Wed Nov 28, 2012, 05:25 PM

Report: SecState candidate Rice "Has a Major Financial Stake in Canadian Tar Sands" i.e. Keystone XL

Last edited Thu Nov 29, 2012, 04:57 PM - Edit history (2)

Secretary of State Candidate Has a Major Financial Stake in Canadian Tar Sands

By Scott Dodd
November 28, 2012

Susan Rice, the candidate believed to be favored by President Obama to become the next Secretary of State, holds significant investments in more than a dozen Canadian oil companies and banks that would stand to benefit from expansion of the North American tar sands industry and construction of the proposed $7 billion Keystone XL pipeline. If confirmed by the Senate, one of Rice’s first duties likely would be consideration, and potentially approval, of the controversial mega-project.

Rice's financial holdings could raise questions about her status as a neutral decision maker. The current U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, Rice owns stock valued between $300,000 and $600,000 in TransCanada, the company seeking a federal permit to transport tar sands crude 1,700 miles to refineries on the Texas Gulf Coast, crossing fragile Midwest ecosystems and the largest freshwater aquifer in North America.

Beyond that, according to financial disclosure reports, about a third of Rice’s personal net worth is tied up in oil producers, pipeline operators, and related energy industries north of the 49th parallel -- including companies with poor environmental and safety records on both U.S. and Canadian soil. Rice and her husband own at least $1.25 million worth of stock in four of Canada’s eight leading oil producers, as ranked by Forbes magazine. That includes Enbridge, which spilled more than a million gallons of toxic bitumen into Michigan’s Kalamazoo River in 2010 -- the largest inland oil spill in U.S. history.

Rice also has smaller stakes in several other big Canadian energy firms, as well as the country’s transportation companies and coal-fired utilities. Another 20 percent or so of her personal wealth is derived from investments in five Canadian banks. These are some of the institutions that provide loans and financial backing to TransCanada and its competitors for tar sands extraction and major infrastructure projects, such as Keystone XL and Enbridge’s proposed Northern Gateway pipeline, which would stretch 700 miles from Alberta to the Canadian coast.

The rest: http://www.onearth.org/article/susan-rice-obama-secretary-state-tar-sands-finances

Here's her financial disclosure info: http://www.opensecrets.org/pfds/CIDsummary.php?CID=N99999935&year=2009

UPDATE: Mother Jones has picked up the story: http://www.motherjones.com/blue-marble/2012/11/obamas-secretary-state-financial-stake-keystone

I'm not familiar with the publication OnEarth. But this does not thrill me.

Don't shoot the messenger. This just came across my desk. Thoughts?

