Showing posts with label Corruption. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Corruption. Show all posts

Sunday, August 05, 2012

Harry Reid is a Crook

There can be no question about it, Harry Reid is a repeat federal offender.

For three years running he has broken the law by, as Senate Majority Leader, personally refusing to pass a budget and personally refusing to allow any budget resolution to reach the Senate floor.

Worse, I heard this morning — from some guy — that Harry made his millions while a humble civil servant from prostitution and gambling.

Then this afternoon I heard from someone else that Harry Reid's friends are deep into organized crime in Nevada.

What about it, is Harry dirty?

Dirty Harry's response

Thursday, December 08, 2011

Barry Corzine's White House

Barack Obama manages the federal government with the same level of skill and judgment that Jon Corzine brought to MF Global.

Monday, November 28, 2011

Barney Frank to Retire!

First reaction: Wow!
Second reaction: It's about time!
Third reaction: Thank goodness.



A very intelligent friend of mine, who spends far too much time with the folks in Washington and therefore should know, says that Barney Frank is easily the most intelligent guy in Congress. That's sad on a number of levels.

Thursday, September 29, 2011

The Good Old Days

Remember when we thought spending $600 for a toilet seat and $400 for a hammer was bad? Sounds absolutely terrific in this day of $24 million for a day job at a relative's solar panel factory.

Let's all hope future history books view the Obama administration as an aberration!

Monday, August 29, 2011

MORE Obama Illegal Aliens?

FIrst, it's Aunt Obama, poor, dirt poor living in government housing, here illegally.

Now it's Uncle Obama, a drunk driving illegal.

What's the man doing, smuggling them in on Air Force One?

Sunday, August 07, 2011

Tim Geithner Plays the Blame Game, Again

During his confirmation process as Secretary of the Treasury, Timothy Geithner famously blamed TurboTax for his errors on his personal tax returns.

Now he's blaming the rating agency for his debt mistakes.

The man will never learn.

Friday, June 17, 2011

Obama Claims Signature Hacked!

First, the national sideshow of Anthony Weiner, who claimed for more than ten days that his Twitter account had been hacked by some mysterious malefactor, perhaps the notorious right wing conspiracy of Hillary's day, intent on either destroying him or playing an innocent prank.

Now, Barack Obama is claiming that his very signature was hacked fifteen years ago to validate a survey which his official spokesman now claims Obama didn't sign. Included in the survey was a question whether then-candidate for state senate Obama favored gay marriage. Statement number 6, on the same page as the signature, says in plain print

I favor legalizing same-sex marriage, and would fight efforts to prohibit such marriages.
His signature is bold and black. The graphic of the signature has been floating around in news stories for nearly 15 years, and now White House communications directors Dan Pfeiffer says it's not Obama's signature on the form.

The gay rights folks are beside themselves, but heck, they're already bought and paid for. I mean, who are they going to turn to, Michelle Bachman?




Give me a break.

Monday, June 06, 2011

Is This A Man Whose Judgement We Should Trust on Anything?

It's official.

According to Anthony Weiner, he has exercised horrible judgement over the past three years or more.



Why on earth should we trust this cad about anything?

He has run roughshod over those who disagree with him, casting aspergions right and left.

He is a baldfaced liar, a slime.

Worse, we – you and I – continue to pay him a salary that puts him in the top 5% of the working population.

The state of the government today is… pitiful.

My sympathies to his new bride, who now understands that he has been doing this through their entire courtship, wedding and marriage.

Wednesday, June 01, 2011

Welcoming Wags Wax Weiner Whacking Wiener

Just when you thought Anthony Weiner couldn't make it wurst, he does.

Notice his very first words:



This guy's way too cool for Congress. He should be on SNL

Monday, May 30, 2011

Why Did Anthony Weiner Lawyer Up?

The question on the minds of millions: Why, when he is the victim of a malicious hack of his Twitter and Facebook accounts, why did representative Anthony Weiner (D-NY) call a lawyer?

Answer 1: Liberals constantly confuse victims with perpetrators, so their first thought is to call a lawyer either way.

Answer 2 : The switchboard at Oscar-Mayer was closed.

Bonus Question: Who do you think is paying for Anthony Weiner's lawyers? 

Certainly not Anthony.

Proof That O'Bama is Irish?

