ABC - Hillary for State: The Big Sticking Point... "It's the Vetting, Stupid!"

[Cosmic Charlie]

Hillary for State: The Big Sticking Point

November 16, 2008 8:27 AM

All my reporting tells me that Barack Obama wants Hillary Clinton to be his Secretary of State, and that Clinton wants the job too.

But there's one significant complication: how to make sure that former President Clinton's foreign speeches, business dealings and foundation work don't present conflicts of interest.

This is not completely new territory for the Clinton team. They would have had to take steps to review, and possibly disclose, foreign contributions to the Clinton Foundation had Senator Clinton won the nomination and the White House.

Clinton's team began thinking about how to do this during the primaries. That work has intensified since Senator Clinton's meeting with Obama on Thursday.

Here are some of the major questions that need to be addressed: How much public disclosure must there be of past foreign donations to the foundation?

Is any more disclosure of foreign business and speaking income required? Are there other ways -- short of or in addition to full disclosure -- to vet for possible conflicts?

Going forward, would the Clinton Foundation be permitted to continue soliciting foreign support? If so, under what conditions?

How would the contributions be reviewed and vetted?

All of these questions can be answered, but getting there is complicated. It's not done yet

http://blogs.abcnews.com/george/2008/11/obama-wants-hil.html

So just as many suspected, the meeting the other day was no offer at all. It was an inquiry into whether Hillary is willing to be vetted for a position in the Cabinet.
Though George tries to glaze over it in his article, it is obvious that the 'leaks' were overblown.
Hillary hasn't even decided whether she even wants to be vetted yet.

That is why others, such as Bill Richardson, are being considered as well. No decision has been reached.

[zuul9]

1. Please No.. Anybody but her

[democrattotheend]

7. Why? What do you have against her?

She's not my first choice for the job but I am not fervently "anyone but Hillary". I think Health and Human Services would be a better role for her but I think she'd be a pretty good Secretary of State.

[zuul9]

10. I just thinks theres going to be a lot of drama .. if she gets the slot

[democrattotheend]

15. True. I think that's why he didn't pick her for VP.

Hillary Clinton has many admirable qualities but I think we can all agree that "low drama" is not one of them.

[Metric System]

51. What drama did she cause in the Senate? By all accounts she has been an exemplary Senator and a hard

worker. Look, you can oppose her for SOS, that's your prerogative, but let's not smear her.

[Zhade]

33. The whole IWR thing. She has FP experience alright - BAD FP experience!

NT!

[Metric System]

42. Do you mean the IWR that VP Biden voted for? That possible SOS Kerry voted for? Oh, but something

tells me you'll claim their votes were somehow different.

[Heather MC]

53. I think she should stay in the Senate, fighting to help pass legislation that

Obama wants passed. Like healthcare.

[TheWraith]

66. War vote, no negotiation with enemies, Kyl-Lieberman...

She's closer to Bush on foreign policy than she is to Obama.

[KittyWampus]

2. George Stephanopoulous says "All my reporting"? Sorry, he has ZERO credibility

especially not on this matter. In fact, that he is writing this sends up all kinds of red flags, flares, sets off alarms...

[Cosmic Charlie]

6. he's the one who made the initial 'leak' report the other day, prior to Mrs. Greenspan

[wisteria]

32. He was the one who brought up Ayers at the urging of Hannity

during one of the Presidental debates.

[gristy]

3. But, but, she's already been appointed. That's what I keep reading today on DU, anyways.

:freak:

[davidpdx]

4. I agree that she would have some questions to answer

and whether she would allow her and her husband to be vetted or not is a good question (this is from the time they left the White House until now of course). When people were getting their panties in a twist the other day over the pro/anti Clinton threads about her being SOS, I was one of the few people to bring this up. The reponses...zero. Which makes me wonder how many people are in lala land who post this stuff.

[Skwmom]

5. You would think honesty and trustworthiness would be important traits in a SOS.

Amazing. We are just getting rid of an administration that constantly LIED to the American Public. You think honesty and integrity would play some part in cabinet appointments.

