NY Post: Marc Rich pardon still paying off for Clintons

posted at 12:01 pm on January 18, 2016 by Ed Morrissey

Now this is a Bill Clinton theme worth pursuing in 2016. In the final days of his presidency, while the First Couple began to strip the White House of its furnishings (and the Ws off of the computer keyboards), the soon-to-be-former president issued the last of his clemency actions. The most significant of these was a pardon for Marc Rich, a billionaire who had flouted international sanctions and then fled the country before his case could be tried. The pardon for a Democratic donor who had become a fugitive shocked even Democrats at the time, especially since the Rich family turned out to be handsome donors to the Clinton library.

It has been 15 years almost to the day since the Rich pardon. Marc Rich died in 2013, but his legacy lives on … mainly in the Clinton family’s fortunes, as the New York Post reports today in an essay by Peter Schweitzer (via Instapundit):

Rich died in 2013. But his business partners, lawyers, advisers and friends have showered millions of dollars on the Clintons in the decade and a half following the scandal. …

Chagoury has been very generous to the Clintons in the years following the Rich pardon. He has organized an event at which Bill was paid $100,000 to speak (in 2003), donated millions to the Clinton Foundation and in 2009 pledged a cool $1 billion to the Clinton Global Initiative. The Chagourys were also active in Hillary’s 2008 presidential bid. Michel Chaghouri, a relative in Los Angeles, was a bundler and served on her campaign staff. Numerous other relatives gave the maximum $4,600 each to her campaign. …

Then there’s Russian investor Sergei Kurzin. He worked for Marc Rich in the 1990s, traveling around Russia looking for suitable investment opportunities in the crumbled former Soviet Union.

An engineer by training, Kurzin has been involved in lucrative deals in Kazakhstan and other countries, including the lucrative Uranium One deal that involved Bill Clinton and Frank Giustra.

Russia bought 20 percent of all uranium production capacity in the US, a deal that needed to be signed off on by the State Department when it was headed by Hillary Clinton. While the deal was going through, Bill Clinton was paid $500,000 to give a speech in Moscow, paid for by a Russian investment bank promoting the uranium deal.

Kurzin, meanwhile, donated $1 million to the Clinton Foundation.

The Uranium One deal is an especially potent topic. That required approvals from the State Department (among other) at the same time that Bill was collecting his $500,000 fee from one of the principals in the deal. It eventually put a substantial amount of control on US uranium in the hands of a Russian consortium.

The pardon of Marc Rich should get more attention as perhaps the launch of the corrupt post-presidency career of both Clintons. It broke precedent, which had required fugitives to return to the US prior to any clemency action, and it involved big-time donors who had broken laws to acquire vast sums of wealth. The Clintons spent the next fifteen years following that pattern, amassing a huge fortune for themselves while purporting to be doing nothing but charitable work. The Clintons made $57 million alone during the four years in which Hillary Clinton served as Secretary of State, with deals like Uranium One contributing significantly to that haul.

Forget the personal peccadilloes of Bill Clinton in the Oval Office. Follow the money instead. The Clintons have left plenty to track.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

They’re both traitors to the US of A, but this will not be reported by the lame stream media twits, nor will ever a question be made to dirt bag Hillary about the obvious.

woodhull on January 18, 2016 at 12:07 PM

The Clintons sell influence. That’s what they do. That’s the only reason Hillary needs to remain viable as a candidate. Once it’s clear that the Clinton dynasty is dead, the money stops flowing.

RBMN on January 18, 2016 at 12:08 PM

Oh god, this 90’s Clinton crap is so old.

Again, people could not be compelled to GAF then, why would they GAF now?

If you can’t look at Hillary Clinton and automatically have a laundry list of current reasons why she shouldn’t be POTUS or anything, you deserve to lose.

Moesart on January 18, 2016 at 12:15 PM

The Clintons are professional grifters. They could make millions “selling” ShamWow towels.

Also, it was Eric Holder who “brokered” the Marc Rich pardon. That scumbag (Holder) should have been nowhere near the DoJ.

Aizen on January 18, 2016 at 12:16 PM

Forget the personal peccadilloes of Bill Clinton in the Oval Office. Follow the money instead. The Clintons have left plenty to track.

Schweitzer, author of Clinton Cash: The Untold Story of How and Why Foreign Governments and Businesses Helped Make Bill and Hillary Rich, lays out a very compelling and well sourced look at the pattern of corruption, malfeasance, and quid pro quo done among the Clinton Foundation, Bill and Hillary Clinton, and the reprobates who sought to buy favors.

Read the article Ed links to. It details just how bad Marc Rich was and why even staunch Democrat sycophants of Bill Clinton were appalled when he pardoned Marc Rich in exchange for $450,000 in Clinton Library donations. Rich callously shilled for and traded with the worst of the worst in the world – in contempt of US law.

I wonder if one of the reasons that Eric Holder thinks Hillary Clinton is best placed to ensure Barack Obama’s legacy is because Obama is as corrupt, craven, and greedy as Hillary?

Athos on January 18, 2016 at 12:17 PM

Oh god, this 90’s Clinton crap is so old.

Moesart on January 18, 2016 at 12:15 PM

You just can’t help beclowning yourself, can you?

The closest this has to the 1990’s Clinton’s is the starting point with the craven pardon of Marc Rich. The vast majority of the story takes place when HRC is SecState you nimrod. But of course, sycophants like you just prefer to dismiss that you don’t want to admit is there.

