My antenna suddenly shot up when I got to the bottom of yet another otherwise innocuous, gossip-filled Stratfor email and saw Stratfor VP Fred Burton claiming that a billionaire Obama fundraiser had accused the President of “weakness and wimpiness” in 2009, and that they would probably sit out the 2012 election:
From: Fred Burton [mailto:burton@stratfor.com]
Sent: Friday, November 06, 2009 8:01 AM
To: ‘Secure List’
Subject: Insight – China/Tibet/Obama
From a billionaire Democratic fundraiser –The billionaire (who also funds ACORN) is greatly disappointed over Obama’s “weakness and wimpyness” towards China (“Fred, they only understand strength”) and Obama’s failure to meet with the Dhali Lama. The fundraiser stated he/she was personally disappointed (“betrayed”) for helping Obama get into The White House and does not intend to support Obama next election, absent a drastic turn-around.
Okay, so the “billionaire Democratic fundraiser” who feels “betrayed” (according to Burton) was a 2008 fundraiser who “helped Obama get into the White House.” Obama had a number of billionaire bundlers, so it doesn’t really narrow it down. They also apparently funded ACORN, but nobody is really taking credit for that these days.
Burton is originally careful to say “he/she” when referring to his source at 8:01 am. But he can’t help himself, and at 9:02 am lets the cat out of the bag:
From: Fred Burton [mailto:burton@stratfor.com]
Sent: Friday, November 06, 2009 9:02 AM
To: ‘Bartholomew Mongoven’; ‘Anya Alfano’
Subject: FW: Insight – China/Tibet/Obama
Mrs. P
“Mrs. P?”
Stratfor’s Bartholomew Mongoven apparently knows Mrs. P too:
From: Bartholomew Mongoven [mailto:mongoven@stratfor.com]
Sent: Friday, November 06, 2009 10:55 AM
To: ‘Fred Burton’; ‘Anya Alfano’
Subject: RE: Insight – China/Tibet/ObamaI remember that she had misgivings about supporting him during the primaries. I assume that rather than support a challenger, she’ll just sit out 2012 (unless Obama finds a spine). I’d love to know if there was any talk about whether she and her set think it’s him or his staff (esp. Emanuel) who is making his presidency so muddled so far.
So Burton doesn’t appear to be the only Stratfor employee that “Mrs. P” dishes to.
There’s only one Obama billionaire bundler who is a woman, and her last name happens to end in “P”: Penny Pritzker, heiress to the Hyatt Hotel fortune. She was called by the Washington Post “the most important person in Barack Obama’s presidential bid – except, perhaps, for Obama himself.” She was his national finance chair in 2008, and did ultimately come back for 2012. She now serves as one of six national co-chairs for the Obama 2012 campaign.
In fact there are only two female billionaires with the last names that begin with “P”: Penny Pritzker and her cousin Linda. Linda is a Tibetan Buddhist, and it’s entirely possible she’d be disappointed with the President’s refusal to meet with the Dahli Lahma and get tough with China over Tibet.
So I looked at Linda’s campaign donation history. She maxed out to John Edwards in 2007, and didn’t donate to the Obama campaign until April of 2008 ($2300). There’s no evidence she was a “fundraiser” for Obama, or that she would have felt “responsible” for putting him in the White House. She put $3.37 million into the 2004 election in support of John Kerry and was one of the biggest 527 donors in 2006 ($2.2 million), but largely seems to have sat out the 2008 Presidential election.
That leaves us with Penny. Why would Stratfor consider Penny a source for intelligence on China?
Well, in September of 2009, Penny was part of a Center for American Progress delegation to China to make recommendations on the future of US-China relations that included CAP CEO and President John Podesta, Former Senator Tom Dashall and Ambassador Wendy Sherman, among others. CAP released a report of their findings on November 12 2009, just after the Stratfor email exchange and just prior to President Obama’s trip to China.
