Washington Babylon — May 29, 2007, 11:21 am

Black Helped Frum Stay in the Black

I recently obtained financial records that showed that in late 2000 David Frum, the former speechwriter for President Bush, received monthly payments of $16,667 from Conrad Black’s Hollinger International. Black, the media magnate, is currently on trial for fraud and racketeering in Chicago. Prosecutors allege he used Hollinger as his personal “piggy bank”; he and three co-defendants are charged with stealing $60 million from the company . A 2004 report by Richard Bredeen, done at the request of Hollinger’s board, said Black displayed “no need to distinguish between what belonged to the company and what belonged to the Blacks.”

In the overall scheme of things the combined sums were relatively small, but I was curious for a number of reasons. First, it wasn’t clear what Frum did for the payments. Second, Frum has publicly defended Black against charges that he misused Hollinger money and yet has never, as far as I can tell, acknowledged that he received money from Hollinger. Third, Black is accused of misspending shareholder money and any payments from Hollinger to Frum, a long-time friend of Black’s, should only have been made for sound professional reasons.

So yesterday I sent Frum an e-mail to ask about the money. He replied online, writing that the payments—which were made between September and December of 2000, and were halted when Frum went to work for the administration—were “to help develop a new Internet publication for Hollinger.” (He didn’t say whether this publication ever came to fruition.)

“I have repeatedly referred in this space and elsewhere,” wrote Frum, “to my long professional association with Conrad Black.” He wrote that the consulting fees he charged Hollinger “were in line with what I have charged other clients for similar work,” and that disclosures “can easily become silly and pedantic. Do I really have to mention that I used to write speeches for George W. Bush every time I write about him?

I’m emphatically not suggesting Frum did anything wrong in taking money from Hollinger, but I do think he should have disclosed the payments. No, he doesn’t need to mention that he was a former Bush speechwriter every time he writes about the president because his work for Bush is common knowledge (and only a Wikipedia search away). But when Frum defends Black on charges that he misspent Hollinger money, I believe he should acknowledge that he was a recipient of Hollinger largesse to the tune of $16,667 a month. That’s a relevant fact beyond any professional or personal relationship the two men had, particularly in the context of Frum’s commentary on the ongoing trial.

The payments are also noteworthy because they are typical of the way that Black spent shareholder money on whatever suited his fancy. I asked a former Hollinger employee about Frum’s explanation of the payments. “If there was a good idea for an Internet publication that would make money, there’s no issue,” she replied. “The trouble for all of us was there were no business plans for any of these ‘internet investments.’ The accountants would ask us for contracts, paperwork, backup, prospectuses, the things you would have in hand before you send large sums of money to someone. These business niceties never existed. So, yes, it could have been a legitimate business consulting fee, though the business was never described or explained to those doing the funding, in the office, or to the shareholders whose money it was.”

Share
Single Page

More from Ken Silverstein:

From the June 2012 issue

The government’s man

How to read the r??©sum??© of a terrorist expert

Washington Babylon September 29, 2010, 11:37 am

Signing Out

Get access to 163 years of
Harper’s for only $19.97

United States Canada

CATEGORIES

THE CURRENT ISSUE

June 2013

How to Make Your Own AR-15

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

Long Division

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

The Separating Sickness

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

view Table Content

FEATURED ON HARPERS.ORG

[Editor's Note]
Why the AR-15 rifle is here to stay,
the conspiracy theories of Room 237,
and more

Lucas Mann on hope and change in a minor-league-baseball city

[Perspective]
The firearm as emblem of personal sovereignty
“Let’s review our recent national paroxysm about guns, shall we?”
Illustration by Jeremy Traum
[Report]
How to Make Your Own AR-15

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

“Even if federal gun-control advocates got everything they wanted, they couldn’t prevent America’s most popular rifle from being made, sold, and used. Understanding why this is true requires an examination of how the firearm is made.”
Illustration by Jeremy Traum
[Publisher's Note]
In Boston, An Exercise in Intimidation

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

In the aftermath of the Boston Marathon bombing, why did so few people protest the decision to lock down parts of the city?
Photo by Sally Vargas/ Talk Radio News Service
[Six Questions]
Class A: Baseball in the Middle of Everywhere

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

Lucas Mann on hope and change in a minor-league-baseball city
“This one constant in the face of job loss, population loss — all of this erratic change — infused the stands with a sense of continual possibility.”

Minimum number of baboons forced to smoke crack in a 1989 study testing the efficacy of cigarettes as a drug delivery device:

3

A reduction in distrust toward atheists was documented among pious Canadians who are reminded of the Vancouver police.

A Missouri cinema apologized for hiring an actor dressed in body armor and carrying a fake rifle to appear at a screening of Iron Man 3.

Subscribe to the Weekly Review newsletter. Don’t worry, we won’t sell your email address!

HARPER’S FINEST

The Water of My Land

By (Photographer)

Winner of the 2012 Olivier Rebbot Award for best photographic reporting from abroad in magazines or books

Subscribe Today