In recent days Mr. Obama spent more time in an Irish pub than visiting the destroyed city of Joplin, Missouri.

Erin go bragh!

Joplin? Meh.

Friday, May 27, 2011

Dominique Strauss-Khan's Best Line

Here the former head of the International Monetary Fund opens with his very best line

"And then, I pop naked out of the bathroom! C'est tre bon, oui?"

Tuesday, May 17, 2011

It's Time to Pull Tim Geithner's Over-Limit Credit Card

Secretary of the Treasury Tim Geithner, the financial genius who admitted he couldn't use TurboTax properly, believes that the solution to a chronic over-limit condition on our national credit card and an admitted inability to pay our debts as they come due is… to raise the limits. I think the Secretary is confusing tactics for winning at blackjack with those needed for spending addiction and political fraud. Mr. Geithner is doubling down, using money borrowed from loan sharks.

Mr. Geithner is playing the old game, now discredited, of mouthing promises that are emptier than the Social Security Trust Fund.

Remember Charles Keating, the man at the center of the Lincoln Savings scandal? He served 4.5 years based on losses of a mere $250 million to 23,000 elderly investors based on shaky securities, and costs to the Resolution Trust and FDIC of only $3 billion.

Pennies. Not even pennies.

How about Bernie Madoff, who built a ponzi scheme of rewarding one generation of investors with the investments of another. To keep the ponzi monster fed ended up costing his victims almost $50 billion spread over a number of years. The losers can draw some comfort, I suppose, that most of the money went to deserving others, people just like themselves. That's the nature of the Ponzi party, rake it from some, give it to others, while the crook(s) at the center rake in the reputational, or political!, benefits of miracle working.

Just as Washington does today, Mr. Madoff  took steps every year to skim off a few dollars to keep himself going, to pay the bills. He fiddled a few more dollars out as necessary to reward particular friends and allies, his supporters, again just like Washington.

Still, $50 billion measured on Mr. Geithner's scale isn't even up to nickels and dimes. Not even a rounding error. Before Mr. Geithner is through, before his boss has completed even a single term, they will have run up more than $6 trillion of new debt.

$6 trillion is 6000 billions of dollars. 120 times larger than Madoff's crime, 2000 times larger than the total cost of the Keating Five.

$6 trillion is a lot of money. It is more than we can repay. It has all been borrowed based on phony numbers and false promises. It has been borrowed from nearly every corner of the world, from billions of people who will never see their investments returned.

Any executive who does the same should end up in jail, serving a sentence in proportion to the size of the fraud and the number of victims. On that scale, Mr. Geithner and his boss, should serve an eternity at hard labor in a hot climate.

It is a crime.

Saturday, May 07, 2011

"I'm From the Federal Government. We're Ordering You To Move"

Imagine a land where the rulers could arbitrarily order you to pick up your family, all your possessions and move to a distant location.

It happened in the Soviet Union in the 1920s and 1930s. It happened in Red China in the 1960s.

Lafe Solomon
And in 2011 it happened in the United States as the Obama administration once again invented a brand new power not found in law or authorized by the Constitution under which we've all agreed to live. Mr. Obama's team of petit despots has ordered The Boeing Company to abandon its newest factory in South Carolina, built at a cost of $1 billion, turn its back on the thousand workers already hired and the two thousand new recruits identified to fill future jobs, and instead build or expand its assembly lines and workforce in only and specifically in Washington.

The civil complaint by the National Labor Relations Board accuses Boeing of "interfering with, restraining, and coercing employees" by opening an expansion plant to manufacture increased numbers of new aircraft in right-to-work South Carolina rather than in the heavily unionized Puget Sound region. The NLRB has requested an order requiring Boeing to build and operate its expansion line for the manufacture of 787 aircraft in Washington State using unionized labor from the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers.

THE NLRB official behind this tyrannical move is its acting general counsel, Lafe Solomon, appointed by Mr. Obama last year on a temporary basis in order to avoid for as long as possible the need for Senate approval.

Interestingly, no Boeing employees lost their jobs because of the decision; Boeing's unionized employment in the Puget Sound is 2,000 jobs greater today than it was prior to the expansion.

