Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiClinton Strategist Represents Blackwater
Mark Penn is the chief strategist for Hillary Rodham Clinton's presidential campaign, working 24/7 on her behalf (indeed, he is known to send email at 2 a.m.) and earning tens of thousands of dollars in fees.
With that sort of day-and-night job, you would think Mr. Penn would have time for little else. Indeed, other Clinton senior advisers took leaves of absences or turned down clients in order to work for the campaign.
But he somehow manages to remain president of Burson-Marsteller, a publicly traded global public affairs firm. And as such, he is inevitably linked to Burson's clients - not all of whom are, shall we say, on Mrs. Clinton's Christmas card list.
Today we learned that recently one of those clients was Blackwater - the American contractor that provides security to some top American officials in Iraq, and which is under investigation for allegedly aggressive tactics and the role of its guards in the shooting at a Baghdad city square where 17 Iraqis were killed.
Mr. Penn was on a plane this afternoon and could not be reached for him; a phone message has been left for a Burson spokesman as well. But Mr. Penn and the spokesman told other news outlets today that Blackwater was only briefly a client in a temporary assignment for a Burson subsidiary, BKSH. That assignment involved preparing Blackwater for a recent hearing before Congress. Blackwater is no longer a client, said Mr. Penn, who added that he never worked on the piece of business himself.
"Through a personal relationship, BKSH, a subsidiary of Burson-Marsteller, helped Blackwater prepare for their recent hearing before Congress. With the hearing over, BKSH's temporary engagement has ended," said the Burson spokesman, Paul Cordasco.
A blog for the Nation and the Associated Press carried stories on the Burson-Blackwater connection first.
Howard Wolfson, a spokesman for the Clinton campaign, said that Mrs. Clinton had not asked Mr. Penn for an explanation about Blackwater - about which she has expressed concerns on the campaign trail - nor asked him to take a leave from Burson.
"Mark is an extremely valuable member of this team," Mr. Wolfson said. "He is our senior strategist. Senator Clinton clearly believes Blackwater must be held accountable for its actions."
About Mr. Penn's ongoing ties to Burson, Mr. Wolfson said. "His situation is very typical for presidential campaigns. There is nothing unusual about a consultant maintaining outside affiliations. Hillary has trust in Mark."
Other Democratic and Republican candidates do have consultants whose firms have a bevy of clients as well; Harrison Hickman, the pollster for former Senator John Edwards, one of Mrs. Clinton's rivals, continues to be a member of Global Strategy Group, which represents insurance and drug companies, for instance.
But Mr. Penn's firm has netted the sort of bad headlines that Mrs. Clinton would not seek: Other than Blackwater, clients have included Countrywide Financial, which has been tainted by the subprime mortgage scandal, and Cintas Corp., which has fought the unionization of its workforce.
One of Mrs. Clinton's rivals, former Senator John Edwards, went on the attack this afternoon, meanwhile. His campaign e-mailed a statement from Mr. Edwards:
"Bush has been a perfect example of cronyism because Blackwater has given hundreds of thousands of dollars to republicans and to President Bush. I also saw this morning that Senator Clinton's primary adviser, Mark Penn who is like her Karl Rove - his firm is representing Blackwater. I think it is important for Iowa caucus goers to understand the choices they have in this election. And it is the reason I continue to say we dont want to replace a group of corporate Republicans with a group of corporate Democrats. I think it is important for caucus goers to see this choice."
Asked to comment on Mr. Edwards' shot, Mr. Wolfson repeated that Mr. Penn was a valuable and trusted member of the Clinton campaign.
Mr. Edwards himself was a consultant in 2005 and 2006 with a hedge fund, the Fortress Investment Group, which has had investments in subprime mortgage companies that have foreclosed on victims of Hurricane Katrina. Mr. Edwards has also had a portfolio with Fortress, but has divested holdings that related to the mortgage companies.
Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company
16 Comments so far
Show AllApropos of what iammyself says, above:
When it comes to the Clinton Wing of the national Democrat Party, there is no difference between Democrat and Republican. Both are proto-to-fully fascist at the national level.
Hillary Clinton isn't even discussable as a viable DEM candidate for progressives. She has gone along with the neocon agenda in too many policy areas to be credible even as a DEM moderate - let alone a progressive. She and most other-like DEM nomination seekers can't even, now, demand an immediate end to privitization of the US armed forces by fascist mercenary corporations let alone decisively oppose the war.
She, like most other DEM congressional leaders and/or Prez aspirants (with the exception of Kucinich and Gravel) spout progressive values only when it looks safe to do so, but back away instantly, if their positions are made to look too 'controversial' by the Rightwing media.
How horrendous things have become: that fascism is now even considered viably debatable; that, among 100 other fascistizations of American ogvernance: demanding an end to Blackwater-type armed forces is 'acceptably controversial.'
