FACTCHECK: No, Hillary Did NOT Get Money from the ‘Fossil Fuel Industry’

[baldguy]

One of the most insidious attacks against Hillary is Bernie’s false assertion that she has received money directly from corporations.

...

It is, bluntly, utterly mendacious to say or imply that Hillary has received campaign contributions from corporations. The donations have come from employees.

...

He trusts that most people won’t know that the contributions come from individual employees. And that is precisely why the attack works.

It’s also why Hillary is so sick of the attack. It has no basis in reality; it’s a smear by insinuation.

Bernie swore that he would not run a negative campaign, but this is not only negative; it’s trading on ignorance about the very system he says is broken. On the one hand, he decries the corruption and brokenness of our political system; on the other hand, he leverages its corruption and brokenness in order to make untruthful attacks on his opponent.

This is not the sort of campaign I expected and hoped to see from Bernie Sanders.

Oh, and, by the way, in case you’re curious: Bernie has received $203,885 in donations from energy industry employees.

http://bluenationreview.com/hillary-did-not-get-money-from-the-fossil-fuel-industry/

And in that same vein:

BREAKING: Bernie Received Millions in Defense, Energy, Health and Financial Industry-Related Contributions

We’re being tongue-in-cheek using “breaking” in this story. And we purposely used the word “related” in the title. It is a known fact and a non-issue that candidates receive contributions from individuals who work for different industries. We would never presume to question Bernie’s integrity because of the millions he’s received from people in the defense, energy, health and financial sectors.

Our point is this: That same standard should apply to Hillary.

Bernie and his team have acted for months as if his only path to the Democratic nomination runs straight through Hillary’s character. In doing so, he’s broken his own promises, riled up his supporters to assault Hillary’s honesty and integrity, hurt his own brand and damaged Democratic prospects in November.

For what?

Just to win?

Is it really worth it to unfairly and unjustly tear down one of the most accomplished and admired women in U.S. history?

Is it really necessary to give Karl Rove and his ilk a general election gift?

Is it?

[DanTex]

1. One of the most persistent lies this campaign: Hillary's campaign is funded by "corporate money."

Corporations do not and cannot donate to campaigns. I don't know why it's so hard for Hillary-bashers to grasp that simple fact.

[FreakinDJ]

4. Blatantly FALSE

Citigroup Inc $891,501 $883,501 $8,000

Goldman Sachs $831,523 $821,523 $10,000

JPMorgan Chase & Co $801,380 $798,380 $3,000

Morgan Stanley $765,242 $760,242 $5,000

Lehman Brothers $362,853 $359,853 $3,000

https://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/contrib.php?cid=N00000019&cycle=Career

[DanTex]

8. It is false, and yet Hillary-bashers keep pushing it. Do they even know it's false?

[FreakinDJ]

16. Your statements are Willfull Denial of reality

[DanTex]

18. It is a fact that corporations don't donate to campaigns.

[FreakinDJ]

31. Understand Repeating a LIE here on DU doesn't necessarily work too well

Sen. Hillary Clinton

Top Industries

Energy & Natural Resources $2,421,730 $147,842 $2,273,888

https://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/industries.php?cycle=Career&cid=N00000019&type=I

In fact she LEADS the Democratic Party in taking Donations from Oil Exploration

Democrats 3,021 $27,611 $84,451,614

Republicans 2,955 $59,875 $184,605,301

Independents 7 $3,843 $58,700

TOTAL 5,983 $44,980 $269,115,615


The US House of Representatives has 435 members and 5 non-voting delegates.

https://www.opensecrets.org/industries/summary.php?cycle=All&ind=E

[DanTex]

33. Those donations are from employees, it's individual money not corporate money.

[polly7]

42. Hillary Clinton’s Biggest Campaign Bundlers Are Fossil Fuel Lobbyists

Clinton’s top campaign financiers are linked to Big Oil, natural gas and the Keystone pipeline.

07/17/2015 09:22 am ET | Updated Jul 17, 2015

http://linkis.com/huffingtonpost.com/FicnN

[DanTex]

55. Those are individuals, who bundle contributions from other individuals.

The corporate money thing is a straight-up lie.

[polly7]

63. Oh ffs.

I can read.

So can everyone else.

[DanTex]

66. Not only can I read, but I know the difference between a person and a corporation.

I remember when progressives laughed at Romney when he tried to conflate the two. My how things change...

[polly7]

72. 'Bundlers' with corporate ties collecting the contributions from their top

CEO's, execs, employees and partners. She'd be in deep shit without those corporate 'bundlers' - thank goodness for her they're so good at what they do. I bet they expect some big return, heh?

[DanTex]

112. The bundlers are individuals, bundling money from individuals.

Everyone who works for a corporation has "corporate ties". Which is to say, most of the workforce, including most of Bernie's contributors.

[polly7]

134. Yeah, no shit. These happen to be 'corporations with fossil fuel ties', whom she says she's

taken nothing from 'that she can recall'. Hillary Clinton’s Biggest Campaign Bundlers Are Fossil Fuel Lobbyists

Do you think you're fooling anyone?

[DanTex]

135. Again, there are no corporations, there are only individuals.

Everyone who works an oil rig has "fossil fuel ties". In fact, so does everyone who drives a car.

All the money Clinton has raised comes from individual donors acting on their own volition. It is not corporate money, and no corporation has coerced anyone into donating for her. All this talk about "corporate money" is outright lies.

