INQUISITR.COM / News & Politics

Bernie Sanders, Jill Stein Oppose DAPL, So Where Is Hillary Clinton?

By Reno Berkeley
Published on: 07:06 PST, Sep 7, 2016

They say silence is worth its weight in gold, or in this case, crude oil. Members of various social media networks are loudly criticizing Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton for her silence concerning the Dakota Access Pipeline, or Bakken Pipeline, as it’s also known.

Clinton’s former rival, Senator Bernie Sanders, has come out in strong opposition against the DAPL, calling it dangerous. Green Party candidate Dr. Jill Stein has joined the protesters in North Dakota, staying true to her activist roots.

So, where, everyone wants to know, is Hillary Clinton? Why has she remained silent in the face of one of the most contentious environmental protests in recent years?

Actress and Bernie Sanders supporter Susan Sarandon has been one of Clinton’s most vocal critics, and the DAPL situation is no different. On September 6, Sarandon tweeted a section from Clinton’s website where she claims that she will support Native Americans.

“And Hillary will continue to stand for Tribal sovereignty and in support of Tribal resources and sacred sites.”

Although some Clinton supporters have criticized Sarandon for questioning where their candidate’s loyalty lies, Sarandon has a point. No one but Clinton can say for sure why she has not come out in opposition to the DAPL, but one can deduce the reason for her silence by looking at her financials.

One of Clinton’s biggest contributors through SuperPACs is Goldman Sachs. Democracy Now has revealed that one of the DAPL’s major investors is — drumroll please — Goldman Sachs. During a show on September 6, Amy Goodman discussed this, and named several other DAPL investors.

“A new investigation has revealed more than two dozen major banks and financial institutions are helping finance the Dakota Access pipeline, the investigation published by the research outlet LittleSis. It details how Bank of America, HSBC, UBS, Goldman Sachs, Wells Fargo, JPMorgan Chase and other financial institutions have, combined, extended a $3.75 billion credit line to Energy Transfer Partners, the parent company of Dakota Access.”

This means that each of these banks wants a return on their investment, and they will not go quietly into the night. The DAPL construction began in May 2016, but once it hit North Dakota’s Standing Rock Sioux Tribal nation, the pipeline met with fierce resistance.

Hillary Clinton will not likely not oppose the DAPL, or will skirt the issue when confronted. Her running mate, Tim Kaine, has already done so, telling 350 Action that he needs “more information” before he can decide whether to side with indigenous leaders or with the DAPL.

Simon Moya-Smith, cultural editor of Indian Country Today and a member of the Oglala Lakota Nation, points out that the DAPL is a “clear violation of the Treaty of Fort Laramie,” which was signed in 1868 between the United States government and several Indian nations and tribes.

“That document guarantees land, sovereignty, and hunting rights, and promises that the territory will be closed to all whites.”

Moya-Smith has also questioned whether Clinton will oppose the DAPL and references her official stand on Native American issues where she promises to support indigenous peoples’ rights as sovereign.

It is unlikely that Clinton will voice opposition against the DAPL, and if she does, it will be weak. Lee Fang and Steve Horn pointed out her hypocrisy in May regarding major polluters China and India. In the report, they reference a Clinton ad promising to protect New Yorkers from hydraulic fracturing, also known as fracking, ignoring the fact that during her time as Secretary of State she was an avid proponent of fracking in other nations around the world, including Poland. While fracking is different than transporting crude oil, it illustrates a pattern of Clinton’s, in which she appears to favor the fossil fuel industry.

On September 6, the Wall Street Journal reported that Clinton had raised more money from people in the natural gas and oil industries than Donald Trump.

“Individuals who work for oil and natural-gas companies donated $149,000 to Mr. Trump’s GOP campaign through July 30 … compared with $525,000 to Mrs. Clinton.”

“The industry’s executives and employees have also donated $470,000 to a fundraising account Mr. Trump established … compared with $650,000 to a similar account Mrs. Clinton set up with Democrats.”

Pipelines, whether they are underground or above ground, are notorious for their leaks. As the Inquisitr reported previously, between 1996 and 2015, nearly 12,000 pipeline incidents occurred with a total cost of nearly $6.9 billion. In 2015 alone, the United States experienced 708 pipeline incidents with 12 deaths, 49 injuries, and nearly $340 million in damages.

Energy Transfer Partners, the main builder of the DAPL, knows that such pipelines are not immune to leaks, yet the company’s website claims they are safer than train transport. While the number of spills is lower with pipelines, the damage wreaked by such disasters is much worse. To compound this, the DAPL is set to be buried a mere three feet underground, and its own website states that the pipeline will run only 60 inches below waterways, such as the Missouri River.

When an existing leg of the Keystone pipeline leaked earlier this year, then-candidate Senator Bernie Sanders was also critical of it. Another the Inquisitr report states that Sanders vowed to fight to protect the lands of Native Americans across the country, and while he is no longer running for president, his outspoken recriminations against the Keystone and DAPL have not gone unnoticed by supporters.

Now that social media mavens have called Clinton out for her silence regarding the fight against the DAPL, it will be interesting to see whether she takes a stand on this issue and what it will be.

[Photo by Andrew Harnik/AP Images]

Share this article: Bernie Sanders, Jill Stein Oppose DAPL, So Where Is Hillary Clinton?
More from Inquisitr