Cesspool on the Potomac
NY Times breaks Clinton scandal
Hillary Clinton's got to be sitting around thinking, "Bill hasn't screwed me for years, and now he's done it twice in a week!" After the ex-President's fierce attacks on Barack Obama sabotaged Hillary's chances in the South Carolina primary, today the New York Times reports that in 2005 (a) Bill Clinton was flown to Kazakhstan by Canadian financier Frank Giustra, (b) Giustra and Clinton dined with the president of Kazakhstan, (c) two days later, Giustra surprised the mining industry by winning the right to invest in Kazakh uranium projects, and (d) coincidentally, just a few months later, Giustra made a U.S. $31 million donation to Clinton's charitable foundation.
Here is the Times on who did what for whom:
A spokesman for Mr. Clinton said the former president knew that Mr. Giustra had mining interests in Kazakhstan but was unaware of “any particular efforts” and did nothing to help. Mr. Giustra said he was there as an “observer only” and there was “no discussion” of the deal with Mr. Nazarbayev or Mr. Clinton.
But Moukhtar Dzhakishev, president of Kazatomprom, said in an interview that Mr. Giustra did discuss it, directly with the Kazakh president, and that his friendship with Mr. Clinton “of course made an impression.” Mr. Dzhakishev added that Kazatomprom chose to form a partnership with Mr. Giustra’s company based solely on the merits of its offer.
After The Times told Mr. Giustra that others said he had discussed the deal with Mr. Nazarbayev, Mr. Giustra responded that he “may well have mentioned my general interest in the Kazakhstan mining business to him, but I did not discuss the ongoing” efforts.
Hold on whilst Westmonster catches breath, and carry on after the break.
You can read all the details in the Times story, which is extraordinarily detailed. It also lists the sometimes conflicts between the words and policies of Hillary Clinton as Senator and candidate and the actions of Bill Clinton regarding Kazakhstan and its potential leadership of the Organisation for Cooperation and Security in Europe. Bill supported it, and Hillary, who chaired a commission in the Senate under whose purview this came, opposed it.
This report could not have come at a worse time for Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign, which was looking to solidify its lead and possibly lock up the Democratic nomination during next Tuesday's 22-state primary fiesta. Now, it's likely the campaign will have to answer questions — again — about husband Bill and what role Hillary may or may not have played in all of this. Don't be surprised if this comes up in tonight's debate between Hillary and Barack Obama.
If Americans are looking for a reason not to return to the Clinton era, this story might be the last proof they need.
del.icio.us
digg
Facebook
Newsvine
reddit
2 Comments
Why is this URL known as WESTMONSTER?
Sidsid-
For the short answer, you can read our About Westmonster page.
If your comment makes reference to the fact that this is a Westminster blog providing extended coverage of the U.S. Election, then touché — we have been dedicating a good amount of time and effort to coverage of the campaign.
We feel the extended coverage of the campaign is justified, for two key reasons. First, it's justified on the basis that there's clearly interest within the UK, as the primary season has led national newspapers and newscasts, and is taking up a lot of space in leading blogs. We've also provided the expanded coverage on the basis that we're providing an angle to our coverage we think UK readers aren't getting elsewhere.
If you want to read a very revealing piece on just how much foreign interest there is in the U.S. election, Westmonster refers you to Roger Cohen's excellent piece on the topic in today's International Herald Tribune (via the New York Times).