MotherJones: "How Hillary Clinton's State Department Sold Fracking to the World"

[NYC_SKP]

Better we learn these things now while there's still time to hold a legitimate Democratic Primary.

How Hillary Clinton's State Department Sold Fracking to the World

A trove of secret documents details the US government's global push for shale gas.
—By Mariah Blake September/October 2014 Issue



One icy morning in February 2012, Hillary Clinton's plane touched down in the Bulgarian capital, Sofia, which was just digging out from a fierce blizzard. Wrapped in a thick coat, the secretary of state descended the stairs to the snow-covered tarmac, where she and her aides piled into a motorcade bound for the presidential palace. That afternoon, they huddled with Bulgarian leaders, including Prime Minister Boyko Borissov, discussing everything from Syria's bloody civil war to their joint search for loose nukes. But the focus of the talks was fracking. The previous year, Bulgaria had signed a five-year, $68 million deal, granting US oil giant Chevron millions of acres in shale gas concessions. Bulgarians were outraged. Shortly before Clinton arrived, tens of thousands of protesters poured into the streets carrying placards that read "Stop fracking with our water" and "Chevron go home." Bulgaria's parliament responded by voting overwhelmingly for a fracking moratorium.

Clinton urged Bulgarian officials to give fracking another chance. According to Borissov, she agreed to help fly in the "best specialists on these new technologies to present the benefits to the Bulgarian people." But resistance only grew. The following month in neighboring Romania, thousands of people gathered to protest another Chevron fracking project, and Romania's parliament began weighing its own shale gas moratorium. Again Clinton intervened, dispatching her special envoy for energy in Eurasia, Richard Morningstar, to push back against the fracking bans. The State Depart­ment's lobbying effort culminated in late May 2012, when Morningstar held a series of meetings on fracking with top Bulgarian and Romanian officials. He also touted the technology in an interview on Bulgarian national radio, saying it could lead to a fivefold drop in the price of natural gas. A few weeks later, Romania's parliament voted down its proposed fracking ban and Bulgaria's eased its moratorium.

The episode sheds light on a crucial but little-known dimension of Clinton's diplomatic legacy. Under her leadership, the State Department worked closely with energy companies to spread fracking around the globe—part of a broader push to fight climate change, boost global energy supply, and undercut the power of adversaries such as Russia that use their energy resources as a cudgel. But environmental groups fear that exporting fracking, which has been linked to drinking-water contamination and earthquakes at home, could wreak havoc in countries with scant environmental regulation. And according to interviews, diplomatic cables, and other documents obtained by Mother Jones, American officials—some with deep ties to industry—also helped US firms clinch potentially lucrative shale concessions overseas, raising troubling questions about whose interests the program actually serves.

Clinton, who was sworn in as secretary of state in early 2009, believed that shale gas could help rewrite global energy politics. "This is a moment of profound change," she later told a crowd at Georgetown University. "Countries that used to depend on others for their energy are now producers. How will this shape world events? Who will benefit, and who will not?…The answers to these questions are being written right now, and we intend to play a major role." Clinton tapped a lawyer named David Goldwyn as her special envoy for international energy affairs; his charge was "to elevate energy diplomacy as a key function of US foreign policy."

http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2014/09/hillary-clinton-fracking-shale-state-department-chevron

See also:

http://nyagainstfracking.org/message-from-new-yorkers-to-hillary-clinton-stop-touting-the-big-oil-gas-line-on-extreme-dirty-energy/

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/12/02/3598104/hillary-clinton-fracking-keystone/

http://ecowatch.com/2014/12/02/hillary-clinton-fracking-keystone/

It just goes on and on.

[Thinkingabout]

1. Just what in your post is going to entice another candidate to enter the race when

The candidates are hit with articles to trash them and their families. They don't want the hassle.

[sabrina 1]

13. If candidates expect that their positions on issues that are of grave importance

to the public, not just here, but around the world, should be hidden from the people, then they should not run for office.

I don't want to speak for you, but you didn't say that anything in the article is wrong, you seem to be saying that it should not have been written.

If it is the latter, I strongly disagree.

