American's Do Not Leave Our People Behind #AfghanistanWithdrawalDebacle

A core part of the American ethos is that we do not leave our people behind. Join us Tuesday (Tomorrow), August 31, at 3:29 pm, as the SWLA Veterans Assn holds a short Rally and Press Conference to give us their views on the manner of our withdrawal from Afghanistan. Do they think we have left Americans behind, or any Afghan's who supported us in our fight against terrorists? We know that we left behind vast supplies of American military equipment, including 16,035 sets of night vision goggles, 358,530 rifles, hundreds of armored vehicles and more. We'll hear their opinion on that as well. See you there. #NeverLeaveYourPeopleBehind

Press Coverage: Lake Charles American Press, KPLCTV

What are the Clintons selling to earn 344 times the Average American? #theClintonMultiple

In an interview with Dianne Sawyer in 2014, Hillary Clinton expressed the difficulty she and her husband faced when leaving the White House in 2001.

"You have no reason to remember, but we came out of the White House not only dead broke, but in debt," Clinton said. "We had no money when we got there, and we struggled to piece together the resources for mortgages for houses, for Chelsea's education. It was not easy. Bill has worked really hard. And it's been amazing to me. He's worked very hard."

As I noted in a related article, the tax returns for the Clinton’s are available for all their political life. I pulled them up and, using our friend Excel, did a little comparison of the income of Bill and Hillary Clinton to the Median Income earned by Americans.

As President, Bill Clinton had net income of $4,111,626 for the 9 years from 1992 – 2000, for an annual average of $456,847. The Median Income in America for those same years was an average of $35,163. So the Clinton’s earned 13 times more income than the Median, or middle, American family.

Mrs. Clinton was accurate to note that the Clinton’s left the White House with some financial woes. But she failed to detail that 100% of their financial negatives were the legal bills they incurred in defending against the multiple corruption and sexual assault allegations against them. Mrs. Clinton listed the issues of mortgages and houses and their daughter’s education. But they lived in the White House and didn’t need a mortgage. While in office, they had taxable income of 13 times the average American, yet she complained about the struggle of paying for their child’s school?

Let’s turn to Chapter 2 in the financial life of the Clintons. In the years following their first White House experience, the Clintons had personal taxable net income of $229,314,701 for the years 2001 – 2014.  That’s an average of $16,379,622 per year. During that same period, the Median income for an American family averaged $47,655. The #ClintonMultiple jumped from a nice 13 times the American average while President, to 344 times the American average (Median) in their years after the White House.

When the topic of the Clintons’ high income has come up during the campaign, I have often overheard this type of reply, “Well, Donald Trump is rich, too. Rich people are all corrupt in one way or another, and do the same things.”

The reason I started this series of articles on the differences between Public and Private life is so we could remember the necessary distinction between them: People who choose the honor and sacrifice of a Public Life must live up to the high standard required, because they are now serving the Public Interest, not simply their own. They are responsible for other people’s money, not their own. They are called to use their position and influence for the good of others, the good of the country, not their own.

In Private life, and private business, you are free to use your time and money and business to serve your own desires. What’s incredible America is how a free and moral people use their private life and money to serve others because they want to, not because they are forced to. America consistently ranks at the top of most charitable countries in the world in private charitable giving.

How is it that the Clintons can earn 344 times what the Median American family earns and do so without owning any businesses? In comparing their income to other business people, remember that the Clintons’ don’t own a chain of car dealerships like the uber-popular John Elway did when he retired at the top as quarterback of the Denver Broncos. Nope. They don’t own part of baseball team or an interest in an energy company, like President Bush did before he was elected. No sir. The Clintons fly around the world and give talks.  As a bonus to them, it appears that President Clinton nearly always flies on the luxury jet of one of his benefactors. And from what I understand, that’s not included in his taxable income, either.

This reminds me of Rumpelstiltskin’s line from the current popular series, Once Upon a Time. When someone comes to Rumple wanting him to use his magic to help them, he always warns them, “Remember Dearie, All Magic Comes at a Price!”

The Clintons have been cashing-in on their fame and more pointedly, their enormous political influence, helping help people and companies at home and abroad get what they want done in Washington. Just like with Rumpelstiltskin, there’s no magical freebies here: the Clinton’s earned their tremendous fortune not by generating value from a product or service, but for selling their political influence. When politicians put their thumb on the scale on behalf of one party, it always costs another party that same amount.

