Published: Sept 1,1997 Author: MICHAEL WEISSKOPF
September 01, 1997 THE WHITE HOUSE THAT INVISIBLE MACK SURE CAN LEAVE HIS MARK BY MICHAEL WEISSKOPF/WASHINGTON Time Magazine In Part:
For a man who had supposedly vanished from the corridors of power, MACK MCLARTY was the man to see in 1996. BILL CLINTON's former chief of staff, now a White House counselor tucked away in the basement, provided assistance to businessmen who ponied up $1.5 million for the Democrats in the last election. On Nov. 22, 1995, for example, Clinton scrawled an FYI note to McLarty, enclosing a newspaper article on Enron Corp. and the vicissitudes of its $3 billion power-plant project in India. McLarty then reached out to Enron's chairman, KEN LAY, and over the next nine months closely monitored the project with the U.S. ambassador to New Delhi, keeping Lay informed of the Administration's efforts, according to White House documents reviewed by TIME. In June 1996, four days before India granted final approval to Enron's project, Lay's company gave $100,000 to the President's party. Enron denies that its gift was repayment for Clinton's attention, and White House special counsel LANNY DAVIS says McLarty acted out of concern for a major U.S. investment overseas.
Nevertheless, there does seem to be a McLarty pattern. At Clinton's request, he met with international oil consultant ROGER TAMRAZ and asked the Energy Department if the Administration could not be more supportive of his Caspian Sea pipeline proposal (Tamraz' contribution: $200,000). And last week the Washington Post reported that Davis says McLarty acted "appropriately" in every case.
I purchased this from the archives of Time magazine and have removed all references to the other funding Mack obtained from non Oil industries. The terms listed in the times archive purchase agreement have been met. I am only displaying a portion of the article and for non commercial purposes.
Pls note that Clinton knew Mr Lay for four years prior to Enron’s implosion. Why did not the democrats secure the pensions of the employees? Hmmmm?