Obama: paid huge money by Wall St just like Hillary

How much money did Trump make on all his golfing trips?

Rocket River

 

Tsk, bigtexx, I'm sure Rice taught you to use primary sources. It was Cantor Fitzgerald and A&E Networks.

But Obama's relationship with Wall Street is [relatively] old news, and this tidbit from last year is actually way more damning, IMHO. For those that don't like reading, the wikileaks of the Podesta emails last year established that Obama was picking cabinet posts based on the suggestions of Michael Froman at Citibank (who was later nominated by Obama in 2013 to be U.S. Trade Representative) all while he was engaging in his populist presidential campaign against selling influence in politics.

Don't believe me? Take a look at this Podesta email, click on the Attachments tab and download the Cabinet Example.doc and then compare it to the people that he ended up picking. What a coincidence!

As everyone is quick to point out that every other president has done it (the speeches that is -- I'm pretty sure he's the first to have a banker choose his cabinet for him) none of them campaigned to end the influence of those very same interests that are now paying him back for bailing them out on the taxpayer's dime and not prosecuting them for their unscrupulous speculation.

Don't be so mean-spirited, man. Maybe someday you can give a presidential candidate enough money to pick his or her candidates for them...and get a sweet appointment. It's the American way, after all.

 

^Yeah... it's crucial for Warren and Sanders to call Obama out because there's the sense that the President won't retire from the limelight anytime soon.

The whole populist angle doesn't mesh well with jetsetting to expensive dinners and getting paid as much for a couple hours that he would get a year as President.

 

It doesn't sit with the tribal nature of our politics. You simply can't call out that kind of hypocrisy without being attacked by the apparatchiks within the corporatist/triangulation wing of the Democratic Party, you misogynist, racist, Bernie-Bro who hates America.

 

I have no problem with Obama making 400k a speech and millions for a book deal. I have no problem with people supporting him for this.

Just dont pretend Obama is different from any other wealthy person or politician out there looking to protect their own interests. He is a typical elitist who decries the wealthy ruining the country all while scooping in his tens of millions. At least Hillary and Trump do not pretend to be anything different. But as long as he's a celebrity and hip, who cares, right? #Bestpresidentever

 

Obama has already said in interviews that he's grown more friendly to corporations as change agents compared to grassroots populist groups that Dems hasn't and will unlikely be able to productively harness anytime soon.

Maybe it's because of the disdainful bias Dem operators like Podesta has against those groups, but Obama also has visible frustration to the fickleness and all-or-nothing idealism of those groups.

People do care...he's getting called out for it, so quit whining. It's makes Trump want to grab you and you know you want it.

You using the word "Elitist" sounds like class warfare. I'm down with that.

 

I wish the GOP was a real opposition party the last 8 years and making a point about actual sketchy things Obama did rather than crying "muslim-Kenyan-socialist gonna ruin America" to cover their own game of "Moneyed-Interest Fellatio Keeps My Office Staffed."

 

I absolutely agree. I have given up on the right. They have let the likes of Cruz, Ryan and Sessions hijack the party. The right is squandering away a golden opportunity to make real change where it matters. Instead, like always, they stay in the background and take the victim mentality straight from the liberals playbook all while Trump goes into anarchist mode.

 

When leaders of a political party that supposedly represent labor and the working class are giving paid speeches to investment banks, it doesn't require all-or-nothing idealism to raise eyebrows.

 

Lots of opinions. Lack of real policy discussion.

Did Wall Street love Dodd Frank? Did they love the other numerous regulations that Obama put on the market? How about reversing the Fiduciary rule that (get this) actually made it a law that financial institutions had to act in the best interests of their clients. Did they enjoy the tax increases and mandates through Obamacare?

Now tell me how they feel about Trump reversing those regulations? Tell me what they think of Trumps tax plan? His health care plan/s?

Maybe Obama hired Wall Street execs to fill out his cabinet too. Maybe he's getting money from speaking fees now and is hanging out with the global elites ... who gives a flying F$&@?

