ArticlesBlog

CLINTON CASH FULL DOCUMENTARY MOVIE [ ENG – SPANISH SUBS ]

CLINTON CASH FULL DOCUMENTARY MOVIE  [ ENG – SPANISH SUBS ]


(Bill): The world is too small, our wisdom too
limited and our time here too short to waste any more of it in winning fleeting victories
at other people’s expense (Reporter): The Clinton global initiative
which brings philanthropists and CEO’s together with nonprofits to make concrete commitments aimed at some of the
world’s most toughest problems, almost ten years in they have leveraged millions of dollars
in assistance in over 180 countries (Bill): CGI was designed to tackle big global
challenges in bite sized pieces with the conviction that, regardless of size or scope our problems
will yield to concerted action and innovative partnerships of individuals, NGO’s, businesses
and governments. We have to now find a way to triumph together (Hillary): All the problems
that we face from climate change to financial contagion, to nuclear proliferation are too
complex and crosscutting for any one government, or indeed for governments to solve alone. We
believe that ending hunger is not only possible but it is both a moral and strategic imperative (Reporter): Hillary Clinton is trying to shift
the spotlight to global warming, the Presidential contender unveiling her plans to combat climate
change (Bill): Together with innovative partners
from the public and private sectors we’re working
to make homes, universities and cities more energy efficient (Hillary): We share a common future and we
are here to find common ground, women must be empowered. (Reporter): It’s classic Bill Clinton, by
using his birthday to help causes he champions, from combatting climate change, to obesity and
even HIV (Hillary): Help bring new dignity and respect, to
women and girls all over the world and in so doing, bring new strength and stability
to families as well. (Bill): We are trying to do something no one
has ever done before. (Reporter): A new report today claims that
the Clinton Foundation gives about 10% of its money that it raises to actual charities and the services
that they offer. It has been reported that you make 5 million
making speeches the President made more than 100 million dollars? (Hillary): Well, if if you *stuttering*
you have no reason to remember but we came out of the White House not only dead broke,
but in debt (Reporter): Six years ago Clinton was about
to become Secretary of State Barack Obama had nominated her, everyone knew
she was going to be confirmed by the senate gonna be confirmed, easily, but, there was
a thought, there was a question, there was a doubt out there about a potential conflict
of interest. The Clinton foundation dropping its self imposed
ban on collecting funds from foreign governments and entities and now the Washington Post reports total
contributions to that foundation amount to 2 billion dollars. There’s a lot of money sloshing around and
everything is blurred and it’s not good. The questions scream out at me, what in the
world happened with the foundation and these ulterior motives and this money and the email
server, I’m sorry, those scream out at me. The amount of schmoozing involved and crossing
lines and one person putting money in a foundation and then Clinton getting unbelievable amounts
for speeches, contracts going one way or another, it’s not good (Hillary): I look forward to working with
all of you. Particularly the appropriators. Uh, we have a lot of work to do and it is
such important, uh, work that lies ahead. (Bill): We did this with a very simple strategy. (Schweizer): Africa is a continent that has
been a chamber of horrors for decades. It’s really not the fault of the African people. It’s largely a result of the kind of system
that’s been perpetuated there. You have these oligarchs which dominate these
countries that often times have natural resources that could be very lucrative and these oligarchs
strike deals with foreign corporations or foreign governments who in effect prop them
up and put them in power and in exchange, these rich oligarchs give them access to rich
mineral deposits and the Clintons, you would expect to be opposed to this sort of thing
and that’s at least what their language does. (Hillary): Our countries have deepened our
cooperation on many issues including good governance and transparency, energy, regional
security and advancing peace and development in the Niger Delta. (Schweizer): The problem is, their words are
different from their actions (Reporter): Rwanda has really taken an impressive projector
of development and the people here still think Kagame’s the man to take them to another level. President Paul Kagame has walked all around
the crowd thanking the people for electing him unopposed as chairman of the RPF for president
of the RPF for another seven year term. Critics say he’s far from changing democracy
in Rwanda, he’s actually eroding it. (Schweizer): Paul Kagame has been praised
by Bill Clinton and the Clinton Foundation. But the fact of the matter is, Paul Kagame
has a terrible human rights record. He’s accused of aiding military operations
in the neighboring Democratic Republic of Congo and that actually forced the recruitment
of child soldiers. The UN has identified him as being involved
in activities that entailed massive human rights violations. (Reporter): Opposition parties that have been
formed in the last year or two have 1 by 1 been silenced or otherwise excluded from the
race and individuals who aren’t even politicians, but even journalists for example and other
Rwandans who may have different views from Kagame have found themselves at the receiving
end of what has become quite a violent campaign of intimidation. (Schweizer): Well Paul Kagame is a friend
of Bill Clinton’s. (Bill): I want to say a special word of appreciation,
for the leadership of President Kagame. (Kagame): I’m greatly humbled to receive this
Clinton global citizen award. (Schweizer): He’s actually been given awards
by Bill Clinton, for his conduct as the leader of that country and they regale him as a great
military leader. This is the sort of legitimization that we
don’t want of these kind of dictators or leaders, that’s the kinds of legitimization that the
Clinton’s have engaged in and they’ve done it in a way that creates commercial opportunities
for donors and friends and allies who want to do business in Africa. Business in Africa means you are dealing with
dictators who are going to give you access to say mineral rights or oil drilling rights,
but you’re going to have to pay them off. The Clintons partner with foreign entities
who want access to Africa and specifically mining companies or energy companies who need
to get concessions for access to oil or natural gas or the rights to mine for gold. Those two make a powerful alliance because
these companies will give money to the Clintons, either in the form of speaking fees, or in
the form of donations to the Clinton Foundation. And the Clintons will then in effect do their
bidding before the halls of power and corridors of power in Africa and they will go to foreign
