Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: This message was self-deleted by its author [View all]Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)42. Bernie Sanders is leading the fight to stop TPP.
Hillary is not opposed to the TPP.
She also has very close relationships to the corporations pushing for TPP.
She has been very clear up to now (May 21, 2015) that she wants to wait and see what's in it.
I'm really looking for a candidate who is opposed to fast track and also opposed to TPP.
Hillary couldn't even do us the decency of making a statement against fast track. That's not someone I would want to vote for.
As pressure increases for 2016 presidential contender Hillary Clinton to say where she stands on the pending Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) trade deal, her ties to avid TPP supporters wont escape notice.
One glaring example: A linked trifecta consisting of the TPP, the mega-investment firm Morgan Stanley, and the Clinton family that involves campaign contributions, former members of Bill Clintons administration and large donations to the Clintons foundation.
Morgan Stanley is one of many U.S. companies supporting the TPP. Its a member of the U.S. Business Coalition for TPP, and since 2013 the firm has lobbied on issues pertaining to the agreement. According to reports filed by the company and its lobbyists, Morgan Stanley spent $4.04 million in 2013, $4.82 million in 2014 and $530,000 in 2015 (thus far) lobbying on a slew of issues, including TPP. Lobbying disclosure rules dont require a breakdown of how much is spent on any particular matter, so its impossible to know exactly how much of Morgan Stanleys budget was devoted to the pending deal.
Morgan Stanleys role in the Clinton orbit is multifaceted. Thomas R. Nides, the firms current vice president, was deputy secretary of state for management under Clinton and is considered a close confidant, though he wont be taking up a formal role in her 2016 campaign. Nides was also Morgan Stanleys chief operating and administrative officer prior to joining the State Department, and served as chief-of-staff to former U.S. Trade Representative Mickey Kantor in the 1990s.
https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2015/05/hillary-clinton-morgan-stanley-and-tpp-a-free-trade-triumvirate/One glaring example: A linked trifecta consisting of the TPP, the mega-investment firm Morgan Stanley, and the Clinton family that involves campaign contributions, former members of Bill Clintons administration and large donations to the Clintons foundation.
Morgan Stanley is one of many U.S. companies supporting the TPP. Its a member of the U.S. Business Coalition for TPP, and since 2013 the firm has lobbied on issues pertaining to the agreement. According to reports filed by the company and its lobbyists, Morgan Stanley spent $4.04 million in 2013, $4.82 million in 2014 and $530,000 in 2015 (thus far) lobbying on a slew of issues, including TPP. Lobbying disclosure rules dont require a breakdown of how much is spent on any particular matter, so its impossible to know exactly how much of Morgan Stanleys budget was devoted to the pending deal.
Morgan Stanleys role in the Clinton orbit is multifaceted. Thomas R. Nides, the firms current vice president, was deputy secretary of state for management under Clinton and is considered a close confidant, though he wont be taking up a formal role in her 2016 campaign. Nides was also Morgan Stanleys chief operating and administrative officer prior to joining the State Department, and served as chief-of-staff to former U.S. Trade Representative Mickey Kantor in the 1990s.
Cannot edit, recommend, or reply in locked discussions
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
42 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
I think you may be right on them agreeing on much. That is why I have been saying that she
jwirr
May 2015
#1
Great, which part of it do you disagree with. I looked over the whole thing and I'm ready with links
Cheese Sandwich
May 2015
#8
Well, as an honest Sanders supporter I would most certainly say that Clinton has in fact rejected
Bluenorthwest
May 2015
#37
Those polls are only for registered Dems. And while her polls have been decreasing, Bernie's have
sabrina 1
May 2015
#9
Like I said, his are increasing among Dems hers decreasing. I am enjoying every minute of having a
sabrina 1
May 2015
#12
Saint Bernie went from a 60 pt deficit to 50. He'll be in the lead anyday now.
Tarheel_Dem
May 2015
#32
A jump from 3% to 13% in just a few months is evidence that once people get to know him
sabrina 1
May 2015
#17
As a former O'Malley supporter, I don't expect to be returning. Beauty if in the eye of the
sabrina 1
May 2015
#21
He isn't running to keep our priorities in the spotlight. If the Dem's choice of candidate can't do
sabrina 1
May 2015
#15