Posted on 04/19/2015 10:18:36 AM PDT by John Semmens
In her bid to portray herself as the champion of the average American, millionaire presidential candidate Hillary Clinton is lambasting the wealthiest 1% for the impoverishment of the other 99%. It is, she says, outrageous that the CEO of a major corporation makes 300 times the annual salary of its lowest paid employee.
Clintons argument is ironic since her hourly rate for public speaking is 16,000 times the $15 hourly rate that she says ought to be the legal minimum wage. If CEOs are overpaid, former Secretary of State Clinton would appear to be obscenely overpaid.
According to Mrs. Clinton, though, the comparison isnt fair because unlike corporate CEOs I havent spent my career grubbing for money. Ive been engaged in governingthe highest service one human being of superior capabilities can contribute to humanity. My $250,000 speaking fees are the deferred reward of a life of public service. I earned them. They are rightfully mine.
In any case, I want every voter to know that when I am president the inequities of capitalism will be rectified, Clinton promised. We will take things away from those who have too much. Selfish self-indulgence will be replaced by socially determined collective investment for the good of the whole. We cant make everyone rich, but we can make every ordinary American equal and finally realize the dream laid out in the Declaration of Independence.
In related news, reports that the so-called typical Americans that Clinton is meeting on the campaign trail have been pre-screened before they are allowed to approach her were pooh-poohed by former Vermont Governor Howard Dean (D): If her staff lets just anybody talk to her there is no guarantee that it will be a representative sample of typical Americans. People with atypical views could disrupt the process and take the campaign off message. By weeding out the unsuited this can be prevented.
Dean also defended the confiscation of cameras and cell phones from those visiting with the candidate. A person has the right to control the use of her image, Dean said. Anyone wanting a picture of Hillary can pay the standard $1,000 fee and the campaign will give him or her an autographed photo.
if you missed any of this week's other semi-news/semi-satire posts you can find them at...
http://azconservative.org/2015/04/18/bipartisan-plea-for-lynch-confirmation/
Sounds about right to me. Not sure this is satire.
Yikes, that sounds painful.
Mark Rich?
In 1983 Rich and partner Pincus Green were indicted on 65 criminal counts, including income tax evasion, wire fraud, racketeering, and trading with Iran during the oil embargo (at a time when Iranian revolutionaries were still holding American citizens hostage). The charges would have led to a sentence of more than 300 years in prison had Rich been convicted on all counts. The indictment was filed by then-U.S. Federal Prosecutor (and future mayor of New York City) Rudolph Giuliani. At the time it was the biggest tax evasion case in U.S. history.
Hearing of the plans for the indictment, Rich fled[11] to Switzerland and, always insisting that he was not guilty, never returned to the U.S. to answer the charges.[Notes 1] Rich’s companies eventually pled guilty to 35 counts of tax evasion and paid $90 million in fines, although Rich himself remained on the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Ten Most-Wanted Fugitives List for many years, narrowly evading capture in Britain, Germany, Finland, and Jamaica. Fearing arrest, he did not even return to the United States to attend his daughter’s funeral in 1996.
On January 20, 2001, hours before leaving office, U.S. President Bill Clinton granted Rich a highly controversial presidential pardon. Several of Clinton’s strongest supporters distanced themselves from the decision. Former President Jimmy Carter, a fellow Democrat, said, “I don’t think there is any doubt that some of the factors in his pardon were attributable to his large gifts. In my opinion, that was disgraceful.”
Clinton himself later expressed regret for issuing the pardon, saying that “it wasn’t worth the damage to my reputation.”
Clinton’s critics alleged that Rich’s pardon had been bought, as Denise Rich had given more than $1 million to Clinton’s political party (the Democratic Party), including more than $100,000 to the Senate campaign of the president’s wife, Hillary Rodham Clinton, and $450,000 to the Clinton Library foundation during Clinton’s time in office.
Clinton explained his decision by noting that similar cases were settled in civil, not criminal court.
Clinton also cited clemency pleas he had received from Israeli government officials, including then-Prime Minister Ehud Barak. Rich had made substantial donations to Israeli charitable foundations over the years, and many senior Israeli officials, such as Shimon Peres and Ehud Olmert, argued on his behalf behind the scenes.
Speculation about another rationale for Rich’s pardon involved his alleged involvement with the Israeli intelligence community. Rich reluctantly acknowledged in interviews with his biographer, Daniel Ammann, that he had assisted the Mossad, Israels intelligence service, a claim that Ammann said was confirmed by a former Israeli intelligence officer. According to Ammann, Rich had helped finance the Mossad’s operations and had supplied Israel with strategic amounts of Iranian oil through a secret oil pipeline. The aide to Rich who had persuaded Denise Rich to personally ask President Clinton to review Rich’s pardon request was a former chief of the Mossad, Avner Azulay.[23][30] Another former Mossad chief, Shabtai Shavit, had also urged Clinton to pardon Rich, whom he said had routinely allowed intelligence agents to use his offices around the world.
Federal Prosecutor Mary Jo White was appointed to investigate Clinton’s last-minute pardon of Rich. She stepped down before the investigation was finished and was replaced by James Comey, who was critical of Clinton’s pardons and of then-Deputy Attorney General Eric Holder’s pardon recommendation. Rich’s lawyer, Jack Quinn, had previously been Clinton’s White House Counsel and chief of staff to Clinton’s Vice President, Al Gore, and had had a close relationship with Holder. According to Quinn, Holder had advised that standard procedures be bypassed and the pardon petition be submitted directly to the White House.
Congressional investigations were also launched. Clinton’s top advisors, Chief of Staff John Podesta, White House Counsel Beth Nolan, and advisor Bruce Lindsey, testified that nearly all of the White House staff advising the president on the pardon request had urged Clinton to not grant Rich a pardon. Federal investigators ultimately found no evidence of criminal activity.
As a condition of the pardon, it was made clear that Rich would drop all procedural defenses against any civil actions brought against him by the United States upon his return there. That condition was consistent with the position that his alleged wrongdoing warranted only civil penalties, not criminal punishment. Rich never returned to the United States.
In a February 18, 2001 op-ed essay in The New York Times, Clinton (by then out of office) explained why he had pardoned Rich, noting that U.S. tax professors Bernard Wolfman of the Harvard Law School and Martin Ginsburg of Georgetown University Law Center had concluded that no crime had been committed, and that Rich’s companies’ tax-reporting position had been reasonable. In the same essay, Clinton listed Lewis “Scooter” Libby as one of three “distinguished Republican lawyers” who supported a pardon for Rich. (Libby himself later received a presidential commutation for his involvement in the Plame affair.) During Congressional hearings after Rich’s pardon, Libby, who had represented Rich from 1985 until the spring of 2000, denied that Rich had violated the tax laws but criticized him for trading with Iran at a time when that country was holding U.S. hostages.
Yes... Mark Rich!!!
Clintons critics alleged that Richs pardon had been bought, as Denise Rich had given more than $1 million to Clintons political party (the Democratic Party), including more than $100,000 to the Senate campaign of the presidents wife, Hillary Rodham Clinton, and $450,000 to the Clinton Library foundation during Clintons time in office.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.