Thursday's Wall Street Journal revealed that former Wonderboy autu czar has been ensnared in the New York State pension fund 'pay to play' scandal.
The article reported,
"Under a deal being negotiated, Mr. Rattner would pay a $6 million and agree to a two-year ban from the securities industry, a person familiar with the matter said."
The Journal piece also noted that Rattner had been involved in earlier discussions with the SEC regarding a possible three year ban for the same activities.
How is that ultra-clean Wonderboy administration working out so far? The guy he taps to untangle the government's role in the auto sector seems to have been involved in bribing state officials in order to manage pension fund money. If not, why the agreement to the fine and ban?
You can't make this stuff up.
Showing posts with label Ethics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Ethics. Show all posts
Monday, October 18, 2010
Monday, August 2, 2010
Alexi Giannoulias' Senate Race Woes In Illinois
A Wall Street Journal editorial two Fridays ago by Kim Strassel wonderfully detailed the woes of Illinois Democrat Senatorial candidate Alexi Giannoulias.
Alexi is running for Wonderboy's old Senate seat, and the First Rookie is campaigning for the youngster.
Trouble is, the rest of the Illinois Democrats aren't all that happy about this. Because of that bank thing.
You know, the problem with Alexi's family bank being shuttered by the feds. And Alexi being chief loan officer when the family's Broadway Bank,
"loaned millions to Michael "Jaws" Giorango, a convicted bookmaker, as well as other crime figures."
Apparently, loaning money to organized crime figure is okay as post-partisan politics for Wonderboy.
Alexi also mismanaged the state's college savings program as Treasurer.
My favorite aspect of all of this is CNBC's MIA behavior.
You see, for many months, beginning, I believe, back in the fall of '09, Alexi was the darling of CNBC's morning Squawk Box program. He would smile and preen as one of the country's youngest State Treasurers, crow about his innovative moves, and wink about running for the Senate. He was probably given this privilege at least monthly for several months running.
Suddenly, no more Alexi. I'm guessing these toxic revelations about his past, and perhaps the failing college savings program, soured the producers on the up-and-coming Wonderboy acolyte.
But, being good liberal media members, did CNBC turn around and investigate their former favorite State Treasurer?
Of course not! That would be impugning a hopeful Democratic Senate candidate, as well as themselves.
Far better to just go quiet and hope nobody noticed.
According to Strassel, downstate Republican Senate candidate Mark Kirk has raised $2.3MM to Alexi's reported $900K.
Maybe they're noticing all this in Illinois, after all.
Alexi is running for Wonderboy's old Senate seat, and the First Rookie is campaigning for the youngster.
Trouble is, the rest of the Illinois Democrats aren't all that happy about this. Because of that bank thing.
You know, the problem with Alexi's family bank being shuttered by the feds. And Alexi being chief loan officer when the family's Broadway Bank,
"loaned millions to Michael "Jaws" Giorango, a convicted bookmaker, as well as other crime figures."
Apparently, loaning money to organized crime figure is okay as post-partisan politics for Wonderboy.
Alexi also mismanaged the state's college savings program as Treasurer.
My favorite aspect of all of this is CNBC's MIA behavior.
You see, for many months, beginning, I believe, back in the fall of '09, Alexi was the darling of CNBC's morning Squawk Box program. He would smile and preen as one of the country's youngest State Treasurers, crow about his innovative moves, and wink about running for the Senate. He was probably given this privilege at least monthly for several months running.
Suddenly, no more Alexi. I'm guessing these toxic revelations about his past, and perhaps the failing college savings program, soured the producers on the up-and-coming Wonderboy acolyte.
But, being good liberal media members, did CNBC turn around and investigate their former favorite State Treasurer?
Of course not! That would be impugning a hopeful Democratic Senate candidate, as well as themselves.
Far better to just go quiet and hope nobody noticed.
According to Strassel, downstate Republican Senate candidate Mark Kirk has raised $2.3MM to Alexi's reported $900K.
Maybe they're noticing all this in Illinois, after all.
Friday, July 30, 2010
Charlie Rangel Assailed By Luke Russert
Last week, or thereabouts, ethically-challenged New York Democratic House power Charlie Rangel was assailed by MSNBC's Luke Russert. Here's the video.
I never liked Tim Russert. He was a liberal media lapdog. But his kid has potential. Note Rangel hoping to diss Luke Russert by alleging smarmy motives. I guess Charlie was projecting, eh?