[book_worm]

11. As usual, it isn't Sen. Clinton, but former president Clinton who represents the problem.

[joshcryer]

12. She should get a divorce.

It'd be a long time coming. ;)

[Skwmom]

27. You think Sen Clinton represents truthworthiness and honesty?

Remember: "Everyone in politics lies, but they do it with such ease, it's troubling," Geffen told Dowd.

Just what you want to send out to the world to represent America. Someone, who even Americans don't view as honest.

[Zhade]

36. bill didn't force her to lie about nonexistent Tuzla snipers or her "opposition" to NAFTA.

She did that on her own.

[Zhade]

35. Hear, hear. I don't think we want to hear more lies about nonexistent snipers.

Uh, I mean, terrorists.

[Peace Patriot]

8. As to vetting--there is the matter of Colombia.

Hillary had Mark Penn as her chief campaign adviser--a paid agent of the Colombian government, a government that is rife with fascist corruption (drug trafficking, death squads, bribery) in no small part due to Clinton's Plan Colombia--billions of our tax dollars to these fascist fuckwads for the corrupt, failed, murderous U.S. "war on drugs" (now up to $6 billion under the Bush junta--the largest U.S. military aid package on earth, outside of Israel, and without a dent in the rampant cocaine trade). Over forty union leaders have been murdered by rightwing death squads with very close ties to the Colombian government, this year alone. Four thousand union leaders and workers were murdered on Chiquita plantations over a seven year period (with Chiquita execs paying rightwing death squads $1.7 million to take care of their "labor problem.") What "free trade" with Colombia would amount to is a "free fire zone on union leaders and workers."

And it has been a big question is my mind: To what extent are the Clinton operatives on Obama's team (such as Eric Holder, Chiquita's death squad attorney) going to push Obama to paper over these horrendous crimes of the Colombian government, with their "promise" to stop killing people and be kinder to the environment? The Peru "free trade" agreement, that Obama did approve of, has turned out to have labor and environmental protections on paper only, and the corrupt president of Peru now has a 20% approval rating, and serious labor unrest. Will Colombia's promises be any more believable? Don't make me laugh.

Hillary said during the campaign that she doesn't support the Colombia "free trade" deal. I don't believe her. Her association with Mark Penn points to shadiness and corruption. Is this how Obama wants to start off a new policy toward Latin America, with heavy strings on the Secretary of State like Mark Penn and Plan Colombia?

[Zhade]

37. A very good point, especially given that Obama has spoken on this subject before.

NT!

[FLAprogressive]

9. The last thing Pres-elect. Obama needs to do is bring people with crap loads of baggage in his admin

And boy does Hillary have a lot of baggage. I still don't know what she's done to make her a foreign policy expert....which is kind of what you have to be to be SoS.

[OnceUponTimeOnTheNet]

13. If this is true that Clinton Aides pushed the envelope on this issue

They have done a disservice to her supporters, herself, and Obama. These folks have been squeezed thru the wringer too many times to count. Media games do not help at this point, only harm.

[gatorboy]

14. Vetted? Clinton?

Really, what else could they find? Digging into their history has been an American tradition for the past 16 years, it seems. :P

[Cosmic Charlie]

18. the Clintons haven't been vetted since 2000

a lot has gone on since then

[Skittles]

16. they never quit bashing Hillary, do they?

:puke:

[4themind]

17. If true

I hope this would all be worth the potential drama in all of this, especially when there are several good candidates for the job IMO, Clark, Richardson, Kerry etc. I'd hope that "building a team of rivals" isn't the primary criterion that he's using for qualification for the job, not that I'm accusing him of that, but he could some explaining to do to quite a few folks out there depending on how this plays out.

[BeyondGeography]

19. Obviously

Hillary as SoS means a heeping helping of Giustra, Kazahkstan and Burkle the Hedge Fundy. Lots to think about for all concerned.

[Beacool]

20. Aha, because Obama would pass his own questionnaire?

You all forgot HIS associates?

Oh, the hypocrisy. Same as in the primaries, nothing changes around here.