139 replies, 14192 views

Thread info Bookmark this thread Trash this thread

Reply to this thread

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum

Replies to this discussion thread

139 replies	Author	Time	Post
Report: SecState candidate Rice "Has a Major Financial Stake in Canadian Tar Sands" i.e. Keystone XL (Original post)	WilliamPitt	Nov 2012	OP
How utterly depressing.	Mika	Nov 2012	#1
My thought, my dear Will, is this:	CaliforniaPeggy	Nov 2012	#2
Agreed...if true, it changes the context of her nomination.	Magoo48	Nov 2012	#13
here here. very depressing but maybe they are doing us a backhanded favor	roguevalley	Nov 2012	#119
That would be a pretty big conflict of interest, then.	TwilightGardener	Nov 2012	#3
First of all, she is NOT a candidate for SOS. This is sh__t made up by the RW media hoping for	kelliekat44	Nov 2012	#67
I like her. But I do believe she was under serious	TwilightGardener	Nov 2012	#73
She also supported Bush on Iraq and opposed ending that war.	sabrina 1	Nov 2012	#104
She didn't oppose Obama's plan to shut Iraq down, though--	TwilightGardener	Nov 2012	#108
If she is named and if she is confirmed, she COULD recluse herself on that decision I think	karynnj	Nov 2012	#110
Yes--she could leave it to the second in charge at the State Dept.	TwilightGardener	Nov 2012	#121
Doesn't thrill me, either.	elleng	Nov 2012	#4
Thought the same thing	PennsylvaniaMatt	Nov 2012	#33
Right, makes sense for public servants.	elleng	Nov 2012	#42
We did not approve of the excuse of a Romney blind trust, nor should we	juajen	Nov 2012	#75
Romney didn't have a blind trust	CreekDog	Nov 2012	#87
Actually, Romney DID claim he had a blind trust	dixiegrrrrl	Nov 2012	#107
right. he claimed to, but his "blind" trust was like his hand over his face promising not to look	CreekDog	Nov 2012	#112
Very illuminating. And not in a good way.	forestpath	Nov 2012	#5
She deserves all the hell they're giving her, then... even if it is a BS reason. nt	Comrade_McKenzie	Nov 2012	#6
Why doesn't she just sell the holdings...? nt	Bigmack	Nov 2012	#7
Ding,Ding,Ding,we have a winner!	Wellstone ruled	Nov 2012	#8
Yep, Council on Foreign Relations	Dont call me Shirley	Nov 2012	#23
I heard Petraus is looking for a new job.	Fuddnik	Nov 2012	#46
Does anyone really believe that this decision will actually be made by the SoS rather than	Freddie Stubbs	Nov 2012	#9
Does anyone believe it would actually matter who makes the decision when	morningfog	Nov 2012	#25
Hey!, stop with the reality check, OK?	DollarBillHines	Nov 2012	#50
I probably own stock in the company that own the Keystone Pipeline. But I oppose the	bluestate10	Nov 2012	#10
I'm at the point where I'm starting to think	DJ13	Nov 2012	#11
+1000 n/t	handmade34	Nov 2012	#26
What you suggest is impossible unless those officials sell everything and put the money	bluestate10	Nov 2012	#32
Bonds are fine	DJ13	Nov 2012	#35
retirement models with scaled back defined benefits indicate a 6-9% return is needed	CreekDog	Nov 2012	#90
government pensions are only 1/3 of one's retirement	CreekDog	Nov 2012	#89
quite a scoop if true	Enrique	Nov 2012	#12
that's pretty damning, if true	bigtree	Nov 2012	#14
why dont her opponents criticize her for this reason instead of BS Benghazi?	NightWatcher	Nov 2012	#15
Because her opponents like this particular nugget about her...	joeybee12	Nov 2012	#16
then why not support her and sit back and reap the stock benefits	NightWatcher	Nov 2012	#18
I bet they think Keystone will go through no matter what...	joeybee12	Nov 2012	#20
that would conflict with their narrative about Obama	Enrique	Nov 2012	#19
Because they know that by performing their dog and pony show the Dems will rally around her	blm	Nov 2012	#39
Well, well, well....	woo me with science	Nov 2012	#17
l know i have. it doesn't though. we don't matter after elections are over	SammyWinstonJack	Nov 2012	#30
Is she Condi's cousin. Thinking Chevron connection?	Dont call me Shirley	Nov 2012	#21
Because it's impossible to sell those investments	jeff47	Nov 2012	#22
Is this true?	kossp	Nov 2012	#24
November 8, 2012:	Zorra	Nov 2012	#27
She is a rich woman who has stock in many foreign companies	OKNancy	Nov 2012	#28
Ummm ...	1StrongBlackMan	Nov 2012	#29
Ummm	waddirum	Nov 2012	#118
Your are correct ...	1StrongBlackMan	Nov 2012	#129
fuck!!! :-((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((	patrice	Nov 2012	#31
This message was self-deleted by its author	AnotherMcIntosh	Nov 2012	#106
I reject that "Rice or Not-Rice" is the definition of a purist any more than a single card face-up	patrice	Nov 2012	#132
This message was self-deleted by its author	AnotherMcIntosh	Nov 2012	#135
BTW, I've actually put my face in the streets on the XL issue in a state run by the Koch bros, what	patrice	Nov 2012	#134
This message was self-deleted by its author	AnotherMcIntosh	Nov 2012	#136
Do you know everything about every issue? You assume XL is all there is to do &	patrice	Nov 2012	#137
what are hillary's stock holdings? what are john kerry's stock holdings? what are john boehner's	spanone	Nov 2012	#34
Hillary's and Kerry's holding have been known because they filed it as Senate disclosures	karynnj	Nov 2012	#114
Here we go	frazzled	Nov 2012	#36
Rice is not an investment manager, or professional investor. My guess is that with a net of	bluestate10	Nov 2012	#55