Still, it's a priceless piece of raw evidence illustrating the contempt for and low regard in which Rangel holds voters, whom he allegedly serves. Basically ignoring media questions, impugning only base motives to what Jefferson held as a more valuable, necessary service than government- a free press' inquiry into government's actions.
Here's just one of many articles on Rangel's situation which you can find by Googling the topic 'Charlie Rangel ethics.'
What I find sad, yet predictable, is Rangel's continued insistence that his stark violations of tax law be seen as 'honest mistakes' or 'oversights.'
There's the abuse of a rent-controlled apartment as an office. The failure to pay taxes on the Dominican vacation home.
For these, Rangels pleads confusion and inadvertent, unintended non-payment of taxes, for which he should be forgiven and not penalized.
What Rangel fails to realize, as have his party's Congressional leaders for the several years that this travesty has been unfolding, is that this attitude infuriates voters everywhere.
Try Charlie's defense for yourself with the IRS, and you, or I, would be in jail. Charlie, on the other hand, is brazenly showing the contempt that so many in Congress feel for the rest of us.
They are different. They deserve exemption and blanket pardons for violations of the law.
First Geithner. Then Daschell. Now Rangel. They all plead 'honest mistakes.'
They all should be in jail. Now.
It's also a measure of the cynicism of Congressional Democrats that they now believe merely tossing Rangel to the wolves of public opinion will help them stave off defeat in November.
His transgressions were affordable until the Democrats' poll numbers became to awful. Now, he's got to go, because his sacrifice will, they calculate, have value.
Forget right and wrong. Forget being answerable to the law, like everyone else. Congressional members seem to have rejected these concepts long ago.
Thus the years-long fumbling by the so-called House Ethics Committee over Rangel's obvious law-breaking.
I never liked Tim Russert. He was a liberal media lapdog. But his kid has potential. Note Rangel hoping to diss Luke Russert by alleging smarmy motives. I guess Charlie was projecting, eh?
Still, it's a priceless piece of raw evidence illustrating the contempt for and low regard in which Rangel holds voters, whom he allegedly serves. Basically ignoring media questions, impugning only base motives to what Jefferson held as a more valuable, necessary service than government- a free press' inquiry into government's actions.
Here's just one of many articles on Rangel's situation which you can find by Googling the topic 'Charlie Rangel ethics.'
What I find sad, yet predictable, is Rangel's continued insistence that his stark violations of tax law be seen as 'honest mistakes' or 'oversights.'
There's the abuse of a rent-controlled apartment as an office. The failure to pay taxes on the Dominican vacation home.
For these, Rangels pleads confusion and inadvertent, unintended non-payment of taxes, for which he should be forgiven and not penalized.
What Rangel fails to realize, as have his party's Congressional leaders for the several years that this travesty has been unfolding, is that this attitude infuriates voters everywhere.
Try Charlie's defense for yourself with the IRS, and you, or I, would be in jail. Charlie, on the other hand, is brazenly showing the contempt that so many in Congress feel for the rest of us.
They are different. They deserve exemption and blanket pardons for violations of the law.
First Geithner. Then Daschell. Now Rangel. They all plead 'honest mistakes.'
They all should be in jail. Now.
It's also a measure of the cynicism of Congressional Democrats that they now believe merely tossing Rangel to the wolves of public opinion will help them stave off defeat in November.
His transgressions were affordable until the Democrats' poll numbers became to awful. Now, he's got to go, because his sacrifice will, they calculate, have value.
Forget right and wrong. Forget being answerable to the law, like everyone else. Congressional members seem to have rejected these concepts long ago.
Thus the years-long fumbling by the so-called House Ethics Committee over Rangel's obvious law-breaking.
Friday, March 5, 2010
Charlie Rangel Gives Up Chairmanship
Thank heavens for minor miracles. Serially corrupt Congressman (D-NY) Charlie Rangel finally stepped down from his chairmanship of the House Ways & Means Committee.
True, he couched it in terms of a 'temporary leave.' But GOP Minority Leader John Boehner immediately retorted that such terminology appears to be a non-starter. He contended that either one is, or is not, chairman of a committee. There is no 'temporary leave' category.
Republicans had been moving ahead to vote Rangel out, if only to force House Democrats to go on record as supporting the corrupt New Yorker.
Amazingly, Rangel actually admitted, in his press conference announcing his turnabout on resigning, given his steadfast denial of doing so only the prior evening, that he was doing this to avoid harm to fellow Democrats running for re-election.
That's a rare moment of candor and awareness of the public mood among Washington's Democratic mis-leaders these days.
