Peter Schweizer: Amy Klobuchar ‘Not Nearly as Moderate as She Claims to Be’
6:16
Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) is “not nearly as moderate as she claims to be” and has a well-documented history of practicing her own brand of crony capitalism and selectively pursuing white-collar crimes while protecting her allies, Breitbart News senior contributor and author of the New York Times bestseller Profiles in Corruption: Abuse of Power by America’s Progressive Elite Peter Schweizer explained during a Monday appearance on Breitbart News Daily.
Klobuchar, whose campaign has experienced a second wind after a strong third-place finish in New Hampshire’s Democrat primary, is hoping to build on that momentum and has been presenting herself as a more moderate choice on the campaign trail. However, that is far from the truth, as Schweizer explained on Monday.
As detailed in Profiles in Corruption, Klobuchar has voted with Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) — her ultra-progressive challenger — 88 percent of the time, and she happens to be one of the top recipients of corporate campaign donations in all of the U.S. Senate, Schweizer noted.
As Schweizer explained, Klobuchar “pulls that off” by practicing a “brand of crony capitalism.”
“There are numerous examples where, you know, a particular company or, you know, a smaller industry — the executives will get together and she’ll get a couple dozen donations from a company over a two or three day period,” he explained. “And then within a couple of weeks, she’ll introduce legislation that specifically benefits that corporation. That’s one of the reasons she’s been such a prolific fundraiser.”
Breitbart News reported on some of the examples laid out by Schweizer in Profiles in Corruption:
A prime example of this occurred in May 2011 when Klobuchar introduced legislation to deter internet piracy. Although Klobuchar was first-term senator mainly known her being “Minnesota nice,” the bill sparked widespread controversyThe legislation’s critics alleged it was draconian, pointing to a provision in the bill that made it a felony to illegally stream TV shows or films off the internet. One of the most prominent critics, the pop star Justin Bieber, even suggested that Klobuchar was the one who deserved to be “locked up” for proposing such a strict law.The response from the entertainment industry, though, was exactly the opposite. Many industry executives not only lined up behind the bill, but it seems that many had already begun favoring Klobuchar even before its introduction.“In the ninety days before she introduced the bill, something unusual started happening,” Schweizer writes. “Over a one-week period in February, seven executives from 20th Century Fox sent her donations. Three more wrote her checks in March.”
But Schweizer says Klobuchar’s problems go even deeper.
“For a Democrat party that’s become very progressive and let’s say ‘woke,’ she has spent a lot of her political career essentially turning a blind eye or doing the bidding of very large powerful financial interests,” Schweizer told Breitbart News Daily host and Breitbart News Editor-in-Chief Alex Marlow.
Schweizer used the Minnesota lawmaker’s role as Hennepin County’s chief prosecutor, and her failure to pursue crimes that involved her own political allies, as another example.
“She highlights the fact that she prosecutes many white-collar criminal cases. A lot of those cases were pretty small fish, to be honest. But the whale that she encountered when she was prosecutor is a guy named Tom Petters, who ran the second-largest Ponzi scheme in American political history,” Schweizer said. “While she went after the small fish, she never went after Petters. And we went through a lot of the legal cases and documents involving this.”
“She went after some of his partners, she went after other people that were doing similar sorts of things but never went after Petters,” he continued, adding that Petters happened to be “her largest donor when she ran for the Senate.”
As Breitbart News detailed:
Klobuchar’s unwillingness to look into Petters coincided with a time their professional relationship was flourishing.When Klobuchar first ran for county attorney in 1998, Petters and his associates only donated $8,500 to her campaign. By the time she was running for the United States Senate in 2006, Petters had emerged as one of Klobuchar’s most prolific financial backers. During that campaign alone, the Ponzi scheme operator donated more than $120,000, earning him the designation of being one of Klobuchar’s single largest campaign contributors.The donations also seemed to signal a strong personal relationship. When the FBI finally caught up to the illegal operation and raided Petters’ office and home in 2008, he admitted on a wire-tap recording that Klobuchar had called him in the aftermath. Even though the confines of that conversation were never made public, the events that followed seemed to indicate Klobuchar was sympathetic to the plight of her longtime donor.
