Why so many scandals? (Rep. Weldon "under investigation")
#51
DVD Talk Legend
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 20,804
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by bhk
from the see-BS link:
Not the same thing at all.
Not the same thing at all.
But your clever use of "see-BS" has helped me rethink the whole thing...

BTW, I love the bolding. You're actually using his public statement at face value as your rebuttal. Awesome!
#52
DVD Talk Legend
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Right of Atilla The Hun
Posts: 19,749
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You're right, it's not. Hastert actually maneuvered federal legislation and federal dollars to his own personal benefit. I see no evidence of Reid doing anything of the sort.
The land that Hastert owns is 3-5 miles away from the proposed highway.
That realclearpolitics article is biased as the AP story on Reid was widely covered by WashingtonPost, USA Today, CNN, NY Times, LaTimes, etc. there are currently 135 links on google news dealing with the land deal and the Reid's statements.
Last edited by bhk; 10-16-06 at 04:57 PM.
#53
DVD Talk Legend
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 20,804
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by bhk
Are you kidding? Reid passed through Clark County Conservation of Public Land and Natural Resources Act of 2002, which forced the dept. of Interior to sell off 18,000 acres of land around Las Vegas.
The land that Hastert owns is 3-5 miles away from the proposed highway.
The land that Hastert owns is 3-5 miles away from the proposed highway.

I think they're both pretty sketchy deals, that they both should be looked into, and that they are (despite your protestations) quite similar.
Thus far the broadcast networks have been pretty silent on it.

Tell you what, google the Reid story and the Hastert story and see which gets more hits. Go ahead, I'll wait.
Just kidding, I'm going home.

#54
DVD Talk Legend
Originally Posted by bhk
Then what was that $400,000 he got for the land before, you know, when he sold it but still owned it afterwars?
#55
DVD Talk Special Edition
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,621
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by DrRingDing
Harry Reid has barely been mentioned, because the scandal is puny in comparison to others...
Lets do some math
Weldon scandal: $1 milllion
Reid scandal: $1.1 million plus using campaign money for things like Christmas bonuses, etc.
Now I'm no rocket scientist but $1.1 million + is bigger than $1 million, so how exactly is that puny in comparison??
#56
DVD Talk Limited Edition
And here's another. The Repubs just don't know when to stop! 
As an aside, how the heck does being a veterinarian qualify you to head the FDA?
Ex-FDA chief to plead guilty in stock case
Lester Crawford held onto shares in companies governed by agency
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15291650/