governments and encourage them to do business with individuals who are putting money in
their pockets and this leads to some amazing fits of behavior that in a way are just reminiscent
of 19th century colonialism. A perfect example of this is Ambassador Joe
Wilson, Joe Wilson is a long time friend of the Clintons, in fact he endorsed Hillary
Clinton in the 2008 Presidential Election and it was also thought that he might become
a senior official in Hillary Clinton’s State Department, but the fact of the matter is
Joe Wilson was up to something far more nefarious during Hillary Clinton’s tenure as Secretary
of State. In 2009, shortly after she became Secretary
of State, when WIlson was the Vice Chairman of a company called Jarch Capital, they took
out a 50 year lease on 4,000 hectares in South Sudan, South Sudan was in the middle of a
civil war and this lease was actually signed with warlords who were involved in the civil
war. These individuals who were engaged in massive
human rights violations including the massacre of opponent tribes and basically what Joe
Wilson was engaged in was something called investing in sovereignty changes, they were
basically cutting deals, lucrative deals worth potentially hundreds of millions of dollars,
with these warlords and the expectation was simple, these warlords would take power, then
they would give them access to these lands, where they could make huge amounts of money,
exploring for natural gas, exploring for oil and for mineral rights. Ambassador Joe Wilson isn’t the only Clinton
friend and Foundation donor who was working in war torn countries, Swedish mining investor
Lukas Lundin has pledged 100 million dollars to the Clinton Foundation. He did that in 2007 and his most lucrative
mining operations are in the war torn country of the Democratic Republic of Congo. This is a country that perhaps has the most
horrific human rights situation on the face of the Earth. By the time Lukas Lundin made his 100 million
dollar pledge to the Clinton Foundation, his Congo operation was making, quote, staggering
profits, end quote, according to his financial statements. His overall capitalization was 20 billion
dollars, but for those profits to remain staggering, US policy under Hillary Clinton had to remain
unchanged, that’s a problem, Hillary Clinton as a Senator back in 2006 supported something
called The Congo Relief Security and Democracy Promotion Act. As the laws name implied, the goal was to
bring reform to Congo, that’s not something that Lukas Lundin would want, so in 2009,
when Hillary became Secretary of State, she reversed course 180 degrees and went from
supporting reform in Congo, to supporting the status quo, which is exactly what Lukas
Lundin would want, who of course had committed 100 million dollars to the Clinton Foundation. But Congo isn’t the only scandal plagued country
where Clinton benefactors have made millions. (Reporter): Africa’s most populous nation
Nigeria is full of promise, but fulfilling that promise is sometimes a struggle. The resource rich country has a poverty rate
of over 50%. (Schweizer): Look at a country like Nigeria,
which is really a cesspool of corruption, in fact people will say it is perhaps the
most corrupt country in the world. It’s rich in natural resources, it produces
a lot of oil, but that money never trickles down to the people, it goes to the oligarchs
who run the country, who often times take that money and put it in Swiss bank accounts,
in a way that of course the people of Nigeria can never benefit from. And you see, there’s a Federal law in the
United States which says, if foreign governments that receive US assistance aren’t transparent,
in how they spend that money, that they will not be able to get US foreign assistance anymore. It’s about transparency, but there’s a way
around that law, you can get a waiver from that law. How? By getting the US Secretary of State to grant
you a waiver. (Clinton): Uh, we intend to remain very supportive
on your reform efforts, uh, thank you for mentioning, uh, the work we did together on
the elections, we’re also very supportive of, uh, the uh, anti corruption, uh, uh, reform
efforts, more transparency in the work that, uh, you and, and your team is also championing,
because we really believe that, uh, uh, the future for uh, Nigeria, is limitless. (Schweizer): So in the case of Nigeria, they
receive hundreds of millions of dollars in US foreign assistance, they’ve not made progress
in being more transparent and of course, they’ve gotten exemptions from Hillary Clinton while
she was Secretary of State. What’s so curious about this, is what was
happening commercially with the Clintons while this was going on. Bill Clinton for the first time ever, gets
paid highly lucrative speeches in Nigeria, which had never happened before, in fact he
gets paid to do 2 speeches for $700,000 a piece, by a businessman in Nigeria who just
happens to be close with the President of that country. Keep in mind by the way, that his normal speaking
fee, is less than $200,000 a speech, so this was an enormous payday for Bill Clinton. (Bill): Okay now we’ll begin the panel (Schweizer): One of the pinnacles of power
in that country, is a gentleman named Gilbert Chagoury. Gilbert Chagoury, who’s committed 1 billion
dollars to the Clinton Global Initiative, is connected to another individual in the
Clinton orbit, that would be Marc Rich, the billionaire who was on the FBI’s ten most
wanted list, that was suddenly and surprisingly pardoned by Bill Clinton in 2001. Marc Rich, you might recall, is somebody who
was trading oil with the Ayatollah Khomeini of Iran as the same time that the Ayatollah
was holding 50 Americans hostage. He also had a long history of busing UN sanctions
by trading oil with the Apartheid regime in South Africa and a whole host of other nefarious
governments. Well Gilbert Chagoury the high Clinton donor
was business partners with Marc Rich. Together they sopped up oil assets in Nigeria
and sold them on the oil market for the benefit of a corrupt individual who was leading Nigeria
at the time, named General Abacha. Abacha smuggled by some estimates 4-8 billion
dollars out of the country and put them in European bank accounts. Gilbert Chagoury was indicted and convicted
in Europe for helping him to do that. He was charged for aiding and abetting a criminal
enterprise and on money laundering charges. And the suffering that ends up being done
here, is by the people of Nigeria, who see their leadership getting a pass from the United
States, the elites in those countries are getting rich, the Clintons are getting rich
and the money somehow never trickles down to the people of Nigeria. Sadly, this theme of resources not trickling
down to those most in need, is a common one when it comes to the Clintons. (Reporter): As we told you at the start of
tonight’s program a major magnitude earthquake has hit the island of Haiti in the Caribbean. The quake measured around 7 points on the
Richter Scale and it’s epicenter fell just ten miles from the capital Port-as-Prince. Haiti’s ambassador to the US described the