[polly7]

136. No, it's not lies. nt.

[CoffeeCat]

130. Man, I feel sorry for you

Trying to spin these facts about where Hillary's money comes from--into some kind of sparkly diamond.

You must be exhausted.

[DanTex]

131. Another personal attack. Meh.

[CoffeeCat]

133. It's not a personal attack. It's an observation

You're working tirelessly. And you're getting beat up with facts.

I am only concerned that you may need a break.

[riversedge]

43. Thank you for trying DanTEX

[Marr]

75. For trying? He's just repeating an easily disproved lie, over and over.

What's to admire?

[polly7]

79. Not one single thing. nt.

[riversedge]

106. Dantex tried to educate you but your bubble is in the way.

[polly7]

108. Dantex better go back to school before he tries to 'educate' anyone.

Repeating lies isn't 'educating'.

[Phlem]

137. Oh my. I certainly wouldn't want him for a teacher.

[FreakinDJ]

47. Oh excuse me - Lobbiest are the New Individuals

Nice try - thanks for playing

Lobbyists $3,048,413

https://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/industries.php?cycle=Career&cid=N00000019&type=I

Run along now and try finding some one who doesn't use Google

[DanTex]

49. Those are also individual donations and not corporate donations.

In fact, all the donations to her campaign are from individuals, because corporations can't donate to campaigns. Why do Bernie fans struggle so much with that fact?

[FreakinDJ]

60. I'm sure many "Individuals" hire Lobbiest to make donations for them

Typical Clinton Word Salad

[DanTex]

64. It is illegal to hire anyone to make donations for you.

[FreakinDJ]

69. Like I said - try finding some one who doesn't use Google

The broken record approach of denying reality is looking rather foolish

[MoonchildCA]

91. If they were truly just from everyday individuals...

...like you and me--the average voter--they would be tapped out at $2700.

[DanTex]

97. No individual can contribute more than $2700, "everyday" or otherwise.

[EdwardBernays]

61. I wonder

if you even remember what it's like to not lie all the time...?

Hillary has raised MILLIONS from corporate lobbyists and from money bundled by corporations.

For example:

Hillary Clinton’s Biggest Campaign Bundlers Are Fossil Fuel Lobbyists

A list of 40 registered lobbyists that the Clinton camp disclosed to the Federal Election Commission on Wednesday revealed a number of Democratic Party lobbyists who have worked against regulations to curb climate change, advocated for offshore drilling, or sought government approval for natural gas exports.

Scott Parven and Brian Pomper, lobbyists at Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld, have been registered to lobby for the Southern California-based oil giant Chevron since 2006, with contracts totaling more than $3 million. The two bundled Clinton contributions of $24,700 and $29,700, respectively. They have helped Chevron over the years resist efforts to eliminate oil and gas tax breaks and to impose regulations to reduce carbon emissions.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/hillary-clinton-bundlers-fossil-fuel_us_55a8335ee4b04740a3df86c5

She also has a campaign RUN by the owner of one of the biggest lobbying firms in DC, whose clients are a who's who of awful, including multiple weapons manufacturers, big pharma, and even Saudi Arabia.

I'm not saying this for you, because you KNOW IT and just chose to lie about it, instead I'm saying it for people that might read you comment and think you're being honest.

Anyone with google can find AMPLE evidence that I'm telling the truth, btw:

Meet the Fossil Fuel Lobbyists Raising Money for Hillary Clinton

Scott Parven and Brian Pomper, lobbyists at Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld, have been registered to lobby for the Southern California-based oil giant Chevron since 2006, with contracts totaling more than $3 million. The two bundled Clinton contributions of $24,700 and $29,700, respectively. They have helped Chevron over the years resist efforts to eliminate oil and gas tax breaks and to impose regulations to reduce carbon emissions.

The two Clinton bundlers also were part of a much-criticized campaign by Chevron to manipulate Congress into inserting language into the Andean Trade Preferences Act that would require Ecuador to dismiss a longstanding lawsuit against the company for polluting the Amazon jungle. Democratic lawmakers pushed back against the campaign and the lawsuit is continuing.

One prominent lobbying topic embraced by Clinton bundlers is the expansion of liquefied natural gas exports and federal approval of new LNG terminals.

Ankit Desai, vice president for government relations at top LNG exporter Cheniere Energy, bundled $82,000 to the Clinton camp, with much of it coming from Cheniere Energy executives. Cheniere executives, including Desai, have donated $38,800 to Clinton's campaign.

http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2015/07/hillary-clinton-bundlers-fossil-fuel-lobbyists

How Clinton takes millions from corporations:
https://www.yahoo.com/politics/hillarys-financial-armada-233033648.html

[DanTex]

62. All those donations are from individuals, not corporations. Bizarre that Bernie fans can't

understand that simple fact.

[EdwardBernays]

73. bullshit

MANY are bundled donations, which is simply a trick to get around campaign finance rules... it's the same standard used by ALL campaign finance watchdogs and ONLY Clintonites seem to think it's not a valid standard... gee golly I wonder why... oh right, they're backing the corporate client.

Really, this is a stretch even for you Dan, which is saying a LOT.

And again, these sorts of lies just increase Bernie or Bust numbers... we all KNOW you're lying, and we have come to associate you and your candidate with dishonesty...