Eg, right now I am leaning towards O'Malley who is expected to announce his candidacy in May.

My reasons are his straight talk on issues that matter to me and millions of others.

SS, he wants benefits increased and opposes the CPI, as should any Democrat.

He opposes the TPP and says so, no 'waiting to see' until it's too late.

So far his positions on issues are what I expect from a Democrat.

However, there are few such as our disastrous Foreign Policies, that I want to hear him speak about.

And if it someone credible writes an article addressing where he stands, I want to read it.

If he is on board with neocon FPs that will be a problem for me and I will wait to see who is else is running.

Why on earth would we not want to know where our Represtatives stand on these important issues?

Hillary now has the opportunity to address this article and be honest with the people as to where she stands.

That is called Democracy.

[erronis]

23. +1. I like how you present what you're interested in.

And I agree with your points.

Too many commentards on this board seem to be interested in their own prose rather than listing direct items/questions for discussion.

[sabrina 1]

39. Thank you. The level of political discourse in this country is so low, probably most

people tune out. Which may be the goal.

But at least here we can try, against the odds I admit, to raise it a little.

[morningfog]

84. Wrong fucking question.

[NYC_SKP]

111. Yup.

We ignore this shit at our own peril.

This is exactly the right time to be vetting our own party's aspirants.

If we don't they will.

[stillwaiting]

94. You would thrive in a totalitarian society.

Don't shine a light on a politician's activities! Heavens, no! Wouldn't be prudent!

Better that we just don't know, and we really don't NEED to know.

[Thinkingabout]

96. You missed the whole point, what person wants to run for an office when

They know they and their families will be under attack? Would you?

[stillwaiting]

97. Every single politician knows that is what they sign up for when they decide to become

politicians.

Every one of them.

The only way that they wouldn't be subject to attacks by the opposition would be if we lived within a totalitarian government that didn't allow it.

It's the price of freedom.

The person who wants to run for an office when they and their families will be under attack is someone who either wants to secure massive financial gains for themselves while they serve the global financial elite (most of our politicians) OR someone who wants to try and fight to help better things for average citizens in this country (frighteningly few of our politicians).

Politicians get paid very well for being subjected to political attacks, and I'm sure that most of them let it roll right off their backs. There are people who are well suited to be able to do this.

For the life of me I can't understand why you are COMPLAINING about politicians being subject to "attacks" if you value a free and open society. That will ALWAYS happen in such a system.

[Thinkingabout]

98. Still missed the point.

[stillwaiting]

99. If you say so. You definitely missed mine.

The things that bother you astound me.

[stillwaiting]

100. I've got to respond again. I have no idea why.

Your point seems to be that no one will want to become a politician because they and their families will be subject to attacks.

It's a point that doesn't have merit since politicians have been subject to attacks from the very beginning of our country's existence, and somehow LOTS of people seem to want to become a politician. They want to become a politician for the reasons that I already addressed in my previous post.

My last post here. You get the last word if you want it.

[NYC_SKP]

115. They can't answer because, well, there is no answer.

One can't on the one hand say "I don't blame them for coming out" and then not be able to explain the apparent exception carved out for Hillary Clinton.

There's a real disconnect between fans and the objects of their desire.

I get it for some supporters but not for the zealous ones who defend the indefensible things about Clinton.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

2. I wonder what the "Hillary can do no wrong" crew here

will say about this mess.

[NYC_SKP]

3. ThinkProgress, MotherJones, and Ecowatch are all RW sources.

...and the OP should be alerted and hidden or locked.

Bizarro land.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

5. Mother Jones is RW?

Oh, sarcasm.

Got it.

[vlyons]

34. Mother Jones as a RW mag

is certainly news to me too. I wonder if anyone has informed David Korn about it. *snark*

[madfloridian]

22. .....

You almost got me mad on that one. Then I saw who posted it...and I know just what you mean.

[NYC_SKP]

25. Hi Mad!

How ya been?

It's good to see you, and there's lots of work to be done.