Further, Klobuchar’s mentor, former Vice President Walter Mondale, had “two sons that were actually working for Tom Petters,” which, as Schweizer noted, raises further questions.
“So you not only have the financial fact that Petters and his associates are donating to her campaign, you have the fact that her mentor Walter Mondale’s family is kind of fused at the hip with Tom Petters, which I think added to this sense that they had a certain level of protection or cover because Tom Petters knew the right people in her social circle,” he explained.
When Petters was finally arrested and charged, he called Klobuchar in D.C., who “gave him legal advice on how to try to counter the charges,” Schweizer noted.
“That certainly does not fit the image that she wants to portray, and it raises all kinds of questions about, you know, this selective enforcement or the selective prosecution of crimes,” he added.
The mounting questions surrounding Klobuchar’s prosecutorial and political past come as she seeks to build on the momentum from her success in New Hampshire ahead of the upcoming Nevada caucuses and South Carolina primary.
Amy Klobuchar, endorsed by New York Times, denounced for
railroading black teenager to prison for life
3
February 2020
Amy Klobuchar speaking in Iowa [Credit: Gage Skidmore]
Klobuchar
Received Thousands from Corporations While Introducing Legislation That
Benefitted Them
Schweizer:
Warren, Klobuchar Have ‘Cashed in’ from Corruption
Amy
Klobuchar Selectively Prosecuted White-Collar Crimes, Failed to Pursue Massive
Ponzi Scheme—Despite Evidence
Amy Klobuchar, endorsed by New York Times, denounced for
railroading black teenager to prison for life
3
February 2020
Amy Klobuchar is the senior US senator from Minnesota and a
candidate for the Democratic Party presidential nomination, having received the
endorsement in January of the New
York Times (along with Senator Elizabeth Warren of
Massachusetts).
The Times praised
Klobuchar as someone “with an empathy that connects to voters’ lived
experiences, especially in the middle of the country.” The newspaper has
relentlessly promoted identity politics, an obvious factor in its endorsement
of the two female candidates.
In fact, like Hillary Clinton, Kamala Harris and, for that
matter, Warren herself, Klobuchar personifies the manner in which gender and
racial politics provides a phony “progressive” veneer to the malicious
ambitions of middle class reactionaries of all colors, ethnicities, genders,
and sexual orientations.
Various polls currently place Klobuchar fifth behind Joe Biden,
Bernie Sanders, Pete Buttigieg, and Warren in the Democratic primary race, but
she has enjoyed a certain “surge” recently, the product of considerable
promotion by the US media. As a result, some surveys put her in third place in
Iowa on the eve of that state’s Democratic Party caucuses on Monday.
Now, a well-researched Associated Press (AP) story suggests that
Klobuchar used the railroading of a black teenager, Myon Burrell, to prison for
life as a springboard for her political career. Klobuchar was then the
prosecutor in Hennepin County, which includes Minneapolis.
Various organizations, including the Minneapolis NAACP, the
Racial Justice Network, Black Lives Matter Twin Cities, and Communities United
Against Police Brutality, have called for Klobuchar to suspend her campaign for
president.
In themselves, the allegations concerning Klobuchar are not
astonishing. The Democratic Party teems with former prosecutors, CIA agents and
military officers, enemies of the working class and the oppressed at home and
abroad.
But there is something special and appropriate about the
exposure and possible downfall of the wretched Klobuchar, recently described by
the Times, in
its inimical pompous jargon of deceit and dishonesty, as “the very definition
of Midwestern charisma, grit and sticktoitiveness.”
Klobuchar has made the death of Tyesha Edwards, an 11-year-old
girl killed by a stray bullet in 2002, and the subsequent conviction of Burrell,
central to her campaign, proving supposedly both her toughness on crime and her
sensitivity to the African American community and the problem of gun violence.
In regard to the Edwards-Burrell case, the AP explains that it
went through more than 1,000 pages of police records, court transcripts and
other documents, and interviewed dozens of inmates, witnesses, and family
members.