event as a catastrophe of major proportions. So far we have no information regarding the
casualties. (Woman): The world is coming to an end! It was a big earthquake, it lasted like 60
seconds I think. (Schweizer): Probably the most devastating
humanitarian crisis that Hillary Clinton faced during her tenure at the State Department,
was the tragic earthquake in Haiti. It happened in January of 2010 and literally
in a matter of seconds 250,000 people were estimated to have died and a large portion
of the Haitian infrastructure and economy was just decimated. It was a crisis on a massive scale. (Hillary): The United States is offering our
full assistance to Haiti and to others in the region, uh we will be providing both civilian
and military disaster relief and humanitarian assistance and our prayers are with the people
who have suffered, uh their families, uh and their loved ones. (Schweizer): In the days and weeks that followed
the earthquake in January of 2010, Hillary Clinton made visits to Haiti. (Reporter): And here’s the latest on Haiti,
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton arrived in Port-au-Prince just about an hour ago,
she is the highest ranking US Official in Haiti right now, since Tuesday’s earthquake,
she’s meeting with Haitian leaders and International officials, to discuss the rescue and relief
effort. (Schweizer): In fact on her first visit, which
occurred days after the earthquake, they literally had to stop traffic going in to the airport
at Port-au-Prince. There of course were relief supplies that
were being flown in, but that traffic was stopped, so the Secretary of State could come
and assess the damage. (Reporter): There is a perception and there
have been complaints or reports of bottlenecks that there’s a lot of aid coming in but it’s
very hard to get it out for people who need it. (Hillary): That’s just not true, the aid is
coming in, we’re getting it out, there’s just not enough of it, yet. (Schweizer): She flew in, with her political
aides on a large federal airplane, she landed at the airport, she made a large press conference,
made statements about her commitment to rebuilding this country and then she was soon whisked
away, headed back to Washington D.C. (Reporter): This is a city of ruins, a country
which could do little but wait for help to arrive. (Schweizer): The international community responded
in a way that you would expect it to, that is large amounts of money were committed,
up to 13 billion dollars from international relief organizations. And of course you had the official role of
the State Department, which would be point on US tax dollars going to Haiti, for the
purposes of relief. (Hillary): I want to assure the people of
Haiti, that the United States, is a friend, a partner and a supporter. (Schweizer): Hillary Clinton’s State Department
would oversee the reconstruction effort, with Chief of Staff Cheryl Mills responsible for
the allocation of US tax dollars through USAID and Bill Clinton already appointed special
envoy to Haiti for the United Nations, was named co-chair of the Interim Haiti Recovery
Commission, along with a former Haitian Prime Minister. (Bill): I hope that it will be rebuilt in
a much stronger, more sustainable way, I think the Haitians want that. (Schweizer): So this was clearly a Clinton
operation from the beginning. Now, the Haitians had their own ideas about
how best to rebuild their country. They wanted new roads, they wanted buildings
rebuilt and that’s what you would expect, this is how you recover from an earthquake. The problem is that the Clintons had their
own agenda, the interest of major donors who had a vested interest in spending that money
in Haiti in ways that would benefit them. And so you immediately have this clash between
the Haitians and the Clintons and Haitians complained almost immediately that they were
shut out of the decision making process, that it was really Bill Clinton and a few of his
friends that were calling the shots in the IHRC and they made some monumentally bad decisions,
that not only didn’t benefit the Haitian people, but ended up putting money in the pockets
of major Clinton donors who had economic stakes in Haiti. (Hillary): We have been united behind a single
goal, making investments in this countries people and your infrastructure. (Schweizer): It’s a classic example of what
some people call disaster capitalism. Disaster capitalism in that a natural disaster
creates opportunities for rebuilding to take place, but also for self enrichment to take
place and if you look at the Clintons and the promises that were made and the results
that actually followed, it is a tragic story of crony capitalism gone awry. The single largest relief project that the
United States committed taxpayer dollars to, 124 million dollars to be exact, was a project
called Caracol, a textile factory that was built in the northern part of the country,
that was supposed to create some 60,000 jobs and was supposed to create tremendous economic
growth. There’s a problem here already, you see, the
earthquake affected the southern part of Haiti, the northern part of the country was entirely
unaffected. But who were the beneficiaries of this? Companies like Gap, Target and Walmart to
name a few. The Caracol factory was built, but it didn’t
create 60,000 jobs, it created barely 5,000 jobs, but the major American companies who
got textiles terra free, made at low wages, benefited enormously and the end effect on
the Haitians was very very minimal. If you look at some of the infrastructure
projects that were undertaken, the Clintons had very grand plans to, uh, build large tracts
of homes and there were contractors that were selected for those projects. Sometimes the contractors had experience,
sometimes they did not. There’s one company in Florida that spent
a million dollars getting equipment into Haiti, they had experience in disaster relief, but
according to the owners of that company, they only made a small donation to the Clinton
Foundation and guess what, they didn’t get any relief contracts, on the other hand the
contractors who did win the awards were given the opportunity to build homes and in some
instances, were supposed to build tens of thousands of homes for Haitians, they ended
up building a fraction of that, for instance New Settlements programs was supposed to build
15,000 homes for 53 million dollars, instead they built 2,600 homes, less than a quarter
of the original estimate for 90 million dollars, or 47 million dollars over budget and they
got away with it. So you had contracts going to the relief organizations
that were also involved with the Clinton Global Initiative and you had this one organization
Dalberg, that was supposed to do an assessment for relocating people that suffered from the
earthquake. They determined that people should be moved
to a site that happened to be on a cliff that was highly unstable. USAID’s Inspector General reviewed Dalberg’s
recommendations and found them basically unusable. One member of the USAID’s shelter team was
quoted by Rolling Stone Magazine saying that the recommendations were so bad, it looked
