Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders, and the Impact of the Panama Papers on the Race



You seemed to have missed an important detail. The trade deal that Clinton (and Obama) supported and Sanders opposed has a provision in it that effectively barred Panama from being used by U.S. citizens as a tax haven. So, it appears that both Clinton and Sanders were concerned about making sure that Panama was not used as a tax haven by U.S. citizens - they just went about it in different ways (as appropriate given the different positions they then occupied).

Are you suggesting that Clinton, as the U.S. Secretary of State, had an obligation to ensure that a trade deal supported by the President also prevented citizens of other states from using Panama as a tax haven? Is that really her (or the U.S.') role / responsibility?

PS -USuncut is worthless as a source of any reliable news or analysis

"Making matters worse for Americans wanting to store their ill-gotten gains offshore, the 2010 United States—Panama Trade Promotion Agreement included a taxation clause that effectively shut down any chance of the rich in the US using Panama as a shelter. - See more at: http://eoinhiggins.com/no-us-names-in-pa…"
This kind of thing is exactly what's gross about Hillary Clinton, forsooth. This and the stuff with Kissinger and all her bullshit about resolve before our enemies and Christmas in the Kremlin and other bullshit borrowed from John McCain.

But I think its a little far fetched to expect this to have any impact on the race. The fact that her supporters know about this stuff but refuse to care about it is what exasperates Sanders supporters.
Even odds that Chelsea Clinton is on that list.
Is there any connection between goods and services covered by the Panama… and financial shenanigans covered by the Panama Papers reveal? Without that connection, you don't have a story, you just have a hazy, lazy smear: a conflation of two stories linked by the common occurrence of one word.

Is there a smoking gun? Is there even an exploding cigar?

Error: the Panama trade agreement did not include Colombia and South Korea. Separate bilateral trade agreements with these separate nations were approved in the same session of Congress.
@4: The Obama administration was warned by financial experts that the Panama trade deal would make it much easier to launder money through Panama and use the country as a tax haven. This is proven by numerous emails and correspondences.

This information is extremely easy to find, but only if you actually try to look, instead of just declaring it bullshit because it makes Clinton look bad.
@ 2,

They LUUUUUV Clinton's open corruption. She doesn't even have to bother hiding her Wall Street zillion$ and foreign government bribe$. "It's what they offerred!" Trade deals that cause mass poverty to enrich the 1% oligarchs show that she gets stuff done and make her even more popular!

If you're opposed to her installing at the Treasury and Justice Department the same Goldmine Sacks and Chittigroup sadistic psychopaths who sacked the eCONomy and will crank up the corruption to a level that makes Brazil look like a Monopoly game, then you're a filthy, radical leftist--or even worse--a BernieBro*.

*Especially if you're a woman! You can't oppose corporate swindles, cronyism, and corruption--that's just your own internalized misogyny talking.
@5 -- I haven't declared it bullshit (like so many accusations against Clinton). I've just asked "Where's the beef?".

"extremely easy to find"? "proven by numerous emails"? Please specify.

Did the Panama TPA (and the accompanying weak-sauce Panama TIEA) open any doors that weren't already open, and did anybody walk through those doors that couldn't have walked through without them?
Tinfoil hat time: Perhaps Iceland was included before the rest of the West because it had the temerity to jail bankers for the 2008/2009 crisis?

Back in reality: I'm guessing we've only seen the opening act and the main show will start soon.
My mind keeps misreading it as the Pajama Papers.
Don't know about the reason for Iceland's inclusion, but the PM ran on reform but turned out to be as corrupt as all git out. Here's a good article I found:

Interesting discovery of today: US corporate criminals don't like to use a money laundering outfit whose first language isn't English. Who knew they were raging bigots as well? That's why so few Americans are implicated. Still, this is the largest leak ever in the history of the world, and apparently there is more to come.

@1, You forgot one little key detail: Clinton has been the beneficiary of outlandish speaking fees from the *very same corporations that are implicated* after she lobbied for the agreement to be approved. And how much did Sanders get? $0. So they're both "concerned," but one gets millions in kickback money and one doesn't. Yeah, no difference there, none at all.
90 percent of the "tax haven" tax fraud is in British possessions.

This is just the start.
There is 2.6 terabytes of data spanning 40+ years but all of it is encrypted.
@7: Try using this new thing called "Google." It is not my job to educate you as you pretend to be a helpless boob so you can keep denying reality.
2.6 terabytes of data spanning 40+ years but all of it is encrypted.
@11 setting aside the ad hominem attacks on Secretary Clinton's character - let's look at the practical effects of her actions compared to Senator Sanders'. Her actions, i.e. supporting the Panama trade deal, helped ensure that Panama and the U.S. entered into a treaty that made it less likely that Panama would be used as a tax haven by U.S. citizens (because the treaty allows the U.S. government to track the ownership of shell corporations). Senator Sanders opposed the treaty. Had his position carried the day, the U.S. would not have entered into the treaty, and it would have been easier for U.S. citizens to continue to use Panama as a tax haven. Clearly, Secretary Clinton and President Obama took the right approach re this treaty.