Dog Brothers Public Forum

HOME | PUBLIC FORUM | MEMBERS FORUM | INSTRUCTORS FORUM | TRIBE FORUM

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
January 20, 2017, 04:03:48 AM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
Welcome to the Dog Brothers Public Forum.
99677 Posts in 2354 Topics by 1083 Members
Latest Member: TuhonBill
* Home Help Search Login Register
+  Dog Brothers Public Forum
|-+  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities
| |-+  Politics & Religion
| | |-+  Corruption, Sleaze, Skullduggery, and Treason
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] Print
Author Topic: Corruption, Sleaze, Skullduggery, and Treason  (Read 60606 times)
DougMacG
Power User
***
Posts: 8490


« Reply #200 on: October 26, 2016, 09:15:03 AM »



Even though he lies and gets caught all the time, this one is a big deal.  It explains why they didn't prosecute her.

His personal and political mis-use of the agencies, Fast and Furious - ATF, Attorney General, IRS targeting - IRS Commissioner, and now this, FBI, Dept of Justice, comprises RICO level crimes and impeachable acts.

To the Lois Lerner's in the agencies who know, you can come forward and tell us what you were directed to do and by whom or you can be prosecuted as part of the corruption conspiracy.
Logged
DDF
Power User
***
Posts: 645


« Reply #201 on: October 26, 2016, 09:28:58 AM »



Even though he lies and gets caught all the time, this one is a big deal.  It explains why they didn't prosecute her.

His personal and political mis-use of the agencies, Fast and Furious - ATF, Attorney General, IRS targeting - IRS Commissioner, and now this, FBI, Dept of Justice, comprises RICO level crimes and impeachable acts.

To the Lois Lerner's in the agencies who know, you can come forward and tell us what you were directed to do and by whom or you can be prosecuted as part of the corruption conspiracy.

If it isn't treason, I'd like to know what is. The double standards are absurd. There are so many cases, of so many, doing so much less, and sentenced away for so long, that how any of this isn't a slap in the face to the entire country, is just incredible.

It seems, the Achilles heel of the United States has been found. It also points out that the founding fathers were correct... wise men, well beyond their time.
Logged

It's all a matter of perspective.
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 6570


« Reply #202 on: October 26, 2016, 10:27:35 AM »

Wasn't Obama also guilty of exposing the White House IT system to attack through his emails to HildaBEAST?  How do we know hackers didn't just trace back through his email up to the WH computer / communications system?  The Right should be pounding the table on this. 

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/441430/wikileaks-hillary-clinton-barack-obama-emails-more-evidence-president-lied
Logged
G M
Power User
***
Posts: 14260


« Reply #203 on: October 26, 2016, 10:58:52 AM »

Wasn't Obama also guilty of exposing the White House IT system to attack through his emails to HildaBEAST?  How do we know hackers didn't just trace back through his email up to the WH computer / communications system?  The Right should be pounding the table on this. 

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/441430/wikileaks-hillary-clinton-barack-obama-emails-more-evidence-president-lied

Should be. I doubt they will.
Logged
DDF
Power User
***
Posts: 645


« Reply #204 on: October 27, 2016, 10:41:06 AM »

18 U.S. Code § 2381 - Treason (Hillary Clinton... talking to you)

"Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States."

(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 807; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, § 330016(2)(J), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2148.)
Logged

It's all a matter of perspective.
DougMacG
Power User
***
Posts: 8490


« Reply #205 on: October 27, 2016, 11:33:35 AM »

18 U.S. Code § 2381 - Treason (Hillary Clinton... talking to you)

"Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States."

(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 807; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, § 330016(2)(J), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2148.)

This is specific to aiding our enemies, applies to Hillary on the Uranium deal for example.  The Obama crimes like IRS targeting are more internal to subverting our constitution and imploding our country.  I would like to see the federal law applying to that.  It might come down to simply violating his oath of office.
Logged
DDF
Power User
***
Posts: 645


« Reply #206 on: October 27, 2016, 02:19:29 PM »

18 U.S. Code § 2381 - Treason (Hillary Clinton... talking to you)

"Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States."

(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 807; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, § 330016(2)(J), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2148.)

This is specific to aiding our enemies, applies to Hillary on the Uranium deal for example.  The Obama crimes like IRS targeting are more internal to subverting our constitution and imploding our country.  I would like to see the federal law applying to that.  It might come down to simply violating his oath of office.