Clearly, because the centerline of Establishment US politics has been artificially rammed so far to the Right, being 'progressive' these days is easily made to look Radically Left by the corporatist Press and craven DEMS -- when in fact most progressive values are, in themselves, simply minimal common sense, democratic approaches to economics, moral decency, and Constitutional lawfulness. Those DEM nomination -seekers, like Hillary, who now find it 'difficult' to stand up for even these basic, traditional values, are worse than worthless: They help legitimate the shifting of the Centerline from semi-sanity to full maddness.
But although Hillary is momentarily ahead in most polls, millions of progressive DEMs do not like or trust her or most of the other DEM nomination seekers; and there is some remaining hope that she and her insider ilk may be thwarted, if progressives retake the national machinery of the Party as the Primaries and platform writing get underway. A platform DRAFT that's clearly at-odds with the nominee's record and rhetoric would at least officially and decisively split the national DEM Party into into two distinct, irreconcilable political forces: Viz: a few thousand Bullshitting, sell-out manipulators at the top Vs a base of millions of fed-up progressives. And this coulld only have clarifying, beneficial consequences for the progressive movement in the country.
In the next few months, even before the 'early '08 Primaries, state DEM platform committee members mostly average folks from across the country, will begin drafing issue planks for intended submission to the 2008 national convention. If rank-and-file DEM progressives fail, at this stage, to even pre- draft a national progressive platform that strongly challenges the go-along-with-fascism values of the present DNC and Hillary ilk, then, yes, the progressive potential of national DEM Party will have shown itself to be good-as-dead at the GRASS ROOTS level as well. And this will be the end of anybody's argumment to 'keep trying to rescue the Party.' At least it'll be the end of mine.
The practicality of this one remaining hope, some of us have for retaking the national DEM Party from the bottom-up, will become clear in the next few months. I know many progressives already think it's perfectly obvious that this isn't gonna happen and can't happen. Maybe so. But there is another implication to all this: if average DEMprogs won't take over the national Party from within (due only to laziness -- (certainly not numbers), how does it follow that these same lazy progs will undertake the far harder task of building an alternative party?
Maybe it DOES follow, and I'm just blind to it.
Which is why, in any case, it makes full sense to be simultaneously working to build SOME kind of alternative progressive force that can nationally unify the Left.
I've written to Kucinich, Sheehan, Gravel, and other progs to see if they have any plans to lead such a unification effort if Hillary and/or like ilk get the DEMO nonination. Even if we don't like to admit it: someone with SOME national visibility will need to marshall the pre or post '08 disaffected, either into the Green Party or something like it. Sans a large national Party, there's scant hope of having useful impact in congress, or even within the states. We are also working against Time: Democracy is already at, or only a metaphorical inch away from, the Failsafe Point. Beyond such a Failsafe Point, turning things around becomes exponentially more difficult/unlikely - if possible at all, in our lifetime.
Knowing this, I, myself, will abandon the DEM-reform scenario I'm advocating, if internal rebellion within the Party doesn't credibly begin to gel, by the earliest 2008 Primaries.
You don't suppose Rove was SENT to help get Hillary elected do you??? just sayin'.
Mr. Bill played a major role in the death of ~1/2M Iraqi babies*. Hillary did not leave him over that. This Blackwater thing is so ticky-tack in comparison.
*Yes, Bush41 and Cheney are more to blame, and Mr. Bill finally did something to stop it, but it took over 3 years for him to get around to it. And, this definition of babies means under 5 years of age.
Do you think that when Senator Clinton is elected President, that she will replace the Secret Service with Blackwater as her private bodyguards?
[sarcasm] Oh, what a bunch of PURISTS you are! If Clinton wins the nomination, you're supposed to "hold your nose" and vote for her. Get with the program! [/sarcasm]
~ Proud Unamerican
stolen elections , rigged elections , republicans infultrating the democratic party any way they can...the war continues on and the american people embrace hillary thinking there can be a good change when she votes for war funding and the continuation of the wars in the middle east...this is truly a sick country with false democracy ....wake up , slap yourself in the face, tell yourself this isn`t a dream, or maybe thats all it is....better yet, take your television set and throw some bricks through it and go talk to your neighbors and start to open your heart and feel the pain we`re inflicting on the innocent people in iraq and the rest of the world and on our poor earth mother...begin to feel like we need to elect some true leaders with some good ideas...i certainly don`t see that in clinton or guiliani , we can do way better then that.
Does the author really believe that Blackwater is not on "Mrs. Clinton's Christmas card list" ???
Hillary Clinton was on the board of Wal-Mart and Tyson and during their negotiations with the Labor Unions, remained unsupportive of the Unions whereby allowing Wal-Mart deunionized. How can any union organization support Hillary wherein fact her interests lie with the corporations, health insurance companies, and receives contributions from such.
Please note the following, between the top 3 candidates Hillary is the only one who loses to Giuliani, yet she is getting record contributions while Republicans are receiving low donations. (50% of Democrats, I suspect these Republicans are donating to Hillary and Obama.) She is receiving large corporate contributions. They are contributing to Hilary so that she would be the Dem's candidate thereby losing to Giuliani (look at the percentage chart below) who will then be our next president.
