Original subtitles

The world is too small,

our wisdom too limited,

our time here too short to waste any more of it

in winning fleeting victories at other people's expense.

The Clinton Global initiative,

which brings philanthropists and CEOs

together with non-profits to make concrete commitments

aimed at some of the world's toughest problems.

Almost 10 years in, they have leveraged billions of dollars

in assistance in more than 180 countries.

CGI was designed to tackle big global challenges

in bite-size pieces with the conviction that

regardless of size or scope, our problems will yield

to concerted action and innovative partnerships

of individuals, NGOs, businesses, and governments.

We have to now find a way to triumph together.

All the problems that we face,

from climate change to financial contagion

to nuclear proliferation, are too complex and cross-cutting

for any one government or indeed for governments to solve alone.

As we believe that ending hunger is not only possible,

but it is both a moral and strategic imperative.

Hillary Clinton is trying to shift the spotlight to global warming.

The presidential contender unveiling her plans

to combat climate change.

Together with innovative partners

from the public and private sectors,

we're working to make homes, universities, and cities

more energy-efficient.

We share a common future

and we are here to find common ground.

Women must be empowered.

It's classic Bill Clinton.

By using his birthday to help the causes he champions,

from combating climate change to obesity and even HIV/aids.

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.

We are trying to do something

no one has ever done before.

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 you've made

5 million making speeches.

The president's made more than $100 million.

Well, if, if you,

you have no reason to remember, but

we came out of the White House

not only dead broke but in debt.

6 years ago, Hillary Clinton was

about to become Secretary of State.

Barack Obama had nominated her,

everyone knew she was gonna 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.

There's a lot of money sloshing around,

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 his speeches, contracts going one way or another.

It's not good.

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 work that lies ahead.

We did this with a very simple strategy.

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 oftentimes have natural resources

that can 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 oligarchs give these entities

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.

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.

The problem is, their words

are different from their actions.

But his critics say that far from

entrenching democracy in Rwanda,

he's actually eroding it by silencing his opposition.

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 U.N. has identified him as being involved in activities

that entailed massive human rights violations.

Newer opposition parties that have been formed

in the last year or two have, one by one,

been silenced or otherwise excluded from the race,

and individuals, not only politicians

but even journalists, for example, and other Rwandans

who may have views different from those of the government,

have found themselves at the receiving end of what has become

quite a violent campaign of intimidation.

Well, Paul Kagame is a friend of Bill Clinton's.

I want to say a special word of appreciation

for the leadership of president Kagame.

I'm greatly humbled to receive

this Clinton Global Citizen award.

He's actually 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 kinds of dictators and leaders.

That's the kind of legitimization

that the Clintons 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

gonna 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 pocket.

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 longtime 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

400,000 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 a civil war.

These individuals who are 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 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 pledge to the Clinton Foundation,

his Congo operation was making, quote, staggering profits,

end quote, according to his own financial statements.

His overall capitalization was $20 billion.

But for those profits to remain staggering,

U.S. 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 law's 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

to the Clinton Foundation.

But Congo isn't the only scandal-plagued country

where Clinton benefactors have made millions.

Africa's most populous nation,

Nigeria, is full of promise.

But fulfilling that promise is sometimes a struggle.

Plagued by corruption and mismanagement,

the resource-rich country has a poverty rate of over 50%.

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 oftentimes 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

U.S. assistance aren't transparent

in how they spend that money,

that they will not be able to get U.S.

foreign assistance anymore.

It's about transparency.

But there's a way around that law,

and you can get a waiver from that law.

How? By getting the U.S. Secretary of State

to grant you a waiver.

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, reform efforts, more transparency,

and the work that you and your team is also championing.

Uh, because we really believe that, uh,

the future for, uh, Nigeria is limitless.

So, in the case of Nigeria, they receive

hundreds of millions of dollars in U.S. 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

to 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 two speeches, for $700,000 apiece,

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.

OK, now we will begin the panel.

One of the pinnacles of power in that country

is a gentleman named Gilbert Chagoury.

Gilbert Chagoury, who has committed $1 billion

to the Clinton Global Initiative,

is connected to another individual in the Clinton orbit,

that would be mark rich, the billionaire who was on

the FBI's 10 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

at the same time that the Ayatollah was holding

50 Americans hostage.

He also had a long history of busting U.N. 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 billion to $8 billion 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.

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 its epicenter fell just 10 miles

from the capital, Port-au-Prince.

Haiti's ambassador to the U.S. has described the event

as a catastrophe of major proportions.

So far, we have no information regarding the causalities.

The world is coming to an end...

it was a big earthquake.

It last like 15 seconds, I think.

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.

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.

In the days and weeks that followed the earthquake

in January of 2010,

Hillary Clinton made visits to Haiti.