That is correct, and why I posted it.

Aiding enemies:

Obama - Cash to Iran... numerous times... and helping them obtain nuclear technology, and then even CNN printing this: http://edition.cnn.com/2016/06/02/politics/state-department-report-terrorism/ calling them state sponsors of terrorism.

"The State Department on Thursday released its annual report on global terrorist activity, listing Iran as the top state sponsor of terrorism and labeling ISIS "the greatest threat globally."

Clinton - Just as you've stated, but they're so much more.... the emails, servers, Benghazi, and we can keep going... it applies.

Lynch - purposely not bringing charges.

Comey - same as Lynch.

Holder - Fast and Furious, with "executive privilege" from Obama saving his bacon. Those weapons went directly to hostile enemies of both the Mexican and American governments and they'v been called "terrorist organizations... " by US politicians. We all know that there have been several accusations of ISIS slipping into the US from the southern border, with and without cartels helping.... and Holder sends them weapons.

If any of the above, isn't aiding American enemies or giving them comfort, what is?
Logged

It's all a matter of perspective.
DougMacG
Power User
***
Posts: 8490


« Reply #207 on: October 27, 2016, 02:51:29 PM »

Great list.  The Iran example alone should do it.

Fast and Furious has elements of treason in it.  Americans died as a direct result of it.  Not even arguable as an unintended result.  Isn't that what they hoped would happen?  Mexican border gangs are enemies of the US, right?  They violate our sovereignty, kill civilians and shoot border guards.

I'm not sure if general examples of weakening our country from the inside are enemy-specific enough to prosecute under the treason statute.  The extreme examples of this like IRS targeting. Improper use (and non-use) of the FBI and DOJ are also be impeachable offenses, IMHO.

I do not support criminalizing political differences.  From the true statement you make about Iran, I don't see how sending them massive planeloads of cash, as a hostage taking bonus, that the people had no idea we were doing, is a political difference.  He was aiding and abetting an enemy.  And now they are killing us (again).  He should be prosecuted and removed.  Instead they brag of "defeating" Iran without firing a single shot.  Their theft of our language is a crime.

It takes two sides agreeing to impeach and remove from office.  I wonder what a leader on their side could do, if not any or all of these, to rise to an impeachable offense for Democrats.

How is it we can't all agree what was done in these examples is wrong, is criminal, and justifies swift action to protect the country and keep future leaders from doing more of the same or worse?!  I am astonished at how otherwise informed, intelligent, liberal friends know nothing about almost all of these scandals.  The exposure is almost all in the right leaning media, not reaching the general public.
« Last Edit: October 27, 2016, 02:58:12 PM by DougMacG » Logged
DDF
Power User
***
Posts: 645


« Reply #208 on: October 27, 2016, 03:15:32 PM »

It takes two sides agreeing to impeach and remove from office.  I wonder what a leader on their side could do, if not any or all of these, to rise to an impeachable offense for Democrats.

How is it we can't all agree what was done in these examples is wrong, is criminal, and justifies swift action to protect the country and keep future leaders from doing more of the same or worse?!  I am astonished at how otherwise informed, intelligent, liberal friends know nothing about almost all of these scandals.  The exposure is almost all in the right leaning media, not reaching the general public.

 I wonder what a leader on their side could do... if it had been a Republican.

How is it we can't all agree what was done in these examples is wrong, is criminal, and justifies swift action to protect the country and keep future leaders from doing more of the same or worse?!... the ends justify the means. This is by far your more important question. The war (and there is one), in the States, isn't between the Right and the Left; it's between capitalism and socialism, between sovereignty (of any country - especially countries with high GDPs) and globalization.
Logged

It's all a matter of perspective.
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 6570


« Reply #209 on: October 28, 2016, 10:39:17 AM »

http://nation.foxnews.com/2016/10/27/judge-napolitano-what-happened-fbi-its-been-corrupted-obama-and-his-team
Logged
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 6570


« Reply #210 on: October 29, 2016, 09:31:29 AM »

"“I'm livid, actually,” one Clinton surrogate told The Hill. “This has turned into malpractice. It's an unforced error at this point. I have no idea what Comey is up to but the idea this email issue is popping back up again is outrageous. It never should have occurred in the first place. Someone somewhere should have told her no. And they didn't and now we're all paying the price.”

