Last week, we examined a number of fun ways to buy access to the Clinton political dynasty. Wealthy individuals and powerful interest groups in this country and around the world have sought to get in on the action over the years. But few corporations have done so more prolifically than Goldman Sachs.
Banks evaluated as having a high “systemic risk” to the U.S. financial system have contributed millions to Hillary Clinton over the course of her political career. A recent study by the Treasury Department’s Office of Financial Research assessed the institutions that, due to their size, complexity and interconnectedness, posed the greatest financial risk. As it turns out, four of the six riskiest banks are big donors to Hillary Clinton:
Mark Mezvinsky has an easy job. His rich and powerful in-laws, Bill and Hillary Clinton, have a bunch of rich and powerful friends who give Mezvinsky and his friends millions of dollars to invest and (in theory, anyway) make them even more money.
But Mezvinsky isn’t very good at his job. The Wall Street Journal reports that Mezvinsky’s boutique hedge fund, Eaglevale Partners LP, reported significant losses last year, and has struggled to turn a profit for investors since its inception in 2012:
THE POLITICO’s Mike Allen has given us inside look at the nascent Hillary Clinton presidential campaign. Allen’s piece is the latest in a long line of stories explaining how formidable the 2016 operation will be, and assuring us that Hillary has learned from her disastrous failure in 2008. Here are five things we’ve learned about the campaign thus far:
Despite her best efforts and most passionate gesticulations, Senator Elizabeth Warren (D., Mass.) failed to shut down the government on Thursday, thus proving her political clout is vastly inferior to that of GOP colleague Ted Cruz. Warren had urged House Democrats to block a controversial spending package, which included a provision to roll back a portion of …
Elizabeth Warren is doing her best Ted Cruz impression this week as she attempts to scuttle a bipartisan budget agreement. She is trying to remove a provision—supported by both parties—that would roll back certain regulations imposed as part of the Dodd-Frank financial reform bill. President Obama, meanwhile, has urged Congress to pass the budget agreement as is.
Warren has taken particular aim at Citigroup, which she accuses of authoring the provision, and seems to be positioning herself to shutdown the government:
“I do think at a certain point you’ve made enough money,” President Obama said in 2010. His potential successor and her philandering husband couldn’t disagree more.
The Clintons can’t stop making money. Hillary recently took home $225,000 for a speech at the University of Nevada-Las Vegas foundation, money she refused to give back after students at the public university protested her exorbitant speaking fee in the face of rising tuition costs.
Bill, meanwhile, just wrapped a six-figure keynote gig at Veritas Capital, a private equity firm. You know, sort of like Bain Capital, which Democrats spent the entire 2012 campaign attacking at as a heartless agent of “vulture capitalism.”
Liberal are very agitated about Burger King’s decision to acquire Canadian coffee chain Tim Hortons in a move that will allow the company to “invert” its headquarters to Canada, and pay a significantly lower tax rate.
Their first instinct was to accuse the “unpatriotic” burger chain of treason. However, conflicting emotions ensued once they learned that “good” billionaire Warren Buffett helped financed the deal.
It doesn’t really matter though, does it? Because Hillary Clinton is going to be the Democratic nominee in 2016, and anyone who thinks she is going to coddle Corporate American any less than the Obama administration has over the years is kidding themselves.