like the team never even got out of their SUV’s, another person, said that only one
of the people that was sent to Haiti by Dalberg actually spoke French. (Reporter): Telecom mogul Denis O’brien is
one of the world’s richest people and he’s finding opportunities in the poorest countries
in the Western Hemisphere. The Irish billionaire is the largest private
investor in Haiti through his company Digicel and he’s now leading the Clinton Global Initiative
efforts down in Haiti. (Schweizer): Probably no one came out better
in the Haitian reconstruction effort that an Irish billionaire named Denis O’brien,
he’s a Clinton Foundation donor giving them between 5 and 10 million dollars, he helped
arrange speeches for Bill Clinton too. (O’brien):The interest of the Obama administration,
particularly the former secretary of state Hillary Clinton, you know all the, the, all
the different things that have happened to help Haiti get up off the floor have been
led by the US (Schweizer): And he was the owner of something
called Digicell, which is a cell phone company at the time of the earthquake, as part of
that relief effort the State Department run by Hillary Clinton wanted to fund a mobile
money transfer service, that would allow Haitian citizens to transfer and receive money on
their phones, well Digicell applied to be the recipient of that grant money, four weeks
after their application, Digicell actually sponsored a speech for Bill Clinton in Jamaica
and they paid him $225,000 and as it turns out, within four months of that speech, Digicell
would receive the first installment of that grant money. The earthquake has actually been great for
Digicell and Denis O’brien. (Reporter): More than 4 years since a magnitude
7.0 earthquake devastated Haiti and outrage there is growing , over the largely failed
reconstruction effort, despite the hundreds of millions of dollars in aid that has been
collected and spent by the IHRC, the Interim Haiti Recovery Commission. (Schweizer): So whether you’re talking about
housing or cell phones, you see that the people that are closest to the Clintons, have made
out very well from the Haitian earthquake, the rest of the country? The ordinary people of Haiti? Not so much. (Reporter): Haitian activists stage a protest
outside Hillary Clinton’s Manhattan office, the demonstrators claim billions of dollars
were stolen through the Haiti reconstruction commission headed by Bill Clinton, they also
say Haiti was used as a cover for foreign governments to funnel kickbacks and possibly
hundreds of millions of dollars through the Clinton foundation. They say it was done in exchange for favors
that Hillary was doing for the as Secretary of State. (Schweizer): The tragedy is, we had an opportunity
to rebuild in a way that would give the people of the country hope, sadly, that opportunity
was squandered and what took place, rather than rebuilding Haiti, was the self enrichment,
by friends of the Clintons. For all of Bill Clinton’s talk about building
Haiti back better, the fact remains that the most visible evidence of Clinton’s role in
the recovery, isn’t the improvement of daily life for everyday Haitians, but the construction
of new luxury hotels just miles from the folks who have been living in tarps USAID handed
out immediately after the earthquake. (Protester): We are telling the world of the
crimes that Bill and Hillary Clinton are responsible in for in Haiti (Schweizer): But while the world eventually
lost interest in Haiti’s recovery, the influence and connections afforded to donors from the
Clinton Foundation appear to have been lessons learned by others. So how much do connections to the Clintons
matter when you’re talking about Haiti? Consider the case of gold mining, the government
of Haiti had not granted a gold mining concession in 50 years. They decided to do so during the reconstruction
of their country, which was being overseen by Bill and Hillary Clinton. What company did they select to get this gold
mining permit? A company called VCS Mining, VCS Mining had
very little experience in gold mining, but what did they have? They had connections. Shortly after they got that concession, someone
joined their board of directors, it just happened to be Tony Rodham, brother of Hillary Rodham
Clinton. It was a true disaster that followed the earthquake,
which was the natural disaster, this was the man made Clinton caused disaster in relief
that led to the wasting of enormous sums of money, the enrichment of elites that were
friends with the Clintons and the Haitians were left in a situation where their life
was really not much better than it was the day after the earthquake happened. (Reporter): An ambitious pipeline is firing
off a war of opinions. Environmental activists marched in Washington
today to protest plans for the Keystone XL Oil Pipeline. A 7 billion dollar project, transporting 800,000
barrels of tar sands oil a day from Canada down to the Gulf Coast. In Washington a showdown on the Senate floor
today over the Keystone XL Pipeline, the vote to approve the controversial pipe project
has big political implications. The pipeline would create 20,000 jobs, but
opponents say the environmental risk is too great. (Schweizer): One of the touchstones of the
climate change debate, has been the Keystone XL Pipeline. It’s designed to carry oil from Canada, through
the United States to refineries in Louisiana and in Texas. The environmental movement has wholeheartedly
rejected this deal from the beginning, because they believe that it’s gonna further contribute
to the problems of climate change. (Protesters): …pipeline…One, we are the
people. Two, you can’t ignore us. Three… Now you would think that the Clintons would
be opposed to the Keystone XL Pipeline deal, because of those concerns and perhaps they
might be, except for 1 or 2 problems, or should I say 1 or 2 million problems. You see when Hillary Clinton became Secretary
of State in late 2008, there was already an issue related the to Keystone XL Pipeline
sitting on her desk, she was going to have to sign an environmental and impact statement
and decide whether the Keystone XL Pipeline should go forward. At that precise time, Bill Clinton gets a
lucrative offer of nearly 2 million dollars to give 10 speeches in Canada, for the first
time ever, from a company called TD Bank Investment Group. He gave the last speech in May of 2011, 3
months later, Hillary’s State Department releases an environmental impact statement that was
seen as largely supportive of the Keystone XL Pipeline, in a way that was massively controversial. Hillary Clinton in effect was betraying the
environmental movement by green lighting this deal, when she had in her hands the power
to kill this deal in it’s crib. It was shocking, organizations like Greenpeace
and Friends of the Earth were stunned. They wanted investigations, but everybody
was mystified, nobody could understand why Hillary Clinton would sign off on this deal,
particularly when she had been in favor of dealing with climate change and her boss,
Barack Obama, by all indications seemed to be opposed to this deal as well. (Hillary): It’s also a time for a new approach