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/303402-anger-disbelief-in-clinton-camp

Rather weird if you ask me.  "Someone should have told her no".  This person I guess means that "someone" should have refused to conspire with her to break the law, cover her lies and corruption, obstruction of evidence, open up national security secrets to hackers knowingly?

They are all complicit.

"now we're all paying the price.”

In other words you may not be able to cash in...........

dirt balls all of them as far as I am concerned

All that said she will still most likely win.
Logged
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 6570


« Reply #211 on: October 29, 2016, 11:49:48 AM »

THIS TIME Comey did not fall for the DOJ manipulation it appears:

http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/10/29/report-james-comey-loretta-lynchs-advice-sending-letter-congress/

*Maybe* he will redeem himself and the FBI after all.

Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 38673


« Reply #212 on: November 01, 2016, 01:32:26 AM »

What a tangled web we weave when first we elect to deceive.

Very good article on all this in the WSJ today.  There ARE good reasons, and policies to support them, to avoid acting in a way that messes with the electoral process-- but in calling upon them the Dems are like the man who killed his parents and then threw himself on the mercy of the court because he was an orphan.
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 38673


« Reply #213 on: November 02, 2016, 06:45:02 PM »

http://dailycaller.com/2016/10/31/hillarys-two-official-favors-to-morocco-resulted-in-28-million-for-clinton-foundation/
Logged
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 6570


« Reply #214 on: November 04, 2016, 04:47:29 PM »

Not only with Lynch but this goes directly to Bamster.  She is a more subtle Eric Holder but otherwise the same handling of the  DOJ :

https://www.conservativereview.com/commentary/2016/11/total-political-hack-loretta-lynch-denies-grand-jury-request-from-fbi-clinton-investigators

If Trump wins he needs to clean house.
« Last Edit: November 04, 2016, 08:10:45 PM by Crafty_Dog » Logged
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 6570


« Reply #215 on: November 05, 2016, 03:43:17 PM »

Thanks to Andrew McCarthy who points out that the Eastern District of NY is the US Attorney Office handling the Clinton Foundation investigation.   

#1  Why is this the Office handling it?   It should be the Northern Office of maybe one in DC!
#2  For those of us not aware, this was the exact District that none other then Loretta Lynch worked in before she was named Attorney General.  What is also interesting is that Hildabeast has her campaign          office in Brooklyn.

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/441815/clinton-foundation-investigation-district

Lynch is just as crooked as Holder.  And no one can even entertain for one second she is not doing Obama's bidding.
Logged
DDF
Power User
***
Posts: 645


« Reply #216 on: November 11, 2016, 12:03:30 PM »

Nepotism in American politics.

Families that have last names starting with the letter "A," represent 89 families with 275 people having served in politics, for almost 3 centuries.

When one removes the state distinction and inter-marital relationships, and differences in spelling that have occurred over the years, the number of families drops to 50, and dates back to 1717 AD on the American continent.

Surnames starting with the letter "B," account for 201 distinct surnames, with their members of there families, offering up 801 public servants, not counting the Breckenridge, Butler-Belmont, or Bush families, which are so large, that they have their own listings, dating back to 1686.

In the case of the Breckenridges, accounting for another 59 politicians throughout the centuries
the Butler-Belmont family dating back to 1759, with 17 members of their family serving throughout the years (not including the other Belmont family members already accounted for)

Bush family, which actually includes two family lines, Bush, and Bush-Davis-Walker, dating back to 1676, with 56 members of their family serving public office and as president twice.

The total number of people from the 201 families with surnames starting with "B" that have been politicians is at least 933 politicians.

Surnames with the letter "C," are represented 218 times or less.

Focusing on the Clintons, of whom, both Bill and Hillary have lineage tracing back to the original 13 colonies, and just between Bill, Hillary and Hillary's brother, have included one president, FOUR presidential candidacies, secretary of state, senator, attorney general, and failed senate and congressional candidacies as well.

If we include marital relationships of Bill, Hillary's brother, and Chelsea, it will include ties to Senator Barbara Boxer, Congressmen James A. Lockhart and US Representatives Edward Mezvinsky and Marjorie Margolies-Mezvinsky.