And here is the latest on Haiti:

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton

arrived in Port-au-Prince just about an hour ago.

She is the highest-ranking U.S. 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.

In fact, on her first visit,

which occurred days after the earthquake,

they literally had to stop traffic

going into 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.

There is a perception,

there have been complaints or reports of bottlenecks,

that there is a lot of aid coming in,

but it's very hard to get it out

to the people who need it.

That's just not true.

The aid is coming in. We're getting it out.

There's just not enough of it yet.

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.

theirs is a city in ruins.

A country which can do little but wait for help to arrive.

The international community responded in the way

that you would expect it to.

That is, large amounts of money were committed,

up to $13 billion from

international relief organizations, and of course,

you had the official role of the State Department,

which would be point on U.S. taxpayer dollars

going to Haiti for the purposes of relief.

I want to assure the people of Haiti

that the United States is a friend,

a partner, and a supporter.

Hillary Clinton's State Department would oversee

the reconstruction effort with Chief of Staff Cheryl mills

responsible for the allocation of

U.S. 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 the former Haitian prime minister.

I hope that it will be rebuilt

in a much stronger and more sustainable way,

and I think the Haitians want that.

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 interests of major donors, who had a vested interest in

spending that money in Haiti,

in ways that would benefit them.

And so, you immediately had 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.

We have been united behind a single goal:

making investments in this country's people

and your infrastructure.

So, 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 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.

It didn't create 60,000 jobs.

It created barely 5,000 jobs,

but the major American companies who got textiles tariff-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 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 program was supposed to build

15,000 homes for $53 million.

Instead, it built 2,600 homes,

less than a quarter of the original estimate,

for $90 million, or $47 million over budget,

and they got away with it.

So, you had contracts going to these 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 shelter team

was quoted by "rolling stone" magazine as saying that

the recommendations were so bad, it looked like

the team never even got out of their SUVs.

Another person said that only one of the people

that was sent to Haiti by Dalberg actually spoke French.

Telecom mogul Denis O'Brien

is one of the world's richest people,

and he's finding opportunities in the poorest country

in the western hemisphere.

The Irish billionaire is the largest

private investor in Haiti through his company, Digicel.

And he is now leading the Clinton Global initiative

efforts down in Haiti.

Probably no one came out better

in the Haitian reconstruction effort

than an Irish billionaire named Denis O'Brien.

He was a Clinton Foundation donor, giving them

between $5 and $10 million.

He helped arrange speeches for Bill Clinton, too.

The interest of the Obama administration,

particularly former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, you know,

all the different things that have happened

to help Haiti get up off the floor have been led by the U.S.

and he was the owner of something called Digicel,

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, Digicel applied to be the recipient of that grant money.

4 weeks after their application,

Digicel actually sponsored a speech for Bill Clinton in Jamaica

and they paid him $225,000.

And as it turns out, within 4 months of that speech,

Digicel would receive the first installment of that grant money.

The earthquake actually has been great

for Digicel and Denis O'Brien.

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.

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.

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 of possibly hundreds of millions of dollars

through the Clinton Foundation.

They say it was done in exchange for favors

that Hillary was doing for them as Secretary of State.

The tragedy is, we had an opportunity to rebuild in a way

that would give the people of that 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.

We are telling the world of the crimes that

Bill and Hillary Clinton are responsible for in Haiti.

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 did 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.

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.

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 project to transport

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.

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.

- 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 one or two problems,

or should I say one or two million problems.

You see, when Hillary Clinton became Secretary of State

in late 2008, there was already an issue related to

the Keystone XL Pipeline sitting on her desk.

She was going to have to sign

an environmental and economic 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 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 its crib.

It was shocking.

Organizations like Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth were stunned.

They wanted an investigation.

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.

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 to foreign oil.

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 we 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 in 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 of giving speeches,

we looked at who was paying him, when they were paying him,

and if they have 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 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.

And in the case of the Keystone XL Pipeline,

they seem to have abandoned their principles,

their commitment as it was to combating global warming,

and dealing with our dependence on fossil fuels.

They jettisoned that when $2 million 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 fees skyrocketed

after being 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.

You will never contribute to an organization

that will give you a higher probability of having

your good intentions turn into real, positive changes

in other people's lives.

That will give you a better chance

than what you've done here tonight.

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 Ericsson 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.

7 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

enormous diplomatic problems for them,

all because essentially, they paid Bill Clinton

to give a speech for $750,000.

Will you continue to give speeches?

Oh, yeah. I gotta pay our bills.

So, the question is, why do we see the Clintons reversing

decades of policy positions that they've held so closely

on issues like human rights and environment?

