/15/1998 1000.00 98033264489
MADOFF, BERNARD L
NEW YORK, NY 10021
MADOFF INVESTMENTS/CHAIRMAN
MARKEY, EDWARD J MR.
VIA MARKEY COMMITTEE, THE
06/17/2004 2000.00 24961871421
06/17/2004 2000.00 24961871421
MADOFF, BERNARD L
NEW YORK, NY 10021
SELF-EMPLOYED
D'AMATO, ALFONSE M
VIA FRIENDS OF SENATOR D'AMATO (1998 COMMITTEE)
09/21/1998 1000.00 98020221244
MADOFF, BERNARD L
NEW YORK, NY 10022
BERNARD L MADOFF INVESTMENT
TAUZIN, WILBERT J II
VIA BILLY TAUZIN CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE THE
05/05/1998 1000.00 98033280117
MADOFF, BERNARD L
NEW YORK, NY 10022
BERNARD L MADOFF INVESTMENT SECUR
SCHUMER, CHARLES E
VIA SCHUMER '98
05/22/1998 1000.00 98020153371
05/22/1998 1000.00 98020153371
MADOFF, BERNARD L
NEW YORK, NY 10022
BERNARD L MADOFF PC
RANGEL, CHARLES B
VIA RANGEL FOR CONGRESS
10/23/1998 1000.00 98034023088
MADOFF, BERNARD L
NEW YORK, NY 10022
BERNARD L. MADOFF INVEST. SEC./CH
DEMOCRATIC SENATORIAL CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE
09/30/2006 25000.00 26020872891
MADOFF, BERNARD L
NEW YORK, NY 10022
BERNARD L. MADOFF INVEST.-SEC./CH
DEMOCRATIC SENATORIAL CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE
05/04/2007 25000.00 27020190980
09/12/2008 25000.00 28020611133
MADOFF, BERNARD L MR.
NEW YORK, NY 10021
BERNARD L. MADOFF INVESTMENT SECU
SECURITIES INDUSTRY AND FINANCIAL MARKETS ASSOCIATION FUND A
09/22/2005 5000.00 25971371439
10/17/2006 5000.00 26950709195
SECURITIES INDUSTRY AND FINANCIAL MARKETS ASSOCIATION POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE
05/24/2007 5000.00 27990166821
MADOFF, BERNARD L MR.
NEW YORK, NY 10021
MADOFF (BERNARD L.) INVESTMENT SE
SECURITIES INDUSTRY AND FINANCIAL MARKETS ASSOCIATION FUND A
07/08/2004 5000.00 24962139131
MADOFF, BERNARD L.
NEW YORK, NY 10021
SAUL, ANDREW MARSHALL
VIA SAUL FOR CONGRESS INC
12/05/2007 -2300.00 28990305541
MADOFF, BERNARD L.
NEW YORK, NY 10021
BERNARD L. MADOFF INVESTMENT/CHAI
SAUL, ANDREW MARSHALL
VIA SAUL FOR CONGRESS INC
07/10/2007 2300.00 27931355510
MADOFF, BERNARD L.
NEW YORK, NY 10022
BERNARD L. MADOFF P.C./CHAIRMAN
RANGEL, CHARLES B
VIA RANGEL FOR CONGRESS
08/30/2001 1000.00 22991228121
MADOFF, BERNARD L. MR.
NEW YORK, NY 10021
BERNARD L. MADOFF INVESTMENT SECU
SECURITIES INDUSTRY AND FINANCIAL MARKETS ASSOCIATION POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE
08/20/2008 5000.00 28933110755
MADOFF, BERNARD MR.