The facts are in the policies and the bottom line. His policies as President do NOT support this notion that he was some sort of Wall Street insider or he was at the very least just NOT as bad as everyone else.

Sanders and Warren are critical of the optics sure as I am too, but nobody is going out here in their right mind to try and make a case that Obama was some Wall Street insider President. Compared to Trump he's Mother F-ing Teresa.

We live in a capitalist economic society. They are paying nearly half a million to talk about economics for an hour. Everyone in this forum would do the same and so would Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders. This is such a non story it's not even funny. If only it got us talking about the policy and how it impacts real Americans.

 

I don't understand what the conflict of interest is here.

Obama - an-ex president, is paid to talk about health care

Trump hides his taxes, hides his deals with Russia, makes deals with foreign countries that happen to benefit his business - and people think the ex-president has potential conflict of interest over the current one????

Bigtexxx is desperately grasping at any straw in hopes of distracting people away from the real issues. SAD!

 

Obama is no longer a politician.

 

I can't answer that question. I'm not an elected politician that takes bribes from bank executives.
The only financiers that gave more to Obama's campaign (2012 at least) were insurance companies. The same insurance companies that got 20 million new customers in a Heritage Foundation designed insurance planthat some people call "socialist."

Trump doesn't have "plans." What does any of this have to do with Trump? You seem to be in the Benjamin Nettanyau school of deflection. "Human rights violations? Why are you picking on us? Have you seen what they do in Syria, and Egypt, and Iran? I'm sooo insulted"

Clearly you didn't read the primary sources I linked to. He hired the people a Wall Street executive told him to and later appointed the same friend to a high-level job, which I said was a much bigger deal than the speaking fees. As far as giving a flying ****, I do and I would hope others hold politicians accountable for their actions. None of these things are illegal, but why should I pretend they are ok? It bothered me when Reagan took his millions from Toshiba (setting the precedent). Why would I give Obama a pass?

Not as bad as everyone else? That's not a very high bar.

I voted for him and I think much better of him than I do Anjezë Gonxhe Bojaxhiu. That doesn't make me a member of his tribe. It's not my obligation to defend every decision he ever made or look the other way when he does something that's cringeworthy. And this is one of many cringeworthy things he's done.

We live in a crony capitalist society where the rules are different for the very wealthy. If you are a politician that was elected to do something to change the status quo on that, you damn sure are open to criticism when you go full on Bill Clinton. As far as Warren and Sanders, they came out vocally against it, since their political identities are defined by advocating a change in the pay-to-play culture of the US Government.

 

obsessed with Obama, the OP

Thoughts just dominated

 

Imagine this scenario: Hillary Clinton is president. It's learned that she has deep ties to Putin. She puts utterly unqualified billionaires in cabinet posts. She puts her daughter Chelsea in a position of influence in the West Wing. And Chelsea's husband is her chief advisor.

She refuses to release any tax returns, she blocks access to the visitor logs in the White House and Bill refuses to live in the White House so our tax dollars are spent keeping him safe in Chappaqua.

And Hillary spends almost every weekend lounging in a resort. AND, in an interview, she names the wrong country she bombed while bragging about the chocolate cake she was eating while she ordered said bombing.

 

Deji is taking this way too serious, and I doubt most people care, but that's just me. People just seem to be looking for Obama for everything now. It's either "Come save us from Trump" or "Its not Trumps fault its Obama's".

Donald Trump is in office. Barrack Obama isn't. I mention Trump because he has the influence on financial/wall street regulations. Obama doesn't. There is no "standard" he NEEDS to set if he doesn't want to set one. Carter went on to make money as did Clinton and both Bush's. The only standard is Obama is somehow treated as though he's bound to this higher level where he has to be better and more selfless than every other president and surely the sitting President.

I would LIKE him to set a higher bar, but now that he's out of office, he doesn't owe me anything (although I'd like to hope Michelle would at least think about running cause I'm a huge fan of her). I'd do the same thing as Barack though. Dude put up with a ton the past 8 years. Let him live the high life for a few years while he's still youngish, coming into some good money, with a happy family, and in good health.