Summing up, the AP notes that the case relied heavily “on a teen
rival of Burrell’s who gave conflicting accounts when identifying the shooter,
who was largely obscured behind a wall 120 feet away.” With no other
eyewitnesses, the story continues, “police turned to multiple jailhouse
snitches. Some have since recanted, saying they were coached or coerced. Others
were given reduced time, raising questions about their credibility. And the
lead homicide detective offered ‘major dollars’ for names, even if it was
hearsay.”
The AP goes on: “There was no gun, fingerprints, or DNA. Alibis
were never seriously pursued. Key evidence has gone missing or was never
obtained, including a convenience store surveillance tape that Burrell and
others say would have cleared him.” Burrell, now 33, has rejected all plea
deals and insisted on his innocence.
A co-defendant, Ike Tyson, insists he was the triggerman: “I
already shot an innocent girl,” said Tyson, serving a 45-year sentence. “Now an
innocent guy—at the time he was a kid—is locked up for something he didn’t do.
So, it’s like I’m carrying two burdens.”
To be blunt, the conviction and jailing of Burrell was a
scandalous state frame-up, organized by the police and the prosecutors,
including, centrally, Klobuchar.
Adding insult to injury, Klobuchar has since attempted to reap
political gain out of the destruction of Burrell and his family. At the Democratic
Party candidates’ debate in Houston in September, Klobuchar bragged about
finding and putting in jail “the killer of a little girl named Tyesha Edwards
who was doing her homework at her kitchen table and was shot through the
window.” Zak Cheney-Rice in New
York magazine suggested that Klobuchar in advertising
Burrell’s case “as a special victory for black safety in Minneapolis … plumbs
new depths.”
Both Burrell’s father, Michael Toussaint, and Tyesha Edwards’
stepfather, Leonard Winborn, see through Myon Burrell’s railroading. Toussaint
expressed sympathy for Tyesha: “She didn't deserve to die … This is a child,
studying at her table.” But he also wanted justice for his son, “a young man,
just 16 years old ... convicted of a case that he didn't do.”
Explaining why he and others were demanding that Klobuchar
suspend her presidential effort, Toussaint argued that “Amy used my son’s case”
in her campaign. Toussaint said Klobuchar wanted a political advantage.
Winborn told the Minnesota
Spokesman-Recorder: “If that man [Burrell] hasn’t done nothing,
then he doesn’t need to be in there at all … Whatever happens, I would never
want to see somebody do some time for somebody else’s wrongdoing.”
Perceptively, Winborn also pointed to prosecutor Klobuchar’s political
ambitions at the time: “Looking at it right now, it was an elevation thing … I
know all the players. I think my family got hoodwinked.”
One publication notes that Klobuchar “is the most unapologetic
hawk of the senators in the [Democratic Party] race.” It adds: “She has voted
for all but one, or 95 percent, of the military spending bills since 2013…
Klobuchar supported the US-NATO-led regime change war in Libya in 2011, and her
public statements suggest that her main condition for the US use of military
force anywhere is that US allies also take part, as in Libya … Klobuchar
received $17,704 in ‘defense’ industry contributions
for her 2018 reelection campaign.”
The Minnesota senator is a slavish supporter of Israeli violence
against the Palestinians and an eager participant in the McCarthyite
anti-Russia campaign, being one of six Democratic senators who introduced
legislation in 2017 that would have created an independent counsel with the
ability to probe potential Russian cyber attacks on political systems and
investigate efforts by Russians to “interfere” in American elections.
The New
York Times did not endorse her despite this
reactionary record, but because of
it. This “standard bearer for the Democratic center,” lyricized the Times, whose “vision goes
beyond the incremental,” had “the best chance to enact many progressive plans.”
Given the most recent turn of events, the Times ’ observation that
Klobuchar’s “more recent legislative accomplishments are narrower but
meaningful to those affected, especially the legislation aimed at helping crime
victims,” which “is not surprising given her background as the chief prosecutor
in Minnesota’s most populous county,” is especially cynical.
The notion that Klobuchar must represent something progressive
because of her gender should be an insult to the public intelligence by now. In
April 2019, the New
Republic, one of the unpleasant voices of self-satisfied,
upper-middle class public opinion in the US, described the then-group of
Democratic female presidential candidates, including Klobuchar—who were
“already making history” and who represented “a profound shift in the political
landscape”—as “Women of Substance.”