:eyes:

[Genevieve]

21. Yes. He would.

[Radical Activist]

22. How many Saudi millions has Obama taken?

Sorry, there's no comparison.
My guess is that some of the Clinton Library money has ties to the Bin-Laden family or people who gave support to Al-Qaeda. It would seriously compromise her role as SOS. For some reason I forgot about this. Now I'm convinced she would be a mistake for SOS.

[Genevieve]

23. and Clinton's Dubai lobbying ties, and the Penn/Colombia ties - oh, but

Obama hangs out with terrorists! :sarcasm:

[Beacool]

24. Colombia, Columbia is a university.

:shrug:

[Genevieve]

25. you're right.

[Genevieve]

26. you're right.

[Beacool]

28. I guess I'm doubly right.

:7

:hi:

[ShortnFiery]

29. The vetting is not pass/fail. Your associations don't disqualify you ...but what you are doing NOW.

If Bill is currently doing shady dealings then Hillary would be out of consideration.

Making past mistakes or past associations that are NOT ongoing = not disqualifiers.

It's what you are about NOW and what you can be counted on in the future.

If Bill can be blackmailed by questionable business partners then, by association, Hillary would not be good security risk - selection for SOS.

[Zhade]

38. He already has. Remember, he's #44.

NT!

[Cosmic Charlie]

47. sad to see you still harbor doubts about our President

some things never change, I guess

[sniffa]

54. It's sad to see others still coming to this realization

about Ignored.

[Beacool]

59. Sad to see you and so many here still bash the Clintons.

As for Obama, I'm withholding judgment into he actually gets into office and performs the job. Not fair to criticize in advance (which is what plenty of you are doing to Hillary).

[JVS]

56. I guess he's just lucky his president instead of some kind of prospective appointment.

:rofl:

[Name removed]

65. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Beacool]

67. Tsk, tsk, such rudeness.

Not that I'm surprised by it.

:eyes:

[wisteria]

30. Everything about the Clinton's is overblown. They retain their power this way.

Snuffy, knows nothing really. Why would Clinton even be considered more qualified than others in the running? And, I don't by that nonsense that Obama really wants her to be SOS, why? And, if he is considering her, it it really because she is so qualified and will make a major contribution to the cabinet or is it because he wants to keep an eye on her. I think some of this is about money the Clinton's think Obama owes them too. Funny thing is, I had heard about the money issue two days before this Hillary hype happened.
I do not want her in this position and I think Obama would be foolish to place her in it. I don't think Obama is that foolish.

[Zhade]

31. I don't think we want as SOS anyone who either fell for b*s* lies about WMD...

...or, worse, didn't - and voted to go to war anyway.

[Whoa20]

34. shut up with this "vetting,"

the Clintons are elite people who have been vetted about 10000 times, and with Bill's business dealing, they were "vetted" in primary season and nothing illegal turned up, as always.

[ShortnFiery]

39. Illegal and Immoral are not synonymous. There could be conflicts of interest that would

mar and/or embarrass HRC if she were selected for SOS.

[Whoa20]

40. embarassing to whom?

to YOU, since the American people are not gonna care? I guarantee you polls will be taken and the overwhelming majority will be for her appointment.

[Zhade]

41. It's a sad comment on Americans that they wouldn't care about a lack of ethics.

NT!

[Whoa20]

43. there is no lack of ethics

just because something happens to involve money does not mean there is some lack of ethics. some liberals sometimes get caught up in the whole "money is the root of all evil" thing, and this sounds like it. There is nothing wrong with helping a friend make money. Its not as if he traded with our enemies, like Prescott Bush or anything.

[ShortnFiery]

45. Yes, we were all thrilled when Bubba PARDONED his half-brother, Roger Clinton.

Yes, that action was HIGHLY unethical. :thumbsdown:

[Whoa20]

46. who the hell would not pardon family

for the minor BS roger did. Sell drugs, bad, yes, but not like he sold out an entire company like Lay, or sold arms for hostages. I would help my family if I could in such a way if I had to.