And a big clue comes from 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'd 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's 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's made billions of dollars over the years

in the so-called penny stock market in Canada,

which is highly open to manipulation.

He's 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's a lot of speculators,

there's a lot of misinformation that's 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, Colombia.

And who arrives there at roughly the same time?

Secretary of state Hillary Clinton.

The big thing from the news conference was,

where Bill and Hillary were dining

the other night in Bogota.

Uh, I had a chance to talk to her about her dinner experience

in the Zona Rosa and here's what she had to say.

Dinner was good?

It was excellent in every way.

So, it was like eating in the states

but eating in Bogota?

Well, uh... it was a real treat to be in Bogota

and, uh, to be with people who love this city so much,

including my husband.

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 3 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 rain forest in Colombia

along the Pacific Coast.

And that timber is not intended to export to the United States,

but is intended for export to china.

There is an outrage and upset environmentalists

who realize what's going on,

and eventually that permit is yanked

by a future president of Colombia,

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.

We all know that in order to build

low-carbon economies for the future,

we need sustainable forests.

I also know the future of our planet

depends on healthy, standing forests.

They have talked about the problems of deforestation.

They've 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.

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.

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.

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.

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 non-proliferation treaty.

Today in New York,

the United Nations General Assembly voted overwhelmingly

to adopt a comprehensive nuclear test-ban treaty

and open it for signature later this month.

The N.P.T. has been sort of the holy grail

when it comes to nuclear disarmament.

Something that the Clintons had 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.

India's action threatens the stability of Asia

and challenges the firm international consensus

to stop all nuclear testing.

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 U.S. nuclear technology until you sign the N.P.T.,

the Non-Proliferation 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 longtime 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.

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.

We're talking about tens of millions of dollars

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

$1 million and $5 million to the Clinton Foundation

in the push to get them to support

Indian access to nuclear technology.

He's a member of parliament who has gotten in

fistfights on the floor of the parliament,

who's been charged with bribing members of parliament

to get certain pieces of legislation passed.

You see, the 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 web site

once he had admitted to his illegal activity.

So, here we are, years later,

and we've got this donation and a guy's name

who swears he didn't actually make the donation.

And you've got this longtime 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.

Sant Chatwal says he's worked with everybody.

And even laid the foundation of the Indo-U.S. nuclear deal.

So, the Indian government says that

they have given you this award for your role

in pushing the Indo-U.S. nuclear deal forward.

How exactly would you describe

the role you played in this?

Well, I can tell you, the Indo nuclear power deal,

if you look at it, I am the first one

that laid the foundation.

On the eve of the vote in 2008

to approve Indian access to U.S. 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 Non-Proliferation Treaty,

and specifically, India getting access

to U.S. 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.

I think the Russian uranium story

is perhaps the most shocking and 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's a press conference where Bill Clinton stands

with the dictator of Kazakhstan

and he praises the human rights record.

He praises that elections that 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's 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 $100 million 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

saying 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 Uranium One.

It's a company traded on the stock market in Canada.

And they start acquiring 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 wanna buy this asset,

and they offer a 40% overprice on the share of the stock,

and for this transaction to go through,

it has to be approved by the U.S. federal government.

Why? Because uranium is regarded

as a critical industry in the United States.

After all, this is used for our 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 uranium one, 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 was another major

Uranium One 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 U.S. 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.

There's doubt that when Putin came back in and said

he was going to be president, uh,

that did change the relationship.

We have to stand up to his bullying and...

what's 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.

4 months before Hillary Clinton's State Department

would sign off on the Russian purchase of Uranium One,

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's being paid,

but the amount that he's being paid.

You see, the last time Bill Clinton gave a speech in Russia

was 5 years earlier.

At that time, he was paid about

1/3 of what he was being paid this time.

Why is Russian control of 20% of U.S. uranium so troubling?

If you're 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

can be found 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've essentially done is handed this

precious resource to Vladimir Putin

and the Russian government.

They're not only engaged in aggression

in places like Ukraine,

but they've been very aggressive in fighting

American interests around the globe.

Russia's not an ally. Russia's not a friend.

Vladimir Putin's Russia is a rival of the United States,

and yet we've given them control over this precious resource.

This is what's gonna 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's 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's been persecution of human rights organization.

There's 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.

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 country,

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.

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's a pattern we've seen repeated over and over

and over again all around the world.

It's not a coincidence.

Money exchanges hands and favors are done.

Now, Clinton friends and supporters

will say there's no smoking gun.

But look at American political history.

People are convicted all the time for a pattern of behavior,

where, for example, they're 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've 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's so shocking to a lot of people

is that 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 are

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's 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.

This is a corruption. This is 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.

Please rate this subtitle at www.osdb.link/859x6 Help other users to choose the best subtitles