Why would so many people pay the Clinton’s so much? Because the Clintons future decisions were going to pay off to them! There’s no magic here, just plain ole’ #Pay4Play Corruption.

P.S. If you are now curious and want specific examples, just dig around. And I’ll be listing a few pointed ones in another article very soon. You could also check out the video of Peter Schweizer’s book, Clinton Cash. Advance to the 5 minute mark, and you’ll here a summary of the Clintons’ interactions with Rwandan “President” Paul Kagame. Then with Lukas Lundin who cut deals with warlords in the Congo and made huge profits, and donated $100 million to the Clinton Foundation. At 12:12, the story turns to Nigeria, resource rich but maybe the most corrupt country in the world. Nigeria was facing a loss of foreign aid if the Secretary of State didn’t grant a waiver for corruption transparency. Then Bill Clinton got paid $1.4 million for 2 speeches in Nigeria about that same time…and Nigeria received that waiver. At 16:40, the story of the Clintons’ involvement in the Haiti recovery begins. (I’ll update the other major mile markers in the documentary later tonight.)

What business are the Clinton’s in? $229 million in direct taxable income since 2001. #theClintonWay

I was a commercial loan officer for most of my 16 years as a banker. I enjoyed the work and learned a ton. I spent most of my time trying to make commercial loans, and in the process I looked at hundreds and hundreds of business loan requests. This usually involved someone wanting to buy a location, a new piece of equipment, or finance larger amounts of inventory to help them grow their sales. Some requests were for new businesses, large and small, and others were for existing enterprises.

When you see a similar situation happen over and over, as I did looking at hundreds of loan requests from all types of borrowers and industries (we called that deal flow), you start to see trends emerge. That deal flow helped me develop a way to look at a business and assess its potential. So here is Paul’s quick method of evaluating a business opportunity.

When I start to explain this to someone, I instinctively put my left hand up, and start by pointing my index finger up and out, then extend my 2nd and 3rd fingers as I quickly go over the first three elements, and it starts something like this:

“Business happens when People, Ideas and Capital…”

By this time, I’ve rolled out my first three fingers on my left hand, and they are sort of hanging there, waiting on the real punchline to get into the story, a;

                “…Meet Opportunity.”

When I say “meet opportunity,” my right hand instinctively wraps around those 3 extended fingers, symbolizing that opportunity is the kingpin of the elements.

Business happens when people, ideas and capital meet opportunity.

I often go on to explain that the first three elements can be shifted about in many cases. If you are short on capital but have good doses of people and ideas, you can often give it a go. The real deal stopper, every time, no matter what, is opportunity. If you have great people with skills and talent, plenty of money (capital), and a nifty idea, but the opportunity, that is, the demand from willing buyers, is lacking, then only heartache and frustration await you if you pursue this business.

When President Bill Clinton left office in January 2001, he and Hillary did what other Presidents have done. Wrote a book and gave some talks, earning a tidy sum in the process.

For example, the President who came after Clinton, George W. Bush, did similarly when he left in 2008. The Center for Public Integrity estimated (in 2012) that President George W. Bush has made $15 million giving speeches since he left office. Another critic of Pres. Bush estimates that he has made 200 speeches at rates of between $100,000 to $175,000 each, which would total $20 to $35 million. He also received a $7 million advance on his first book out of office. That’s a hefty income, something between $27 to $42 million giving speeches and writing books. We don’t know exactly what President Bush has earned, since he is out of office and does not need to provide any financial disclosures. Maybe he did some of those talks for less or more. But even his critics estimate his post-presidency income in this range.

What about the Clinton’s? Well, since Mrs. Clinton has run for and been a Senator and run for President twice, their tax returns from 1992 to 2014 are all available for you and me to review. I pulled up all of them and compiled their income sources for the 23 years from 1992 to 2014, with a summary of the years after the White House (2001-2014) below. During those 14 years, the Clinton’s made net taxable income of $229,426,701. That’s an average of $16.4 million per year, with 2014 their peak year, $28.3 million! Their speaking fees and book advances/royalties have totaled a staggering $201,040,971. That’s about 10 times more than President Bush earned from speaking/writing. Another interesting component is that $32,519,872 of the Clinton’s speaking income is from foreign payors. Additionally, since leaving office, Bill Clinton has received consulting income of $50,534,450. This includes $16 million from a for-profit college, Laureate Education, over five years, and $6 million from an education entity from Dubai, GEMS Education, during that same period.