The CAP report did deal with human rights issues in Tibet:
The Chinese officials with whom the CAP delegation spoke maintained that the Dalai Lama and Rebiya Kadeer are not spiritual or cultural leaders, but political figures whose campaigns threaten the territorial integrity of the entire country.
While the CAP delegation disagreed with that assessment, they stopped short of recommending that the President meet with the Dahli Lama. Instead, the report concludes:
The United States should not let human rights define the relationship, but it must ensure that human rights and the values and beliefs that have come to define the United States are never left off the table.
CAP is pretty much an arm of the White House, so I don’t imagine anyone thinks this report didn’t have the Obama seal of approval. If someone were committed to the idea of Obama meeting with the Dahli Lama and prioritizing Tibetan human rights, they might well think Obama was being “wimpy” with such a mushy statement.
Or worse. By 3:58 Fred Burton is really going for the gold, and fires off another email in response to Mongoven:
From: Fred Burton [mailto:burton@stratfor.com]
Sent: Friday, November 06, 2009 3:58 PM
To: ‘Bartholomew Mongoven’; ‘Anya Alfano’
Subject: RE: Insight – China/Tibet/ObamaShe blames Obama and Biden. I dropped Emanuel into the soup and she said that he would be added to her list. She believes Biden is weasel and Obama is a pussy. I want her to fund my bid for Congress. Yes, I can be bought.
O-kay. I have nothing to say about that.
Mongoven goes on to state that he doesn’t categorize Mrs. P as a typical liberal environmental extremist: ”I think Mrs. P is far closer to a D.C. view of things. The liberal factions in DC think Obama is being a pussy. They don’t want a climate deal that kills the US economy and gives everything to the Chinese, but they want someone to stand up to the Chinese and say this is the way it’s going to be.’”
But could there be another reason why Penny Pritzker would be thinking Obama was…er, “wimpy” in 2009?
Well, remember in 2008 that the White House put up a trial balloon about nominating her for Commerce Secretary, a job she sought. The right predictably attacked Obama for “cronyism” and Pritzker publicly took herself out of the running, but nobody really believed it was due to her lack of nerve in the situation. Obama clearly did not want to take the heat that nominating her would bring, and after having raised bucketloads of money for him, she was probably rightfully sore.
What I find most interesting about the entire exchange though is that if indeed Burton’s source is Penny Pritzker, she’s a White House insider who has just been on a junket to China with other White House insiders, in preparation for the President’s trip, and is probably privy to all kinds of intelligence that would be valuable to Stratfor’s corporate clients about where US-China policy is headed. But these “intelligence analysts” are consumed with petty domestic political gossip that has exactly zero value, because again, if it is Penny Pritzker they were discussing, she ultimately did re-up for Obama’s 2012 campaign.
After reading through the Stratfor emails for the past five days, I still have to wonder exactly why companies like Coka Cola and Duke Energy were paying $20,000 a year to these guys for what basically amounts to unreliable gossip and news aggregation.
Other posts on the identity of Stratfor’s “sources”:





48 Comments

Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL Action
Why would Mrs. P be Pritzker? She’s virulent anti-union. So she wouldn’t have much of a problem there. Is she otherwise a big DFH? Is there something I missed? But you are right. What exactly are companies buying but garbage?
Did I miss something in the emails about unions? I don’t find it.
And I’m totally willing to entertain the notion that there’s another person being discussed. Can you point me to the list of female billionaire fundraisers for the Obama 2008 campaign whose last names start with “P”? Or don’t start with “P” for that matter.
O is anti-union. Perhaps not rabidly enough for Mrs. P. Gotta pretend to placate the ‘base’ to keep them securely in the veal pen.
BTW, are D.C. cocktail weenies made from ground veal? Inquiring minds…
FWIW, I’m 100% convinced Barton was talking about Penny Pritzker. He’s just DYING to be an insider and he can’t wait to get back and spill about his big news. The bulls-eyes he’s drawing around her identity could not be more obvious.