[DanTex]

88. Bundled donations are still bundled from individuals. There is zero corporate money there.

Every penny that Clinton has raised has come from an individual who decided to give his or her personal money to the campaign. Any suggestion that it's corporate money is an outright lie.

[EdwardBernays]

124. Again bullshit

Bundled donations are not nearly the same as individual donations and you KNOW THIS.

It's amazing to me me that you're so willing to say things that are so obviously untrue.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=14434721

And again, every single time you lie Dan, you hurt your candidate because you remind people of how dishonest she and her supporters are. You remind people of how valuable honesty is. Ironic.

[DanTex]

127. The money comes from individuals. It is not corporate money.

As that article explains, bundlers are nothing more than fundraisers who collect contributions from other individuals and deliver them to the campaign in a "bundle". The bundlers are individuals, and the donors are individuals. There is no corporate money.

[Phlem]

139. That's his M.O.

I've gone around the circle with him and it's a like talking to a Republican. If he repeats it enough times, you might, if you're gullible and don't know how to use a computer, believe him.

It's pretty sad.

Poor guy.

[revbones]

101. Nice. Just calling people names and saying it's false definitely proves your point.

[DanTex]

102. Federal law proves my point. Corporations do not donate to campaigns.

[revbones]

103. So those donations just disappeared eh?

No, they went to her super-PAC as people have been saying. Donating to it is donating to Hillary.

[DanTex]

104. There were never any corporate donations to begin with. They didn't have to disappear.

And the SuperPACs backing her and Bernie have thus far been funded by individuals and unions, not corporations.

[revbones]

117. ROFL

If you're going to throw out so much garbage, at least bag it up first.

Super-PACs are not required to disclose the list of their donors because they can take from incorporated entities.

[KingFlorez]

9. This

If we are going to go through donations and categorize them by who the donor works for, I'm sure we can find some donors to the Sanders campaign that are not appropriate. He's received donations from people who work on Wall Street, yet no one is really calling that out.

[DanTex]

13. Exactly. It used to be Mitt Romney who believed "corporations are people" but now

apparently it's Camp Bernie as well.

[baldguy]

81. Worse. They're saying that people are the corporations they work for.

As if a paycheck confers slavery.

[DanTex]

84. Yes, it is worse. Romney was at least talking about the business owners who get the profits.

But these "progressives" are insisting that donations from Wal-Mart greeters are the same as donations from Wal-Mart. It's nuts.

[Phlem]

140. Go for it.

Do it.

[astrophuss42]

12. Yeah...

The most egregious donations go to the foundation, we know.

[think]

21. They paid her millions in direct income for speeches. That's BETTER than donations.

And these aren't your run of the mill corporations.

These include the mega too big to fail banks that are currently involved in a lawsuit for rigging markets. These are mom and pop outfits. They have long histories of violating US laws EVEN while Hillary was taking their money! Some became FELONS though no one went to jail!

And you expect Hillary to make sure these banks are regulated and policed fairly after she took those millions in DIRECT INCOME? Hillary has already stated she doesn't believe Glass Steagall shouldn't be reinstated. The banks KNOW what they paid for.

You might personally believe Hillary will be the first politician in history to not be influenced by millions of dollars being showered on her by these banks and corporations but don't expect everyone to fall for it...

[DanTex]

26. Yes, the unfounded accusations of bribery are a close second.

[think]

36. I made no claim of bribery. It's perfectly legal for Hillary to take millions from corporations

that violate US laws and spend billions to lobby our government.

[DanTex]

39. Good for you. Now if the rest of the Bernie fans drop the conspiracy theories....

[think]

71. So you're happy Hillary took millions in cold hard cash from banks that were under investigation

and found guilty of rigging markets effectively stealing from the American people?

Sure it's completely legal under current laws but should it be?

Do you really want politicians to give a quick speech and make a cool 6 or 7 figure paycheck from corporations known to violate laws, lobby to help write laws that govern them all at the same time they actively violating the laws that already exist?

Case in point. Goldman Sachs. Senator Carl Levin claimed that Goldman Sachs LIED to congress and DUPED their own clients:

Goldman Sachs Misled Congress, Duped Clients, Levin Says

Goldman Sachs Group Inc. misled clients and Congress about the firm’s bets on securities tied to the housing market, the chairman of the U.S. Senate panel that investigated the causes of the financial crisis said.

~SNIP~

“That is not for Congress to determine whether or not a crime was committed or whether or not he violated the security laws,” Levin said, referring to Blankfein. “That is for the Justice Department and that is for the SEC to make those determinations.”

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2011-04-14/goldman-sachs-misled-congress-after-duping-clients-over-cdos-levin-says

[DanTex]

82. I don't begrudge her for giving paid speeches, any more than I begrudge any of the other

thousands of high-profile people who do the same. And I certainly don't buy into any of the silly conspiracy theories that this is some kind of quid pro quo.

[think]

93. It's not THAT she is giving paid speeches but rather to WHOM she is making the paid speeches to

Out of 14 banks in a lawsuit for rigging interest rates Hillary has made speeches to at least 7 of them. She was paid MILLIONS of dollars collectively from them for these speeches at a going rate over $200k for each speech.

It is well known she has taken millions in cash collectively from:

Goldman Sachs
Citigroup
JP Morgan
Morgan Stanley
UBS
Bank of America
Deutsche Bank AG


This is epitome of Wall Street corruption and Hillary is willing to take millions from these crooks and the American people are just suppose to trust her to not play any favors for them.