[NYC_SKP]

117. Work of the devil, they are!

[Doctor_J]

8. Check my reply #4.

They've already got this one covered. I think it's recycled from the KXL debate

[joshcryer]

89. Well, I think fracking is wrong.

And I await to see if Clinton owns up to why she supports it or tries to downplay it. She can downplay it by saying "it's about jobs, it's about the communities, there are a lot of people working in the fracking industry, and natural gas pollutes less than any other fossil source." That's bad, that's BS, and it's not really a big deal.

Now if she's up front about it I'll respect her, "fracking is done because we're moving off of coal and on to a sustainable renewable roadmap, so we need to use natural gas, of which a huge portion comes from fracking, to achieve that goal."

But I'll still be against fracking because it's part of the energy roadmap for the US and the US will promote its use worldwide for similar reasons.

[Doctor_J]

4. Ah, but she had nothing to do with this! Her lips were moving up and down, but the president

was making them move and puling the strings that resulted in all of arm twisting, back slapping, and glad handing. She gets no blame

[Agschmid]

112. .

[FlatBaroque]

6. MotherJones

is a known fringe left haterz magazine.

[BeanMusical]

19. Lol!

[merrily]

32. You really need the sarcasm emote here.

[truedelphi]

57. In all fairness, the smilies and emoticons can be hard to use.

Especially for those who can't shoot or think straight!

[merrily]

61. LOL. I was just about to explain how to type for the sarcasm emote.

People on this thread seem so giddy. Was NYC giving out mimosas before I got here? And, if so, are there any left?

[truedelphi]

70. We did save some minosas for you,

Although you will have to go here to get them:


http://tinyurl.com/pfekycn

[merrily]

72. Why, thank you. I don't usually drink alcohol

I don't like the taste of most alcohol and even one glass of wine gets me about a minute of buzz and then a migraine that lasts the rest of the day. However, I can tolerate an occasional mimosa or a bit of amaretto over lots of ice.

[NYC_SKP]

116. I don't drink either, it gives me headaches and I prefer to be clearheaded!

[merrily]

118. I once told my husband I was a cheap date, meaning I get drunk (and hung over) on

amazingly little alcohol. He replied, "No, you're a cheap drunk, not a cheap date."

Pffft. Just because I chow down like a longshoreman when we go out to eat, he has to get picky, picky, about my wording?

[Gman]

7. Get over it. She's going to be the Democratic nominee

Because it's her turn. And she'll be the next prez too.

[BeanMusical]

20. This should be Hillary's campaing slogan:

"Nice of you all to vote but we've already decided it's my turn"

[cascadiance]

21. At least we can give her credit for having a more honest campaign plank then!

[NYC_SKP]

26. Or, "I'm Hillary. Get over it."

[L0oniX]

50. "I'm Hillary. Get over it." What a great campaign slogan. LOL

[KoKo]

113. ...!

[cui bono]

80. LOL

[truedelphi]

81. You have provided my laugh of the week BeanMusical -

And I very much agree!

[Dragonfli]

88. .

[BeanMusical]

90. Lol!

[merrily]

35. There's no such thing as a turn to be President.

Republicans used to say that, and I'd laugh. McCain's turn, LOL! I laugh when a Democrat says it as well.

The notion that losing a primary gets you a "turn" is the Oval Office is ridiculous on its face.

[Gman]

78. Ok well

In any event, it's Hillary's turn.

[merrily]

79. Her turn to apologize maybe.

[stillwaiting]

95. Your posts certainly seem to try and sow discord.

You seem to love to start arguments and try to upset people by posting inflammatory messages with the seemingly deliberate intent of provoking a negative emotional response in some of us around here.

Quite nasty communication style you have. Not that you care, no doubt.

[FarPoint]

102. Exactly...

I'm Ready for Hillary!

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

9. But..but..it was/is "smart" politics. Like the IWR vote.

[mopinko]

10. drill baby drill.

i do believe that the obama admin has embraced that meme big time.
i dont particularly like fracking, but i do believe she was doing her job of promoting admin policies. and i do believe that until renewable are in place, people will still need oil and gas.

we have, after all, finally taken steps to change the global oil economy. we are finally a net producer instead of a net importer. and the mess is in our own back yard.

in the end, that might be a good thing, sorta. we need to see w our own eyes, i think, the filth that comes with extractive industries. the other choice is pillaging other countries to feed our addiction. and leaving them to clean up the mess.

no easy answers.