Let’s go back to my little method for evaluating a business enterprise: Business happens when people, ideas and capital meet opportunity. Let’s break each of the elements down, briefly.

People. The Clinton’s are famous. A former US President lends credibility beyond words to any gathering. President Clinton, when he is in his zone, has an incredible way of connecting with people. His, “I feel your pain,” talks helped get him elected then re-elected, even amidst scandal. So the Clinton’s are good on this element.

Ideas. The Clinton’s are career Democrat Party politicians and are articulate the policies of their party. I’ll give them an okay on this one too.

Capital. It doesn’t take much money to write books, fly around, and give talks, so they are fine on Capital for the speaking and writing business

So, we are good on the first three elements.

Opportunity. Here I start to scratch my head. Yes, former Presidents are very interesting. And former First Ladies/Former Senator/Former Secretary of States are as well. But the scope of their fees are just staggering. It’s one thing to have the novelty of a former President speak at your event, and it’s another thing for hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of groups to pay the former president several hundred thousand dollars a pop for a talk for over a decade.

Why are so many groups doing this? It is for the novelty? Are President Clinton and Secretary Clinton’s talks so compelling that groups will invest hundreds of thousands of dollars for a 45-minute talk? Are these groups getting that kind of motivational/inspiration to get a return on investment on those speaking fees?

Let me ask you, have you ever gone on YouTube and watched a Hillary Clinton speech because it was so compelling? Have you overhead people sharing a quote from a Bill or Hillary book or speech, other than “It takes a village?” In just two years, 2013 and 2014, the years just after she left Pres. Obama’s cabinet, Secretary Clinton was paid over $20 million to give talks.  Much attention has been paid to the $675,000 she was paid for three speeches to Goldman Sachs, a Wall Street Investment Bank.

Why would a financial firm pay such a huge fee for a politician to come speak to their group? Is it to hear her wisdom on how to run an investment bank?

It seems to me that their speaking fees are much more than their celebrity power alone would yield. That is evident on the trend in Bill Clinton’s per speech fee as his wife moved in and out of her position as Senator and Secretary of State. In the year she was neither of these, 2007, his speaking income fell by half.

What is the opportunity that people/companies/foreign countries are buying when they hire the Clinton’s to speak or consult with them?

There’s a fun country expression I heard a lot when coming up, “If something walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, has feathers like a duck…it’s a duck.” This explains my view perfectly. These corporations and foreign states and NGO’s want to get on the Clinton’s good side, to influence the Clinton’s decisions. A couple hundred million dollars of direct, personal income* is Exhibit A that the Clinton’s business isn’t just giving talks and writing books, it is the sale of their future policy decisions and vast political influence.

* FYI, that couple hundred million is over-and-above gifts to the Clinton Foundation, to Hillary’s multiple campaigns for office, nor to the Democrat party or PAC’s.

We will look into some specific Clinton clients, and the role of the Clinton Foundation in an upcoming article.

What is Public Corruption? What's the impact of Others People's Money? And Why does it Matter? Part 2

When Public Life Leaders use their position and influence to benefit themselves or their supporters, the cost is born by all the taxpayers. I did a quick search and landed on the Internal Revenue Service’s page listing examples of such money corruption, Examples of Public Corruption Investigations - Fiscal Year 2015[1].

Department of Justice officials announce the conviction of Veterans Administration official who skimmed $1.2 million on $6.0 million in construction contracts in New Jersey. 

Department of Justice officials announce the conviction of Veterans Administration official who skimmed $1.2 million on $6.0 million in construction contracts in New Jersey. 