In fact, Klobuchar is something well known and horribly insubstantial — an unscrupulous big
business politician, who, like Clinton and the rest of the Democratic Party
hierarchy, would think nothing of climbing over heaps of bodies to make
her career.
Hypocritical, conventional and cruel, Klobuchar might well step
out of the pages of Main
Street, Babbitt, It Can’t Happen Here or another of the novels
of Sinclair Lewis, the Minnesota-born American author and social critic.
But in her role as ruthless and striving prosecutor, she may
most closely resemble Orville W. Mason, the district attorney in Theodore
Dreiser’s An American
Tragedy, who anticipates a murder trial in the light of the
“prominence and publicity with which his own activities in connection with this
were very likely to be laden!”
Dreiser continues: “At once he got up, energetically stirred. If
he could only catch such a reptilian criminal, and that in the face of all the
sentiment that such a brutal murder was likely to inspire! The August
convention and nominations. The fall election.”
This is the Democratic Party. This is contemporary American
politics, including its utterly fraudulent “identity politics” wing, which has nothing remotely progressive about it.
Klobuchar
Received Thousands from Corporations While Introducing Legislation That
Benefitted Them
Sen. Amy Klobuchar
(D-MN) has a troubling pattern of introducing legislation favored by major
institutions in corporate America around the same they make large contributions
to her campaign.
The revelations are detailed
in Profiles in Corruption: Abuse of Power by
America’s Progressive Elite—a new book by
Peter Schweizer, a senior contributor at Breitbart News and president of the
Government Accountability Institute.
As a senior member of the Senate
Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee, Klobuchar is uniquely situated
to impact the bottomline of corporate interests. Unlike her more progressive
rivals, like Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Klobuchar
has not been reflexively opposed to such interests. Rather, as Schweizer
details, the Minnesota Democrat has become particularly adept at using her
legislative powers not only to benefit corporate institutions, but herself as
well.
A prime example of this occurred in
May 2011 when Klobuchar introduced legislation to deter internet piracy.
Although Klobuchar was first-term senator mainly known her being “Minnesota
nice,” the bill sparked widespread controversy
The legislation’s critics alleged it
was draconian, pointing to a provision in the bill that made it a felony to
illegally stream TV shows or films off the internet. One of the most prominent
critics, the pop star Justin Bieber, even suggested that Klobuchar was the one
who deserved to be “locked up” for proposing such a strict law.
The response from the entertainment
industry, though, was exactly the opposite. Many industry executives not only
lined up behind the bill, but it seems that many had already begun favoring
Klobuchar even before its introduction.
“In the ninety days before she introduced the bill, something
unusual started happening,” Schweizer writes. “Over a one-week period in February,
seven executives from 20th Century Fox sent her donations. Three more wrote her
checks in March.”
Other entertainment industry giants quickly followed suit.
Warner Bros., which would have reaped huge benefits from the proposed
anti-piracy law, donated $20,000 through its political action committee.
Soon afterwards, no fewer than 15 of its executives donated thousands to
Klobuchar. Individuals associated with the Motion Picture Association of
America and Comcast similarly made large-scale donations in the weeks leading
up to the bill’s introduction.
“In all, the entertainment industry sent her more than $80,000,
a flow of cash she had not experienced before; all of it was collected in the
brief period before she introduced the bill,” Schweizer notes.
That troubling pattern has been on display throughout most of
Klobuchar’s tenure in the United States Senate. In 2011 and 2017, respectively,
Klobuchar’s campaign coffers saw a flood of incoming donations from Xcel
Energy, a Minnesota-based utility holding company.
The money would not have drawn much scrutiny if not for it
arriving in what appeared to be a coordinated fashion.
“At the end of September 2011, over a six-day period, no fewer
than twenty-one executives from Xcel Energy wrote campaign checks to Klobuchar,”
Schweizer writes. “Weeks earlier, Klobuchar introduced legislation … to give a
‘renewable electricity integration’ [tax] credit to utility companies.
If enacted, the legislation would have allowed companies like
Excel to claim thousands if not millions of dollars in federal tax credits for
producing renewable energy.