Earlier, the same Lafe Solomon threatened to sue four states for passing laws guaranteeing workers a right to a secret ballot for union elections. According to Mr. Solomon, since a right to a secret ballot does not exist in federal law it should not, cannot exist at the state level.

Given his radical agenda, there is no possibility that Mr. Solomon's nomination will ever be confirmed by the Senate. His continued presence in the office of General Counsel might very well threaten the NLRB's future funding. It will be interesting to see how long Mr. Obama hugs organized labor's coin purse before he throws Mr. Solomon under the bus.

Granted that this is the way it's done in Chicago, but it ought not to be the way the system operates nationally.

UPDATE:  Here is the complete text of Boeing EVP Michael Luttig's letter to the NLRB calling that agency's acting general counsel out for a number of "misrepresentations." It makes for incredible reading.

UPDATE: A special welcome to Doug Ross' readers. Please feel free to nose around!

Thursday, April 28, 2011

The Most Expensive Birth Certificate Ever?

Apparently Mr. Obama has not heard of FedEx, DHL or UPS. Perhaps he doesn't trust the U.S. Post Office.


For whatever reason, he felt delivery of his certified birth certificate was so important that it required the dispatch of a lawyer from the Washington, DC offices of Perkins Coie to personally pick it up in Honolulu and hand deliver it to the White House Tuesday evening. And no, the Perkins associates or paralegals weren't up to the task; no less than a full partner was tasked for the 22-hour round trip flight.

Total cost, more than $12,000.

Tuesday, April 26, 2011

Coca-Cola Paying for Terrorist Lawyers While Objecting To DOMA?

It appears that Coca-Cola pressured its hometown law firm to drop the House of Representatives of the United States as a paying client.

The Obama administration, speaking through Attorney General Eric Holder, had declined to defend the Defense of Marriage Act, leaving what is normally an executive branch duty to Congress to perform in its stead. The House of Representatives retained Atlanta megafirm King & Spalding to defend the law on behalf the people of the United States. A week after being hired, as noted below in Profiles in Cowardice,  K&S dumped its representation to defend the constitutionality of DOMA, which had been enacted by overwhelming majorities from both parties in  Congress and signed into law by President Clinton in 1996.

There are other King & Spalding clients that haven't created measurable concern at Coke. Among them are several of the terrorists being held at Guantanamo Bay. Not only has Coca-Cola not objected, but because K&S is providing legal assistance to the terrorists for free, the firm's other clients, certainly including its largest, are picking up the tab.

So, according to King & Spalding and Coca-Cola, the Defense of Marriage Act is out but Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and his associates are in.



Coke, teaching the world to sing in perfect harmony.

Profiles in Cowardice: King & Spalding

I've spent too many decades and too many dollars working with lawyers to have very many illusions of the industry left. Many of the lawyers I've known are terrific people and impressive professionals. Some, not so much.

In all that experience, I've not yet personally met an outright coward or a complete prostitute for fees.

The King & Spalding firm and its chairman, Robert Hays, set a new low standard for the former and a dark example of the latter.

It is almost unknown for a firm to dump client representation once it has started. I've never actually known of it happening before this. According to Mr. Hays, K&S has spent much of the time since it signed the contract two weeks ago working to break it.

Interestingly, the news release announcing its abandonment of its client does not appear on the firm's website though scores of other, lesser news items do. Instead, on its home page K&S makes great hay from the fame and great respect accorded its former partner, Attorney General Griffin Bell. Among Mr. Bell's strongest-held values were his appreciation for the ethics he held and practiced.

According to Griffin Bell,
You are not required to take every matter that is presented to you, but having assumed a representation, it becomes your duty to finish the representation. Sometimes you will make a bad bargain, but as professionals, you are still obligated to carry out the representation. Sometimes you will make a bad bargain, but as professionals, you are still obligated to carry out the representation.
These are words with which Mr. Bell's firm and its chairman no longer agree. Every client and every potential client is now forewarned that representation by K&S is subject to veto by the perceived will of the politically strong.

As Mr. Clement, the individual lawyer and K&S partner at the center of the storm wrote in his resignation letter,
…I resign out of the firmly-held belief that a representation should not be abandoned because the client's legal position is extremely unpopular in certain quarters. Defending unpopular positions is what lawyers do. The adversary system of justice depends on it, especially in cases where the passions run high. Efforts to delegitimize any representation for one side of a legal controversy are a profound threat to the rule of law. Much has been said about being on the wrong side of history. But being on the right or wrong side of history on the merits is a question for the clients. When it comes to the lawyers, the surest way to be on the wrong side of history is to abandon a client in the face of hostile criticism.
I know that when I hire a law firm, I want it to have a backbone.