to climate change. We know we’ve got to deal with global warming
,we’re seeing the effects of it. We need to invest in clean energy technology
today, so that we can create new, high paying jobs, to protect our environment, to grow
our economy and to finally break our addiction for foreign oil. (Schweizer): How did we go from the Clintons
being in favor of fighting climate change and dealing with fossil fuel dependence, to
Hillary Clinton signing off on the Keystone XL Pipeline? The evidence that would be found, was that
it was about the money, this was not a philosophical change, this was not a new way of thinking
about global warming, this was a way of taking 2 million dollars cash, to essentially buy
a decision by the Secretary of State. Why is the TD Bank Investment Group so interesting? Because they just happen to be one of the
largest shareholders in the Keystone XL Pipeline itself. When we looked at Bill Clinton’s pattern at
giving speeches, we looked at who was paying him, when they were paying him and if they
had ever paid for a speech before. What’s so stunning is that TD Bank had never
sponsored a speech by Bill Clinton before and then suddenly, in late 2008, when Hillary
Clinton has been announced to be the Secretary of State and when sitting on her desk is the
matter of the Keystone XL Pipeline, they suddenly decide to sponsor these speeches. And when people realize that the Clintons
had pocketed about 2 million dollars, at the precise time Hillary Clinton was making this
decision, it all now suddenly made sense, because as we’ve seen repeated, over and over
and over again, when it comes to the Clintons, you have to follow the money. In the case of the Keystone XL Pipeline, they
seemed to of abandoned their principles, their commitment, as it was, to combatting global
warming and dealing with our dependence on fossil fuels, they jettisoned that, when 2
million dollars showed up and suddenly came out in favor of the Keystone XL Pipeline. When you see this sort of pattern of behavior,
you can’t come to any other conclusion, that it’s a system of pay to play. And again, other entities appear to have picked
up on this business model too. Well Bill Clinton has been paid enormous sums
of money over the years to give speeches, on average he gets a little less than $200,000
per speech. But something happened in late 2008, his speaking
fee skyrocketed, after he’d been out of office for years. The reason was, his wife had become Secretary
of State, in fact 11 of the 13 speeches for which Bill Clinton has been paid half a million
dollars or more, occurred precisely when Hillary was the most powerful diplomat in the world. (Bill): You will never contribute to an organization
that will give you a higher probability of having your good intentions turned into real
positive changes in other people’s lives, that will give you a better chance than what
you have done here tonight. (Schweizer): His single biggest speech payday
came from the Swedish telecom company, Ericsson, and it’s a very, very unusual and troubling
story. Now Ericsson is a Swedish telecom company
that in 2009 and 2010 was in trouble with Hillary Clinton’s State Department because
Ericsson was selling a lot of telecom equipment to Iran, to Belarus, and to other oppressive
governments about which the State Department was concerned. Ericsson risked being put on a list by the
federal government in the United States for trading with an enemy state. There was actually an effort being put forward
in Washington to broaden Iranian sanctions to include the very technologies that Ericsson
was selling to the Iranian government. So it’s against this background that Ericcson
decided now might be a good time to hire Bill Clinton to give a speech. They had never paid for a speech by him before,
and they decided to go in big — $750,000 for a single speech. Seven days after he gave that speech, Hillary’s
State Department came out with a statement which said we are not going to broaden sanctions
on Iran to include technologies like telecom. We are going to rely and expect companies
like Ericsson to police themselves. It was a massive win for Ericsson. Ericsson was able to avoid having to deal
with a regulatory battle in Washington, giving up contracts that were highly lucrative in
these countries, and being put on a list that would create an enormous diplomatic problem
for them, all because essentially they paid Bill Clinton to give a speech for $750,000. (Reporter): Will you continue to give speeches? (Bill): Oh yeah, I’ve got to pay our bills. (Schweizer): So the question is why do we
see the Clintons reversing decades of policy positions that they have held so closely on
issues like human rights and environment. And a big clue comes from the folks that are
giving the Clinton Foundation literally tens of millions of dollars. And one, if not the biggest donor to the Foundation,
is a Canadian named Frank Giustra. Giustra is in the mining business, hardly
something you would call environmentally friendly, and he has interests all over the world. And he uses his relationship with the Clintons
to benefit those interests, regardless of the environmental concerns. A great example of this is what happened in
Colombia. What is so interesting about the relationship
that the Clintons have with Frank Giustra is they tend to show up in these foreign countries
together at the same time. Frank Giustra has made billions of dollars
over the years in the so-called penny stock market in Canada which is highly open to manipulation. He has been very successful in this area. Now the Vancouver Stock Exchange is not like
the New York Stock Exchange in the United States. This is a stock market, or an exchange, that
is dominated by penny stocks, made up of a lot of natural resources stocks. It’s sort of the Wild Wild West of investing. It’s called Dodge City sometimes. And the reason is because there are a lot
of speculators, there is a lot of misinformation that is put around, and there are a lot of
mining companies that don’t really have any assets but will proclaim to have gotten the
rights to some lucrative gold mine, let’s say, and then they send that news out to the
public in the hope that it will lead to a flood of people buying the penny stock so
the shareholders can sell their assets. So in June of 2010, Bill Clinton and Frank
Giustra fly to Bogota, Columbia. And who arrives there at roughly the same
time? Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. (Reporter): The big thing from the news conference
was where Bill and Hillary were dining the other night in Bogota. I had a chance to talk to her about her dinner
experience in the Zona Rosa and here’s what she had to say: (Reporter): The dinner was good? (Hillary): Yeah, it was excellent in every
way. (Reporter): So it was like eating in the States
but eating in Bogota? (Hillary): (laughs) Well it was a real treat
to be in Bogota and, uh, to be with people who love this city so much, including my husband. (Schweizer): Now in her memoirs, Hillary Clinton