Athos on January 18, 2016 at 12:19 PM

I had actually forgotten (grr) about that uranium one deal.
what a POS

dmacleo on January 18, 2016 at 12:21 PM

To be honest, I hope Hillary wins the primary. It’ll be much easier to beat that awful woman than Bernie. He’s tapped into the tried and true strategy of promising everything for free, while simultaneously using the stupidity of the average American voter to avoid being thoroughly questioned about his unsustanable fantasies about free college and healthcare.

I saw it first-hand with 2 grown-ass men that think Bernie (and socialism) are fantastic ideas….

I tried to educate them on the 2 main things that socialists don’t understand, economics and human nature, but was met with snide insults in return.

Bernie will get the dummy millenials, and the leftover wannabe hippies. I pray that’s not enough…..

Hank_Scorpio on January 18, 2016 at 12:28 PM

Bernie will get the dummy millenials, and the leftover wannabe hippies. I pray that’s not enough…..

Hank_Scorpio on January 18, 2016 at 12:28 PM

Sadly, millions of American children learned their only economics from other socialist Bernies who teach in public schools.

RBMN on January 18, 2016 at 12:32 PM

I had actually forgotten (grr) about that uranium one deal.
what a POS

dmacleo on January 18, 2016 at 12:21 PM

Yup. The Clintons are sleaze personified, and scam artists. Republicans should be hammering Mrs. Clinton on her dereliction of duty, at the very least.

Aizen on January 18, 2016 at 12:33 PM

Oh god, this 90’s Clinton crap is so old.

Again, people could not be compelled to GAF then, why would they GAF now?

If you can’t look at Hillary Clinton and automatically have a laundry list of current reasons why she shouldn’t be POTUS or anything, you deserve to lose.

Moesart on January 18, 2016 at 12:15 PM

Don’t often agree with you, but this comment is Spot on….

Her comments IN THIS MOST RECENT DEM DEBATE offer up enough
fodder to go after her on.

ToddPA on January 18, 2016 at 12:33 PM

Oh god, this 90’s Clinton crap is so old.

Moesart on January 18, 2016 at 12:15 PM

ToddPA on January 18, 2016 at 12:33 PM

I disagree with both of you over this reason…

Then there’s Russian investor Sergei Kurzin. He worked for Marc Rich in the 1990s, traveling around Russia looking for suitable investment opportunities in the crumbled former Soviet Union.

An engineer by training, Kurzin has been involved in lucrative deals in Kazakhstan and other countries, including the lucrative Uranium One deal that involved Bill Clinton and Frank Giustra.

Russia bought 20 percent of all uranium production capacity in the US, a deal that needed to be signed off on by the State Department when it was headed by Hillary Clinton. While the deal was going through, Bill Clinton was paid $500,000 to give a speech in Moscow, paid for by a Russian investment bank promoting the uranium deal.

Kurzin, meanwhile, donated $1 million to the Clinton Foundation.

Selling a national security resource to a past enemy for money to launder for your campaign WHILE SERVING AS SECRETARY OF STATE, involved her public office for private gain, and is most definitely a current reason to oppose her. It happened while she served, only a few years ago. She should be tried and executed for treason. Period.

dominigan on January 18, 2016 at 12:47 PM

Sadly, millions of American children learned their only economics from other socialist Bernies who teach in public schools.

RBMN on January 18, 2016 at 12:32 PM

That and socialists like to use the word “free” a lot. Kids and hippies don’t like to question things that are free even if it’s obvious they’re being lied to.

Hank_Scorpio on January 18, 2016 at 12:52 PM

You just can’t help beclowning yourself, can you?
Athos on January 18, 2016 at 12:19 PM

Come on, man. The following is Moesart’s point, and it’s a good point:

If you can’t look at Hillary Clinton and automatically have a laundry list of current reasons why she shouldn’t be POTUS or anything, you deserve to lose.

Moesart on January 18, 2016 at 12:15 PM

Not everybody is a political scientist/history buff. But the recent history of Benghazi is enough a reason by itself to disqualify her.

BigAlSouth on January 18, 2016 at 12:55 PM

Oh god, this 90’s Clinton crap is so old.

Moesart on January 18, 2016 at 12:15 PM

In 2012, Democrats said that what Republican nominee Mitt Romney had done as a teenager in prep school was absolutely fair game.

And in 2004, Democrats said that what Republican George Bush had done 40 years earlier was absolutely fair game. At the same time, they also said what his wife Laura had done a decade before she had ever met him was absolutely fair game.

Double standard duly noted!

F-

Del Dolemonte on January 18, 2016 at 1:09 PM

So now even her stint as Sec of State is too ancient history to be considered?

Funny, then why is she touting her service and “achievements” as Sec of state as a big part of her qualifications for president?

If you’re currently campaigning on it, it’s fair game baby.

Oxymoron on January 18, 2016 at 1:34 PM

The continuing precense of the Clinton’s on the political stage, and the fact that she remains even a viable candidate are the strongest evidence that the Rule of Law has fallen in America. “Priviledge” is technically defined as “Private Law” as in the Law does not apply to the nobility, who carry their own law. The Clinton’s are the epitome of Priviledge in the most classical sense. “At this point what does it matter!”

patches on January 18, 2016 at 3:55 PM