Public Corruption 101. Say you are an Engineering Supervisor for the Veterans Administration in New Jersey in 2008. You and three friends set up construction companies to do construction work for the VA. You use your position at the VA to direct over $6 million in construction work to these companies. In return, you get $1,277,205 in kickbacks siphoned off this work between 2008 and 2013. That means the Federal Government paid $1,277,205 EXTRA for these projects so the Public Life Leader could pocket the money. Nice work if you can get it. If you are into being a criminal. Welcome to the life of Jarod Machinga, of Hopewell, New Jersey!

Stacey Jackson, former head of the New Orleans Affordable Homeownership, convicted of skimming $424,000 in from Hurricane Katrina recovery money.

Stacey Jackson, former head of the New Orleans Affordable Homeownership, convicted of skimming $424,000 in from Hurricane Katrina recovery money.

Public Corruption 201. Say you are the Executive Director of New Orleans Affordable Homeownership (NOAH), a city agency and non-profit corporation, and say you received money from the Federal Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to address blight within the city and to remediate homes damaged by Hurricane Katrina. As the Executive Director of NOAH, you can determine how much each contractor would be paid, and you arranged to overpay certain contractors, instructing them to kickback portions of the overpayments to you and to do renovation work on property you own, to the tune of $424,000. When you get investigated, you provide fraudulent documents to a contractor in an effort to mislead the federal grand jury investigation into the fraud. That’s the actual story of Stacey Jackson.

These are some of the public corruption stories we know about, because they were caught, the investigations went forward and uncovered the facts, and they were both convicted to multi-year jail terms for using their Public Life leadership authority to steal money.

Assistant Attorney General Peter J. Kadzi, according to WikiLeaks, gave a "Heads Up" to Hillary Clinton's Campaign Chair, John Podesta, about FBI and Congressional investigations.

Assistant Attorney General Peter J. Kadzi, according to WikiLeaks, gave a "Heads Up" to Hillary Clinton's Campaign Chair, John Podesta, about FBI and Congressional investigations.

Political Corruption 301. Political corruption can be about more than just money, however. If Public Life leaders use their power, information, and influence to help the people they like to get or stay elected, that is public corruption on maybe a more insidious scale.  This happens regularly but seems to be prosecuted less often than money corruption. Maybe the reason is we have become fatigued with the regularity of what I will call here Pubic Life Political Corruption. Examples happen every day. Here is one from today. I am typing this at 6:15 am, November 3, 2016, and as I look at my phone the first tweet I see is from Breitbart: Emails revealed by WikiLeaks show that Assistant Attorney General Peter J. Kadzik shared information about congressional investigation of Hillary Clinton with his friend John Podesta, Chairman of Hillary Clinton’s 2016 Campaign. Here is the email:  

Fwd: Heads up

From:john.podesta@gmail.com

To: jpalmieri@hillaryclinton.com, bfallon@hillaryclinton.com, cheryl.mills@gmail.com, hsamuelson@cdmillsgroup.com, kschake@hillaryclinton.com, nmerrill@hillaryclinton.com

Date: 2015-05-19 11:12

Subject: Fwd: Heads up

 

Additional chances for mischief.

 

---------- Forwarded message ----------

From: *Peter Kadzik* <peterkadzik@gmail.com>

Date: Tuesday, May 19, 2015

Subject: Heads up

To: John Podesta <john.podesta@gmail.com>

 

 

There is a HJC oversight hearing today where the head of our Civil Division

will testify. Likely to get questions on State Department emails. Another

filing in the FOIA case went in last night or will go in this am that

indicates it will be awhile (2016) before the State Department posts the

emails.

 

Did you catch that? A top FBI official (Kadzik) sent a warning to Hillary’s campaign chief (Podesta) that Congress was about to bring up the Emails, that FBI agents would testify, and that a Freedom of Information Act request to release emails wasn’t going to be fulfilled until next year. Then, the Hillary campaign chief, Podesta, forwards the intel to six Clinton campaign leaders with the added comment, “Additional chances for mischief.”

If a person accepts a role in “Public Life,” then they are accepting the requirement for making the public good their goal, rather than their own good. Mr. Kradzik is a senior official at the Department of Justice, the ones who would prosecute , where I feel certain he is under strict standards about sharing information on cases, and here is an email, sent on his gmail.com account not his justice.gov one, where he shares inside information from the FBI about the investigation of Hillary Clinton’s private email server to Hillary’s Campaign Chair! 