As to whether he’s a reliable narrator or not about the exchange — well, that’s another matter entirely, and I don’t have any way of knowing. But they all seem to discuss her with a familiarity that indicates it’s not the first conversation they’ve had about her.
You make a strong case here for it being Pritzker.
But I’m not clear that she is a source, or the source is a fundraiser who knows her. That is, I am not sure that Pritzker realizes that she is feeding information to Stratfor.
Then I found this at SourceWatch:
The SourceWatch profile of Jack Magoven is fascinating.
Did MBD ever do work for Hyatt?
Paul Street’s first book on O mentioned Penny on pp 14, 15. Here’s the p15 quote
I don’t have any reason to believe she thinks she’s telling something to these goofballs for their stupid reports if that’s what you mean. But if Burton is using what she says as intelligence (which he is), she is by definition one of his “sources.”
Aha, yet another potential case of hearsay. Or maybe even hearsay squared. Who can keep track.
Oh that’s a good one. Phillip Morris on Mongoven Sr.
No, he quotes her as speaking directly to him (Fred):
Again, I don’t say he’s reliable, but he unequivocally says he was talking to the “billionaire” himself, and that they were addressing him by name. There’s no second “fundraiser” implied.
Even if the info purchased online is garbage, perhaps clients were also buying telephone access and face time? There could be stuff that never got in the emails.
Also I disagree with the notion that this is junk.
What if a person / org is looking for funding? Perhaps a political campaign? Perhaps influence inside the WH?
How does one gain the confidence of another? Oftentimes, people will judge others based on their words.
For example, what if someone wanted to ask Mrs. P for funding for a business or a campaign… and let’s say that person met Mrs. P at a casual fundraiser someplace. No doubt it’s possible to attend many fundraisers, including with billionaires… if you’re willing donate.
Then you meet her at the event, get introduced by someone. If you’re a Dem running for Congress… the mutual acquaintance would likely mention you are a Dem running for Congress… and you would likely talk about politics. Would it be hard to bring up Obama?
Mrs. P: “How bout the Presidential campaign?”
Buyer of Stratfor intel: “Well, I’m a Democrat. But to be honest, Obama is a wimp. He should tougher with the Chinese!”
Suddenly Mrs. P sees a “rising star” with “great judgment.” And Mrs. P take a liking to the candidate.
Does she decide to bundle for him?
The same concept would apply to funding for businesses and funding for anything. It could apply to foreign intelligence agencies who are trying to gain the confidence of Mrs. P (and others) in an attempt influence US foreign policy.
Heck, if Russia could do that with ten people in Obama’s inner circle… and somehow plant the seed of a particular idea… and then three or four of those people returned to the WH and made similar comments to Obama… it’s almost certainly to become a part of Obama’s thought process in that part of his foreign policy.
Stratfor’s intelligence can give interested parties insight that could prove invaluable to them. No, there are no guarantees. But if you want to join the MOTU or influence policy, it seems to me that this information could be extremely valuable.
A blast from the past. Not sure if it is helpful but it is an observation of another email or something on the Stratfor subscribers list.
Gotcha.
Granting everything you say, how would you ever KNOW the info would be valuable, as opposed to meaningless stroking, for example.
Really? Wow. Where is that? I’ll have to try and chase it down. If that’s the case, “Mrs. P” may be a client.
Bart Mongoven is now of Keyframe Policy Consulting. In 2010 he was on a program about the oil industry holding forth on sustainability activists as Stratfor. In 2011 he was on the panel at as “Sustainability” conference as Keyframe Policy Consulting.
Try the Wikileaks 2-26 release. The comment came from one of Kevin’s diaries on that date.
Well, it’s intel that simply requires you to roll the dice when you make your initial payment to Stratfor.
But if you do:
1) pay the money;
2) get the intel;
3) meet Mrs. P;
4) drop the bombshell (the unsolicited, “I’m a Dem and Obama’s a wimp!”); and
5) later get significant bundling…
then I think it’s safe to say the intel was damn good.
