Long before Clinton declared
candidacy, the DNC researched her "vulnerabilities"—including
speaking fees, private jets, and high-rolling Clinton Foundation donors
By Nika Knight
http://www.commondreams.org/news/2016/06/22/hacker-leaks-secret-dnc-master-files-hillary-clinton-foundation
The anonymous hacker calling
themselves Guccifer
2.0 released a second
trove of internal documents from Democratic National Committee (DNC)
servers on Tuesday, including a hefty 113-page file titled "Hillary
Clinton Master Doc" that includes research the party performed on behalf
of Clinton's candidacy—months before she declared an intention to run.
The documents reveal that the
DNC was particularly worried about Clinton's speaking fees, her book advance,
and her somewhat exacting luxury travel requirements for appearances.
As the Daily Beast summarized:
Several documents leaked [...]
show that DNC researchers, whose annotated notes can still be seen in the
electronic files, looked for the tiniest potential infraction or questionable
item in Clinton’s travel expenses, for instance, asking why one trip from New
York to Washington, D.C., aboard a Bank of America jet cost just $45.75, an
amount that a researcher called "weirdly low."
A whole section in the
"Master Doc" is devoted to questions and criticism about the money
Clinton made from her book advance, book tour, and her public speeches, which
generally ran around $250,000 per appearance and required the host to provide
first-class travel and accommodations. In Clinton's defense, the DNC cites
articles stressing that fees went to the Clinton
Foundation, and characterizing the work that the former secretary did in
her private life not as an attempt to enrich herself, but to benefit her and
her husband’s charitable work.
Also in the dossier were
documents gathered by the DNC related to Clinton's sky-high speaking fees,
including an email
from her booking agency that contradicts Clinton's defense
that she merely accepted "what they offered" when she was paid over
$200,000 per speech—a claim that reporters have previously
critiqued.
As journalist Shaun King
observed on Twitter:
The Smoking Gun notes the
other amenities Clinton required in her speaking contracts:
In addition to a "standard"
$225,000 fee, Clinton required a "chartered roundtrip
private jet" that needed to be a Gulfstream 450 or
a larger aircraft. Depending on its outfitting, the Gulfstream jet, which costs
upwards of $40 million, can seat 19 passengers and "sleeps up to
six." Clinton's contract also stipulated that speech hosts had to pay for
separate first class or business airfare for three of her aides.
As for lodging, Clinton
required "a presidential suite" and up to "three (3) adjoining
or contiguous rooms for her travel aides" and up to two extra rooms for
advance staff. The host was also responsible for the Clinton travel party’s ground
transportation, meals, and "phone charges/cell phones."
Additionally, the host also
had to pay "a flat fee of $1000" for a stenographer to create
"an immediate transcript of Secretary Clinton's remarks." The
contract adds, however, "We will be
unable to share a copy of the transcript following the event."
Moreover, the DNC appeared
particularly worried about the "vulnerabilities" of the Clinton
Foundation, such as its acceptance of million-dollar plus donations from
private corporations and foreign governments, its veiled finances, and its
record in Haiti.
One file
(pdf) titled "Clinton Foundation Donors $25K+" documents the
high-rolling donors to the Clinton Foundation, including the Kingdom of Saudi
Arabia (in the $10-$25 million column), the Saudi Arabian construction magnate
Sheikh Mohammed H. Al-Amoudi ($5-$10 million), Barclays Capital ($1-$5
million), ExxonMobil ($1-$5 million), and Chevron ($500,000-$1 million), among
many other private corporations—including healthcare, oil and gas, and media
giants—and foreign governments.
In a master file called
"Clinton Foundation Master Doc," DNC researchers appear to have
gathered reporting spanning years on the "vulnerabilities" of the
Clinton Foundation's record and finances, revealing a particular point of
anxiety for the party:
The documents, most of which
appear to be dated from the spring of 2015, reveal a party entirely focused on
propping up its establishment candidate, critics contend, while failing to
support or even predict the success of outsider candidate Bernie Sanders.
Indeed, much of the
"opposition research" on other Democratic candidates focused on
Lincoln Chafee, Martin O'Malley, Jim Webb, and even Vice President Joe Biden,
who never declared an intention to run.
Some argue that these leaks
lend more weight to accusations that the primary was "rigged" in
favor of the former secretary of state.
And whoever Guccifer 2.0 may
be, they appear to be taking a more active role in the leaks—saying they're now
willing
to speak to the press via Twitter—supporting
whistleblower Edward Snowden's statement that such hacktivists are "now
demonstrating intent—and capability—to influence elections."
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License
No comments:
Post a Comment