Those without need not apply.

Thursday, April 21, 2011

Should Securities Fraud Be An Impeachable Offense?

In 2008 the Securities and Exchange Commission for the first time filed a complaint for securities fraud against public officials, citing five employees of the city of San Diego with misleading purchasers of the city's bonds. I was struck by the language in the SEC's announcement

The SEC charged the former officials for failing to disclose to the investing public buying the city’s municipal bonds that there were funding problems with its pension and retiree health care obligations and those liabilities had placed the city in serious financial jeopardy.
According the Linda Chatman Thomsen, Director of the SEC's Division of Enforcement
Municipal officials responsible for municipal bond disclosure play a key gatekeeper role in protecting investors. It is therefore imperative that they honor the public’s trust by ensuring that investors are provided with accurate, material information about the issuer’s fiscal health.
A SEC Regional Director piled on with
Despite knowing of the city’s substantial pension and retiree health care liabilities, these five former San Diego officials failed to disclose what they knew to municipal securities investors. Their actions not only jeopardized the investors, but also compromised the interests of the city’s citizens and its current and future retirees.
But it is the next paragraph in the SEC announcement that really resonates
According to the SEC’s complaint, the five former officials knew that the city had been intentionally under-funding its pension obligations so that it could increase pension benefits but defer the costs. They were aware that the city would face severe difficulty funding its future pension and retiree health care obligations unless new revenues were obtained, pension and health care benefits were reduced, or city services were cut. They specifically knew that the city’s unfunded liability to its pension plan was projected to dramatically increase, growing from $284 million at the beginning of fiscal year 2002 to an estimated $2 billion by 2009, and that the city’s liability for retiree health care was another estimated $1.1 billion. But the officials failed to disclose these and other material facts to rating agencies or to investors in bond offering documents and continuing disclosures.
In the end, four of the defendants settled the SEC charge by formally acknowledging that they misled the investing public and paying pretty hefty fines. As part of the settlement, they agreed not to seek reimbursement of the fines from others, so the dollars had to come out of their own pockets. The City of San Diego was also sanctioned, the first time ever, and paid big bucks as well as agreeing to sin no more, in order to settle.


Now, what happens if just for the fun of it we substitute federal government for city or San Diego?

The question is, how is this different from what Messrs. Geithner, Bernancke  and Obama have been doing in order to keep U. S. Treasuries afloat? Haven't they been intentionally under-funding pension obligations in order to increase benefits but defer costs? Is there anything substantially different from the SEC charge and Obama administration practices?

Obama Talks, But Skips the Walk

In his speech last week on the American debt crisis, Barack Obama volunteered that a number of millionaires would be delighted to volunteer to pay more to support the government.

Well, with an income last year  of $1.7 million Mr. Obama is one of those very "millionaires" of which he speaks.  How many dollars is he willing to contribute to his cause? Not a one. Not a dime, not a penny. In fact, quite the opposite.

Mr. and Mrs. Obama paid a small fortune to accountants to generate 53 pages of tax forms designed to avoid paying his "fair share." In those 53 pages, Mr. and Mrs. Obama apparently took advantage of every single tax-minimization tool, every exclusion, every loophole available to them. Deductions? Yep. Capital gains treatment? You bet. Tax credits? Lots.

Mr. Obama wants the wealthy to pay more. Fine and dandy. When's he going to start? The Obama's paid a lot of taxes on their income last year, $454 thousand to be precise, or about 25% of their income. But that left them with $1.3 million free and clear. To parrot Mr. Obama, I have trouble believing they "need" all that. I mean, their rent, medical care and transportation are free, or more accurately, I'm paying the freight. They get a food allowance of, what, $50 thousand a year? That'll buy a burger or two, even a nice arugula salad. Why does he feel he needs to keep so much while he is constantly pointing out the many who need more and getting a free ride to boot?