You might be buying it but come November it is very likely many Americans will see this as a willingness on Hillary's part to be soft on banks that commit crime:

U.S. judge rejects 14 banks' bid to throw out rate-rigging lawsuit

A federal judge in Manhattan on Monday rejected an effort by 14 of the world's biggest banks to throw out a private lawsuit accusing them of rigging an interest rate benchmark used in the $553 trillion derivatives market.

U.S. District Judge Jesse Furman said investors led by several pension funds and municipalities could pursue federal antitrust claims over an alleged conspiracy to rig "ISDAfix" from 2009 to 2012, and breach of contract and unjust enrichment claims against most defendants. Other claims were dismissed.

The defendants include Bank of America Corp, Barclays Plc, BNP Paribas SA, Citigroup Inc, Credit Suisse Group AG, Deutsche Bank AG, Goldman Sachs Group Inc, HSBC Holdings Plc, JPMorgan Chase & Co, Morgan Stanley, Nomura Holdings Inc, Royal Bank of Scotland Group Plc, UBS AG and Wells Fargo & Co.

~Snip~

Banks were accused of rigging ISDAfix for their own gain by executing rapid trades just before the rate was set each day, called "banging the close"; and causing ICAP to delay trades until they moved ISDAfix where they wanted, and post rates that did not reflect market activity....

Read more:
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-banks-rigging-lawsuit-idUSKCN0WU1E8

[Jefferson23]

28. They don't care, they'll keep splitting hairs, the OP is pitiful and they added an update. lol

[revbones]

100. They can donate to her super-PACs though... oh and Victory Funds...

[dchill]

128. Bluenationreview = the Word of God.

Sorry, typo - word of Brock. So credible in so many ways!

[morningfog]

2. Blue nation review....LOL.

[geomon666]

65. Might as well been sent out by Hillary herself. n/t

[Marr]

85. Blue Nation Review is good for *one* thing.

It tells you what the Hillary Campaign is most scared of any given moment.

[BeyondGeography]

3. She didn't keep her cool either

Last edited Fri Apr 1, 2016, 11:33 AM - Edit history (1)

Rookie mistake. I hope she has someone who can tell her just how awful her response was. She sure told that polar-bear lover off.

[baldguy]

115. "Sanders walks out of interview after tense exchange on Arpaio"

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/273570-sanders-walks-off-interview-after-arpaio-question

[BeyondGeography]

142. I know; neither one of them will win the grace under pressure award

Unlike the current Prez.

[bobbobbins01]

5. If BNR says it, it must be true!

Propaganda sites never lie.

[morningfog]

11. "Fact check" my ass.

[baldguy]

15. What is inaccurate in either of the two articles?

Please provide links.

[bobbobbins01]

23. Nah, I'm not playing your game.

You post propaganda.

[baldguy]

34. Then it should be easy to refute with facts.

You do know what facts are, don't you?

[bobbobbins01]

45. I do. And so do you.

I can only assume the bald in your name is referring to your face and not your head.

[baldguy]

53. You can't refute, so you resort to ad hominem.

I have to wear a hat on sunny days for 1) prevent sunburn, and 2) so I don't blind the people around me.

[bobbobbins01]

67. No, the ad hominem attack was just labeling you for what you are.

You're supporting propaganda. There are several links in this very thread that prove my point, you don't need any from me. You're playing a game and being deceitful.

[baldguy]

76. You still got nothing to prove your alligations.

[bobbobbins01]

86. Nothing except all the links that others provided?

Both your name and your avatar are appropriate, because now you're going in circles chasing your own tail. I'm going to have to bid you good day now, I've wasted too much time on your nonsense already.

[baldguy]

109. The links using OpenSecrets as the source? Just like the articles in the OP?

Seems to me you just like what OpenSecrets says about Sanders' hypocrisy.

[thesquanderer]

152. Links as requested

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511624988

and

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511625026

[baldguy]

171. I see. You're not looking for facts - you're looking for spin.

The raw data from OpenSecrets posted with links on BNR, including a short factual summary, must be undermined at all costs. But that same data is perfectly acceptable when propagandized through the Clinton Hater filter.

I imagine Lee Atwater is doing a little dance in hell watching these unwarranted attacks on Hillary play out.

[thesquanderer]

174. I'm not looking for anything. You asked for links, I provided them. But...

Mother Jones is spin?

[dragonfly301]

27. +1,000,000

[thereismore]

6. David Brock to the rescue! That really convinced me. nt

[astrophuss42]

7. All this because she refused to even listen to the pledge

Bernie signed immediately. She wasn't put on blast at all by the activist, but responded with an epic meltdown.

[baldguy]

19. Bernie signed it, then took $200K anyway.

Is that an example of the much-lauded "Sanders Integrity"?

[Recursion]

10. Corporate contributions to campaigns remain unlawful

The fact that what is probably the least intelligent criticism of Clinton is the one that's really had traction is interesting to me.

[lostnfound]

44. LOL. Corporate bundling = CEOs nudge execs to donate to PACs

Like the disgusting Tom Delay used to do so intensely in Texas. And the bush bundlers.
Deny reality or play with technicalities all you want, but they expect favorable treatment in return for that largesse.

Disingenuous or naive for people to pretend otherwise.