True, he couched it in terms of a 'temporary leave.' But GOP Minority Leader John Boehner immediately retorted that such terminology appears to be a non-starter. He contended that either one is, or is not, chairman of a committee. There is no 'temporary leave' category.
Republicans had been moving ahead to vote Rangel out, if only to force House Democrats to go on record as supporting the corrupt New Yorker.
Amazingly, Rangel actually admitted, in his press conference announcing his turnabout on resigning, given his steadfast denial of doing so only the prior evening, that he was doing this to avoid harm to fellow Democrats running for re-election.
That's a rare moment of candor and awareness of the public mood among Washington's Democratic mis-leaders these days.
Monday, December 7, 2009
Max Baucus' Brand of Ethics
Have you heard the latest news concerning the ethics of Senate Democrats?
Montana Democratic Senator Max Baucus, the driving force behind the Senate's health care bill, hid his romantic relationship with a woman whom he nominated for US attorney in Montana last year.
Baucus, who was separated, but not divorced, had taken up with Melodee Hanes. He subsequently urged her appointment as a US attorney in his home state, without, of course, making clear his personal interest in the matter.
As is now typical with these things, Baucus' office came clean over the weekend, the better to hide the ethical lapse amidst holiday-related stories.
What do these Senators, of either party, think it looks like when they play such obvious favorites in handing out politically plum jobs? Have they so totally lost perspective that they simply believe they can reward friends, donors and lovers with government jobs?
Evidently Max Baucus thinks so.
Do you want a health care bill designed by someone so ethically challenged? Would you now believe anything this guy says about anything, when he hid his behavior in the Melodee Hanes matter for so long?
Montana Democratic Senator Max Baucus, the driving force behind the Senate's health care bill, hid his romantic relationship with a woman whom he nominated for US attorney in Montana last year.
Baucus, who was separated, but not divorced, had taken up with Melodee Hanes. He subsequently urged her appointment as a US attorney in his home state, without, of course, making clear his personal interest in the matter.
As is now typical with these things, Baucus' office came clean over the weekend, the better to hide the ethical lapse amidst holiday-related stories.
What do these Senators, of either party, think it looks like when they play such obvious favorites in handing out politically plum jobs? Have they so totally lost perspective that they simply believe they can reward friends, donors and lovers with government jobs?
Evidently Max Baucus thinks so.
Do you want a health care bill designed by someone so ethically challenged? Would you now believe anything this guy says about anything, when he hid his behavior in the Melodee Hanes matter for so long?
Tuesday, January 16, 2007
San Francisco Nan's Minimum Wage Exemption
The Wall Street Journal ran an editorial yesterday regarding newly-elected House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's exemption of one of her hometown companies, DelMonte, via its StarKist Tuna unit, and its Samoan operations, from her highly-touted minimum wage hiking bill.
There are many more news articles on the topic, such as those found here, here, here, and here. It's not simply a Journal editorial hack job. Many people have noted the ethical lapse by Speaker Nan.
By the way, that last link is really precious. The writer outlines my own thoughts, which are that the Democrats have been starved of effective power for so long (and still are, btw), that they could not wait to begin ramming through the House their version of America, bill by bill.
With a weak plurality in the Senate, and a sitting President of the opposing party, the craigslist poster notes that Nan is simply butting heads with a process that will deny her anything but a reputation for ineffectiveness and naivete.
But, that's for later. For now, we see Nan as the usual House hack she, in fact, is. Anyone in the House long enough to make the 'leadership' team is typically so irretrievably hacked up that s/he can't help her/himself from grabbing for the goodies ASAP.
Welcome to the Speaker's House of Shame, Nan. You got there in record time, baby! I guess women can do something better than men.
There are many more news articles on the topic, such as those found here, here, here, and here. It's not simply a Journal editorial hack job. Many people have noted the ethical lapse by Speaker Nan.
By the way, that last link is really precious. The writer outlines my own thoughts, which are that the Democrats have been starved of effective power for so long (and still are, btw), that they could not wait to begin ramming through the House their version of America, bill by bill.
With a weak plurality in the Senate, and a sitting President of the opposing party, the craigslist poster notes that Nan is simply butting heads with a process that will deny her anything but a reputation for ineffectiveness and naivete.
But, that's for later. For now, we see Nan as the usual House hack she, in fact, is. Anyone in the House long enough to make the 'leadership' team is typically so irretrievably hacked up that s/he can't help her/himself from grabbing for the goodies ASAP.
Welcome to the Speaker's House of Shame, Nan. You got there in record time, baby! I guess women can do something better than men.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