Since the number of surnames in the United States is accumulative, accounting for everyone that has ever come to the country, and numbering at least 150,000 - 1,350,000 means that a fraction of the families in the US are ever included, and that those who are, overly so.


Leaving the Wikipedia list for a moment, others too, have made the same observation as noted here:

"My infatuation with political dynasties began in Frankfurt, Germany, in 1957, when, as a bored private in a peacetime army, I wandered into a library and discovered the "Biographical Directory of the United States Congress." Who were these Bayards, Muhlenbergs and Frelinghuysens, I wondered, with five or six names apiece in the directory? I counted 700 families in which two or more members had served in Congress. I eventually explored these questions in a book, "America's Political Dynasties," published more than four decades ago." http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/09/11/AR2009091101831.html

When one contemplates the numbers of households/families, in 2015 numbering 124,590,000, https://www.statista.com/statistics/183635/number-of-households-in-the-us/, distinct surnames numbering between 150,000 to 1,350,000 (the date is still being counted and will be released in 2020), and the American population numbering 318,900,000, the fact that it is even possible to discuss dynasties existing in American politics should render the possibility of it occurring, out of reach, but it isn't. It happens frequently, which is concerning, when the amount of corruption perceived to exist happens, and given the roots of the United States having fought and defeated a monarchy in the name of freedom; yet, clearly, nepotism exists, and exists to a point, that given the references above, is too large to number, which even includes people such as discredited Sheriff Lee Baca, who has three relatives who have served public office, one of whom has served as senator, and Lee Baca isn't even included on the list I counted, when it i still a public office.

Some interesting notes:

The Kennedys:

1.) Arrived to the United States in 1849 from Ireland. Have had 12 members of their immediate bloodline serve public office since arriving.

2.) Two of them married men who would serve as governor, and another married to the mayor of Boston.

3.) Sargent Shriver, who never served, was the Democratic VP Nominee in 1972

4.) The first Kennedy took office in 1884, 35 years after their arrival, meaning that in 132 years, 17 people from their line, have either run, held, or been married to people holding public office.

http://www.businessinsider.com/the-kennedy-political-dynasty-family-tree-infographic-2012-1



John Kerry :

1.) Distant blood relative to the Bush family.

2.) A member of the Forbes family.

3.) Husband to Teresa Heinz, who's family also includes prominent politicians and wealth.

4.) Direct family lineage includes at least one chief justice and a senator.

5.) Kerry himself served as senator for almost 30 years, before becoming Secretary of State, and has served as Lt. governor and congressman since 1972 (almost 45 years).


I've been reading this all day, and it's starting to sound like a skull and bones party before even the beginning of the States, and also having cross referenced this with lists from Forbes wealthiest... smh


"In 1848, for example, more than 16 percent of congressional seats were filled by someone whose relative had previously held the position [source: Kieley]. Moreover, a 2006 study found that Congress members who serve more than one term have a 40 percent chance of someone in their family later ending up in Congress [source: Alexander]. "

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/politics/2010-08-03-1Adynasties03_CV_N.htm

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-politics-dynasties-idUSN0332238720070304
« Last Edit: November 11, 2016, 12:12:49 PM by DDF » Logged

It's all a matter of perspective.
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 38673


« Reply #217 on: November 11, 2016, 02:47:52 PM »

Interesting and timely.

Please post in the American History thread on the SC&H forum as well.
Logged
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 6570


« Reply #218 on: November 14, 2016, 12:49:47 PM »

I wonder is she is wearing a wire to the FBI or CIA:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/pamela-anderson-visits-wikileaks-founder-192337693.html
Logged
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 6570


« Reply #219 on: December 09, 2016, 09:18:47 PM »

https://www.yahoo.com/news/congress-just-passed-watershed-human-214735854.html
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 38673


« Reply #220 on: December 10, 2016, 08:24:53 PM »

With everything in the air about the purported Trump-Putin connection, we might want to remember what has been said and done by each side previously

http://thefederalist.com/2015/03/10/ted-kennedy-secretly-asked-the-soviets-to-intervene-in-the-1984-elections/
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 38673


« Reply #221 on: December 20, 2016, 12:49:27 PM »

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/19/business/imf-trial-christine-lagarde-france-verdict.html?emc=edit_th_20161220&nl=todaysheadlines&nlid=49641193
Logged
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 6570