[Recursion]

50. PACs are a separate issue

She has a leadership PAC, I believe (actually she may not even have one of those anymore), and her campaign technically is a PAC (they all are), plus there are I think two super PACs that support her candidacy. Oddly their donors never get mentioned, despite being publicly available. No, it's the employers of the people who donate to her campaign.

[lostnfound]

155. just two sides of the same coin

Lobbyist contributions, fundraiser dinners... Bundling with ten of your fellow friends capable of donating the max.

If I'm CEO and I want my execs or my lobbyists to chip in to hopefully "buy a listen to" when we need one, I could choose to suggest a PAC or I could choose to suggest a direct contribution. Similar result , and yes, perfectly legal and perfectly normal.

I just hope that in some future election, it won't be so perfectly normal.

[HumanityExperiment]

14. Fracking...

If Bernie hits her in NY about fracking and her documented history of supporting and encouraging that industry along with re-running that video she'll tank in NY

http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.ssf/2015/06/new_york_officially_bans_hydrofracking.html

She's toast...

[Gwhittey]

17. Breaking News: Foxnews reports

Hillary has just been arrested by FBI in connection with 9/11 terrorist attacks and Bill Clinton pay off to allow it.


This is about as true source as a http://bluenationreview.com article except bluenationreview is actually owned by Clinton Staffers.

[baldguy]

20. What is inaccurate in either of the two articles?

Please provide links.

[Gwhittey]

29. Well the topic post is lie

FACTCHECK: No, Hillary Did NOT Get Money from the ‘Fossil Fuel Industry’

IF do not know a person who is a lobbyist for ‘Fossil Fuel Industry' them given money to someone is from the ‘Fossil Fuel Industry' because that is what lobbyist do.

[baldguy]

41. So, the $200K Sanders received was ... what?

Pardon me, but your double-standard is showing.

[Gwhittey]

59. He signed the pledge

And I don't remember him saying he has never what ever you are claiming. Look at the info and stop arguing with me with your bullshit deflections because I am no longer seeing them because you are on hide because you want to argue about made up straw-men.

[baldguy]

87. He signed the pledge not to take the money, and then took the money anyway.

Your posts aren't an April Fool's Day thing, are they?

[global1]

22. But This Listing Of Hillary Speeches Is Interesting Though....

[DanTex]

37. The American Camping Association. She's in the pocket of Big Camping! LOL.

[baldguy]

46. Those flannel-wearing fascists!

[global1]

56. Got To Throw A Few Of Those In The Mix.....

to provide cover for the Bankster speeches.

[DanTex]

57. LOL. Conspiracy!

[randome]

70. And the Cardiovascular Research Foundation? I knew it! She plans on eating our hearts!

[hr][font color="blue"][center]A 90% chance of rain means the same as a 10% chance:
It might rain and it might not.[/center][/font][hr]

[mmonk]

24. Greenpeace has all the figures on their site.

I'm using a handheld device and can't provide the link. I will later should I be requested.

[randome]

25. Why the hell do you keep clouding the issue? Sanders is pure and gentle! Clinton is evil!

(We now return to our regularly scheduled hate-a-thon.)
[hr][font color="blue"][center]A 90% chance of rain means the same as a 10% chance:
It might rain and it might not.[/center][/font][hr]

[Gwhittey]

32. Snarky remarks

What is the point? Show us that info on Green Peace site is wrong. I bet you could at least find some misleading arguments over on Rush Limbaugh's site or any other GOP source. Because this is what they do too, argue that Green Peace is wrong.

[randome]

52. If GreenPeace can prove the amounts come directly from a corporation, they should show that.

Otherwise, it is entirely plausible that the amounts represent individual contributions. When a simple explanation suffices, the need for evidence to the contrary becomes paramount. And I give as equal a damn where Sanders' contributions come from as I do Clinton's. Always, of course, absent compelling evidence of illegality or kickbacks or what-not.

GreenPeace published a number. Now they need to provide context.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]A 90% chance of rain means the same as a 10% chance:
It might rain and it might not.[/center][/font][hr]

[Gwhittey]

74. Seriously Do you think we can not look up info

"First there are the direct contributions from people working for fossil fuel companies to Hillary Clinton’s campaign committee. According to the most recent filings, the committee has received $309,107 (as of 3/21/16; source: Center for Responsive Politics) from such donors"<<---sure that can be what you say

Next are the fossil fuel lobbyists, many of whom have also bundled contributions. These donations also flow to Hillary Clinton’s campaign committee. Greenpeace has tracked $1,259,280 in bundled and direct donations from lobbyists currently registered as lobbying for the fossil fuel industry. This number excludes donations from lobbyists who are employed directly by a fossil fuel companies, as those donations would have been included in the previous number.

Last are contributions from fossil fuel interests to Super PACs supporting Hillary Clinton. Greenpeace has found $3,250,000 in donations from large donors connected to the fossil fuel industry to Priorities Action USA, a Super PAC supporting Secretary Clinton’s campaign.
http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/campaign-updates/hillary-clintons-connection-oil-gas-industry/

[randome]

94. Sure, that's my goal in life: to deceive you as much as possible.

Whoever has more accurate numbers -and however the money was bundled- is irrelevant to me -again, absent any evidence of illegality. I mean, Sanders is #2 (behind Clinton) in donations from Internet-related interests. Is that worrisome? Not to me.