says that this is just a happy coincidence. But when you see what follows, you realize
that this is no coincidence. The following morning, Bill Clinton has a
breakfast meeting with the outgoing president of Colombia, President Uribe. Then, like a tag team, Secretary of State
Hillary Clinton has a noon lunch meeting with him. And she grants him several favors, including
technical agreements that the Colombian government wants. In the days that follow, something dramatic
happens. Frank Giustra has three companies that get
major concessions from the Colombian government: Pacific Rubiales, Petroamerica, and Prima
Colombia Properties. One of those, Prima Colombia Properties, gets
a concession to cut timber in a rainforest in Colombia along the Pacific coast. And that timber is not intended to export
to the United States but it is intended for export to China. There is an outrage and upset environmentalists
who realize what is going on, and eventually that permit is yanked by a future president
of Columbia but not before Frank Giustra’s company is able to profit from cutting down
these rain forests, which again is a behavior that runs so contrary to what the Clintons
profess to be in favor of. (Hillary): We all know that in order to build
low carbon economies of the future we need sustainable forests. (Bill): I also know the future of our planet
depends on healthy, standing forests. (Schweizer): They have talked about the problems
of deforestation, they have talked about the problems of the need for successful growing
forests to mitigate carbon dioxide in the air, and yet when this commercial opportunity
was presented to a major donor of theirs they seemed to be very much supportive of that
and in fact helped to get him those concessions. (Bill): He deserves the credit for this. This was his idea, not mine, and he raised
the money, and it’s an astonishing achievement. My job is to make sure that it’s not in vain,
that he gets the return on his investment and his compassion and his commitment. (Schweizer): The Clintons appear to have changed
their stance on issues even more significant than the environment in ways that benefit
those who have put money in their pockets. (Hillary): I represent a president and a country
committed to a vision of a world without nuclear weapons and to taking the concrete steps necessary
that will help us get there. (Schweizer): The Indian nuclear deal, I think,
is so troubling because this is a core national security issue. One of the signature achievements in foreign
policy for Bill Clinton was pushing the test ban treaty and the nonproliferation treaty. (Bill): Today in New York the United Nations
General Assembly voted overwhelmingly to adopt a comprehensive nuclear test ban treaty and
to open it for signature later this month. (Schweizer): The NPT has been sort of the
holy grail when it comes to nuclear disarmament, something that the Clintons have been supportive
of not just for years but for decades. That was all thrown asunder in 1998 when the
Indian government tested nuclear weapons underground. (Bill): India’s action threatens the stability
of Asia and challenges the firm international consensus to stop all nuclear testing. (Schweizer): These were tests that truly shocked
the world. Even the CIA was not aware that these tests
were about to take place. Clinton’s reaction was volcanic. He felt betrayed by the Indian government,
and as a result he imposed sanctions on India, essentially saying you’re not going to get
access to US nuclear technology until you sign the NPT, the nonproliferation treaty. In 2005 the Indian government wanted to get
these sanctions lifted. Not only do they have an interest in expanding
their civilian nuclear base, they live in a neighborhood where some pretty tough customers
and rivals have nuclear weapons themselves. First of all, you’ve got Pakistan which is
right next door, which is widely believed to have nuclear weapons, and then you have
China, a long-time rival of India, which has a nuclear arsenal. The Clintons said that they were in favor
of giving the Indian government some access but the problem is it didn’t go nearly as
far as the Indian government wanted. So in 2005, they started making donations
to the Clinton Foundation. (Reporter): This morning yet another shady
donation to the Clinton Foundation has surfaced, this time tied to a donor from India, apparently
a friend of Bill Clinton. (Schweizer): We’re talking about tens of millions
of dollars from Indian interests flowing into the Clinton Foundation, and we’re talking
about at least hundreds of thousands, if not millions of dollars in speeches that Bill
Clinton was paid by interested parties in the Indian nuclear deal. Amar Singh, according to Clinton disclosures,
has given between and $1 and $5 million to the Clinton Foundation in the push to get
them to support Indian access to nuclear technology. He is a member of parliament who has gotten
in fistfights on the floor of the parliament, who has been charged with bribing members
of parliament to get certain pieces of legislation passed. You see, a problem is when you ask Amar Singh,
he says, “it wasn’t my money, I don’t have that kind of money, I couldn’t have given
him that amount of money.” And in fact when you look at Indian public
records, you see that Amar Singh doesn’t have a net worth anything close to being able to
give that amount of money. So where did the money come from? Well, sometimes the most obvious answer is
the correct one. Sant Chatwal is an Indian businessman who
has been close to the Clintons for years. He pledged to raise $5 million for her 2008
presidential campaign, and Bill Clinton was at his son’s wedding. They actually named him as a trustee of the
Clinton Foundation. When Hillary Clinton was first running for
the senate in 2000, Sant Chatwal was in trouble with a federal agency called the Federal Deposit
Insurance Corporation. He basically owed them millions of dollars
from unpaid loans. Well, in 2000, Chatwal throws a fundraiser
for Hillary Clinton and he brings in half a million dollars. A few months later, with Bill Clinton still
president of the United States, Sant Chatwal’s case with the FDIC was abruptly settled for
a mere $125,000. So basically the federal government got pennies
on the dollar. He would actually go on to plead guilty for
funneling $180,000 in illegal campaign contributions to Hillary Clinton, among others, and no one
seems to have made the connection. Well, maybe one reason no one made the connection
is because the Clinton Foundation mysteriously erased any mention of Sant Chatwal from the
website once he had admitted to his illegal activity. So here we are years later and we’ve got this
donation in a guy’s name who swears he didn’t actually make the donation. And you’ve got this long-time Clinton benefactor
who actually gets the highest civilian award in India because of his role in changing Hillary
Clinton’s mind on this nuke deal. (Reporter): Chatwall says he has worked with
everybody and even laid the foundation of the Indo-US nuclear deal. (Reporter): So the Indian government says