« Reply #222 on: December 20, 2016, 02:19:05 PM »

   
"IMF's Lagarde's get out of jail free card"

"now is not the time to leave the IMF rudderless"


Hey it is for the good of humanity!!!  rolleyes
Too big to jail.  Same as Hillary.   angry
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 38673


« Reply #223 on: January 02, 2017, 11:31:12 PM »

http://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/02/us/politics/with-no-warning-house-republicans-vote-to-hobble-independent-ethics-office.html?emc=edit_na_20170102&nlid=49641193&ref=cta&_r=0
Logged
G M
Power User
***
Posts: 14260


« Reply #224 on: January 03, 2017, 12:02:06 AM »


Representative Nancy Pelosi of California, the House minority leader, joined others who had worked to create the office in expressing outrage at the move and the secretive way it was orchestrated.

“Republicans claim they want to ‘drain the swamp,’ but the night before the new Congress gets sworn in, the House G.O.P. has eliminated the only independent ethics oversight of their actions,” Ms. Pelosi said in a statement on Monday night. “Evidently, ethics are the first casualty of the new Republican Congress.”


http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2016/04/is_pelosis_husband_guilty_of_insider_trading.html

Logged
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 6570


« Reply #225 on: January 03, 2017, 07:06:11 AM »

And because I am more of pessimist then ever I believe it doesn't just look bad but is bad.   I think it portends bad things to come.

If Tom Fitton of Judicial Watch is against it then I am.  OTOH this committee was established by Pelosi in 08 so how non partisan can it be?  Perhaps Dems were just going to use it as a political weapon.

I think we are in for major scandals under Trump.  There are just too many crooks and too few law enforcement types who are ethical.  And this move by the Republicans makes it harder to investigate the crooks.  As if it were not hard and almost impossible now........

https://goodlatte.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=735
Logged
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 6570


« Reply #226 on: January 03, 2017, 09:35:59 AM »

He is questioning this surprise as well.  Maybe he will be a countermeasure to GOP corruption which is probably every bit as bad as the other side's:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/house-republicans-criticized-after-vote-to-gut-ethics-panel-115307034.html
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 38673


« Reply #227 on: January 03, 2017, 11:56:04 AM »

 Thank God this has been reversed-- but what a profoundly STUPID first move by the Rep Congress!!! angry angry angry We are already going to have a ton of suspicion and negativity over Trump's complex business affairs!
Logged
G M
Power User
***
Posts: 14260


« Reply #228 on: January 03, 2017, 04:28:59 PM »

Thank God this has been reversed-- but what a profoundly STUPID first move by the Rep Congress!!! angry angry angry We are already going to have a ton of suspicion and negativity over Trump's complex business affairs!


Suspicion from whom? The same crowd utterly uninterested in the numerous Obama and Hillary related scandals? Funny how that works.
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 38673


« Reply #229 on: January 03, 2017, 07:42:57 PM »

And well-meaning people who were also revolted by the serial criminality of the Clintons.
Logged
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 6570


« Reply #230 on: January 05, 2017, 03:53:53 PM »

IF true, this is annoying.  Aren't these people for some reason exempt from insider trading laws?

If so why?

https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-presses-democrats-obamacare-calls-bipartisan-fix-132820781.html
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 38673


« Reply #231 on: January 05, 2017, 06:52:36 PM »

My understanding is that they are exempt-- which it should be noted, reveals the deep cynicism of Schumer's remarks  rolleyes tongue angry

As to why, I suspect the answer has something to do with greed.


Logged
G M
Power User
***
Posts: 14260


« Reply #232 on: January 05, 2017, 08:01:59 PM »

IF true, this is annoying.  Aren't these people for some reason exempt from insider trading laws?

If so why?

https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-presses-democrats-obamacare-calls-bipartisan-fix-132820781.html

http://www.forbes.com/sites/kylesmith/2011/06/01/insider-trading-rules-that-dont-apply-to-congress/print/

Insider Trading Rules That Don't Apply To Congress


You want strict ethics rules? Start at the top — with the shining example of the noble knights of the House of Representatives, which bans all gifts from lobbyists and imposes a $50 limit on gifts from anyone else. And no, you can’t give an infinite number of $49 gifts to Larry Lawmaker. Sayeth the holy rulebook.