Whether it's a million dollars for Sanders or ten million dollars for Clinton, those amounts should be treated with the same suspicions but they aren't. It's only Clinton who receives our ire and that speaks volumes.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]A 90% chance of rain means the same as a 10% chance:
It might rain and it might not.[/center][/font][hr]

[synergie]

54. Indeed what's the point, no matter how many people explain it to you, no matter how many

times, you still prefer to reject the truth, because lies are pretty much all Bernie has to run on now, and even when evidence is presented to him, he digs in on the falsehoods, and his followers follow suit.

[JoePhilly]

77. It really is something amazing to watch.

[Phlem]

141. Here's a good one from DU 2008 on her experience.

Somethings never change. Except Hillary, she'll be whatever you want her to be at any given moment.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4836695

She's soooooooo trustworthy!

Yea, been there done that. Still voting for someone else.

[Punkingal]

30. Brock to the rescue again....NOT.

He can't hide that video meltdown, though. No one that behaves like that should be President, even if there wasn't many other reasons she shouldn't be President.

[Gwhittey]

35. But But

She is saner than Trump so we must vote for here because Trump is evil, or maybe it is act to get us to think that so we vote for Hillary.

[Ichingcarpenter]

38. I trust Open Secrets. com

Green peace research and other sources

before I'd trust your link.

Open Secrets

https://www.opensecrets.org/pres16/select-industries.php

Green peace.

http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/campaign-updates/hillary-clintons-connection-oil-gas-industry/

[baldguy]

68. The information from the articles came from OpenSecrets.

https://www.opensecrets.org/pres16/select-sectors.php?sector=E

[Segami]

40. DAVID 'SMEAR-RODENT' BROCK = BLUENATIONREVIEW

[RiverLover]

48. If the source is Hillary's BNR, the opposite of whatever it says is most likely the truth.

The very purpose of BNR is to spread propaganda which attempts to spin HRC into a favorable candidate.

[Autumn]

51. OH NOES! We been Brocksplained!

[frylock]

122. #brocksplanationreview

[Autumn]

125. Every time I see that place posted I get an urge to take a hot shower

and send my clothes to the dry cleaner. I love #brocksplanationreview too.

[Jester Messiah]

58. Gettin' deep in here.

Another load of fertilizer from David Brock.

[Hiraeth]

78. welcome to ignore.

no time for this.

[revbones]

80. ROFL Blue Nation Review is owned by her super-PAC

and is just a Pravda style propaganda outlet for Hillary. Find a better source that isn't owned by Correct the Record ran by David Brock who previously smeared the Clintons until they started paying him.

Completely uncreditable source.

[polly7]

98. Oh jeez ....... I can't believe I even replied in this thread.

I had forgotten what Blue Nation Review was.

[EndElectoral]

126. LMAO...so she didn't even have to coordinate

[brewens]

83. You would even try and pretend you don't know what bundler's are and what they do?

That is sillary! LOL

[berni_mccoy]

89. LMFAO! So Brock-O'Keefe is now a FACTCHECKER?!?!

[frylock]

123. Fact maker.

[CentralCoaster]

90. "Is it really necessary to give Karl Rove and his ilk a general election gift?"

Actually, I think the gift to Rove is letting the weaker candidate, Hillary, win the election by all of this "shhh, leave her alone" crap.

She is what she is, her donors are what they are, we deserve the truth NOW, not after it's too late.

Look, I'm sure that the Secretary believes in herself, that fracking is a necessary evil, that trickle down works and "job creators" need to be protected.

I also believe that she sincerely cares for women and children, but in a limited way.

I think she's grossly out of touch with middle America.

[baldguy]

96. Right. The candidate with the most votes & most delegates is "weaker".

And the candidate that thinks women's issues are second-tier issues & aren't important, and that you have to be black to be poor isn't "grossly out of touch with middle America."

This is one of those April Fool's posts, isn't it?

[CentralCoaster]

99. Who does better in match-ups against Trump, Cruz?

Who has momentum?

Who is increasingly winning states?

Who won the last six of seven contests?

Who's up in Minnesota?

Who's doing this despite being totally unknown nationally six months ago?

[Blue Meany]

92. By this standard no politician takes corporate money

She argues: " The money came from the organizations’ PACs; their individual members, employees or owners; and those individuals’ immediate families."

As well a know, a number of devices have been used by politicians and donors to skirt the restrictions and well as to camaflouge efforts to buy influence. PACs are one of the main ones, but also bundling contributions, overpaid speeches, buying up large numbers of a candidate's books (mainly a Republican trick, I think). In the case of the Clinton's, contributions to the Clinton Foundation seem to be perceived as a way to influence the candidate. I corporate money no longer corporate money if it is laundered through a PAC or used for overpaid speeches? I don't think so.

To say that there is no corporate money in politics because it is hidden behind these devices seems absurd, but I suspect that this nitpicking over the meaning of the term "corporate money," is just another attempt to turn the truth into a "lie."

[baldguy]

113. So, employees are slaves.

They can't do anything of their own volition and without the approval of their employer.

[Dragonfli]

95. Since bluenarionreview is owned by a PAC rhat directly coordinates with her campaign why didn't

Her campaign just put out this as a press release? It is pretty much exactly the same as doing that after all.

I know why! They figure some may not realize that this site is a part of her campaign and may be under the false impression that it is an impartial "news" source!

[LAS14]

105. Hang in there DanTex!!!

It's a lot of work to try to keep a rational presence in this forum. Keep it up!!!