Likewise, Klobuchar’s decision to co-sponsor the Clean Energy
for America Act in May 2017, coincided with another surge of campaign donations
from Exel’s executives.
“Beginning at the end of May 2017 over a ten-day period,
twenty-eight executives from Xcel Energy sent her contributions totaling
$12,500,” Schweizer writes.
The bill, if passed, would have extensively expanded the tax
credits available to energy companies.
Klobuchar’s intermingling of legislative prowess and campaign
finance has made her a powerhouse fundraiser among Senate Democrats. In her
most recent reelection in 2018, she raised more than $17 million—thirty-eight
times the amount brought in by her Republican opponent. The astronomical sum
was made possible by Klobuchar’s strong backing from corporate America and
their special interest representatives in Washington, D.C.
“She took in donations from the CEOs of eleven of Minnesota’s
twenty-five largest corporations,” Schweizer writes. Klobuchar “has done
particularly well with law firms and lobbyists—they have donated more than $3
million to her three Senate races.”
The revelations posed in Profiles in Corruption emerge
as Kolobuchar’s 2020 campaign picks up steam, buoyed by a high-profile endorsement by The
New York Times.
In announcing its endorsement
the Times lauded
Klobuchar for her legislative accomplishments, arguing she was “most productive
senator among the Democratic field in terms of bills passed with bipartisan
support.”
As Schweizer shows, however, those accomplishments often
resulted in mutual benefit for the senator as well as the corporations donating
to her campaign.
Schweizer:
Warren, Klobuchar Have ‘Cashed in’ from Corruption
21 Jan 202023
2:10
Author Peter Schweizer on
Tuesday’s “Fox & Friends” discussed his new book, Profiles in Corruption: Abuse of Power by America’s Progressive
Elite, which offers a look into some of
the shady dealings of the United States’ political leaders.
After detailing the corruption seen
among former Vice President Joe Biden and his family, Schweizer described how
his fellow 2020 Democratic presidential candidates Sens. Elizabeth Warren
(D-MA) and Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) had “cashed in” from corruption.
Schweizer said there is a
“three-layer cake of corruption” with Warren.
“[Warren] was actually a government
consultant paid by the U.S. Congress in the 1990s to rewrite our bankruptcy
laws,” Schweizer outlined. “OK, that’s all fine and good, but she did the
typical Washington crony move: She cashed in. After she rewrote those
laws, what did she do? She went to the corporations who would benefit from the
law and said, ‘Hire me, and I will help you interpret the law that I myself
wrote.’ And she made millions of dollars doing that.”
He continued, “She’s also got a
daughter who set up a business. She was setting up that business while
Elizabeth Warren was head of the TARP Oversight Committee, and what ends up
happening is the daughter gets her business financed and gets advisors from the
very investment banks that Elizabeth Warren’s TARP Committee was bailing out.”
Schweizer said Klobuchar has
“mastered the art of shaking down contributors and then pushing their
legislation.”
He stated, “[Klobuchar] was a
prosecutor before she was a U.S. Senator — very selective, did not go after people
that were donors of hers, who were clearly engaged in corruption. And as a U.S.
Senator, she has mastered the art of shaking down contributors and then pushing
their legislation. There are instances where dozens of executives from a
corporation over a three-day period will give her the donation, and then
literally a few days later, she introduces legislation on their behalf.”
Follow Trent Baker on Twitter @MagnifiTrent
Amy
Klobuchar Selectively Prosecuted White-Collar Crimes, Failed to Pursue Massive
Ponzi Scheme—Despite Evidence
Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN)
selectively enforced the law regarding financial crimes as a local prosecutor,
often to the benefit of friends and political allies.
The bombshell revelations are
detailed in Profiles in Corruption: Abuse of Power by America’s Progressive
Elite—a new book by Peter Schweizer, a
senior contributor at Breitbart News and president of the Government
Accountability Institute.
Klobuchar cut a profile as a
tough-on-crime prosecutor during her tenure as the chief legal officer of
Minnesota’s most populous county in the early 2000s. Not only did she push for locking
up more juvenile offenders, but she was also a leading exponent of the “broken
windows” theory of policing.
“What I’ve heard again and again is
that no crime is a small crime and that we must enforce the law down the line,”
she wrote in a policy paper at the
time.
