I hope the Ethics committee checks this one too

I hope the Ethics committee checks this one too (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

Sternhand4 -> I hope the Ethics committee checks this one too (3/28/2007 7:27:07 PM)
What war is profitable, even for some Dems too.. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., has abruptly walked away from her responsibilities with the Senate Military Construction Appropriations subcommittee after a report linked her votes to the financial well-being of her husband's companies, which received billions of dollars worth of military construction contracts she approved. As reported in Metroactive, an online report from the Silicon Valley, Feinstein's resignation followed six years of subcommittee work during which time her conflict of interest stemmed from her husband Richard C. Blum's ownership of Perini Corp. and URS Corp. Feinstein, chairperson and ranking member of the subcommittee, regularly reviewed and accepted contracts from her husband's companies for not only construction work for military bases, but also addressing "quality of life" issues for the veterans of the United States military services. "As MILCON leader, Feinstein relished the details of military construction, even micromanaging one project at the level of its sewer design," wrote Peter Byrne in the report. "She regularly took junkets to military bases around the world to inspect construction projects, some of which were contracted to her husband's companies, Perini Corp. and URS Corp." He suggested perhaps Feinstein resigned "because she could not take the heat generated by metro's expose of her ethics… Or was her work on the subcommittee finished because Blum divested ownership of his military construction and advanced weapons manufacturing firms in late 2005?" The writer also noted another reason could be that since that subcommittee is responsible for veterans' "quality of life" issues, perhaps she was trying to distance herself from the military's failure to provide decent medical care for wounded servicemembers. "Feinstein abandoned MILCON as her ethical problems were surfacing in the media, and as it was becoming clear that her subcommittee left grievously wounded veterans to rot while her family was profiting from the occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan. It turns out that Blum also holds large investments in companies that were selling medical equipment and supplies and real estate leases – often without the benefit of competitive bidding – to the Department of Veterans Affairs, even as the system of medical care for veterans collapsed on his wife's watch," he wrote. The Metroactive report, based on research partly funded by the Investigative Fund of the Nation Institute, noted that as of the end of 2006, federal documents showed three companies in which Blum's financial entities owned a total of $1 billion in stock got $17.8 million for medical equipment and supplies (Boston Scientific Corp.), $12 million for medical supplies and equipment (Kinetic Concepts Inc.), and additional funding through lease contracts (CB Richard Ellis). More at... http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=54932 BTW thats a link Farg..

Real0ne -> RE: I hope the Ethics committee checks this one too (3/28/2007 8:17:56 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sternhand4 D-Calif.. damn it here i thought only republicans did that... er... oh wait republicrats thats right!

DomKen -> RE: I hope the Ethics committee checks this one too (3/28/2007 9:05:50 PM)
If she voted on contracts for her husand's company that is very serious. However WingNut Daily isn't exactly a reputable source. The spin is pretty cler just in the quoted section above. For example since the investigation was for 2006 and before Feinstein was not chairperson of the subcommittee as the republicans were in power and held all the chairs. Also the passage above strongly implies that Blum indirectly owned these companies and it is entirely possible she was unaware of the conflict. No matter what though if she did vote on issues where her husband stood to directly profit she needs to be punished.