The general provision goes on to state that a member, officer or employee may accept from any other source virtually any gift valued below $50, with a limitation of less than $100 in gifts from any single source in a calendar year.  Gifts having a value of less than $10 do not count toward the annual limit.

Okay, so maybe you can give an infinite number of $9.99 gifts, and meals are specifically designated as such. Feel free to make your case to Rep. Portentous over a daily lunch at Arby’s. But still: pretty tight rules, eh?

Except that one thing you can do as a member is study pending legislation and regulatory changes, call up your broker and instruct him to trade on that nonpublic information. Do this as often as you want; you will suffer no penalty. There is no limit to how much money you can earn on insider trading in the House or Senate. Lawmakers and their staffers are specifically exempted.

As you might expect, those who work in the hallowed halls are not shy about availing themselves of the opportunity. A Wall Street Journal analysis published more than six months ago that has thus far provoked no particular sense of shame on Capitol Hill found that at least 72 Congressional aides in both parties had recently traded shares of companies that their bosses helped regulate. In 2009, while Senate Banking Committee member Mike Crapo, a Republican from Idaho, was involved in discussing “stress tests” on banks such as Bank of America, his aide Karen Brown traded the company’s stock on several occasions in the weeks before May 7, 2009 — when BofA surged thanks to a press release on its stress-test result, assuring Ms. Brown a nifty profit.

Asked by the Wall Street Journal to explain, Sen. Crapo’s office said the trades weren’t really made by Karen Brown but by her husband, who had no knowledge of what was going on in the banking committee. Would you go to your compliance officer, much less the SEC, with that line? True, these folks do need a good laugh now and again, and the SEC has to be in a jolly mood after the jury in the Galleon case all but repeated the verdict from The Producers: “We find the defendants incredibly guilty.”

Last week a study of some 16,000 stock transactions carried out by House members was published in the journal Business and Politics. This detailed analysis showed that the investment portfolios of House members beat the market by about six points a year. (Democrats did especially well, outperforming by some nine points a year, while Republicans topped the average investor by only two percent annually.) Senators apparently do even better: “their portfolios show some of the highest excess returns ever recorded over a long period of time, significantly outperforming even hedge fund managers,” noted the journal, citing a previously published study.

In a surprising twist, the study found that there tended to be an inverse relationship between the lawmaker’s seniority and the insider-trading profits pocketed by him and his minions. The authors speculated that “Whereas Representatives with the longest seniority (in this case more than 16 years), have no trouble raising funds for campaigns, junkets and whatever other causes they may deem desirable owed to the power they wield, the financial condition of a freshman Congressman is far more precarious. His or her position is by no means secure, financially or otherwise. House Members with the least seniority may have fewer opportunities to trade on privileged information, but they may be the most highly motivated to do so when the opportunities arise.”

Doesn’t that give you a cozy feeling, knowing that nonpublic securities info is helping make your friendly local politician more secure as he daydreams new ways to prevent, limit, or appropriate for his own reelection purposes – sorry, the needs of the Republic!– your financial success?

It’s not an accident that Congressionalites are expressly exempt from insider-trading laws. The reasoning is that, were the situation otherwise, “it might tend to “insulate a legislator from the personal and economic interests that his/her constituency, or society in general, has in governmental decisions and policy,” says the House ethics manual.

This is entirely beside the point: no one would object if lawmakers placed their assets in ETFs, in which case they’d still have an interest in the overall performance of the market. Or why not be simple and allow Congressional trading on everything except nonpublic information?

In what must be treated as more of a practical joke than a serious effort at legislation, every so often a group of lawmakers typically numbering in the high single digits proposes that Congress be subjected to the same insider-trading laws as you or me. Said proposal is always swiftly ignored — it has yet to reach the House floor and hasn’t even been bandied in the Senate. Then everyone goes out to their Spartan lunches of baloney and Cheez Curls, comfortable in the knowledge that they have improved on the Golden Rule: He who makes the rules pockets the gold.
Logged
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 6570


« Reply #233 on: January 05, 2017, 09:21:58 PM »

"Last week a study of some 16,000 stock transactions carried out by House members was published in the journal Business and Politics. This detailed analysis showed that the investment portfolios of House members beat the market by about six points a year. (Democrats did especially well, outperforming by some nine points a year, while Republicans topped the average investor by only two percent annually.)"