If Obama wants to make a little cash now, sure he's gonna take some flack for getting cash like this, but again.... he's not president anymore, and there is no influence that Wall Street can get from this transaction unless Michelle Obama is running 2020 which I doubt she is.

If this was 2007, sure this would be an issue, but again... his policies did not reflect the portrayal of Wall Street insider corruption you are insinuating because of cabinet hires. The bar is not set very high for politicians but whatever one that was set he sure was higher than virtually every Republican that came before him.

Cut the dude a break, and focus on what matters. Future politicians are the ones we need to focus on holding more accountable than their predecessors. Especially agent orange who is lowering the bar to the core of the earth.

 

What he does as a private citizen concerns me less than what he did as a candidate and president. It was not right, and it was really disappointing to read.

Carter rarely accepted money for speeches and when he did, unlike every president after him, donated it to charity. In 1989, when Reagan accepted $2 million from Toshiba it was a huge stink across the political spectrum, and it was a very new and disappointing precedent. Before the 80s (which I'm guessing you are too young to remember) ex-senators and ex-Congressmen also didn't become lobbyists and take millions to access their connections for corporations. These things became normal in my lifetime, and they were everything candidate Obama campaigned against, and the reason many like me voted for him. So, "virtually every Republican" before Obama would number three that did the same. And only one other democrat (Bill Clinton) -- and he would drop as many as 60 speeches in a ****ing year. Presidents like LBJ and Eisenhower would die before they'd ever sell out their country and the dignity of their office that way.

Former presidents and Congressmen have a lot to offer Wall Street, Silicon Valley, foreign governments, and other monied interests. They have unparalleled access to people in power and a great deal of influence, even if they no longer hold office. That's why lobbying pays so damn well -- and why it's eroding the democratic framework of governance.

What Obama was caught doing (in the leaked email, which you should read) was beyond even this, and it warrants criticism.These conversations were happening with Citibank while he was campaigning against the very same thing he was doing. If that doesn't bother you, then I suppose nothing will.

As for the speeches, if private industry forces sysadmins and middle manager to sign non-competes and NDAs, why would we have a different standard for people who posses a wealth of proprietary and confidential information they are privy to solely from their tenure in public service? These people are public servants, and we are their employers. And even if they are retired, we are still paying for their retirements and security details until the day they die.

They serve the people and the public trust and it shouldn't be ok to w**** it out to the lobbies they promised to fight as soon as they are out of office.

This thread isn't about Trump, and to bring President Caligula into the conversation would derail it. The man is a walking obscenity and the ethics surrounding these very same issues are creeping steadily in a direction contrary to his own populist promises as well. The accountability we hold our public servants to shouldn't be subject to partisan bias. Trump experiences far more scrutiny for his casual relationship with decorum and ethics than any other politician in living memory.

Why not treat all politicians like that? It's not because he's less ethical -- it's because, well, we just don't like him. Because he's an *******. Because it gets clicks. Because it makes money, it makes everyone feel great, and everyone wants to make sure they are in on the shibboleth that pretends to be a joke: "He's so dumb, amirite?" Our shitty republic has moved on from the celebrity president we all want to suck up to, to the reality TV star we all love to hate. Is it really too much to ask that we treat public servants like public servants and hold them accountable to the boring jobs they were elected to do?

If voters don't stand up to demand the removal of the influence of the very wealthy out of politics, to stand up to the pay-to-play lobby-dominated government, and to hold all public servants to the kind of accountability that any other employer would expect of his employees, we are all complicit in supporting oligarchy.

 

Just because Democrats want more regulation doesn't mean they're anti Wall Street


Same with energy

What was the Dow at when he took office and what was it when he left

 

Combined with Sanders the Wall Street issue really got to the criticism that she didn't stand for anything

 

Obama is a capitalist?!? And here I thought that he was a socialist.

Who knew that politics could be so complicated?