NEW YORK, NY 10021
BERNARD MADOFF INVESTMENT SECURIT
BRADLEY, BILL
VIA BILL BRADLEY FOR PRESIDENT INC
04/26/1999 1000.00 20990130846
Total Contributions: 161050.00
Joint Fundraising Contributions
These are contributions to committees who are raising funds to be distributed to other committees. The breakdown of these contributions to their final recipients may appear below
MADOFF, BERNARD L
NEW YORK, NY 10021
BERNARD L MADOFF INVESTMENT SECUR
VICTORY IN NEW YORK
10/30/1998 1000.00 98020270881
MADOFF, BERNARD L
NEW YORK, NY 10021
BERNARD MADOFF INVESTMENT/CHAIRMA
LAUTENBERG NJ VICTORY COMMITTEE
07/20/2007 300.00 27931343375
07/20/2007 2300.00 27931343375
07/20/2007 5000.00 27931343376
Total Joint Fundraising: 8600.00
Recipient of Joint Fundraiser Contributions
These are the Final Recipients of Joint Fundraising Contributions
MADOFF, BERNARD L
NEW YORK, NY 10021
BERNARD L MADOFF INVEST SEC
DEMOCRATIC SENATORIAL CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE
10/30/1998 1000.00 98020270462
MADOFF, BERNARD L
NEW YORK, NY 10021
BERNARD MADOFF INVESTMENT
LAUTENBERG, FRANK R
VIA LAUTENBERG FOR SENATE
07/20/2007 300.00 27020400524
07/20/2007 2300.00 27020400525
Recipient Total: 3600.00
TRY A: NEW QUERY
RETURN TO: FEC HOME PAGE
Will Obama Throw Rahm Emanuel Over The Side?
Today's Chicago Sun-Times reports 21 contacts between Rahm Emanuel and Blagojevich over Valerie Jarrett as well as other candidates for Barack Obama's Senate seat. They also ran this photo of Blago with Rahm. Which means Rahm Emanuel is now on the "hot seat."
If Obama is unable to keep a lid on the scandal, the price for this screw-up may be the withdrawal of Congressman Emanuel as the next White House Chief-of-Staff...at least until things blow over.
If Obama is unable to keep a lid on the scandal, the price for this screw-up may be the withdrawal of Congressman Emanuel as the next White House Chief-of-Staff...at least until things blow over.
President-elect Barack Obama's incoming chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, was pushing for Obama's successor just days after the Nov. 4 election, sources told the Chicago Sun-Times.
Emanuel privately urged Gov. Blagojevich's administration to appoint Obama confidante Valerie Jarrett, and the Sun-Times learned Tuesday that he also pressed that it be done by a certain deadline.
Jarrett was initially interested in the U.S. Senate post before Obama tapped her to be a White House senior adviser, sources say.
The disclosure comes days after Obama's camp downplayed Jarrett's interest in the post.
Tuesday, December 16, 2008
Unlike The Wall Street Journal Editors, Asharq Alawsat Understands Shoe-Thrower
From Tariq Alhomayed's column in Asharq Alawsat:
If the Iraqi man who threw his shoes at US President George W Bush on Sunday was just an ordinary citizen who took such action on one of Baghdad’s streets then perhaps it could be argued that he simply has no decency. But for a television reporter to take such action is a matter that should be condemned.
The reporter could have asked the American president a difficult or uncomfortable question as Bush stood next to Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al Maliki, but instead he chose to use shoes over words, forgetting that journalism does not debate and communicate using violence and vulgarity.
What we saw in the press conference was nothing but an insult to the profession of journalism and an indicator that the nature of journalism has been misunderstood. A journalist is not a Mujahid nor is he a fighter; he is the one who communicates information...
The Wall Street Journal Editors Miss Shoe Assault's Meaning
Today's Wall Street Journal editorial celebrates the violent attack on the US President during a news conference:
It is a violent act, it incites further disorder, it is disrespectful to the peaceful exchange of ideas, and it undermines the democratic process.
Not to mention that the Baghdad shoe-throwing has diminished American prestige globally.
In addition, as pointed out in a post below, it is a federal crime punishable by a fine and up to ten years prison time in the United States.
Do Journal editors really believe that the US is not a free country? Or have Journal editors not realized what freedom of speech means? What part of "speech" don't you understand? For example, "fighting words" are not protected speech anywhere in the USA--much less throwing things at people. That's not speech--that's violence. Look at the velocity behind those thrown shoes in the video. Luckily, President Bush has good reflexes. But throwing those shoes was no different from throwing a couple of punches.
There is a world of difference between words and things.
Are Journal editors seriously suggesting reporters start throwing things at Barack Obama? How do you think the Secret Service would react if the Journal's Washington Bureau Chief threw his shoes at the President-Elect at a press conference?