This further confirms what we already know - Democrats are more clever then stupid Republicans.

There are elites.  Wanna be elites
and then everyone else.

Reminds me of  a famous line from Elaine Stewart (alias Elsie Steinberg from NJ) from the movie the "bad and the beautiful" when whe says there are no "good men, only men".
I will apply that to politicians .  There are no honest politicians, only politicians.

Another disappointment was about my home town mayor. I was telling a doctor friend of mine how Mayor Dunn of Elizabeth NJ was a rare Democrat who supported President Reagan.  Most Dems wanted him dead.  Not Dunn.  Reagan was so impressed he came to our city and gave a speech at the church just across the street from my old high school.  AFter telling my friend this story he seemed to know of mayor Dunn and stated he was "one of the honest ones".  So recently I was reading about him on Wikipedia only to learn the FBI had him on tape taking a bag of cash from the Elizabeth mafia.

I guess there simply are no "honest ones".
But I can think of Elsie Sternberg.  She was something in Playboy in the 50s .  (and Jewish too!)

« Last Edit: January 05, 2017, 09:42:57 PM by ccp » Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 38673


« Reply #234 on: January 07, 2017, 11:04:11 AM »

http://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/07/us/politics/jared-kushner-trump-business.html?emc=edit_ta_20170107&nlid=49641193&ref=cta&_r=0
Logged
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 6570


« Reply #235 on: January 07, 2017, 11:50:16 AM »

Well like father like son.

I am not talking about his father in law.
The LEFT will be shoving this in our faces for the next four years.  And I might add maybe rightly so if he has a "role " in the WH. They just bought a mansion in DC no?
And Ivanka seems to be the new expert who is tinkering with tax policy for single mothers .

I dunno.
What can I say?   cry
Logged
DougMacG
Power User
***
Posts: 8490


« Reply #236 on: January 07, 2017, 02:18:33 PM »

From media thread, ccp: Media purposely distorts Trumps firing ambassadors.  Obama fired all the Bush ambassadors and I don't remember hearing a single peep about.  These are not lifetime appointments.  Their shift is up.  Go home.  No controversy here.  I don't know how we can defeat the msm CNN ha become the worst of bunch.


Bill Clinton fired all 50 US attorneys as he took offrice just to get at the Arkansas one without making too big a scene.  There were no right wing websites then.  There was one big radio show and the WSJ editorial page.  Otherwise no one screamed and he eventually was reelected - before getting impeached, disbarred, shamed for other crimes.
Logged
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 6570


« Reply #237 on: January 12, 2017, 06:21:53 PM »

DOJ - corrupt to BOs last day in office:

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/443825/hillary-clinton-e-mails-doj-investigation

Perhaps Sessions can put a stop to this.  Since he said he would recuse himself from clinton email stuff who else can investigate the DOJ under Brock.
Logged
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 6570


« Reply #238 on: January 13, 2017, 03:49:01 PM »

Want to drain a swamp.  Start by getting rid of this corrupt  DOJ IG.  Stop this phoney investigation or replace it with real non partisan and include finding out the real reason DOJ refused to have grand jury on an obviously guilty clinton in the first place.  Republicans hold power now - use it! for gods sake don't cave.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/m/167d5aec-f2bb-3c97-a51a-b5d599107b41/donald-trump-is-remarkably.html
« Last Edit: January 16, 2017, 01:18:36 AM by Crafty_Dog » Logged
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 6570


« Reply #239 on: January 18, 2017, 11:09:38 AM »

Its ok because she is a Democrat.

http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/pelosi-stock-insider-60minutes/2011/11/13/id/417848/
Logged
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 6570


« Reply #240 on: January 18, 2017, 11:27:38 AM »

Starting to sound like Reid land deal scams or cattle futures trading;  but then again there is nothing here; after all they are liberals:

http://freebeacon.com/politics/pelosi-subsidies-benefit-husbands-investment-in-dem-mega-donors-company/
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 38673


« Reply #241 on: January 18, 2017, 01:50:29 PM »

Good to see Pelosi getting nailed.

In fairness, I thought I saw something on Sec HHS nominee Price in a similar regard.  Anyone have anything on this?
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!