Granted, the Obama's made a number of generous (and tax deductible) donations last year, but isn't that still pretty selfish of them, making their own decisions on where that money goes? Why not cut out the private charities and put the money where his mouth is by giving it to Treasury secretary Geithner and the other 2.75 million federal bureaucrats to spend as they see right and proper? Isn't that more the American way that Mr. Obama thinks made our nation great? Further granted that spreading an extra couple hundred thousand dollars between nearly 3 million public servants doesn't amount to much, but isn't that the point? It's going to take  ton of money to finance all the "investments" that Mr. Obama outlined in his speech and his budget. Best get started!

To the point, why doesn't Mr. Obama make a really tangible offer to lead, something we ordinary people can see and count? Perhaps he'd pony up at least as much as the maigned Bush tax rates call for while skipping all those horrible "loopholes for the rich?" Volunteering to step up to the top Bush rate of 35% would cost the Obama's an extra $174 thousand, really not much for a family of their wealth.

Even more impressive would be a true feat of leadership. I'd like to see Mr. Obama name his new, fair rate for the wealthy, and then pay it.

UPDATED and BUMPED: Gregg Easterbrook, writing at Reuters, has similar thoughts in Why Obama Should Pay More in Taxes.

Obama, Turning the Rule of Law Upside Down

The Obama administration has a real affinity for Alice in Wonderland interpretations of the law. According to both Mr. Obama and Humpty Dumpty,  the law means what they say it means, the writings be damned.

We've seen this with their defense of Obamacare. Seeking a constitutional grounding for taking over the medical payments industry, Obama's lawyers are claiming authority under a power to regulate interstate commerce. Fair enough, but it stretches language to its limits, and turns it completely upside down to define my decision not to participate in the program, perhaps instead napping in the afternoon, doing nothing at all, as commerce.

Under this theory, Mr. Obama can order a seemingly endless number of improvements to our lives. A decision not to buy a car this year can be reversed by regulation. Presumably the Department of Commerce could decide that auto sales are a national priority and that we must purchase a car to support the country. Further, since the Obama administration retains a multi-billion dollar investment in General Motors, a person could be specifically ordered to buy a Chevy or a GMC. We could be required to buy broccoli and asparagus weekly, and be ordered to prove we actually ate them. Think the observation is extreme, not so. Obamacare would require of each of us similar actions in an area that has never before been subject to federal oversight. Under Mr. Obama's vision, there's no corner of our lives that would be immune from federal oversight.

Now comes news that according to the Obama mandarins running the National Labor Relations Board, to move a company from a heavily unionized state to a right to work state is illegal. In an amazing display of arrogance, Lafe Solomon, the NLRB's chief lawyer, has adopted the position pushed by the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers that Boeing should be required to abandon its efforts to build its new 787 in North Carolina and instead manufacture the plane in Washington State. Boeing has already hired 2,500 North Carolinians to build the plane.

According to Mr. Solomon, a corporate decision to not manufacture in a location because of a history or work stoppages and delivery delays, high costs or unfriendly labor environment is against the law. Only if the purpose is political payback from Mr. Obama to his organized labor supporters, by far his largest contributors, can this decision be other than insane.

As unions have become ever more thuggish over the decades, employers and their employees have voted with their feet, fleeing the inhospitable for the welcoming. Here, with a h/t to Forbes, is a graphic illustration of the thousands of people who fled union-controlled Detroit for friendlier climates:


Each red line represents 200 residents leaving Detroit in 2008. In-migration, to the extent there is any, is shown by the black lines.

Notice the correlation with right-to-work states, as shown here:


The majority of population movement from the nation's most notorious union headquarters city outside of Washington, DC., is to states that offer a better labor environment.

Now, according to the Obama's NLRB, the employers of everyone of those migrants could face prosecution for actions that might be construed as "retaliation" against unions.

Last, but probably not the final example, Mr. Obama's Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives has been actively arranging to supply illegally purchased firearms to Mexico's drug cartels. This effort, aptly codenamed Gunrunner, allowed thousands of illegally-purchased guns to walk across the southern border with the knowledge and specific approval of the federal agency charged with keeping guns out of the hands of criminals. Two of the rifles the BATFE arranged to deliver to the crime cartels were later used to kill a federal agent.

As Humpty Dumpty recognized long ago, "The questions is, 'Which is to be master, that's all.'"

That question is with us still.