[ShortnFiery]

48. I wouldn't ... and others wouldn't either. Nepotism and cronyism are VILE. eom

[Whoa20]

50. so is absolutism.

Its not as if he gave Roger a special position in an administration for nothing, nor did Bill get anything in return other than satisfaction from helping out his troubled younger brother. Is that so bad? Family values do matter sometimes.

[ShortnFiery]

52. No, it's not absolutism. Roger Clinton has MOVED beyond his conviction. It was not harming him

as a business person. I would not have done it because there are so many other people who were more deserving than my PERSONAL family.

We deserve BETTER moral fiber within our President. I was disgusted when I heard that Bill Clinton Pardoned his half-brother.

It was just VILE. :puke:

[Whoa20]

55. Roger was beaten by his alcoholic dad

as a young man. Bill had to intervene. Bill also pardoned some very deserving peeps, with Rich as the exception, but every Pres pardons bad guys, even Jimmy Carter who pardoned G Gordon Liddy, a lot worse than Roger Clinton. Roger deserved a break.

[ShortnFiery]

57. Roger's dad didn't beat him into committing a drug felony. Pardoning a family member is immoral.

Nothing can detract from that ... not even Roger's sad early life. Bill Clinton took "the low road" by placing HIS PERSONAL FAMILY above thousands of other more worthy potential men/women to be Pardoned.

It was VILE ... nothing (no extraneous information) can make this decision MORAL because it would defy basic "public service" decency.

[Whoa20]

58. who should he have pardoned

that he didn't? Give some names, please. I don't see how any national interest was hurt by helping out family, with respect to nothing that serious.

[ShortnFiery]

60. You don't pardon FAMILY when you SERVE THE PUBLIC. I don't know how to simplify it more.

It's immoral to place your PERSONAL or FAMILY interest *ABOVE* that of the constituents that you have vowed to serve.

You just don't get it, do you? Bill Clinton served THE PEOPLE of the United States of America. As such, you are expected to SERVE them/us NOT the best interest of your family.

Pardoning your half-brother would score you a ZERO on the scale of Public Service INTEGRITY.

I'm ashamed that I voted for Bill Clinton because he clearly views his personal interests as more important than the welfare of his Country. It now shows. :(

[Whoa20]

62. you missed the question: WHO SHOULD HE HAVE PARDONED?

that he did not. Whom did he screw over to help his troubled younger brother? I'm pretty damn sure the founders allowed Presidential pardons because some of them had family who may have gotten in trouble, as they weren't stupid, and know Presidents were gonna do things like pardon their family. What national priorities took a back seat to Roger Clinton, or will you just admit your Clinton hatred?

[ShortnFiery]

63. There's no need to get irate. There WERE hundreds of people who applied for Pardons -

Dozens of them were warranted before Bill's brother ...

Why is it so hard for you to PROCESS the fact that Bill Clinton, as President of The United States, was expected to be a PUBLIC SERVANT?

No, if I knew that Bill Clinton would pardon FAMILY, I would not have voted for him. That is a profound TELL that you don't give a damn about your Country.

You just don't do that. If you find nothing immoral about this VILE act, then there's no hope to you ever opening your mind to understand the "public" in "public servant."

There are valid reasons why I do not like Bill Clinton. The most glaring for all to see NOW - are his sense of entitlement and arrogance.

[ShortnFiery]

44. The American People do care about the character of their representatives. NO, she's not

a team builder. She plays favorites but works well in small groups within the Senate. HRC is intelligent but she's no "people manager." She doesn't have that talent needed for a SOS.

[Cosmic Charlie]

49. they were not vetted in the primary season. they refused during the veepstakes.

they will refuse again now, and she will not be picked.
no big mystery...

[renman95]

61. Secret Meeting

I guess we all know what the meeting between the two was about
last spring when HRC conceded.  I never thought he would allow
the Clinton's to be so close to him after clobbering 'em. 
Remember some wished he had picked HRC after the Palin pick. 
No way do we need the Clinton's that close to the pulse.

[AtomicKitten]

64. Obama isn't screwing around with this. Nobody is above the process.