"Trolling"	WilliamPitt	Nov 2012	#56
I agree re Hillary also. I don't like either of them, both supported Bush's illegal wars	sabrina 1	Nov 2012	#120
Wouldn't any recommendations and/or decisions	NashvilleLefty	Nov 2012	#37
SOS has nothing to do with that, but it is a good diversion	still_one	Nov 2012	#40
Statement by the President on the Keystone XL Pipeline	Enrique	Nov 2012	#48
some pipelines are good	central scrutinizer	Nov 2012	#53
Wait though	AldoLeopold	Nov 2012	#115
OK, I stand corrected.	NashvilleLefty	Nov 2012	#117
No, it crosses an international border, so SoS approval is necessary.	Fuddnik	Nov 2012	#54
Post 48 quotes Obama saying the SOS did not support	Lucinda	Nov 2012	#61
Those of us in the Environmental Sciences have been asking that question	AldoLeopold	Nov 2012	#58
This is not what they are attacking her on however. In addition, she has not been even nominated	still_one	Nov 2012	#38
Her husband is from Canada	Cicada	Nov 2012	#41
Rice can recuse. Hillary Clinton did recuse the first time that issue came up.	bluestate10	Nov 2012	#45
Her father was a Governor of the Federal Reserve	FarCenter	Nov 2012	#43
Her mother was a Vice President of the College Board, the notorious educational testing organization	FarCenter	Nov 2012	#47
That, too, should be known by more.	AnotherMcIntosh	Nov 2012	#109
Give me a break. $600,000-$7000,000 out of a net worth of $23-$45 million?	bluestate10	Nov 2012	#44
That's just how much she has invested in TransCanada. A full third of her personal wealth is similar	riderinthestorm	Nov 2012	#49
Did her father, who was a finance man will her those holdings?	bluestate10	Nov 2012	#57
I don't presume to be an expert on Dr. Rice. I have no idea.	riderinthestorm	Nov 2012	#65
"emotional reasons for not wanting to let those holdings go"? Yea, especially if they make money.	AnotherMcIntosh	Nov 2012	#111
Her husband is Canadian.	frazzled	Nov 2012	#72
Yah but she should have seen this as a potential roadblock	AldoLeopold	Nov 2012	#60
There seems to be	John2	Nov 2012	#51
DO NOT WANT	dbackjon	Nov 2012	#52
yep - most politicians are in the 1%. This is what the 1% does/owns. Our system is the problem.	NRaleighLiberal	Nov 2012	#59
well, well, well, I didn't like Rice before, and now she goes directly to my shit list	quinnox	Nov 2012	#62
I don't believe the Secretary of State would have approval over a pipeline...	Jeff In Milwaukee	Nov 2012	#63
See post #48	WilliamPitt	Nov 2012	#64
I'll be dipped...	Jeff In Milwaukee	Nov 2012	#66
aaahhhrrgg	They_Live	Nov 2012	#68
Let's get this straight	SCVDem	Nov 2012	#69
same bar for Mitt and Rice	Enrique	Nov 2012	#74
This is	grandpamike1	Nov 2012	#70
President Obama: I am the Pipeline Decider	bvar22	Nov 2012	#71
OMG OMG OMG OMG OMG	Ineeda	Nov 2012	#76
I suppose if she were up for Dept of Energy, or the Interior, I'd be more concerned...	Cooley Hurd	Nov 2012	#77
Statement by the President on Keystone XL	Enrique	Nov 2012	#80
Thanks for the info	Cooley Hurd	Nov 2012	#83
here	Enrique	Nov 2012	#85
Thanks Enrique!	Cooley Hurd	Nov 2012	#88
I don't know what she would do	Enrique	Nov 2012	#91
I have to agree...	Cooley Hurd	Nov 2012	#93
I have supported her, but in my opinion, this should	JDPriestly	Nov 2012	#78
This just confirms what I've believed all along...........	jeggus	Nov 2012	#79
there's nothing wrong with wringing our hands	newspeak	Nov 2012	#138
No way should she be considered now. Just let her leave	plethoro	Nov 2012	#81
RATS! Thanks, WRP. n/t	Duval	Nov 2012	#82
geesh!!!????	heaven05	Nov 2012	#84
Give it to my man, John Kerry.	JanetLovesObama	Nov 2012	#86
Kerry is my first choice	democrattotheend	Nov 2012	#116
Mass is politically twitchier than that	AldoLeopold	Nov 2012	#124
Goddammit. I hate it when this happens.	lumberjack_jeff	Nov 2012	#92
shit.	robinlynne	Nov 2012	#94
Not. Gud. n/t	ProfessionalLeftist	Nov 2012	#95
Between that and the auction of 20 mil. acres of Gulf oil drilling rights	NickB79	Nov 2012	#96
Pile on time! Does anyone else have any negative Rice stories	fried eggs	Nov 2012	#97
sure	quinnox	Nov 2012	#98
Great! Let's keep the attacks going! Bipartisanship is fun!	fried eggs	Nov 2012	#99
well, personally I'm not a fan of war hawks and people with heavy investments in oil polluters	quinnox	Nov 2012	#100
What, are you one of those "purists"?	AnotherMcIntosh	Nov 2012	#113
So you think people shouldn't know these things?	WilliamPitt	Nov 2012	#103
Your devotion to small ball is duly noted, and commended	hatrack	Nov 2012	#128
US Embassy bombing in Kenya haunts Rice	godai	Nov 2012	#102
Pick someone else.	jsr	Nov 2012	#101
Wow.	AnotherMcIntosh	Nov 2012	#105
So, now THIS is a real reason to oppose her (potential) nomination for SOS?	Proud Liberal Dem	Nov 2012	#122
Because I like to think that we have more integrity than Republicans	AldoLeopold	Nov 2012	#125
So, Democrats can't own stock?	Proud Liberal Dem	Nov 2012	#127
I see your point	AldoLeopold	Nov 2012	#139
YO William a probloem with this story	FogerRox	Nov 2012	#123
What about Gary Locke as nominee instead?	AldoLeopold	Nov 2012	#126
if the republicans are against it --must we be for it?????	dembotoz	Nov 2012	#130
This message was self-deleted by its author	AnotherMcIntosh	Nov 2012	#133
What a great stock tip!	Oilwellian	Nov 2012	#131