[RiverLover]

114. Posting fiction presented as fact is "rational"?

And when Hillary lies & spins its RW & irrational to call her out? When she hides so many things which then come to light its a conspiracy against her?

Seriously, dealing with you guys is like dealing with repubs. Black is white. The world is flat.

Such a strange election.

[LAS14]

118. See response #116

[Phlem]

145. See response #144

[whatchamacallit]

107. This belongs in here

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511623617

[EndElectoral]

110. You do realize that your post is exactly WHY HRC is considered so untrustworthy. Selective truth.

First, she accused Sanders when in fact the person questioning her was from Greenpeace, NOT from the Sanders campaign, and second both Greenpeace and Mother Jones have BOTH wrote articles detailing exactly HOW the Clinton campaigns is benefitting from big fossil fuel contributions.

To suggest otherwise or blame Sanders is deflection from the actual information available for anyone to read.

http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/campaign-updates/hillary-clintons-connection-oil-gas-industry/

Hillary Clinton’s Connections to the Oil and Gas Industry
by Jesse Coleman

Hillary Clinton's campaign and the Super PAC supporting her have received more than $4.5 million from the fossil fuel industry.

Hillary Clinton’s campaign has been backed by the fossil fuel industry in a number of ways.

First, there are the direct contributions from people working for fossil fuel companies to Hillary Clinton’s campaign committee. According to the most recent filings, the committee has received $309,107 (as of 3/21/16; source: Center for Responsive Politics) from such donors.

Next are the fossil fuel lobbyists, many of whom have also bundled contributions. These donations also flow to Hillary Clinton’s campaign committee. Greenpeace has tracked $1,259,280 in bundled and direct donations from lobbyists currently registered as lobbying for the fossil fuel industry. This number excludes donations from lobbyists who are employed directly by a fossil fuel companies, as those donations would have been included in the previous number.

Last are contributions from fossil fuel interests to Super PACs supporting Hillary Clinton. Greenpeace has found $3,250,000 in donations from large donors connected to the fossil fuel industry to Priorities Action USA, a Super PAC supporting Secretary Clinton’s campaign.

All told, the campaign to elect Hillary Clinton for president in 2016 has received more than $4.5 million from lobbyists, bundlers, and large donors connected the fossil fuel industry.

Number of oil, gas and coal industry lobbyists that have made direct contributions to Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign: 57

57 registered oil, coal and gas lobbyists have personally given $126,200 to the Hillary campaign
Of those 57, 11 are bundlers.
11 lobbyists have bundled $1,140,930 in contributions to the Hillary campaign
43 lobbyists have contributed the maximum allowed ($2700).
This includes:

Lobbyists who have reported lobbying for the oil and gas industry – both in-house company lobbyists and hired lobbyists from “K-Street firms.”
This does not include:

Industry executives
Other employees of the oil and gas industry
Board members
Corporate PAC contributions
Contributions by major investors
Donations to Super PACS or non-profit groups
Contributions made by trade associations to Super PACs
Hillary takes more from lobbyists in general than any other candidate

https://www.opensecrets.org/pres16/select-industries.php

Total amount bundled from oil and gas lobbyists: $1,140,930

http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2015/07/hillary-clinton-bundlers-fossil-fuel-lobbyists

Meet the Fossil Fuel Lobbyists Raising Money for Hillary Clinton
Many of Clinton's bundlers are linked to Big Oil, natural gas, and the Keystone pipeline.
—By Paul Blumenthal and Kate Sheppard

Nearly all of the lobbyists bundling contributions for Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton's campaign have at one time or another worked for the fossil fuel industry.

A list of 40 registered lobbyists that the Clinton camp disclosed to the Federal Election Commission on Wednesday revealed a number of Democratic Party lobbyists who have worked against regulations to curb climate change, advocated for offshore drilling, or sought government approval for natural gas exports.

Clinton, the former secretary of state, has called climate change the most "consequential, urgent, sweeping collection of challenges we face as a nation and a world" and says it would be a major focus of her administration if she wins the White House. But having so many supporters who have sold their services to fossil fuel companies may complicate her emphasis on pro-environment policies.

Scott Parven and Brian Pomper, lobbyists at Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld, have been registered to lobby for the Southern California-based oil giant Chevron since 2006, with contracts totaling more than $3 million. The two bundled Clinton contributions of $24,700 and $29,700, respectively. They have helped Chevron over the years resist efforts to eliminate oil and gas tax breaks and to impose regulations to reduce carbon emissions.

The two Clinton bundlers also were part of a much-criticized campaign by Chevron to manipulate Congress into inserting language into the Andean Trade Preferences Act that would require Ecuador to dismiss a longstanding lawsuit against the company for polluting the Amazon jungle. Democratic lawmakers pushed back against the campaign and the lawsuit is continuing.

What is HRC's response? To attack Sanders for lying about this stuff! There's a reason she's considered untrustworthy and a liar. Read these articles and many more, and you'll understand why.

[LAS14]

116. Talk about prejudice

So many of the responses in this thread assume that if you work for a particular industry you can't have any personal political opinions. That your vote is only to support the industry you work for. That is just nuts. And bordering on scary.

[Phlem]

144. Yep and Hillary just cares about herself. That's bordering on typical

from Hillary.

When "I" win instead of when "we" win.

Been there done that.