UtopianRanger -> RE: I hope the Ethics committee checks this one too (3/28/2007 9:41:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sternhand4 What war is profitable, even for some Dems too.. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., has abruptly walked away from her responsibilities with the Senate Military Construction Appropriations subcommittee after a report linked her votes to the financial well-being of her husband's companies, which received billions of dollars worth of military construction contracts she approved. As reported in Metroactive, an online report from the Silicon Valley, Feinstein's resignation followed six years of subcommittee work during which time her conflict of interest stemmed from her husband Richard C. Blum's ownership of Perini Corp. and URS Corp. Feinstein, chairperson and ranking member of the subcommittee, regularly reviewed and accepted contracts from her husband's companies for not only construction work for military bases, but also addressing "quality of life" issues for the veterans of the United States military services. "As MILCON leader, Feinstein relished the details of military construction, even micromanaging one project at the level of its sewer design," wrote Peter Byrne in the report. "She regularly took junkets to military bases around the world to inspect construction projects, some of which were contracted to her husband's companies, Perini Corp. and URS Corp." He suggested perhaps Feinstein resigned "because she could not take the heat generated by metro's expose of her ethics… Or was her work on the subcommittee finished because Blum divested ownership of his military construction and advanced weapons manufacturing firms in late 2005?" The writer also noted another reason could be that since that subcommittee is responsible for veterans' "quality of life" issues, perhaps she was trying to distance herself from the military's failure to provide decent medical care for wounded servicemembers. "Feinstein abandoned MILCON as her ethical problems were surfacing in the media, and as it was becoming clear that her subcommittee left grievously wounded veterans to rot while her family was profiting from the occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan. It turns out that Blum also holds large investments in companies that were selling medical equipment and supplies and real estate leases – often without the benefit of competitive bidding – to the Department of Veterans Affairs, even as the system of medical care for veterans collapsed on his wife's watch," he wrote. The Metroactive report, based on research partly funded by the Investigative Fund of the Nation Institute, noted that as of the end of 2006, federal documents showed three companies in which Blum's financial entities owned a total of $1 billion in stock got $17.8 million for medical equipment and supplies (Boston Scientific Corp.), $12 million for medical supplies and equipment (Kinetic Concepts Inc.), and additional funding through lease contracts (CB Richard Ellis). More at... http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=54932 BTW thats a link Farg.. I grew up in SF and have thought her and her husband were shills. This doesn't surprise me at all. - R

Sternhand4 -> RE: I hope the Ethics committee checks this one too (3/28/2007 9:50:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen If she voted on contracts for her husand's company that is very serious. However WingNut Daily isn't exactly a reputable source. Sure the source is to be questioned but the original source is... http://www.metroactive.com/feinstein/ Hardley a rightwing blog, In fairness I'm sure you would agree KOS or Huffington wont expose this story. The spin is pretty cler just in the quoted section above. For example since the investigation was for 2006 and before Feinstein was not chairperson of the subcommittee as the republicans were in power and held all the chairs. True She only chaired it after the 2006 election... but she was on the committee ( ranking member ) and voted on the issues.. As chairperson and ranking member of the Military Construction Appropriations subcommittee (MILCON) from 2001 through the end of 2005, Feinstein supervised the appropriation of billions of dollars a year for specific military construction projects. Two defense contractors whose interests were largely controlled by her husband, financier Richard C. Blum, benefited from decisions made by Feinstein as leader of this powerful subcommittee. http://www.metroactive.com/feinstein/ Also the passage above strongly implies that Blum indirectly owned these companies and it is entirely possible she was unaware of the conflict. What no COINTEL defense.. No matter what though if she did vote on issues where her husband stood to directly profit she needs to be punished. Want to bet the MSM never airs this....

popeye1250 -> RE: I hope the Ethics committee checks this one too (3/29/2007 9:23:50 AM)
Just another reason to vote everyone IN office OUT of office! We also need to outlaw "Lobbyists". All foreign countries hire lobbyists in Washington who's sole purpose is to get U.S. Taxpayer Dollars for their "clients." This is rediculous!

luckydog1 -> RE: I hope the Ethics committee checks this one too (3/29/2007 10:15:37 AM)
At least she isn't a Neo Con...that makes it all ok. The silence on this thread is deafening. Surely Puella, Crappy, ect. will rise to her defense in the face of this slanderous attack.