Former Secretary of State and current Democratic Presidential Nominee Hillary Clinton and her 2016 Campaign Chair and longtime adviser, John Podesta, who received a "Heads Up" email in May 2015 from his long-time friend and Assistant Attorney Genera…

Former Secretary of State and current Democratic Presidential Nominee Hillary Clinton and her 2016 Campaign Chair and longtime adviser, John Podesta, who received a "Heads Up" email in May 2015 from his long-time friend and Assistant Attorney General Peter Kadzik about Congressional and FBI investigations into Clinton's private email server.

We don’t go see heroic movies about the dirty politician Boss Tweed and the Tammany Hall life in Chicago, where politicians were are on the take, making themselves rich at the expense of the taxpayers. Why? Because Political Corruption is slimy.

#FreedomIsBetter, and it requires that we hold our leaders to the standards of Public Life.

[1] https://www.irs.gov/uac/examples-of-public-corruption-investigations-fiscal-year-201

What is Public Corruption? What's the impact of Others People's Money? And Why does it Matter? Part 1

We regularly hear politicians reference their experience in, “Public Life,” or “Public Service.” This is meant to display a willingness to sacrifice self for the good of the public. Are there different standards for leaders in “Public Life?”

 The short answer is that Public Servants have a higher burden of leadership and ethics, since the organizations they lead use Other People’s Money, rather than their own. Contrast that with leaders in Private Enterprise, who have a direct financial state in the organizations they run – where there is no opportunity for the owner to “skim” funds, since the funds involved are already theirs.

Lord H quote on not doing something worth being found out about.png

An illustration to compare/contrast will help us here.

For several years now, I have owned a business. As the owner, I hold the responsibility to do the work or hire others to do the work. I am responsible to set the policies, to hire and fire, and to decide what products/services will be attractive to our customers and at what price. I am responsible to decide what assets we should buy (equipment, inventory, buildings, etc.) from which vendors, and to either invest my own saved money to purchase them, arrange for the financing from a lender, or recruit a partner. If my business is successful and I earn a profit above the cost of hiring all these people, paying the vendors and purchasing all these assets, then I alone get to reap the joy of my income (after taxes, of course). If my business fails, I alone must bear the cost, both financial, losing all I invested in this business and maybe losing other savings or going bankrupt, and otherwise (business failure has a huge emotional cost). We will call this, “Private Enterprise.”

Compare that to “Public Life.” In Public Life, an individual wins an election, is appointed to a political position, or is otherwise hired and placed in authority over a government department. That puts them in the same decision making position as business owners in Private Enterprise. The Public Life leader does the work or hires others do to the work there. The Public Life leader sets the policies (sometimes in conjunction with a legislative body, sometimes on their own), hires and fires, and decides what products/services will be provided to the customers (the public) and at what price. The Public Life Leader is responsible to decide what assets should be purchased by the government entity from which vendors, and either spends current tax receipts collected from the citizens or borrows money that the government entity must repay at a later date.

Now comes The Difference. With Private Enterprise, business owners have a built-in incentive to make the best decisions possible to build a bigger customer base and do so in such a way that they make a profit at the end of the day. People in Private Enterprise can make wrong decisions as to how to do that, and they surely do make such decisions, which is why many businesses fail and the owners lose the money and time they had invested. However, their Incentive is always to run their business to earn a profit, and those profits flow to the business owner to do as they see fit.

In Public Life, that built-in incentive is not there. If the Public Life Leader runs the government organization with excellence, ensuring by his superb decision making that his organization is efficient, that the employees are happy and productive, that the government entity serves its customers with innovation and tireless energy, the Public Life Leader earns no more money than if he did an average or a below-average job. It’s my opinion that most Public Life Leaders WANT to run their organizations well. But if the organization is not well-run, or if it is well run but on a wild-goose-chase mission, that does not negatively impact the leader’s financial future directly.

So, since there is no built-in link between the mission of a government organization and the financial benefit of the Public Life Leader, some other things must be put in its place, to keep the Public Leader accountable. Those other things are ethics rules, anti-corruption laws, a skeptical and rigorous independent press, and an informed citizenry come re-election time.

Do Public Life Leaders ever use their position for money or political corrupt ends? The plot thickens as we will find out in Part 2 of this article.