My own "Golden Rule" for Journal editorial writers: Don't advocate that others do things you would not do yourselves....
BTW, Journal editors might note that the shoe-thrower reportedly was inspired by Che Guevara, not known for his love of a free press:
On Sunday, as everyone in the world now knows, a young Iraqi TV reporter named Muntander (sic) al-Zaidi took the opportunity of a press conference to throw his shoes at George W. Bush and call the President a "dog." Congratulations, Iraq: You really are a free country...Earth to Paul Gigot, Bill McGurn, James Taranto and other Journal editors: Throwing shoes at people is not a sign of freedom, any more than rioting or looting.
It is a violent act, it incites further disorder, it is disrespectful to the peaceful exchange of ideas, and it undermines the democratic process.
Not to mention that the Baghdad shoe-throwing has diminished American prestige globally.
In addition, as pointed out in a post below, it is a federal crime punishable by a fine and up to ten years prison time in the United States.
Do Journal editors really believe that the US is not a free country? Or have Journal editors not realized what freedom of speech means? What part of "speech" don't you understand? For example, "fighting words" are not protected speech anywhere in the USA--much less throwing things at people. That's not speech--that's violence. Look at the velocity behind those thrown shoes in the video. Luckily, President Bush has good reflexes. But throwing those shoes was no different from throwing a couple of punches.
There is a world of difference between words and things.
Are Journal editors seriously suggesting reporters start throwing things at Barack Obama? How do you think the Secret Service would react if the Journal's Washington Bureau Chief threw his shoes at the President-Elect at a press conference?
My own "Golden Rule" for Journal editorial writers: Don't advocate that others do things you would not do yourselves....
BTW, Journal editors might note that the shoe-thrower reportedly was inspired by Che Guevara, not known for his love of a free press:
Alternatively described by sources as a leftist, and a nationalist, his brother said, “Muntazer is a nervous guy especially, whenever he sees violence and Iraqi people dying, but he calms down very fast afterwards. “We as a family hate occupation in all of its forms. And Muntazer hates it too. We all have the same attitude regarding the American forces occupying Iraq. I think that Bush did destroy Iraq and he did kill Iraqis.”
With pictures of Che Guevara hanging in his bedroom, Al-Zaidi’s mom told France24 that it was always her son’s dream to hit Bush with a shoe, “and he did fulfill his dream in the end,” she said.
Dirgham says that what his brother did gave back a sense of dignity to all Iraqis who had been affected by the U.S. occupation. “The behaviour of my brother was very spontaneous. It reveals what all the Iraqi people want, which is to humiliate the tyrant. My brother hates everything that has to do with American occupation as a fact and the Iranian occupation as a concept.”
Another source that did not want to reveal his name, and worked with Muntazer at a local Iraqi channel called Al Diar, said that Zaidi promised a lot of journalist friends that he was going to throw a show at Bush when he had a chance. But no one believed him.
Monday, December 15, 2008
Corruption 101 at the University of Chicago
Here's David Henderson's explanation of the distinction between what George Washington Plunkitt called "honest graft" and Gov. Blagojevich's case, with regard to administrative staff promotion at the University of Chicago (ht Arnold Kling):
In 2005, shortly after her husband became a U.S. Senator, Michelle Obama was promoted to vice-president of the University of Chicago Hospitals, with a salary increase from $121,910 to $316,962. One of her bosses said she was "worth her weight in gold." In 2006, Obama requested a $1 million earmark for his wife's employer. How upset have people got about this? But take away the explicit exchange and the crass language and she and her husband did what he Illinois Governor did. Yet where's the outrage?
Siberian Computer Geek Crowned Miss World 2009
Russian computer science student Kseniya Sukhinova was crowned in South Africa, according to Moscow News:
Tutors at the university in northwest Siberia where the new Miss World studies praised her academic record on Monday, happily complaining that the news of her victory almost disrupted classes.
Sukhinova is a fifth-year student studying cybernetic systems in the Oil and Gas University in Tyumen, a center of the region's oil and gas industry located over 2,000 kilometers from Moscow. She is one of only five women in the 27-student group.
"It is a very difficult discipline, but Sukhinova's grades are all A's and B's," university deputy president Veronika Yefremova said.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)