Why did Bill Clinton seek US OK for a North Korea speech?
In 2012, former President Clinton asked the State Department if it would be OK for him to accept speech invitations related to two of the cruelest nations in the world: the Democratic Republic of the Congo and North Korea.
That鈥檚 what is reporting today, in any case. They鈥檝e obtained copies of e-mails from Clinton鈥檚 speaking agency to State that discuss the offers.聽
North Korea? Really? What was Mr. Clinton thinking? He鈥檚 a smart guy 鈥� he must have known these requests might prove, uh, controversial.
鈥淚s Bill Clinton out of his mind? Doesn鈥檛 he have ENOUGH money? NORTH KOREA??鈥� tweeted Greta Van Susteren of right-leaning Fox News.
In Clinton鈥檚 defense, these speeches weren鈥檛 given. The State Department turned the requests down flat.
The Congo-related request would have paid $650,000. But it included a poison pill: Clinton would have been required to appear in photos with the dictators of both the Congo, where the event was to be held, and of the neighboring Democratic Republican of the Congo. The latter's leader, Joseph Kabila, has a particularly grim human rights record, as noted on the Clinton e-mail.
Clinton said he would channel the fee to the Clinton Foundation. State still nixed it.
The ABC report has less detail about the North Korea request. It does appear to have been channeled through Hillary Clinton鈥檚 businessman brother, Tony Rodham. Still, the (obvious) answer was 鈥渘o.鈥澛�
A Clinton spokesman told ABC that the former president wasn鈥檛 pushing for these speeches to be approved. His speech agency recommended against accepting the offers, but passed them along anyway, according to the e-mails. Clinton aides just forwarded them to the US government to get their opinion.
鈥淎s a matter of course, all [speech] requests were run by the State Department,鈥� said Clinton spokesman Angel Urena.
What鈥檚 at work here? First, it鈥檚 possible this is indeed the result of office-work run amok. Maybe Clinton鈥檚 aides just routinely forwarded stuff to Foggy Bottom, without thinking about political consequences. Their jobs were to vet opportunities, not protect Hillary Clinton鈥檚 future political prospects.
Second, it鈥檚 also possible Bill Clinton was just walking close to the edge of politically-permissible activities. He鈥檚 given lots of speeches since he left the Oval Office, raising lots of money for his foundation and his own pocket.
This has been well documented. Between 2001 and 2013, Clinton delivered 542 speeches, according to a . He earned $105 million. Of this money, more than half came from foreign speeches, many delivered in China, Japan, Canada, and Britain.
His single biggest payday was in 2011, when he received $750,000 for one day鈥檚 talk in Hong Kong.
The Congo fee would have been pretty close to that, you鈥檒l notice.
Third, unflattering stories such as this are going to drip out for months to come, right up until Election Day if Hillary Clinton wins the Democratic nomination. The ABC report came from e-mails uncovered by the conservative group Citizens United. (Yes, that Citizens United 鈥� the one in the Supreme Court case that opened the money taps for campaign finance.)
Citizens United received them pursuant to a request for public records. That鈥檚 called opposition research 鈥� and it鈥檚 an industry today, on both right and left.
