Now that the story of Hillary Clinton's shady dealings with the Clinton Foundation have come to light, especially those massive foreign "contributions" and payments for speeches by Bill from foreigners with business in front of the State Department while Hillary was Secretary of State, the New York Times is trying to do damage control. Today, the Times has a long story about the relationship between senator Marco Rubio and a Miami area billionaire who is his largest supporter. That billionaire is Norman Braman, a mega-car dealer who used to own the Philadelphia Eagles. In the past, Braman employed Rubio as an attorney before Rubio became a US senator. Braman's charitable foundation also employs Mrs. Rubio in a senior position. According to the Times, when Rubio was Speaker of the Florida House, he steered some state cash to two programs for medical research done at universities in Florida which Mr. Braman also supported. Lastly, Rubio has used Braman's private jet four times, but he has reimbursed Braman for the cost each time. That's it.
The contrast between what Hillary Clinton and Marco Rubio have done is quite astounding. In fact, the Times article actually hurts Hillary more than helps her. Rubio, a lawyer, did some work for Braman, something that was perfectly proper under Florida law. When Hillary was the first lady of Arkansas, she was put on the board of Tyson Foods, the largest company in the state. Even though this was thirty years ago, Hillary was paid much more by Tyson to show up to an occasional board meeting than Rubio was paid just a few years ago for months of legal work. Braman's charity employs Mrs. Rubio, and she is well known in the community in Florida for her work in that regard. The Clinton Foundation put political staff like Ira Magaziner on its payrolls and used the Clinton Foundation to keep the political machine functioning off of supposedly charitable contributions. If there were any doubt of that, consider that Braman's foundation spends less than 10% of its income on all of its staff while the Clinton Foundation spends over 80% of its income on staff and administrative expenses. The focus of Braman's foundation is on actual charity, unlike the Clinton Foundation focus on keeping the Clinton machine intact. Rubio used Braman's jet occasionally but reimbursed Braman each time. On the other hand, the Clinton Foundation spent $8 million per year on travel, mostly for Bill, Hillary and Chelsea, and there were no reimbursements.
It is the next comparison where the real difference between the Braman foundation and the Clintons is best illustrated. All those foreign and large corporate donors to the Clinton Foundation were buying influence with Hillary at her job at the State Department. It is no coincidence for example that GE just happened to donate millions at the same time that Hillary was lobbying the government of Algeria to give GE a huge contract that would earn that corporation hundreds of millions or even billions of dollars. There are literally thousands of people, nations and companies who gave cash or hired Bill at inflated speech prices to buy influence. With Rubio, there are two instances of Braman lobbying for Rubio to support medical research activities which Braman also supported. As a car dealer, Braman got nothing personally out of those state grants; he just advanced certain worthwhile charities. Hillary was selling influence to the highest bidder and gaining millions. Rubio was considering the worth of the state giving money to medical research from which Braman got no benefit.
The final comparison is this: at the end of the day, Hillary and her husband managed to end up with a net worth of roughly one hundred and fifty million dollars, most of which comes from crazily inflated speaking fees or from having their expenses paid by the Clinton Foundation. Marco Rubio, on the other hand, has a net worth of under $10,000 according to the Times article. He still has student loans outstanding as well as mortgage debt. If he were really gaining cash from Mr. Braman, it is safe to say that Rubio would not still be in debt.
The truth is that Rubio's conduct makes Hillary Clinton look all that much more sleazy.
The contrast between what Hillary Clinton and Marco Rubio have done is quite astounding. In fact, the Times article actually hurts Hillary more than helps her. Rubio, a lawyer, did some work for Braman, something that was perfectly proper under Florida law. When Hillary was the first lady of Arkansas, she was put on the board of Tyson Foods, the largest company in the state. Even though this was thirty years ago, Hillary was paid much more by Tyson to show up to an occasional board meeting than Rubio was paid just a few years ago for months of legal work. Braman's charity employs Mrs. Rubio, and she is well known in the community in Florida for her work in that regard. The Clinton Foundation put political staff like Ira Magaziner on its payrolls and used the Clinton Foundation to keep the political machine functioning off of supposedly charitable contributions. If there were any doubt of that, consider that Braman's foundation spends less than 10% of its income on all of its staff while the Clinton Foundation spends over 80% of its income on staff and administrative expenses. The focus of Braman's foundation is on actual charity, unlike the Clinton Foundation focus on keeping the Clinton machine intact. Rubio used Braman's jet occasionally but reimbursed Braman each time. On the other hand, the Clinton Foundation spent $8 million per year on travel, mostly for Bill, Hillary and Chelsea, and there were no reimbursements.
It is the next comparison where the real difference between the Braman foundation and the Clintons is best illustrated. All those foreign and large corporate donors to the Clinton Foundation were buying influence with Hillary at her job at the State Department. It is no coincidence for example that GE just happened to donate millions at the same time that Hillary was lobbying the government of Algeria to give GE a huge contract that would earn that corporation hundreds of millions or even billions of dollars. There are literally thousands of people, nations and companies who gave cash or hired Bill at inflated speech prices to buy influence. With Rubio, there are two instances of Braman lobbying for Rubio to support medical research activities which Braman also supported. As a car dealer, Braman got nothing personally out of those state grants; he just advanced certain worthwhile charities. Hillary was selling influence to the highest bidder and gaining millions. Rubio was considering the worth of the state giving money to medical research from which Braman got no benefit.
The final comparison is this: at the end of the day, Hillary and her husband managed to end up with a net worth of roughly one hundred and fifty million dollars, most of which comes from crazily inflated speaking fees or from having their expenses paid by the Clinton Foundation. Marco Rubio, on the other hand, has a net worth of under $10,000 according to the Times article. He still has student loans outstanding as well as mortgage debt. If he were really gaining cash from Mr. Braman, it is safe to say that Rubio would not still be in debt.
The truth is that Rubio's conduct makes Hillary Clinton look all that much more sleazy.
No comments:
Post a Comment