Ronan Farrow Daily | April 21, 2014
>>> about the power but perils of money and politics of the one presidential front-runner is living out the very perils with front page new york times scrutiny of his finances, that is former florida governor jeb bush who is still a golden boy in the eyes of money. listen to cardinal timothy dolan weighing in.
>> would you like to see him run for president?
>> i sure think he would bring something, yeah, he would be good.
>> anybody else you would like to see run for president?
>> pope francis.
>> "the times" and others are putting a microscope on bush's rush to raise money with an estimated net worth of $1.3 million. with that paper writing his efforts to capitalize on his resume and reputation have thrust him into situations that may prove challenging to explain. according to the times, he became heavily involved with consulting the failed wall street bank lehman brothers and failed manufacturer called innovida and swisher hygiene. are these bad investments that could happen to anyone or is the public starting to blanche at this big money entanglement. joining me is mark halperin and robert costa , national political reporter at the " washington post ." thank you both for joining. there's all of this scrutiny on the finances of someone like jeb bush . do you think that's something the public actually cares enough about to have a lasting political impact? it seems we elect a lot of people with shady financial entangleme entanglements.
>> he does want to make a lot of money and one of the reasons he didn't run in 2008 he built up this big financial empire and when he was governor of florida he missed out on the big real estate bubble in florida and wants to provide for his family. it's clear if he does run, people from the left and right will go after him for this kind of stuff. he's vulnerable politically and maybe on some of this stuff but the bigger complication is that jeb bush has some a.m. biflance about running. you ask people to give up their financial lives to join your campaign and disentangle yourself from a complicated portfolio, i'm not sure they won't be barriers, do i want to spend time traveling around iowa and new hampshire after i built this empire.
>> one of the individuals is his son, part of that professional empire he built. there's a lot at stake for him. robert, there's no indication that jeb bush knew about these instances of financial mismanagement and not criminal activity at issue. at one point the article notes jeb bush sat on six different boards which is twice what they recommend to awe allow enough time to scrutinize the company you're a part of. do you think that's negligent or at least irresponsible?
>> i think sitting on six different boards is going to present a question for governor bush should he run. another interesting aspect of that article was his work for lehman brothers during the financial collapse and barclay's bank. there's a new element in the republican party , especially on the right, there's a skepticism and an tag nix towards crony capitalism cozy with big business . since he has not been on a ballot since 2002 when he won re-election in florida, if he wades back into the political fray, he's going to get tagged by a lot of his critics on the right as someone who is too cozy for business and they can use this article as evidence.
>> another interesting investment is quite successful financially but politically dif divisive, tenet, medical, a hospital that endorses obamacare and aggressive in signing people up for the insurance program. do you think that's something that could cost him with republicans?
>> i don't mean to minimize all of the things, i don't think they are political mine fields , this one is too. as he explains it, he's on a board where he doesn't necessarily agree with the company that supported the affordable care act , doesn't mean he doesn't want to serve on the board. i think boards on general are targets for people on the left and right and all i'm saying, i think he can handle this stuff. i don't think this is in any way what we know about him now disqualifying, everybody has stuff in their backgrounds that will be challenged and jeb bush has proven he's adept at handling this in general.
>> the point made in the context of "times" article, he's a guy who can separate prag ma tix and his own ideology. so maybe something that's positive. mark, speaking of money and politics, there's all of this news about napster founder sean parker get into the political game in a bipartisan way. do you think contributions on both sides of the aisle, someone who never donated to republicans before and obviously on a scale where it's unusual to see bipartisan giving. do you think he's part of a generation to younger donors more open to giving to both sides?
>> that's the case particularly, those who want to see there be less partisanship, some issues like immigration and related to technology and education where there have been bipartisan coalition, you do see that amongst younger voters particularly ones you haven't been part of finance boards for years. let's see if he follows through with money that people are talking about.
>> and robert costa , when you look at this bipartisan donating from someone like sean parker , he's meeting with rand paul, he's donated to marco rubio , how much do you think it could ag agitate democrats?
>> you've seen them double their donations to president obama , 8 million to obama and 4 million to romney. they have to close that dpap. you've seen paul try to reach out to silicon valley , gone to google and facebook met with bill gates . this could be a rich place to mine for donations should he run and republicans may take cues from him.
>> do you think this new generation of donors is more issue based and more party based? that seems to be the logic under lying parker's --
>> a lot of them are but a they want to play by the old rules and you see younger people from the valley giving to politicians and demanding access and not necessarily giving for al truistic purposes, in general, not to be overly broad, they are more issue oriented and do find that giving money cannot only appeal on specific issues but change the process in a way they would like to see less partisan and attention to their issues.
>> it does seem over the weekend the times is covering the positive element of younger philanthropists and courted these and held an event at the white house , where they are bringing people in who have access to huge fortunes and aren't typical players in the partisan donor scene. we'll see if that continues to evolve in that direction. stick around, our panel will stay as we ask, is the president's latest move on the keystone pipeline slick or just greasy? it's our heroes and zeros