Same would apply if you got a phone call on Monday from Mrs. P’s office asking for more details on your socially-responsible business venture.
And the intel would be known to be good, if you eventually saw a change in foreign policy… imagine if Iran had access to key WH officials… and kept repeating that the Iranian leadership was rational? Or if another country kept repeating the mantra that the Iranian leadership was irrational? If it eventually seeps into the foreign policy, then you had good intel.
I’m not saying any of this would be easy to do. I’m just saying that determined individuals / orgs could / would use Stratfor’s information to their advantage.
The key is for Stratfor to sell their intel. And that’s based largely on their reputation. As for whether they have a good reputation… who knows at this point? Too much happening for me to figure that out now.
Well, Penny did get the one thing she really wanted out of the Obama first term: no Employee Free Choice Act.
I’m looking. I see the 2-5-07 client list, which has Hyatt International as a client but the contract ended in 2006. These were the interactions in the final month:
Responded to question about hotel security tearline sent on Friday–looking for further information
Sent t brief about bombing making, related to hotels, etc
Sent Kevin security assessment about WEF, asked for feedback about weekly product, sent monitoring information about Thailand
Sent monitoring about Egypt, Spain and Philippines
Talked to Kevin regarding variations in the terror threat between urban and rural areas in Spain and Thailand. Mostly focused on ETA activities and the southern insurgency in Thailand. Also somewhat concerned about Italy and the Philippines. Sent recent terror daily briefs.
Touched base with Kevin again to set up a short phone briefing regarding the two subjects he was interested in last week–Thailand and Spain
Influencing policy would be the most difficult to conclude the ultimate value of the information. But if you have multiple independent sources, it could be confirmed. If you feed info to someone, you hope that the info reaches the POTUS’ ear. And if the POTUS has a meeting with multiple people… and you have a mole sitting in the office with Obama… and s/he hears the words spoken to Obama… then that source may return to you and say “John Doe said to the POTUS ‘do this.’”
Independent confirmation.
Then you see Jim “Mik” announce a few days later that “Iran has hundreds of long-range missiles” aimed at US bases… you just got your message of fearmongering spread across the entire USA.
Just saying that influencing policy would be the most difficult to judge, but not impossible.
StratFor reminds me of the second- and third-level not-terribly-popular but not-completely out-of-it kids in high school who used to run around from one Premier person to another, changing the gossip just enough to get things spun up so there would be fights at the weekend parties. Really worthless tidbits, slanted and stepped-on just enough, passed from one ear to the next.
Amazing that grown-ups and professional businesspeople pay these people for this kind of information.
Okay, I went back through his tweets and I think I found it:
http://wikileaks.org/gifiles/docs/1429763_client-working-list-.html
A “client working list” for 2011 shows that they were doing “protective intelligence” for LINDA Pritzker. Linda is a Hyatt heiress, but she isn’t associated with the company I don’t believe. She’s supposed to be something of a recluse according to some bios.
Frequently wealthy people would pay Stratfor for intelligence on security threats when they travel. Will keep looking to see what she was paying them for.
Dead end. Sorry about that.
I’m betting the apple hasn’t fallen far from that tree.
One of my human hypotheses is that they never emotionally exceed adolescence, at least without a lot of talk therapy.
Got this idea from the following. My 80+ year old mother moved into a very nice apt building for seniors. (Father was senile & in a nursing home down the road.) 99ers were single females, Oners were single males. My mother would go on & on & on on the phone about how her new BFF was ruining her life by chasing after the sole single male.
After about 20 minutes of this, I realized the ‘conversation’ was exactly what the girls talked about when they were 13. I exclude myself from girls only bc I thought it was just as stupid when I was 13 as when my mother was 80+ and I was 50+.
Aside from everything else, I’m not surprised that the Obama administration doesn’t want these in the public – discussing his lack of spine from his own donors. Makes me smile.
