Oil Corps Donated to Clinton Foundation While Lobbying State Dept

[amborin]

Oil Companies Donated To Clinton Foundation While Lobbying State Department

By David Sirota @davidsirota AND Ned Resnikoff @resnikoff On 04/05/16 AT 5:12 PM


Faced with new questions last week about her cash haul from the oil and gas industry, Hillary Clinton and her campaign fended off the queries with a flat rejoinder: There is no explicit quid pro quo between major donations and public policies pushed by Clinton. The Clinton team also noted that the millions of dollars that flowed to her campaign and a super PAC supporting her White House bid came from the industry’s individual employees and lobbyists, not from the oil companies themselves.

But Clinton’s family foundation has accepted millions of dollars directly from major fossil fuel companies — including from those that lobbied her State Department just before the agency approved a controversial pipeline delivering what environmentalists call one of the world’s dirtiest sources of energy. The Clinton Foundation did not respond to International Business Times’ request for comment.
In 2009, the Clinton-led State Department approved a permit for the 400-mile Alberta Clipper pipeline, which is designed to pump up to 450,000 barrels of oil per day from the Canadian oil sands to Wisconsin (where recent polls show Democratic primary voters are concerned about its impact). According to federal lobbying records reviewed by the IBT, Chevron and ConocoPhillips both lobbied the State Department specifically on the issue of “oil sands” in the immediate months prior to the department's approval, as did a trade association funded by ExxonMobil.

Those three oil companies have delivered between between $2.5 million and $3 million to the Clinton Foundation. That is on top of money their executives and lobbyists delivered to Clinton’s campaign and super PAC in her 2008 presidential bid — the year before she approved the pipeline.

All three companies have made substantial investments in developing the Canadian oil sands served by the Alberta Clipper. Environmental experts interviewed by IBT agreed that any major oil company operating in the tar sands benefited from the State Department’s decision to approve the pipeline because it increased the overall amount of petroleum that can now be pumped to market from the remote region.

“A pipeline is like a highway for the transport of oil, and if you build a new highway then all of the businesses along that highway or at the end of the highway are going to benefit,” said Sarah Burt, a staff attorney at the environmental group Earthjustice, which filed a lawsuit to try to overturn the Obama administration's approval of the pipeline, which now may be further expanded. “Whether it’s because they are using that highway or because it frees up space on another highway that also goes from point A to point B, it’s still a general benefit for the transportation of oil.”

In the case of Chevron, the company has since 1999 owned a 20 percent stake in a major Canadian tar sands project with Royal Dutch Shell. Chevron reported lobbying the State Department and other agencies on the issue of “oil sands” between April 1st and December 31st of 2009 — precisely when the Clinton-led State Department was reviewing and approved the Alberta Clipper.

In the year prior to the approval, Chevron’s Laurence Humphries was a top fundraising “bundler” for Clinton’s 2008 presidential bid, raising more than $100,000 for her run, according to the watchdog group Public Citizen. Following the pipeline approval, Chevron hosted an event at the Clinton Global Initiative in 2010, according to CGI’s website. The company also gave the Clinton Foundation $250,000 in 2013, reported the Wall Street Journal. In all, Chevron has given between $500,000 and $1 million to the foundation. Two Chevron lobbyists are listed as fundraising bundlers for Clinton’s 2016 campaign, according to the Huffington Post .


snip

http://www.ibtimes.com/political-capital/oil-companies-donated-clinton-foundation-while-lobbying-state-department-2348832

[SoLeftIAmRight]

1. $hillary will never let the money change her mind

and the sad part is - she is a republican at heart and loves corporate america

the liberal social stuff is just candy for the suckers

[nichomachus]

2. She certainly won't

She's already committed to the corporatist agenda. No change of mind needed when it comes to screwing working people.

[Avalon Sparks]

8. She vows to never let her Big Money Backers down....

It's despicable.

[Cali_Democrat]

3. Good

The Clinton foundation does excellent work when it comes to addressing issues such as climate change and poverty.

[amborin]

5. like what? just a tiny % goes to charity; the rest is luxury trips and huge salaries

[Avalon Sparks]

7. Like what....

Sure wish she'd vote against Fracking since there are about 300 different sites all around me in Texas, within a 30 mile range.

One Texas town (Denton) - the citizens voted to ban it. Unfortuntately the Governor of Texas signed a bill saying the town could not ban it.

Looks like Hillary isn't interested either.

[Uncle Joe]

4. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, amborin.

[Avalon Sparks]

6. Ka CHING KA Ching........ How they gonna keep up with all the paybacks due?