Same tactics as 2008. But you know that cause you been through it right? You've seen all the data that has gone through here since back then right?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4836695

[Avalux]

157. That's not what I'm talking about. n/t

[frylock]

119. Brock Nation Review

[Fuddnik]

120. APRIL FOOLS!!!!!!!!!

[azmom]

161. It's gotta be. There's no other explanation.

[Gothmog]

121. These facts will be ignored

[HassleCat]

132. Get ready to accept your premise in the general election.

The Trump campaign will receive no money from corporations because federal election law prohibits such contributions. If we want to connect Trump to various special interests, we cannot follow the money. Is that OK? Personally, I am vitally interested in the people who support a particular candidate with large contributions, because such support always (yes, I said always) generates favors and special treatment.

[LexVegas]

138. Rec for truth. Exposing lies perpetuated by Sanders campaign. nt

[Phlem]

146. Oh my. The irony.

[Avalux]

143. It's so funny to read this drivel. Notice the word DIRECTLY in the very first sentence.

Of course it's not directly done, that's not allowed. This silly author assumes we're too stupid to understand and then goes on a rampage of false indignation. Oh the drama!!!

[LAS14]

147. See response #116 - nt

[Persondem]

148. The Truth needs to be seen. Thank you. K & R nt

[Katashi_itto]

149. Have you thought about getting therapy?

This is patently delusional.

[Lucinda]

150. KNR Thank you!

[Orsino]

151. If that's how Clinton herself spins it...

...then campaign finance reform would be DOA in her administration.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

153. Any moment now --

I am waiting for Brock to proclaim Bernie "an old fogy whose little bit a doty".

Any feelings I have about Cinton 's "honesty and integrity" come from my observation of them personally, and nothing Bernie Sanders or his campaign have EVER said.

[Bread and Circus]

154. Blue Nation Review literally equals propaganda.

What is wrong with you people?

[DisgustipatedinCA]

156. Stopped reading the instant I saw the URL. Lying carries consequences.

And Brock is nothing if not a lying fuck. So you can enjoy reading the words of a lying fuck. I won't be.

[Persondem]

158. Go ahead, bury your head in the sand. Can't handle the truth, eh? You obviously have NO

clue how campaign contributions work.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

159. This was predictable. And sophomoric.

To answer your question, yes, I can handle the truth. What does that have to do with a lying fuckstain of a propagandist? I question your ability to discern truth versus propaganda, based on your reply to me.

[Persondem]

162. The Truth is the Truth. You just don't want to admit the reality of the BS accusation.

People in the fossil fuel industry have contributed $203,885 to Sanders’s campaign, according to OpenSecrets.org.

Is St. Bernie corrupt?? In the pocket of the FF industry??

[DisgustipatedinCA]

163. And Einstein comes back with The Reflexive Property of Truth.

You've caught me. I've spent 30 of my 47 years being politically aware. But by golly, an Internet Person has busted me good. Run on now.

[Persondem]

165. OOOOhhhhhhhhhh my..... Such condescension ... and willful ignorance all rolled up into one

how about we try the symmetric property of truth

condescension = ignorance; ignorance = condescension

Oh, oh, oh ... how about the transitive property of truth

If Condescension = ignorance and ignorance = internet jerk, then condescension = internet jerk.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

168. Call me weird, but I'm beginning to like you. THAT was a spirited reply. The Brock shit, not so much

[Persondem]

169. I can appreciate that. . Cheers. nt

[DisgustipatedinCA]

170. Thanks. You too, and have a good weekend.

[jfern]

160. A site run by David Brock isn't where you go to get facts

[beedle]

164. David Brooks:

Money laundering 101.

And he didn't change a penny for this awesome lesson on organized crime tactics.

[joeybee12]

166. Bernie took fossil fuel money AFTER signing a pledge saying he wouldn't

Talk about hypocrisy.

[baldguy]

173. It's that celebrated "Sanders Integrity" at work.

Of course, his worshipers won't accept the fact that he has feet of clay.

[jfern]

167. Is Anita Hill "a little bit nutty and a little bit slutty"? Because David Brock said so.

[reddread]

172. since Anita Hill wasnt the real target

getting Thomas on the bench was,
e v e r y s i n g l e H R C supporter is going to have sign off on
Clarence Thomas
Iraq sanctions that killed how many children? "It was worth it"
you special level of hellbound women.
The completely bogus and absolutely historically shameful IWR vote.
The coup in Honduras, and the persecution of refugees and orphans.
and really, all those video'd remarks that show her for what she is.
all you have to do is vote Hillary Clinton.
step right up, dip your hands deeply!

[DemocracyDirect]

176. She got rid of her SuperPAC?

Her SuperPAC is full of corporate money.

Yes technically a campaign can't accept money directly from corporations.

But bundlers get around that too by splitting corporate donations among many "individuals".

So stop the lies.

[aintitfunny]

177. There is truth, and there is all the truth

While individuals working for oil and gas interests haven’t contributed much to Clinton, relatively speaking — the industry doesn’t even make her top 20 — a review by the Center for Responsive Politics of FEC filings reveals that Clinton has taken $1.4 million in contributions bundled by lobbyists who represent the industry.

https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2016/04/clintons-fossil-fuel-friends-lobbyist-bundlers-brought-in-big-money/

Individual contributions, no problem. Oil & Gas industry lobbyists who have made a difference and will likely have her ear? Valid concern.