Left unsaid, though, is that certain
“small” crimes were more likely to warrant prosecution than others, especially
depending on one’s personal connection to Klobuchar. As Profiles in Corruption notes,
that inequitable approach was nowhere more apparent than “white-collar” crimes.
While Klobuchar aggressively pursued
small actors, like airline pilots not paying state income taxes or a home
remodeler upcharging his clients, bigger and more nefarious financial crimes
were ignored.
“But the largest financial fraud by
far in her jurisdiction involved a massive conspiracy that she never even
appeared to investigate, despite plenty of warning signs,” Schweizer writes.
“It involved the second-largest Ponzi scheme in American history to date.”
The man at the center of the crime
was Tom Petters, a Minnesota philanthropist and longtime Democrat campaign
donor. Petters, who counted among his friends not only Klobuchar, but also
former Vice President Walter Mondale, operated a series of shady investment
funds.
Between 1998 and 2008, roughly the
years spanning Klobuchar’s tenure as prosecutor, Petters raised nearly $4
billion for his hedge funds. More of than not, individuals entrusting him with
their money would never see a penny of their investment returned.
As Schweizer elaborates, there were
plenty of warning signs that something was off. Petters was consistently facing
legal troubles, either from clients he had failed to repay or from his own
improper conduct, like writing bad checks. More troubling, however, was the
fact that his business associates kept getting convicted of wrongdoing, often
by Klobuchar herself.
“In January 1999, just weeks into her
tenure, potential evidence of the Ponzi scheme began to cross her desk,”
Schweizer writes. “Officers from her office raided the home of Richard Hettler
and Ruth Kahn. They were Petters investors.”
Documents seized during the raid
reportedly implicated Petters in a “mutually beneficial and highly illegal
financial scheme.” Despite securing convictions for both Hettler and Khan,
Klobuchar seemed to make no attempt to move against Petters or “apparently even
investigate” his part in the matter.
Klobuchar’s unwillingness to look
into Petters coincided with a time their professional relationship was
flourishing.
When Klobuchar first ran for county
attorney in 1998, Petters and his associates only donated $8,500 to her
campaign. By the time she was running for the United States Senate in 2006,
Petters had emerged as one of Klobuchar’s most prolific financial backers.
During that campaign alone, the Ponzi scheme operator donated more than $120,000, earning him the
designation of being one of Klobuchar’s single largest campaign contributors.
The donations also seemed to signal
a strong personal relationship. When the FBI finally caught up to the illegal
operation and raided Petters’ office and home in 2008, he admitted on a
wire-tap recording that Klobuchar had called him in the aftermath. Even though
the confines of that conversation were never made public, the events that
followed seemed to indicate Klobuchar was sympathetic to the plight of her
longtime donor.
“Reportedly Klobuchar’s aides
suggested a close family friend, Doug Kelley … provide legal help,” Schweizer
writes. “Kelley had been a longtime friend of Klobuchar’s father, both as a
lawyer to help him with legal issues and as a mountain-climbing partner.”
Ultimately, Kelley was unable to
make much of a difference. Petters’ fate seemed to be sealed as soon as court
proceedings began, especially when law enforcement and judicial officers
expressed disbelief that he was able to operate for so long with so many red
flags.
“But, it looks to me like [Petters]
had friends in high places,” Garrett Vail, an attorney who initially worked on
case against Kuhn in 1999, told the Daily Caller. “The
only way he ran a $3 billion Ponzi scheme was [that] he had politicians in his
pocket.”
In December 2009, Petters was
convicted on 20 different counts of mail fraud, money laundering, and wire
fraud. He was sentenced to more than 50 years in prison for defrauding
investors of more than $3.7 billion.
Klobuchar, for her part, escaped the
situation relatively unscathed. The senator was reelected overwhelmingly in
2012, despite attempts by her Republican challenger to make Petters an issue.
Reelected again in 2018, Klobuchar is now vying for the Democrat presidential
nomination on a platform that relies heavily on her accomplishments in public
office.
Those accomplishments, however, only
underscore Klobuchar’s selective approach to exercising political power,
as Profiles in Corruption exposes.
No comments:
Post a Comment