Mercnbeth -> RE: I hope the Ethics committee checks this one too (3/29/2007 11:11:03 AM)
The appearance of hypocrisy is rampant universally in USA politics. But the reality is it is just the appearance. There is no hypocrisy if you take the time to get fundamental. The PACS control the votes of both houses of Congress, and to some extent the Presidency. No matter how rich a person is going into politics it does not take long for them to be influenced by the money available to them provided by PACS. It occurs at every level of government. The most local elections are minor league. By the time a person gets to Congress or the Senate PAC money is no longer perceived as a benefit, but a right. Personal wealth, such as that of Senator Fiensten or Senator Kennedy, is immaterial. Using someone else's money to run an election campaign is much preferred to using personal assets. Why is there Billions of Dollars of Pork in the Iraq War funding Bill? PACS put them there. Sure Pork comes back to the area served by the Senator, but it's the payoff given the PAC in exchange for the campaign dollars. Don't you think the millions allocated to peanut storage within the bill were initiated by the PAC funded by peanut growers? The election contribution laws that limited personal donations in effect eliminated the ability for an individual to have an impact on who represents them. Unless you have mega wealth and set up an "Interest Group" that happens to back a particular party or candidate, no politician will put your personal opinion ahead of that of a PAC. It should seem obvious. Consider a few of the front burner issues. Health Care - As long as the AMA puts Millions in the hands of politicians, it's not going to happen. Social Security - Anyone under 50 think they'll ever see a nickle of any money from SS? Yet the AARP needs to keep the pump primed and the status quo. Education - Performance based teaching? fugetaboutit - the NEA thinks tenure = competency. Tort Reform - How simple would it be, and fair, to have a loser pays court cost? The Trial Lawyers PAC will never allow that. Immigration - Both political parties and the President seek some form of amnesty for the people here illegally. Less than 30% of US citizens support this. The PACS representing a range of businesses from meat processing plants to corporate farms keep pushing so this cheap labor can be exploited with no consequence to employers. The "law and order" party (whichever one that is this week) supports illegal action to the point of amnesty. It took 25 years for Vietnam vets living in Canada, US citizens!, to get the same consideration. We placate ourselves by playing out parlor game debates to the amusement of those holding real power. Are you amazed that these nameless and faceless groups control so much? They see and put money into the campaigns of our Representatives daily. I consider myself fairly active, and I doubt I write a letter on average of once per month. I've never met any of my Representatives who go to Washington. Go ahead, point out Senator Fiensten, and they'll be those pointing to a Republican counterpart. If that doesn't work we'll use a example of President Carter and get a response citing President Nixon. It will evolve into a President Reagen Iran Contra example and inevitably someone will give a Nazi reference. End result - next November the status quo. Different names, different party, a new "us" against a redefined "them". And so it goes. Need a list of PACs: http://www.csuchico.edu/~kcfount/alpha.html Forget contributing to a politician. To have influence pick a few of these who back your position to contribute and you may actually see results. Obviously most don't want to take the other course of action. Just once - vote them all OUT, don't vote for ANY incumbent, serving in any capacity. I did it last election, I'll keep doing it, but its a lonely existence.

Vendaval -> RE: I hope the Ethics committee checks this one too (3/29/2007 11:24:16 AM)
Follow the money, follow the money... quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth The appearance of hypocrisy is rampant universally in USA politics. But the reality is it is just the appearance. There is no hypocrisy if you take the time to get fundamental. The PACS control the votes of both houses of Congress, and to some extent the Presidency. No matter how rich a person is going into politics it does not take long for them to be influenced by the money available to them provided by PACS. It occurs at every level of government. The most local elections are minor league. By the time a person gets to Congress or the Senate PAC money is no longer perceived as a benefit, but a right. Personal wealth, such as that of Senator Fiensten or Senator Kennedy, is immaterial. Using someone else's money to run an election campaign is much preferred to using personal assets. Why is there Billions of Dollars of Pork in the Iraq War funding Bill? PACS put them there. Sure Pork comes back to the area served by the Senator, but it's the payoff given the PAC in exchange for the campaign dollars. Don't you think the millions allocated to peanut storage within the bill were initiated by the PAC funded by peanut growers?

SimplyMichael -> RE: I hope the Ethics committee checks this one too (3/29/2007 11:36:22 AM)
Don't expect me to rise to that crooks defense. Fineswine is and always has been a lying sack of shit. However, if those who are wringing their hands over this corruption whined half as much when the republicans were busy looting the country, I might have some respect for them but I don't recall anyone doing anything but downplaying things like 8 billion in cash dissapearing in Iraq or the Abramaoff scandal which has only been partially exposed thanks to McCains coverup. Fineswine is a lying POS anti-gunner but funny thing is, we lost more gun rights under a government controlled in all branches by Republicans than we ever did before. Try and buy a spare barrel for any of your military weapons that isn't cut into three pieces. Thanks GWB! Anyone who thinks Republicans have any genuine interest in the 2nd Amendment other than as way to attract suckers dumb enough to fall for their bait and switch, doesn't deserve to own guns.

Page: [1]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125