that they have given you this award for your role in pushing the Indo-US nuclear deal for
what, how exactly would you describe the role you played in this? (Chatwal): Well I can tell you the Indian
nuclear power deal, if you look at it, I am the first one, I laid the foundation. (Schweizer): On the eve of the vote in 2008
to approve Indian access to US civilian nuclear technology, Amar Singh, who barely knows Hillary
Clinton, had a two-hour meeting with her where they discussed the Indian nuclear deal. Amar Singh says that the dinner meeting resulted
in her telling him that she was supportive of the deal and that she was making efforts
to make sure that the deal did get through. And lo and behold, by 2008, Hillary Clinton
was fully in support and in favor of this policy in a way that was a complete reversal
of the position that she had taken before. In other words, the flow of money had led
the Clintons to change their positions on the nonproliferation treaty and specifically
India getting access to US nuclear technology. This was a decision that was wholly out of
step, wholly inconsistent with the progressive liberal agenda. Hillary Clinton made the decision of reversing
her previous position after the flow of funds to the Clinton Foundation and her husband
gave some speeches in India. But this wouldn’t be the last time Hillary
reversed herself regarding nuclear weapons technology. Shockingly, Bill and Hillary would end up
receiving money from folks that were looking to make something happen a lot closer to home. (Schweizer): I think the Russian uranium story
is perhaps the most shocking, the most blatant example of how the Clintons operate. This is a story about the Russian state nuclear
agency, American uranium, $145 million in cash, and the Clintons. At the end of the day, this is a story about
buying influence and selling influence. The Clintons are the sellers of influence,
the Canadian investors and the Russians are the buyers. Bill Clinton had gone to the central Asian
country of Kazakhstan in 2005 with Frank Giustra. Kazakhstan is a country that has been run
since the collapse of the Soviet Union by a dictator named Nazarbayev who shuts down
political opposition and tortures political opponents. The ostensible purpose of the visit to Kazakhstan
by Bill Clinton was to talk with Nazarbayev about AIDS/HIV. The problem is Kazakhstan really does not
have an AIDS/HIV problem, so that explanation really doesn’t make sense. What makes far more sense is that Frank Giustra
wanted access to very lucrative Kazakh uranium mines. Kazakhstan is one of the largest producers
of uranium in the world. Bill Clinton arrives there with Frank Giustra
and they have a series of meetings with Kazakh officials. There is a press conference where Bill Clinton
stands with the dictator of Kazakhstan and he praises the human rights record. He praises that elections are being held in
the country and he even says that Kazakhstan should head up something called the OSCE which
is the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe. Think about that for a second. Bill Clinton is saying that a known human
rights violator who has been condemned by human rights organizations around the world
should head up a human rights organization! They go from a press conference to a dinner
where Frank Giustra, Nazarbayev (the dictator of Kazakhstan), and Bill Clinton meet and
talk. Well, two days after that meeting, Frank Giustra
finally gets his uranium concessions worth hundreds of millions of dollars. A couple of weeks after that, Bill Clinton
gets his $30 million from Frank Giustra, the first payment in what will become more than
a hundred million dollars in pledges and commitments and donations made by Frank Giustra. So it’s really in a way a simple story in
that they all are walking away from the table with something that they want. Nazarbayev is getting the legitimacy of an
ex-president say what a nice and kind leader he is. Frank Giustra gets his uranium concession. And Bill Clinton and his foundation get cold,
hard cash. Now let’s move to Chapter Two of this story
which is even more sinister. You see, the international uranium market
is very competitive. The Kremlin sees dominance and control of
the uranium market as a source of national power. Frank Giustra takes that uranium concession
he got in Kazakhstan and puts it into a company in a so-called “reverse merger” which is one
way for a private company to go public, to form something called UraniumOne. It is a company traded on the stock market
in Canada, and they start acquiring the uranium concessions in places like Wyoming, Texas,
New Mexico, and Utah. And by 2009, they have what is expected to
be 50% of future uranium production in the United States. This gets the interest of Vladimir Putin and
the Russian government, and in fact there are State Department cables that were leaked
through WikiLeaks which show that Hillary was aware of the fact that the Russians took
great care to try to dominate the international uranium market. Well, the Russians want to buy this asset,
and they offer a 40% _____ price on the share of the stock, and for this transaction to
go through it has to be approved by the US federal government. Why? Because uranium is regarded as a critical
industry in the United States. After all, this is used for civilian nuclear
reactors and goes into nuclear weapons. So it goes before the federal government where
it needs to be signed off by a series of federal agencies including the Secretary of State,
Hillary Clinton. As Hillary Clinton is contemplating this,
shareholders in UraniumOne, including Frank Giustra, have sent more than $145 million
to the Clinton Foundation. The chairman of that company at the precise
time is a guy named Ian Telfer who is also making donations to the Clinton Foundation,
as is Frank Holmes who is another major UraniumOne shareholder. And Hillary Clinton, who has a record of opposing
precisely these kinds of deals, comes out and says you know what, I think this is a
good deal, let’s let Vladimir Putin take control of what is now 20% of US uranium production. Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton are the only
figures in American politics who are willing to do this deal and who could actually pull
it off because they had a reputation that runs so contrary to what they’re doing. I mean this is what the Clinton Foundation
does, right? This is what they talk about politically:
their support for human rights, their concerns about proliferation, their concerns about
issues related to Russian aggression. (Hillary): There is no doubt that when Putin
came back in and said he was going to be president, that did change the relationship. We have to stand up to his bullying… (Schweizer): What is so interesting when you
consider this uranium deal are the actions of a small Canadian investment firm called
Salida Capital. Salida Capital in 2010, as this deal was going
down, committed to give millions of dollars to the Clinton Foundation and they also sponsored
a speech by Bill Clinton in Canada. Salida Capital is also the name of a wholly
