Top Bill Clinton aide Douglas Band wrote a memo. At the time he was a central player at the Clinton Foundation and president of his own corporate consulting firm. Over the course of 13 pages, he made a case that his multiple roles had served the interests of the Clinton family and its charity.
Band also detailed a roster of names in which he used to raise money for the Clinton Foundation from top-tier corporations such as Dow Chemical and included the Coca-Cola Company giving $4.33 million over six years and Barclays Capital paying $1.1 million over four years. They were clients of his firm, Teneo, while pressing many of those same donors to provide personal income to the former president. Band also used his position at Teneo, which he established in June 2011, to solicit the company’s clients to donate to the Clinton Foundation.
The system has drawn scrutiny from Republicans, who say it allowed corporations and other wealthy supporters to pay for entree to a popular former President of the United States, and a one time Secretary of State during the time she was Secretary Of State, who is now the Democratic presidential nominee. There is just an incestuous nature to these relationships which make it unhealthy for America.
Band wrote the memo in 2011 to foundation lawyers conducting a review of the organization amid a brewing feud with the Clinton’s’ daughter, Chelsea Clinton, who was taking a stronger role in leading the foundation and had expressed concerns about Teneo’s operations. Read memo here
Douglas Band was one of Clinton’s closest confidants when he outlined his lengthy 2011 memo how he and another aide helped secure at least $50 million in speaking fees and other ventures for the former president – in addition to raising “the bulk” of funds for the controversial Clinton Foundation.
The 12-page memo from Doug Band, released Wednesday by WikiLeaks, was designed to highlight the crucial role he – and his global strategy company Teneo – played in procuring money for the ex-president and Clinton’s namesake foundation.
“Throughout the past almost 11 years since President Clinton left office, I have sought to leverage my activities, including my partner role at Teneo, to support and to raise funds for the Foundation,” Band wrote. “This memorandum strives to set forth how I have endeavored to support the Clinton Foundation and President Clinton personally.”
Under a section titled “For-Profit Activity of President Clinton (i.e., Bill Clinton, Inc.),” Band wrote that he and Clinton aide Justin Cooper “found, developed and brought” to Clinton all four of his advisory arrangements at the time – arrangements that “yielded more than $30 million for him personally, with $66 million to be paid out over the next nine years should he choose to continue with the current engagements.” The memo also included a footnote explaining how Clinton’s speaking agent estimated that during a 10-year period, “$20 million in speeches for the President have derived … from Justin and my efforts.”
What’s more, Band and Cooper apparently helped make Clinton wealthy – and “solicited and obtained … in-kind services … for personal travel, hospitality, vacation and the like” – at no extra charge.
“Neither Justin nor I are separately compensated for these activities,” Band wrote, noting the pair didn’t take a “fee” or “percentage” of Clinton’s income, only collecting their standard Foundation salaries.
Band was also organizing personal income directly for Clinton. Under the heading, “For-Profit Activity of President Clinton (i.e. Bill Clinton, Inc.),” Band wrote, “We have dedicated our selves to helping the President secure and engage in for-profit activities—including speeches, books, and advisory service engagements… In support of the President’s for-profit activity, we also have solicited and obtained, as appropriate, in-kind services for the President and his family—for personal travel, hospitality, vacation and the like. Neither Justin nor I are separately compensated for these activities (e.g., we do not receive a fee for, or percentage of, the more than $50 million in for-profit activity we have personally helped to secure for President Clinton to date or the $66 million in future contracts, should he choose to continue with those engagements).”
Band mentions four such “arrangements” without naming them. Bill Clinton was paid nearly $18 million to be “honorary chancellor” of a for-profit college, Laureate International Universities, according to reports and the family’s tax returns. A Dubai-based firm, GEMS Education, paid Bill Clinton more than $560,000 in 2015, according to the tax returns. Band also lists a variety of speaking fees, previously disclosed by the Clinton’s, including hundreds of thousands of dollars each from UBS, Ericsson, BHP and Barclays. In 2011 alone, according to the Clinton’s tax returns, Bill Clinton earned $13,454,000 in speaking fees. That’s right. More than $13 million dollars in speaking fees!
Although no evidence has been found to support allegations of a quid pro quo of official acts by Hillary Clinton as NY Senator or Secretary of State in exchange for the money received by the Clinton’s or the Clinton Foundation. The obvious commingling of funds, and the relationship between Clinton’s personal, business and philanthropic undertakings detailed in the memo raises new questions about Bill Clinton’s activity. In the email to which Band’s draft memo was attached, Band tells Podesta he has removed the “lasry section all together.” Marc Lasry is a hedge fund manager and Clinton donor who funded an unsuccessful investment vehicle launched by Chelsea Clinton’s husband Marc Mezvinsky.
Other questions arise in the paragraph of the memo, entitled “Other Matters.” Without providing further details, Band writes that since the end of Bill Clinton’s presidency he and Cooper had served as the primary contact and point of management for President Clinton’s activities, including political, business, and Foundation matters, speeches, books, and family/personal needs, including “securing in-kind private airplane travel, in-kind vacation stays, and supporting family business and personal needs.”
The Hillary Clinton campaign declined to confirm to the Washington Post that the memo, or other emails released by Wikileaks, are in fact undoctored documents stolen from Podesta’s personal email account. However a campaign spokesperson, Glen Caplin, tweeted on Wednesday that Wikileaks was advancing a “clear political agenda” by “dribbling out” Podesta’s emails. “If Podesta dump was about high-minded transparency @wikileaks would release all at once,” Carlin tweeted.