Former Clinton Treasury Secretary Turned Obama Adviser Was Paid Tens of Millions by Bailed-Out Citig

Former Clinton Treasury Secretary Turned Obama Adviser Was Paid Tens of Millions by Bailed-Out Citigroup

www.cnsnews.com

Robert Rubin, a key economic advisor to President-elect Barack Obama who served as Treasury secretary in the Clinton Administration, has been one of the highest paid executives at the now twice bailed-out financial giant Citigroup.

Rubin, who has been associated with the bank since 1999, served as its interim chairman from November to December 2007.

Rubin’s role has been described as an advisor to the company’s top executives.

“It’s a little like visiting Yoda, you go and get a dose of wisdom,” Citigroup co-head of global investment banking Raymond J. McGuire told the Times.

McGuire, who is one of Obama’s bundlers – the fundraising titans responsible for bankrolling Obama’s presidential campaign – is a member with Rubin on Citigroup’s Senior Leadership Committee.

Rubin has been well compensated for his advice, earning $17.3 million in 2006, according to Citigroup’s SEC filings. Rubin earned $16.4 million in 2005, $16.5 million in 2004, and $16.6 million in 2003.

Rubin has also served on the executive board of the struggling Ford Motor Co. as a director until 2006, which paid him over $100,000 that year, according to Forbes.com.

(visit the link for the full news article)

The connections to the Obama Whitehouse are startling to say the least. What can I possibly say that has not already been said.

America has been fooled and we are virtually helpless. The world is watching and the world is laughing.

The story just gets deeper and deeper. We are so wrapped up in our own economic turmoil and the inauguration of President Soetoro, that we don't see what is happening all around us.

www.cnsnews.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

What type of message does this send?

Hire your closest advisers from the talent pool that helped create this mess in the first place. My confidence in our new Pres. elect was low to begin with. Now, it is in the gutter. The day after the election, I actually thought that I would give him an honest chance.

This just makes me sick.When are people going to realize that if someone is running for president,that means they have been CLEARED to run by their handlers.That is why Ron Paul wasn't on the ballot in my opinion.You have to be part of the group to be able to play.
I knew Obama was one of them but was really hoping we meaning the rest of the world would win one for a change.
Funny how he used the word change to rope everyone in.

Just goes to show that Washington is the hardest place to change.

They are rolling in greenbacks at taxpayers expense.

They should be tarred and feather.

He acted as a consultant?

Is it a bad thing that major companies find his advice reliable and worth while?

Could the reason behind him being chosen to work in washington be based on the fact that he is an economic "yoda" of sorts?

Lets start the tour before we start complaining about the tour guide...

Originally posted by nj2day
He acted as a consultant?

Is it a bad thing that major companies find his advice reliable and worth while?

Could the reason behind him being chosen to work in washington be based on the fact that he is an economic "yoda" of sorts?

Lets start the tour before we start complaining about the tour guide...

...and his "Yoda" like advice was so good they are now being bailed out to the tune of tens of $Billions and saddling the government...or should I say the American taxpayer... with perhaps hundreds of $Billions in toxic debt.

Yeah! what sterling advice he must have given.

Originally posted by Britguy

Originally posted by nj2day
He acted as a consultant?

Is it a bad thing that major companies find his advice reliable and worth while?

Could the reason behind him being chosen to work in washington be based on the fact that he is an economic "yoda" of sorts?

Lets start the tour before we start complaining about the tour guide...

...and his "Yoda" like advice was so good they are now being bailed out to the tune of tens of $Billions and saddling the government...or should I say the American taxpayer... with perhaps hundreds of $Billions in toxic debt.

Yeah! what sterling advice he must have given.

Star for you. You beat me to it.

reply to post by Britguy


Erm... you're blaming the economic crisis on him now?

I don't get it...

Blaming the economic crisis on the banks is not all that bright IMHO.

It took Morgage holders, Banks, and the Government to get us into this mess...

However, the unemployment rate is completely Clinton and Bush's fault.

Do some research instead of just spewing MSM talking points...

reply to post by nj2day


I don't think anyone is blaming Rubin for the circus/crisis. Rubin is an adviser behind the bailout and the subsequent debt vacuum created by it. Rubin is certainly a player. If he is such a genius he would have seen this day looming years ago. Perhaps he did.

We all know it is just a game to create the largest and most powerful banks. Here is some money for you, now, use this money to buy up "unhealthy" banks. What constitutes an "unhealthy" bank? The potential buyout of NCB by PNC is a prime example. NCB is denied TARP funds, PNC is granted TARP funds and is now poised to buy NCB at a bargain. Next step, who buys PNC?

