The Democratic Party Senator from California, Dianne Feinstein played host to Senators Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Hussein Obama at her home. It was the prelude to Clinton’s conceding (oops, suspending), her Democratic Party’s nomination, Saturday June 7th for President. It reminded me of how Olympians pass the torch to the site of the competitive games. Coming in first, gets for the winner a gold medal. They talked about how this gold would be assured. To keep from prying ears, they spoke in private for an hour. I imagine Hillary Clinton’s special talents, in acquiring gold, would be beneficial to Obama’s election efforts.

First, Hillary must attend the matter of recouping 30 million dollars of her personal cash she claims was spent in her efforts. This amount is well documented in disciplined accounting practice, as I am sure her accounting in cattle futures was managed. Having 30 million to spend did not consume her personal fortune, as I am sure proceeds from book writing and other financial sources more than adequately form her net worth.

In my reverie I see how grifting along in the right circles of public service can benefit the student of government to achieve wealth far and above gratified personal service to humanity. Many US Citizen multimillionaires have accumulated personal fortunes solely through privileged government employment affiliation. Indeed direct tax payer funded association generates direct profit through a politician’s privileged knowledge, and passing of legislation. Commercial beneficiaries of tax-distribution always become grateful donators. If this private knowledge were a parallel Department of Justice concern as with the Securities and Exchange Commission, in adjudicating commercial public market schemes, someone would go to jail. Ask Martha Stewart.

I am suggesting the private meeting with Obama assured that Hillary Clinton’s primary concern was to manage repayment of the mystical 30 million before any of her collecting effort was to benefit Obama. I would say that it was good business sense; wouldn’t you? Which brings me to a perception of the Clinton duo’s pursuit of personal wealth above all other service to the nation; as their true-life ambition? The level of Grifting, from local State political privilege donation- management to national financial collection, open to any source was and is stunning. Actually paying to drink coffee at the Clinton Whitehouse was not too low a source in the world of grifting. Do not disconnect from any old successful grifting achievements, as this is an added trickle into the account, and a rule to which all frugal grifters must adhere.

One can imagine the political donations from M. Larry Lawrence, later to become Bill Clinton’s Ambassador to Switzerland as a convenient host on visits to the banking state. Visits that have clearance; no-search privilege of “Diplomatic Pouch,” when traveling, gives a more comfortable traveling experience to visit Swiss orphans or deposit-accounts. Strange that this Ambassador, dying in service, was later exhumed from Arlington Cemetery due to fraudulent qualifications for that honor. Picking the right guy for a job can pay off. Clinton Whitehouse attorney, Vincent Foster, did his job well and it paid off while still on the job..

Perhaps the Senators’ private talk included Hillary’s Vice Presidential dreams to better manage future accounting practices with a little tutoring for Obama from the Master Grifters. Introductions to moguls and avenues of cash from both their mutual Hollywood admiring donors would be useful. Skimming political donations into private accounts can have a mutual advantage to both the donor and the receiver in any scene when both benefit. The accounting pipeline visibility has little or no policing. It could be just one of many surreptitious activities within the Mutual Blackmail Society. Why, one does not even have to win an election to reap the flow of political donation into creative accounts. Speaking of creative accounts for political celebrities, we must not assume they are composed from domestic sources, but are fruited with foreign funds as well. The fact that foreign donors buying influence through transfer of cash to un-named accounts does not need normal political donation viewing. Flat out, bribery is the evidentiary accounting practice and responsibility of the briber. It is the insurance ticket and membership into the MBS. The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia can well afford such secure donation evidence; just to mention a possibility.