[erronis]

24. Darn, a bit of rationality here. Thanks!

[HereSince1628]

86. It seems to me that Sec Clinton is presented as not arguing for a bridge to renewables.

In the op she's presented as suggesting to nations with accessible shale that they can use it to change energy geopolitics and she's insistent on the US being involved in the creation of that changed geopolitics.

I think that most people would agree that the volume of nat gas produced by fraking has changed energy politics. What is at issue is what appears to be discounting of environmental damage that fraking was known to cause by that time, such that energy as a political tool against Russia was a higher priority than the safety of citizens in the nations being encouraged to allow American companies to frak.

[McCamy Taylor]

11. Why is Clinton blamed for everything Obama did that the left does not like?

It's the Obama administration. He is a big man. He will not be hurt if you criticize him.

[merrily]

67. Is she to get credit for being Secretary of State, but no responsibility?

Supposedly, we can't hold her accountable for her husband's Presidency, though they both sold it as co-Presidency, she's endorsed some of it expressly and never disavowed a bit of it. Now we can't hold her responsible for what she did herself as Secretary of State either? So, it's WalMart board, private corporate law practice and a Senate stint of voting with her caucus, twice introducing flag burning legislation and advocating for the Iraq War?

Hell, that makes it even easier, then. No Hillary, No way, No how.

[TheKentuckian]

110. Why is Hillary Clinton given credit for jack shit then? Why do we give a shit about her vaunted

"experience" when she according to her biggest fan the bulk of it was just doing someone else's dirty work as an obidient puppet, a mere cog in someone else's machine.

[zeemike]

12. Perhaps she just wanted to frack them over there

So we don't have to frack here...Write that one down I think I have something there.

[merrily]

75. FWIW, I think this is the thread winner.

[BeanMusical]

91. Lol, good one!

[polynomial]

14. A famous Quote

“A woman is like a tea bag – you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water.”
- Eleanor Roosevelt

[McCamy Taylor]

17. Good one!

[customerserviceguy]

27. Would you hazard to make a guess

about how Cruz and Gowdy feel about fracking? My bet is that they're strongly for it.

This is up here for us, while we still have time. I've been reading the NYT piece on the uranium deal, and I have a feeling that a whole Pandora's box is just starting to open up with what the Clintons have been up to for the last several years. If we find that Chevron made substantial contributions to their foundation, it looks a little more clear what's going on.

Sexist? I don't think the OP mentioned or even hinted at anything regarding the gender of the person who is at the heart of the post. Maybe you think that Pandora's box metaphor I used is sexist, too.

[L0oniX]

38. I love vacations.

[McCamy Taylor]

16. Mother Jones, this one is for you.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/100265663

[BeanMusical]

18. Kick and fracking R.

[OKNancy]

28. She sure is powerful to single handedly get them to accept fracking

H20 man posted the same article Tuesday. http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026544725

As I posted then, Eastern European countries have to balance their energy needs with the cons.
They are under the Russian thumb when it comes to gas. Russia could play politics very easily and cut off supply.
They do not have the means to go with clean energy, so they are in a pickle.
Again it's weighing the pros and cons.

Energy policy IS foreign policy.

ETA: of course that won't change minds that are made up. I expect neverending posts until she is the nominee, then the President and beyond.

[merrily]

76. It matters that she even tried.

[BeanMusical]

92. "until she is the nominee, then the President and beyond."

Beyond? You mean like Empress of the Universe?

[merrily]

29. Unanimous jury.

On Sat Apr 25, 2015, 03:36 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

Take a right wing hit job and post it on DU. Why are you carrying water for Cruz and Gowdy?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6566396

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Sat Apr 25, 2015, 03:40 PM, and the Jury voted 7-0 to HIDE IT.

Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Mother Jones, etc. are NOT right wing and neither is NYC. DesMoines Dem needs to make his or her points without name calling and falsehoods.
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given

[OKNancy]

33. Poor sarcasm got a bad hide.

The poster detests Hillary Clinton. They forgot their sarcasm tag.

[merrily]

37. Happened to me when I posted kids should drop out of elementary school and create jobs.

I thought the post was so extreme that a sarcasm emote would insult DU. I was mistaken.

[sabrina 1]

68. Happened to me when I referred to Unkraine's new president as

the 'chocolate king'. I overestimated the expertise of the 'experts' on Ukraine. Got alerted on for 'racism'. Lol!

[merrily]

69. In my case, some of the jury comments made clear they thought they were

teaching me a lesson because I thought myself "leftier than thou" and needed to learn that not everyone thought as I did.

The actual thought, sans sarcasm, in the post that got hidden being that elementary school kids deserved the effort Wendy Davis was putting in on their behalf.




Do you think a bit of that might have happened in your case, too?

FWIW, as soon as I saw "chocolate king" in your post, I knew what the rest of the story was going to be.

[L0oniX]

41. LMFAO ...nice fake ...and you caught a fly with it too.

[merrily]

42. No clue what you mean.

What did I fake?

[L0oniX]

44. *

Your post looked like was in ref to the op...which is not hidden (no links to any other). Your next responder took it as real for this op?

I have seen jury result fakes to make a sarc point in ref to ultra sensitive alerters

[merrily]

46. My bad. I didn't copy enough of the notice. I'll fix it.

I posted it to the OP because I did want NYC to see it and I can't reply to a hidden post anyway.

All unintentional on my part. I was not trying to fake. You gave me way too much credit.

[L0oniX]

47. No don't do it! I love it.

[merrily]

48. Sorry. Already fixed.

[L0oniX]

51. Yer bad!

[merrily]

56. I'm bad because I never meant to be bad?

I'm so confused!

[morningfog]

85. Good job jury. That bullshit won't fly.

[neighbor tim]

30. I think that if Hillary did this

Last edited Sat Apr 25, 2015, 05:44 PM - Edit history (1)

that she probably did it with the best intentions and didn't know that fracking was harmful. I really don't believe she would have done it had she known facing was harmful.

[merrily]

40. If you're not trying to sell us a bridge, I have one to sell you.

But, my hunch is that you are on the selling end. Too bad I'm not in the market for a bridge, either.

[L0oniX]

43. What??? How could anyone not know that "facing" is bad.

she probably did it with the best intentions and didn't know that facing was harmful. I really don't believe she would have done it had she known facing was harmful.

[merrily]

53. This thread has been very good for you, hasn't it?

Last edited Sat Apr 25, 2015, 06:16 PM - Edit history (1)

On a board I used to post on, a poster who was later outed as a Republican from NJ posted exactly like that. After about 2 posts, I wasn't buying it. However, other Democrats on the board would patiently write these long explanatory replies.

The odd thing was, on that board, all political views were allowed. Guess he thought imposing on the kindness of Democrats was hilarious.

[L0oniX]

58. I believe in humor.

[merrily]

73. As do I.

It's good to see a poster really enjoying a thread.

[neighbor tim]

71. Auto typing. woops.

[NYC_SKP]

49. If she didn't know that fracking was bad then she should not have encouraged it.

Read the excerpt again:

The people of Bulgaria and Romania were protesting, successfully convincing their governments not to allow Chevron to come in and frack.

Hillary went in there and convinced the governments to disregard the citizens' wished and let the big global corporation come in.

Does that sound like she was trying to do the right thing?

Don't you think a SOS should ask for expert opinions before going and meddling in foreign affairs?

[L0oniX]

52. Can we please agree to be happy it wasn't a big red nuke button at 1 am in the morning?

[merrily]

59. I think you mean three am.

As in, "Senator McCain and I are ready for that 3 am phone call, but Senator Obama is not."

Nothing like a Democratic candidate for POTUS endorsing the Republican nominee during a Democratic Presidential primary debate.