Thanks everyone at FDL for this and for Jane:) Thank You.
O has plenty of spine in defending his donors. We just don’t see it. Those emails have yet to be hacked & released.
Rahm’s FU comments to base gives a complete example of what you need to know.
Jeezy-beezy, I thought we lived in the bestest democracy ever. USA!
What do you mean billionaires have more power than me? They only have one vote.
If you disagree, you’re a Lesbian, Communist infidel.
On the other hand, Rush Limbaugh’s face looks like a sweaty pot roast.
Given Obysmal’s new term for female protesters (‘young lady’), I’m sure this individual is ‘Deb of the Year’.
Tru dat. Look no further than his Wall Street donors.
I’m particularly enthralled by the theater of O saying he’s gonna takaway HC tax benies and running agin Wall St. Those backstory emails to the direct contrary are the ones that need to come out.
Common knowledge. Just sayin’.
Great working thread.
Judy Miller’s “Dust Bunnies”
Wereya ever on a thread where I dissed Miller & Blair over WMDs and got a reply from both? Worth the price of retyping.
“Fred, they only understand strength”
Ye gods, who are these people that would make such ignorant, bigoted comments about an entire country of people they are in competition with? I remember Gen. Mark Clark (and many others) making similar dismissive comments about the Vietnamese and their supposed inferior culture, complete disregard for human life, deference only to strength and other concomitant bullshit about the “Oriental mind.” Such nonsense didn’t help then and it won’t help now. These are the ideas of the people in charge.
So Obama is weak and wimpy. It seems that strength is the only thing the likes of Mrs. P understand.
Mrs. P is PO’d that Obama did not stand up to China over the Dalai Lama. It is the Chinese that she is talking about only understanding strength (according to Burton).
And there’s this interesting bit from Mongoven:
You have to look beyond the surface of their criticism to realize that they in no way agree with you.
That’s been left to rot in the hot sun for a few days.
Just to round out the picture.
;-)
Great catch Mz. Hamsher, I think it’s insightful as to the nature of the insider DC Weiner party people and donors . . . they are as bad as Kochs and fund the likes of Breitbarts . . .
They are the 1% and are evil.
Very entertaining too, the diary and the comments.
*G*
Apologies, missed it.
Don’t get me wrong. It’s just that Pritzker sounds more like one of us, according to that Stratfor email, then the corporatist she is. At least that I thought she is.
I get all that!! My point is that the “Mrs. P” sounds more like one of us in what she said to the Stratfor clowns. Would Penny Pritzker be calling Rahmbo a jackass? I don’t think so, since Rahmbo is her type(meaning corporate stooge).
“unreliable gossip and news aggregation.”
yep – spot on observation.
And corporations paying $20,000 for “subscription/special reports” get little more than the individual subscriber gets for their $139 annual payment for the subscription. I always thought the Pentagon’s overnight news aggregation that has that limited circulation of about 100,000 – and is free – is a better source, albeit they label their source for each report – like CBS NEWS, etc. – so you don’t feel that special when reading it.
They are also just planted lies – as in the 2003 invasion progress reports they put out, and in their analysis before the war given to those in Congress that it would be 90 days and out with costs paid for by stealing a bit of oil with folks expected to cheer us the minute we showed up.
Sorry to be pedantic, but his title is spelled “Dalai Lama” and former majority leader is Daschle. It just irks me to no end that a simple name like “Dalai” is mispelled in so many ways, adding insult injury of Chinese occupation of his former country.
I was going to say the same thing; that her sentiments would fit quite nicely here in the comments section.
And so would her money I thought, until I got further into the post and read that she had decided to steer her $millions to propping up a spineless Obama’s second term run afterall.
OT: has anyone else noticed that the feet in the right half of the photo (to the main post) stay ordered and in line, while the toes of the persons in the left half of the photo are all over the place? some ‘crossing the line.’