Exclusive: Dick Morris explains differences between Hillary’s filings and her husband’s.
This column was originally published on WND.com, as part of a new partnership with them.
The Clintons lined their joint bank accounts with millions of dollars from Bill’s speaking fees from foreign governments, government related organizations and multinational corporations.
But you won’t see all of the details on Hilary’s mandatory financial reports filed and publicized while she was secretary of state.
Was she hiding something from us?
Sure looks like it, because Hillary’s financial disclosures routinely omitted the sponsorships of many of Bill’s lucrative speeches. Federal law required her to publicly disclose the “source” of honoraria to Bill, but she apparently interpreted that to mean the entity that wrote the check, not the entity that paid or contributed to it.
Bill had no duty to publicly disclose anything. But in a Jan. 9, 2009, letter to the State Department ethics officer, Clinton lawyer David Kendall volunteered that “President Clinton would provide the “identities of the host(s) (the entities that pay the speaker’s fee) of proposed paid speeches.” And he did.
But Hillary’s public list of payees for speeches is a lot different than Bill’s private list.
A comparison of the two shows a wide disparity in what he told them and what she told us. Thanks to Judicial Watch’s Freedom of Information lawsuit, Bill’s filings are public and reveal who is really paying the Clintons.
Here are some of the highlights:
• Hillary disclosed “Power Within” as the source of five speeches in 2009 and 2010, totaling $955,000. Power Within, produced by lifestyle guru Anthony “Tony” Robbins, was the event planner. But the sponsor for the events was TD Bank, a major investor and proponent of the Keystone Pipeline, which Hillary’s State Department had to approve. Hillary mentioned nothing about the generous benefactor and ignored her blatant conflict of interest.
• The Vancouver Board of Trade was listed as the source of a 2009 speech for $175,000, but according to Bill, TD Bank was one of several sponsors. Was there something about this $1,130,000 from TD Bank Hillary didn’t want us to know?Hillary did disclose an additional $455,000 from TD in 2009 and 2010, so the total take from TD for the two years was $1,585,000.
• Teck Resources, Ltd.,a Canadian mining company was a co-sponsor at the Vancouver event. Donald Lindsey, CEO of Teck is also the president of the Vancouver Board of Trade. Bill Clinton announced a partnership with Teck Resources for a “Zinc Nutrition Initiative” to eliminate zinc deficiencies in poor countries. Teck is also a contributor to the Clinton-Guistra Sustainable Growth Initiative.
• Hillary disclosed the Silicon Valley Business Information Council as the “source” for an October 21, 2011, speech for $200,000. But Bill’s filing indicated that the money came, in part, from the Suzhou People’s Government, a provincial People’s Republic of China (“PRC”) government. Additional sponsors included the California State Friendship Committee, an organization that fosters relationships with China and California legislators. The Committee paid for a trip by Rep. Mike Honda to China to meet government ministers. Another sponsor was the China Association of Science and Technology Industry Parks, another Chinese government-related organ.
• A $300,000 speech to FOSUN in New York was listed by Hillary, but Bill’s submission indicated that it was FOSUN Intl., a Chinese conglomerate and Prudential Financial that sponsored the event. The event was moderated by Fosun CEO Guo Guangchang, an active member of elite PRC political committees, such as the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference, Standing Committee of All-China Federation of Industry and Commerce. And Prudential Financial participated in CGI, the Clinton Global Initiative. Get the picture?
• A $150,000 fee Hillary disclosed as coming from the Canadian National Exhibition, Toronto Canada. Nothing indicated that this was funded by Canadian tax money. Local newspapers reported that only 9,000 of the 25,000 tickets available were sold and that taxpayers might have to foot the bill because of the terms of a federal grant to cover the costs. Coca-Cola was one of the corporate sponsors of the CNE and has been a partner in several CGI projects.
• A speech to C3 Summit, LLC was disclosed by Hillary. Bill indicated he would be giving the keynote address to the C3 Summit on U.S.-Arab Relations. The main sponsor was the Government of Bermuda, which promoted Bermuda as a Shariah law-friendly financial center.
• Hillary’s disclosure of a $325,000 speech to Magic Dreams Productions did not mention another sponsor, the Panama Government Authority on Tourism, that Bill had disclosed.
• Hillary disclosed Bill’s $500,000 speech i to Nova Nordisk in Dubai. That speech was sponsored by the UAE Minister of Health. Novo Nordisk participated in CGI.
• The disclosure of Abu Dhabi Global Environmental Data Initiative (AGEDI) does not mention that it, too, is a UAE government-sponsored initiative.The UAE has donated between $10-20 million to the Clinton Foundation.
• Hillary disclosed a speech in Egypt for the American Chamber of Commerce for $250,000. Bill disclosed it as the American Chamber of Commerce in Egypt and a sponsor of Etisalat, a UAE government-related company that provides 60 percent of its profits to the UAE government.
• A Uni Strategic speech in Taiwan for $400,000 is listed on Hillary’s financial; Citibank, Taiwan, and HSBC, Taiwan were sponsors.
• Hillary disclosed the speech for $300,000 for the Tanmiah Group in Saudi Arabia, without mentioning it was a group with strong government ties and that the speech was to the Global Competitiveness Forum, hosted by the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.Saudi Arabian interests have donated between $30-60 million to the Clinton Foundation.
If foreign governments were to send the U.S. secretary of state checks totaling millions of dollars for her personal use, it would trigger a big scandal. But, disguised as speaking fees for Bill Clinton, few questions were asked.
Given Hillary’s filings, which are misleading at best, its time to start asking some serious questions.