owned subsidiary of Rosatom. Who is Rosatom? Well, this is the government agency in Russia
that controls their nuclear arsenal, that built nuclear reactors in Iran, and engages
in nuclear technology exchanges with rogue countries like North Korea. What this means in essence is that the Russian
government, specifically Rosatom, was funneling money through a subsidiary directly to the
Clinton foundation. But the payday didn’t end there. Four months before Hillary Clinton’s State
Department would sign off on the Russian purchase of UraniumOne, Bill Clinton got paid $500,000
to give a single speech in Moscow. He was being paid by a firm called Renaissance
Capital which has a long history of association with Russian intelligence services. What makes this speech stand out is not only
the timing of when he is being paid but the amount that he is being paid. You see, the last time Bill Clinton gave a
speech in Russia was five years earlier. At that time he was being paid about one third
of what he was being paid this time. Why is Russian control of 20% of US uranium
so troubling? If you are in an era where nuclear weapons
are a reality, where nuclear energy is an important component of energy production in
the United States, and increasingly around the world, control of uranium is absolutely
crucial, and unlike oil or natural gas that can be found in so many places around the
world, there are precious few places where you can find significant and large amounts
of uranium that you can produce on a commercial scale. What we have essentially done is handed this
precious resource to Vladimir Putin and the Russian government. They are not only engaged in aggression in
places like Ukraine but they have been very aggressive in fighting American interests
around the globe. Russia is not an ally. Russia is not a friend. Vladimir Putin’s Russia is a rival of the
United States, and yet we have given them control over this precious resource. Uranium, the key mineral in nuclear generation,
is a domestic resource. This is what is going to power America. I think a lot of people in middle America
would be surprised to know that the Russian government is doing business in places like
Colorado or Wyoming or Utah. These are small mining towns. These are operations that have existed for
a while that have been under the control of American companies, or for a while Canadian
companies, but it is now Russian companies that control this, and those companies are
controlled by the Russian government. Having read through the archives of the KGB,
the files that have been released, I can tell you that they look at the United States as
weak and ineffectual. This is a thuggish government that is engaged
in massive human rights violations, there are opponents of this regime that have been
killed or have disappeared, there has been persecution of human rights organizations,
there has been persecution of homosexuals, and it’s shocking and stunning to me that
there has not been more attention focused to this fact, that we have given this critical
resource to somebody who is engaged in so much nefarious behavior. (Hillary): Greetings from Washington. I want to thank all of you for your work to
root out corruption that weakens economic development, feeds black markets and organized
crime, and undermines the promise of democracy. As we work together to eradicate corruption
in our own countries, we should also maintain the highest standards of transparency and
accountability in our development efforts around the world. Corruption in emerging markets and fragile
democracies undermines the confidence of citizens and investors alike, while responsible governance
helps to foster sustainable economic development and political stability. (Schweizer): I believe in the oldest adage
in American politics which is “follow the money.” Enormous amounts of money have flowed to the
Clintons from foreign governments, foreign financiers and businesses. Some of that money lands in their pocket. Some of it lands in their foundation. It is a pattern we have seen repeated over
and over and over again all around the world. It is not a coincidence. Money exchanges hands and favors are done. Now Clinton friends and supporters will say
there is no smoking gun. But look at American political history. People are convicted all the time for a pattern
of behavior where, for example, they are engaged in insider trading on the stock market. So, for example, you have a foreign corporation
or a foreign government that wants something from the State Department while Hillary Clinton
is Secretary of State. They will make a large payment to the Clinton
Foundation. That will be followed by favorable action
on their behalf. If that happens one or two times you might
say look, it’s just a coincidence. But when you see the pattern recreated over
and over and over again, you have to recognize that these events are connected. They have created a model for massive self-enrichment
that allows you to go into so-called “public service” but get extremely rich at the same
time. And when friends and allies say that the Clintons
aren’t really that interested in money, their actions show otherwise. What is so shocking to a lot of people is
that the making of that money requires them to betray their progressive values: the environment,
labor unions, women’s rights, human rights. The Clintons are doing business and growing
rich with the favor of the very individuals who you would expect to be their political
opposites. For a very long time in American history and
probably still to this day, one of the worst things that could be said about you as a politician
is that you were on the take from foreign interests. What the Clintons have essentially done is
busted down the door and robbed the bank of that concept. So when people think of the Clintons taking
foreign money, they think it’s maybe an insurance company from Great Britain, or they think
it’s from a supermarket chain in Canada. The fact of the matter is a lot of that money
comes from the darkest, worst corners of the world. Are countries like Nigeria and Russia in the
habit of giving money to politicians and not wanting something back? The Clintons are glad to take this money. It has made them fabulously wealthy. But what has it done for us? Before, we had to worry about money from Wall
Street and big labor. Now we have to worry about it coming from
around the world and infecting our politics and damaging our politics, everything from
our uranium policy to our human rights policy. Nothing seems to be safe anymore. How is this not corruption? How is this not a crime? With the Clintons, nothing is sacred. Everything is for sale. But we are the ones who are paying the price. Maybe, just maybe, the American people are
tired of being sold out. Based on the reporting in this film and the
book on which it’s based, Clinton corruption has cost US taxpayers an estimated $5,100,000,000.00 The cost associated to the citizens of the
countries whose leadership is tied to Clinton corruption is estimated to be $1,446,751,663.70 -END-

Comments (1)

  1. Supposed to have Spanish sub-titles?  Doesn't!

Comment here