[L0oniX]

62. It was a while back ...forgot the time.

[merrily]

74. McCain went on to use that in his campaign against Obama.

Seems odd that so few Obama supporters (the OP being one of the exceptions) hold that or her "racially tinged" 2008 campaign against her.

After that Hillary comment, Pelosi said that no one who did that was going to get the nomination. Bet Pelosi changed her mind now, too. Time heals all wounds, I guess. Or something.

[NYC_SKP]

60. OT about the button:

cool episode on NRP's show, Radiolab:

The whole episode is cool, but go to the 15:45 mark to hear the part about the nuclear bomb "button":

I like in particular the suggestion of what the president should have to do to launch a thermonuclear attack.

Listen to it.

[merrily]

63. I'll bookmark Too much going on around me at home right now to add a video.

[L0oniX]

64. Wow ...it came from before the bomb in the early 1900's.

[EL34x4]

108. Radiolab bump to listen to later (eom)

[AzDar]

31. K/R

[L0oniX]

36. Oh silly you ...you're just going to make enemies on DU with all that Clinton hatred...

and I like that. Thanks much.

[Octafish]

45. That's one heck of a coincidence.

vicepretzeldent Dick Cheney also likes fracking.

Vice President Joe Biden also likes fracking.

Small world.

I wonder who else? Besides Halliburton.

[NYC_SKP]

54. Joe Biden?

Well, ya know, Hunter Biden has to make a living, just like the other kids.

TPTB have successfully implemented their vision/strategy. Two parties, one outcome.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1277&pid=6155

[Oilwellian]

65. Yes, it does seem to be a budding cottage industry

for politically connected people and private investors. Only a few will benefit at the expense of the masses. You don't want your water source polluted? Fuck you and eat your peas!

Isn't Cheney the Godfather of Fracking? Why are Democrats fulfilling his filthy dream?

[Octafish]

66. When it comes to fracking, Sneering Dick Cheney is the deregulater extraordinaire.

Know your BFEE: Dick Cheney FRACKED America



"Scientific advisory panels at the Department of Energy and the EPA have enumerated ways the industry could improve and have called for modest steps, such as establishing maximum contaminant levels allowed in water for all the chemicals used in fracking. Unfortunately, these recommendations do not address the biggest loophole of all. In 2005 Congress—at the behest of then Vice President Dick Cheney, a former CEO of gas driller Halliburton—exempted fracking from regulation under the Safe Drinking Water Act. Congress needs to close this so-called Halliburton loophole, as a bill co-sponsored by New York State Representative Maurice Hinchey would do. The FRAC Act would also mandate public disclosure of all chemicals used in fracking across the nation."

-- Scientific American, Nov. 2011, "Safety First, Fracking Second"

A lovely oiligarch.

[KoKo]

55. Recommmend....!

[jalan48]

77. This doesn't sound good and Mother Jones is a reliable magazine.

[NYC_SKP]

83. Yes, Mother Jones is a reliable source. My RW comment was a snarky reply meant in jest.

Articles critical of celebrated politicians are sometimes accused of being Right Wing.

[glinda]

82. Thank you for this.

[Triana]

87. I dislike Hillary's doing this but still lay the blame for fracking on Cheney.

FRACKING was invented by Halliburton and foisted on the American People by an "energy policy" written by them along with other big oil, coal, and gas companies. Excluded from those meetings were the public, climate scientists, renewable energy companies, and environmentalists. Presided over by DICK CHENEY, former CEO of the damned vile aforementioned corporation, he saw to it that this darling new fracking technology was EXEMPT from the Clean Air and Clean Water Acts in the US.

Could it be that Ms. Clinton was doing her job as ordered by Barack Obama and his "all of the above" energy strategy, to push this crap as Secy of State? Maybe. Or maybe she truly believes it's a good thing.

Besides clean air and clean water laws, fracking has few other regulations governing its processes either - because the technology was developed before any regulations could be written and the oil/gas companies who want to do the dirty business so strongly resist regulation. I noticed that in several of the articles, at the very least Hillary states that strong regulations should be put in place to protect natural resources and local communities. That is not the case now, today. And, of course that could be just empty promises of a politician.

Did SHE personally profit from pushing fracking around the world?