Originally posted by nj2day
He acted as a consultant?

Is it a bad thing that major companies find his advice reliable and worth while?

Could the reason behind him being chosen to work in washington be based on the fact that he is an economic "yoda" of sorts?

Lets start the tour before we start complaining about the tour guide...

So which part of this whole thing do you not understand? Because you obviously aren't getting it.

He was an advisor to a company that, had it not been for the taxpayer stepping in, would of gone BANKRUPT. So there is two options here:

1. They paid him Millions of dollars for his advice, but didn't take it, and they went bankrupt. (doubtful)

2. They paid him Millions of dollars for his advice, took it, and then went bankrupt. (More likely)

And now this dude is part of our new president's financial team. Thats who I want helping run the show. The guy that gave such great advise that the company listening to him needs to have some $300 billion of bad advise taken off their books.

I think, unfortunately, you started listening to the saying on your avatar...

[edit on 25-11-2008 by ag2000]

I tried my best to warn people, but they just called it racism,

I tried my best to warn people,

wait till the rest of the skeletons come falling out of his closet.

reply to post by ag2000


well thats a pretty drastic oversimplification.

Reductio ad absurdum anyone?

Can we name a company who hasn't felt the economic climate?

most publicly held companies have seen 50% loss of value so far this year...

How do we know that the people he's advising wouldn't have gone belly up months and months ago if he hadn't offered his advice?

you're basing success on a win/lose from your perspective. Maybe in relation to where the companies were going to end up, he "saved" them?

Success doesn't have to mean a win in your books... just in the minds of the people he's consulting.

If you remember, I'm not defending, or admonishing this guy... as I stated earlier... maybe we should start the tour before we start complaining about the tour guide...



[edit on 25-11-2008 by nj2day]

reply to post by nj2day

you're basing success on a win/lose from your perspective. Maybe in relation to where the companies were going to end up, he "saved" them?

And how exactly do you figure he "saved" them? They should be bankrupt right now...His advise got them nothing. They were on their merry way, raking in millions of dollars in pay, to be insolvent by the end of the week...If that long.

Originally posted by ag2000
And how exactly do you figure he "saved" them? They should be bankrupt right now...His advise got them nothing. They were on their merry way, raking in millions of dollars in pay, to be insolvent by the end of the week...If that long.

That all depends on your perspective, doesn't it?

reply to post by nj2day

That all depends on your perspective, doesn't it?

I really don't see what other perspective you can have? Care to enlighten me? What could he possibly have saved them from? Going in the tank a week earlier? Two weeks? The end point is the same...They should be INSOLVENT right now...If not for the large pockets of the American taxpayer.

This is just one of the many things that will come out folks now that the president elect is making his choices not for our nation but for himself.

Now, please remember, that many of these Clinton advisors or cabinet members or friends are the ones that were involved in creating this crisis in the early 90's. Finally there may be some vindication as to this credit crisis is not the total result of failed Bush policy as we were explained in the months leading up to the election. We are lucky that we recovered as a nation after 9/11. However, to kill the pain, people spent and spent and spent and now they are broke. Who is to blame then? the administration? No, the people who bought interest only homes and are now walking away from the mortgages.

The 90's were a boom where the rich made ALOT of money. It was a time of prosperity but in the waning months, with the Blue Dress scandal, we saw cracks in the foundation. Now, the pres elect is putting those same people back in charge to correct what they started? Makes no sense except that it is the first step in the creation of a socialist state where the government owns everything, taxes go through the roof and people are confused that the promises of a president are unanswered. Welcome to America folks.

I mean, did you REALLY expect anything different from another Ivy league man with jsut as many illicit ties as Mr Cheney????

Originally posted by ag2000
I really don't see what other perspective you can have? Care to enlighten me? What could he possibly have saved them from? Going in the tank a week earlier? Two weeks? The end point is the same...They should be INSOLVENT right now...If not for the large pockets of the American taxpayer.

Like I said, you're looking at this from a win/lose, or a pass/fail prospective.

this is not win/lose.

Maybe they would have been insolvent months ago... but his advice kept them afloat...

Maybe they would have been in significantly MORE debt... but he helped them liquidate effectively.

you have no way of knowing the nature, nor the impact of his advice to these firms. Instead, you're looking at it like "they went bankrupt, thus, he failed".

Like I said, it depends on perspective. Maybe a win here was to put the bank in a position to be eligible to receive funds from the bailout? or maybe it was simply keeping them afloat until the legislation passed... or maybe he did fail.

You can't base your opinion of the guy's success off of a logical fallacy.