Response to WilliamPitt (Original post)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 05:28 PM

Mika (17,751 posts)

Report: SecState candidate Rice "Has a Major Financial Stake in Canadian Tar Sands" i.e. Keystone XL

1. How utterly depressing.

2. My thought, my dear Will, is this:

13. Agreed...if true, it changes the context of her nomination.

119. here here. very depressing but maybe they are doing us a backhanded favor

3. That would be a pretty big conflict of interest, then.

67. First of all, she is NOT a candidate for SOS. This is sh__t made up by the RW media hoping for

73. I like her. But I do believe she was under serious

104. She also supported Bush on Iraq and opposed ending that war.

108. She didn't oppose Obama's plan to shut Iraq down, though--

110. If she is named and if she is confirmed, she COULD recluse herself on that decision I think

121. Yes--she could leave it to the second in charge at the State Dept.

4. Doesn't thrill me, either.

33. Thought the same thing

42. Right, makes sense for public servants.

75. We did not approve of the excuse of a Romney blind trust, nor should we

87. Romney didn't have a blind trust

107. Actually, Romney DID claim he had a blind trust

112. right. he claimed to, but his "blind" trust was like his hand over his face promising not to look

5. Very illuminating. And not in a good way.

6. She deserves all the hell they're giving her, then... even if it is a BS reason. nt

7. Why doesn't she just sell the holdings...? nt

8. Ding,Ding,Ding,we have a winner!

23. Yep, Council on Foreign Relations

46. I heard Petraus is looking for a new job.

9. Does anyone really believe that this decision will actually be made by the SoS rather than

25. Does anyone believe it would actually matter who makes the decision when

50. Hey!, stop with the reality check, OK?

10. I probably own stock in the company that own the Keystone Pipeline. But I oppose the

11. I'm at the point where I'm starting to think

26. +1000 n/t

32. What you suggest is impossible unless those officials sell everything and put the money

35. Bonds are fine

90. retirement models with scaled back defined benefits indicate a 6-9% return is needed

89. government pensions are only 1/3 of one's retirement

12. quite a scoop if true

14. that's pretty damning, if true

15. why dont her opponents criticize her for this reason instead of BS Benghazi?

16. Because her opponents like this particular nugget about her...

18. then why not support her and sit back and reap the stock benefits

20. I bet they think Keystone will go through no matter what...

19. that would conflict with their narrative about Obama

39. Because they know that by performing their dog and pony show the Dems will rally around her

17. Well, well, well....

30. l know i have. it doesn't though. we don't matter after elections are over

21. Is she Condi's cousin. Thinking Chevron connection?

22. Because it's impossible to sell those investments

24. Is this true?

27. November 8, 2012:

28. She is a rich woman who has stock in many foreign companies

29. Ummm ...

118. Ummm

129. Your are correct ...

31. fuck!!! :-((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((

132. I reject that "Rice or Not-Rice" is the definition of a purist any more than a single card face-up

134. BTW, I've actually put my face in the streets on the XL issue in a state run by the Koch bros, what

137. Do you know everything about every issue? You assume XL is all there is to do &

34. what are hillary's stock holdings? what are john kerry's stock holdings? what are john boehner's

114. Hillary's and Kerry's holding have been known because they filed it as Senate disclosures

36. Here we go

55. Rice is not an investment manager, or professional investor. My guess is that with a net of

56. "Trolling"

120. I agree re Hillary also. I don't like either of them, both supported Bush's illegal wars

37. Wouldn't any recommendations and/or decisions

40. SOS has nothing to do with that, but it is a good diversion

48. Statement by the President on the Keystone XL Pipeline

53. some pipelines are good

115. Wait though

117. OK, I stand corrected.

54. No, it crosses an international border, so SoS approval is necessary.

61. Post 48 quotes Obama saying the SOS did not support

58. Those of us in the Environmental Sciences have been asking that question

38. This is not what they are attacking her on however. In addition, she has not been even nominated

41. Her husband is from Canada

45. Rice can recuse. Hillary Clinton did recuse the first time that issue came up.

43. Her father was a Governor of the Federal Reserve

47. Her mother was a Vice President of the College Board, the notorious educational testing organization

109. That, too, should be known by more.

44. Give me a break. $600,000-$7000,000 out of a net worth of $23-$45 million?

49. That's just how much she has invested in TransCanada. A full third of her personal wealth is similar

122. So, now THIS is a real reason to oppose her (potential) nomination for SOS?