Shameful fundraising?

Absolute Zero · September 11th, 2007, 09:24 PM

Selling access to Homeland Security Committee members the week after the 911 anniversary? Now who would be behind that?

http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/...ls-of-911.html

wallyburger · September 12th, 2007, 01:53 PM

What am I missing here? Care to explain what is wrong with this?

Russ Smith · September 12th, 2007, 02:03 PM

I just assumed this was a Norman Hsu thread.

KloD · September 12th, 2007, 03:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wallyburger

What am I missing here? Care to explain what is wrong with this?

I had commented the same thing last night... then decided to delete it. I figure what's the point? It's obvious to me that some just hate the Clintons no matter the rational. My bet is a bunch of these same people would also vote for Rudy (I use 9/11 to no end) Guiliani.

Same thing as the ones who hate liberal actors pumping for Thompson.

wallyburger · September 12th, 2007, 04:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KloD

I had commented the same thing last night... then decided to delete it. I figure what's the point? It's obvious to me that some just hate the Clintons no matter the rational. My bet is a bunch of these same people would also vote for Rudy (I use 9/11 to no end) Guiliani.

Same thing as the ones who hate liberal actors pumping for Thompson.

Then I am not alone. I thought the same thing and was waiting for some pearl of wisdom that would tell me what I am missing.

I don't even want to say that one trick Pony Rudy's whole campaign is 9/11, but how does one even compare the two on the same level.

Hillary is not my nominee of choice, but the hate from a small group is mind boggling at times. If she is guilty of something, I suggest the shooters get past innuendo and float a fact or two. I'd listen.

BTW, isn't Homeland Security a cabinet level agency that will require a nomination by whomever takes the office and hitting the ground running might not be such a bad idea. Get a head start on meeting the players. Hell, Hillary might even be able to separate the pimps and hustlers from the legitimate vendors ahead of time. I am willing to wait and see what comes of this not exactly clandestine affair.

82CardsGrad · September 12th, 2007, 05:54 PM

Seems to me the bigger issue is connecting fund raising efforts with legislators and contractors... It no doubt happens more than most of us know, however, that doesn't make it kosher...

Absolute Zero · September 12th, 2007, 06:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wallyburger

What am I missing here? Care to explain what is wrong with this?

She is cashing in on 911 and selling access to key legislators to put $ in her campaign coffers.

Disgusto. No wonder she didn't match the challenge from Obama and Edwards to refuse fed. lobbyist contributions. All the while she claims she is not influenced by them.

This may be politics as usual, but many of us are ready to turn the page on this.

Absolute Zero · September 12th, 2007, 06:54 PM

On Heels of 9/11, Clinton Fundraiser Raises Eyebrows

Email

Print

Share

September 11, 2007 12:02 PM
Justin Rood Reports:

Just days after the sixth anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks, Hillary Clinton and several Democratic lawmakers will be getting uncomfortably cozy with moneyed interests who have stood to reap billions in post-9/11 homeland security spending, watchdog groups say.
On the sixth anniversary of the attacks which killed nearly 3,000 people, Democratic presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton is slated to attend a sober memorial service near Manhattan's Ground Zero.

One week later, the junior New York senator is scheduled to speak at a homeland security-themed, $1,000-a-plate fundraiser for her campaign in the downtown Washington, D.C. offices of a powerful legal firm.
"Being a week after 9/11, it appears unseemly and politically opportunistic," said Steve Ellis, a former Coast Guard officer who is now vice president of Taxpayers for Common Sense, a Washington, D.C. good government group.

Clinton's fundraising audience is expected to include many of the government contractors and lobbyists whose fortunes have soared in the years since the attacks, which triggered a massive government reorganization and billions in new government spending.
But that's not the only objectionable feature of the event, critics say.
For the price of a ticket -- from a $1,000 personal donation to a $25,000 bundle –- attendees will get a special treat after the luncheon: an opportunity to participate in small, hour-long "breakout sessions" hosted by key Democratic lawmakers, many of whom chair important subcommittees on the Homeland Security committee.
Click Here for Full Blotter Coverage.

"It's an outrage," said Danielle Brian, executive director of the Washington, D.C. good-government group Project on Government Oversight.
"You never want to see lawmakers trading on their national security credentials...to people making large donations," Ellis concurred.
The break-out sessions include:

First Responders, with Reps. Henry Cuellar, Texas (chair, Emergency Communications, Preparedness, and Response Subcommittee of Homeland Security Committee) and Nita Lowey, N.Y. (Appropriations, Homeland Security Committee)

Intelligence and Information Sharing, with Reps. Jane Harman, Calif. (chair, Intelligence, Information Sharing and Terrorism Risk Assessment Subcommittee of Homeland Security Committee) and C. A. "Dutch" Ruppersburger, Md. (chair, Technical and Tactical Intelligence Subcommittee of intelligence committee)

Border, Maritime and Global Counterterrorism, with Reps. Sheila Jackson Lee, Texas (chair, Transportation Security and Infrastructure Protection Subcommittee of Homeland Security Committee) and Jerrold Nadler, N.Y. (Transportation and Infrastructure Committee; Judiciary Committee)

Science and Technology, with Reps. Jim Langevin, R.I. (chair, Emerging Threats, Cybersecurity, Science and Technology Subcommittee of Homeland Security Committee; intelligence committee) and Ellen Tauscher, Calif. (chair, Strategic Forces Subcommittee of Armed Services Committee)

National Security, with Reps. Kendrick Meek, Fla. (Armed Services Committee) and Joseph Sestak, Pa. (Armed Services Committee)
"Political fundraising should have no relationship to policy recommendations," said Brian, a former policy analyst for Congress. "Most of these [participants] are seasoned policymakers. How can they not see this as wrong?" It only made things worse, she said, that the event was centered around so sensitive and vital a topic as homeland security.
The Clinton campaign and most lawmakers participating in the event did not respond to requests for comment for this story.
One participant, Rep. C. A. "Dutch" Ruppersberger, D-Md., said he didn't see anything wrong with the event.

"I very strongly feel that it's time we get politics out of national security," he said in an interview Monday. "It's more important than ever that we keep discussing national security."

"The unfortunate part of our [political] system is that to get your message out, you have to raise money," Ruppersberger said. "Until that system is changed, you have to have the ability to raise money so people know what you are and who you are."

wallyburger · September 12th, 2007, 07:07 PM

I have read it now 3 times and don't see anything aberrant, but you do. Just a difference of opinion

BTW

This is how he describes himself.

Professional muckraker.

Quote:

Justin Rood is a reporter/blogger for TPMMuckraker.com. He's based in Washington, D.C.

Before joining TPM, he covered homeland security and intelligence for Government Executive magazine and Congressional Quarterly. His work has also appeared in the Washington Post, the Washington Monthly, Salon.com and elsewhere.

A D.C. native, Justin earned his B.A. in American Studies at California's Pitzer College. When he isn't reporting he plays the popular Xbox driving game /Burnout 3: Takedown/. He says it is part of a doctor-prescribed therapy regimen to cure his addiction to foreign oil. He also eats cookies.