God knows DICK CHENEY did.

[NYC_SKP]

103. That's just weird. Cheney did not invent hydraulic fracturing.

And your "all of the above" claim never extended to Bulgaria and Romania.

The president does not micro-manage the thousands of decisions that have to be made by his cabinet members and it's very unlikely that he told her, "Hillary, I want you to make sure that Chevron get's their contracts over in Bulgaria".

No. Plus, Hillary wasn't known for asking for permission or being transparent about what she was doing.

I think she probably did profit personally by way of garnering more favored status with Chevron, et al. through such behaviors as these.

[The Second Stone]

93. The Secretary of State carries out the policy, she does not make the policy

The SoS carries out the priorities set by the President

[NYC_SKP]

104. The president does not micro-manage the thousands of decisions that have to be made...

The president does not micro-manage the thousands of decisions that have to be made by his cabinet members and it's very unlikely that he told her, "Hillary, I want you to make sure that Chevron get's their contracts over in Bulgaria".

No. Plus, Hillary wasn't known for asking for permission or being transparent about what she was doing.

I think she probably did profit personally by way of garnering more favored status with Chevron, et al. through such behaviors as these.

[The Second Stone]

109. So in your thoughtful opinion, the SoS defied broad Presidential policy

to get Bulgarian contracts for Chevron.

Remember, between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, one devised a public option health care plan and worked it before Congress, and one did not.

[The Second Stone]

120. Well then we have absolutely nothing to worry about when Hillary

is president because the president does not micromanage all the decisions. And that is absolutely correct. The president sets the general policy and the appointees carry it out. Those of us who paid attention to Obama's energy policy, which I assume includes you, had to listen to his "clean coal" crap, his nuclear power subsidies in profit protection and disaster losses, and everything else. Was Secretary of State Hillary Clinton also responsible for the domestic energy policy of the Obama administration, or was that the DOE? (Hint, it was the DOE.)

[Doctor_J]

114. so any day now she'll loudly and strongly denounce fracking!

Thanks for the Sun hilarity

[AgingAmerican]

101. Clinton's state department?

Or Obama's? Everything she did as SOS, she did because that is what Obama wanted done.

[NYC_SKP]

105. Oh bullshit, presidents don't follow the SOS around checking every last decision that they make.

You must know better than that.

The president does not micro-manage the thousands of decisions that have to be made by his cabinet members and it's very unlikely that he told her, "Hillary, I want you to make sure that Chevron gets their contracts over in Bulgaria".

No. Plus, Hillary wasn't known for asking for permission or being transparent about what she was doing.

I think she probably did profit personally by way of garnering more favored status with Chevron, et al. through such behaviors as these.

She's got sticky oil on her hands from being nice with the industry.

That's OK, though, because:

Hillary!

[AgingAmerican]

106. They carry out the presidents wishes

The SOS is not a rogue position. They do the presidents bidding as you are well aware.

Oh, wait....in this case it can't be true because:

Hillary!

[NYC_SKP]

107. No, Secretaries of State have a great deal of latitude in these things, and report directly to POTUS

Hillary could spin it to the president any dishonest way she wants.

He's not going to fact check it.

Clinton: "Barack, we need to twist arms in Bulgaria and make them let Chevron in for some fracking before the Russians yada yada..."

Barack: "Hillary, do the right thing and, by the way, don't forget to let me know if any of your friends abroad are getting favors and then donating to your Clinton Foundation, K? Cuz that wouldn't be cool."

Clinton: "Oh yes of course I'll let you know but nothing like that will ever happen." (smiles as she moves chair and leaves the room)

[AgingAmerican]

119. Bologna

You are grasping at straws. This is bottom feeding.

[NYC_SKP]

121. I've been there, spent two weeks, the covered porticos are cool, as are the towers.

It's an ancient city and very intact, home of the world's oldest university.

You should visit Bologna.

[Segami]

123. BWHAHAHAHAHAHA!!

[AgingAmerican]

124. Bottom feeding

...is still bottom feeding.

[woo me with science]

122. K&R

Corporate politicians are predators.