In a straw poll effort amongst thousands a couple of weeks ago, Edwards wins Texas by a large margin.
There are games being played, and Republicans are pushing Clinton to be the frontrunner.
Please note recent poll results in Missouri:
Source: SurveyUSA / KCTV-TV
Methodology: Telephone interviews with at least 499 registered Missouri voters, conducted from Sept. 14 to Sept. 16, 2007. Margin of error is 4.4 per cent.
A few questions now about the next election. If there were an election for president of the United States today, and the only two names on the ballot were (the following) who would you vote for?
Rudy Giuliani (R) 42% - 47% John Edwards (D)
Fred Thompson (R) 40% - 50% John Edwards (D)
Mitt Romney (R) 32% - 56% John Edwards (D)
Rudy Giuliani (R) 44% - 46% Barack Obama (D)
Fred Thompson (R) 45% - 48% Barack Obama (D)
Mitt Romney (R) 40% - 51% Barack Obama (D)
Rudy Giuliani (R) 48% - 45% Hillary Rodham Clinton (D)
Fred Thompson (R) 45% - 48% Hillary Rodham Clinton (D)
Mitt Romney (R) 40% - 51% Hillary Rodham Clinton (D)
To further my point on Hillary Clinton: Published in Reuters last week:
. . . Senator Clinton's primary adviser, Mark Penn, who is like her Karl Rove, his firm is representing Blackwater. . . Blackwater is a private security firm whose employees have been accused of using their weapons too aggressively against Iraqi civilians and police. . . .
Penn, Clinton's pollster and senior strategist, is the worldwide president of Burson-Marsteller, a public relations firm. A subsidiary, BKSH, helped prepare Blackwater founder Erik Prince for a contentious congressional hearing this week, but Burson-Marsteller says the relationship has ended. . . .
Penn's association with Burson has caused headaches for the Clinton campaign in the past. . .
The firm represents corporate clients accused of union-busting activity, as well as tobacco giant Philip Morris. While Penn says he does not personally work on any accounts that could be construed as anti-labor, labor leaders including Teamsters president James Hoffa have publicly expressed concern about his involvement with the campaign
Listening this morning to General Clark on the Stephanie Miller show, and how he reenforced Hillary's staying in Iraq platform, and her prozionist stance in the middle east. That he is preparing himself to be Hillary's nomination as Vice President. But in all actuality as Stalin once said, it is not who casts the vote that counts but the one who counts the vote. And we all know who handles the voting in the United States. So the candidates will be Hillary Clinton/General Clark v. Guiliani/?. But Guiliani will win.
So now we know why the culpable Senator is eager to keep troops in Iraq for the next twenty or thirty years: MONEY! The corruption runs so deep down the rabbit hole proving once again just how dirty these people are and then have the audacity to DEFEND THEIR CORRUPTION!
Wake up Ameri(K)a and vote for INDEPENDENTS.
Actually the real Hillary Clinton has been abducted and is being held at a secret CIA black site. The candidate we see is none other than Joe Lieberman in drag.
I doubt that Hecate will delve into this dark matter unless her AIPAC masters so order it.
King George the First, King William the First, King George the Second, Queen Hillary the First. Look forward to Prince Jebadiah's coronation 2016, with Princess Chelsea groomed for 2024. The Tudors and Stuarts live on.
Mark Penn and the rest, It's all about $$$$$$$$
If hillary gets elected that means for at least 24 years we will have been governed by either a bush or a clinton. How f#%ked up is that? Man are democrats suckers, stupid or what? Yeah I said it, bite me. Go Cindy! And Dennis, I'm still shoutin out your message but unless you get the "Nod" I will not vote for any member of your party. Spineless, backstabbing, power grabbing cowards, yeah, thats what they are!
"But he somehow manages to remain president of Burson-Marsteller, a publicly traded global public affairs firm. And as such, he is inevitably linked to Burson's clients - not all of whom are, shall we say, on Mrs. Clinton's Christmas card list.
Today we learned that recently one of those clients was Blackwater -"
As if Hillary Clinton were interested in criminally indicting Blackwater any more than she's interetsed in putting the Bush Crime family on trial for war crimes.
We shouldn't paint too fine a brush stroke here. This is not a Hillary Clinton issue or a John Edwards issue or a Mark Penn issue - this is a MOTS issue. MOTS = More Of The Same.
Putting our faith in any one candidate, especially one of the major party members, is a grave mistake. The problem is systemic and requires us to address the system. Anyone who is within this system is either part of the problem or has been made irrelevant by the system.
Only the people can make this system change. I think I can say with some assurance that the system will not change easily or by way of a few corrections. Systems don't change that way.
Now we know what we're up against. Do we have the courage to make the necessary changes? We'll see...