As an aside, how the heck does being a veterinarian qualify you to head the FDA?
Ex-FDA chief to plead guilty in stock case
Lester Crawford held onto shares in companies governed by agency
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15291650/
WASHINGTON - Former FDA chief Lester Crawford will plead guilty for failing to disclose a financial interest in companies his agency regulated, his lawyer said Monday.
The Justice Department accused the former head of the Food and Drug Administration with falsely reporting that he had sold stock in companies when he continued holding shares in the firms governed by FDA rules.
Crawford “is going to plead guilty to two misdemeanors tomorrow afternoon and he is going to admit his financial disclosures had errors and omissions, mostly with his wife’s continued ownership of stocks,” said Crawford’s lawyer, Barbara Van Gelder.
Story continues below ↓ advertisement
“At the end of the day, he owned these stocks and he will admit he owned them while he was at the FDA and he will take responsibility for that,” said Van Gelder.
Accused of making a false writing and conflict of interest, Crawford was scheduled to appear before a federal magistrate Tuesday afternoon. Each carries a maximum penalty of one year in prison.
The papers say Crawford failed to disclose his income from exercising stock options in Embrex Inc. of Research Triangle Park, N.C., an agriculture biotechnology company. Crawford had been a member of Embrex’s board of directors, according to federal filings.
The court papers also say Crawford chaired FDA’s Obesity Working Group at a time when he and his wife owned stock in soft drink and snack food manufacturer Pepsico Inc., based in Purchase, N.Y., and food product manufacturer Sysco Corp., based in Houston.
The panel Crawford was chairing was making decisions affecting food and soft drink manufacturers.
Crawford, a veterinarian, abruptly resigned from the FDA job in September 2005 but gave no reason for his decision to step down. He had held the top position for just two months but had been acting head of the agency for more than a year.
According to the Justice Department’s court papers:
* A government ethics official inquired about Crawford’s ownership of stock in several companies FDA regulates and Crawford replied in a Dec. 28, 2004 e-mail that “Sysco and Kimberly-Clark have in fact been sold.” Actually, the court papers state, Crawford knew that he or his wife held shares in both.
* Even though financial reporting requirements for federal officials say all income must be disclosed, Crawford failed to reveal $8,000 in income from the exercise of Embrex stock options in 2003, and failed to report $20,000 from the sale of Embrex stock options in 2004.
* At the time he was making decisions chairing the government obesity panel, Crawford and his wife owned more than $25,000 in Pepsico shares and over $25,000 in Sysco shares.
The Justice Department accused the former head of the Food and Drug Administration with falsely reporting that he had sold stock in companies when he continued holding shares in the firms governed by FDA rules.
Crawford “is going to plead guilty to two misdemeanors tomorrow afternoon and he is going to admit his financial disclosures had errors and omissions, mostly with his wife’s continued ownership of stocks,” said Crawford’s lawyer, Barbara Van Gelder.
Story continues below ↓ advertisement
“At the end of the day, he owned these stocks and he will admit he owned them while he was at the FDA and he will take responsibility for that,” said Van Gelder.
Accused of making a false writing and conflict of interest, Crawford was scheduled to appear before a federal magistrate Tuesday afternoon. Each carries a maximum penalty of one year in prison.
The papers say Crawford failed to disclose his income from exercising stock options in Embrex Inc. of Research Triangle Park, N.C., an agriculture biotechnology company. Crawford had been a member of Embrex’s board of directors, according to federal filings.
The court papers also say Crawford chaired FDA’s Obesity Working Group at a time when he and his wife owned stock in soft drink and snack food manufacturer Pepsico Inc., based in Purchase, N.Y., and food product manufacturer Sysco Corp., based in Houston.
The panel Crawford was chairing was making decisions affecting food and soft drink manufacturers.
Crawford, a veterinarian, abruptly resigned from the FDA job in September 2005 but gave no reason for his decision to step down. He had held the top position for just two months but had been acting head of the agency for more than a year.
According to the Justice Department’s court papers:
* A government ethics official inquired about Crawford’s ownership of stock in several companies FDA regulates and Crawford replied in a Dec. 28, 2004 e-mail that “Sysco and Kimberly-Clark have in fact been sold.” Actually, the court papers state, Crawford knew that he or his wife held shares in both.
* Even though financial reporting requirements for federal officials say all income must be disclosed, Crawford failed to reveal $8,000 in income from the exercise of Embrex stock options in 2003, and failed to report $20,000 from the sale of Embrex stock options in 2004.
* At the time he was making decisions chairing the government obesity panel, Crawford and his wife owned more than $25,000 in Pepsico shares and over $25,000 in Sysco shares.
#57
DVD Talk Legend
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Right of Atilla The Hun
Posts: 19,749
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Questions I'd like to have Harry Reid answer:
How did he get the $400,000 to buy the land in the first place?
Why did he go into a partnership with a lawyer whose name keeps cropping up in organized crime investigations involving LasVegas Casinos?
If his relationship with that lawyer is legitimate, why did Reid structure his Senate ethics filings to eliminate any reference to their partnership or the corporate entity they owned jointly?
Reid's investment increased by $700,000 in a very short time after his unacknowledged partner used Harry Reid's name to get rezoning so that a shopping center could be built on that site. Did Reid knowingly peddle his influence in Wash. and Nevada to increase his profit by almost 200%(around 175% more that the percentage of the profits of Exxon)?
How did he get the $400,000 to buy the land in the first place?
Why did he go into a partnership with a lawyer whose name keeps cropping up in organized crime investigations involving LasVegas Casinos?
If his relationship with that lawyer is legitimate, why did Reid structure his Senate ethics filings to eliminate any reference to their partnership or the corporate entity they owned jointly?
Reid's investment increased by $700,000 in a very short time after his unacknowledged partner used Harry Reid's name to get rezoning so that a shopping center could be built on that site. Did Reid knowingly peddle his influence in Wash. and Nevada to increase his profit by almost 200%(around 175% more that the percentage of the profits of Exxon)?
Last edited by bhk; 10-17-06 at 12:43 AM.
#58
DVD Talk Legend
Originally Posted by bhk
Questions I'd like to have Harry Reid answer:
How did he get the $400,000 to buy the land in the first place?
How did he get the $400,000 to buy the land in the first place?
Why do you keep ignoring my question about how was Harry Reid hiding his ownership by saying he owned the land, when in actuality it was his LLC. It's a simple question. I promise to answer any of yours, that I haven't already posed to you.
Did Reid knowingly peddle his influence in Wash. and Nevada to increase his profit by more than 100%(more that the percentage of the profits of Exxon)?

#59
DVD Talk Legend
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Right of Atilla The Hun
Posts: 19,749
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
http://www.latimes.com/media/acrobat...06/8306315.pdf
Some details of what Harry Reid has done.
Includes sponsoring quite a bit of legislation that helped his family. Reid isn't alone in doing that however.
Some details of what Harry Reid has done.
Includes sponsoring quite a bit of legislation that helped his family. Reid isn't alone in doing that however.
#60
DVD Talk Legend
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Right of Atilla The Hun
Posts: 19,749
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why do you keep ignoring my question about how was Harry Reid hiding his ownership by saying he owned the land, when in actuality it was his LLC. It's a simple question. I promise to answer any of yours, that I haven't already posed to you.
Info from the original AP story.
He was hiding it by not disclosing it to the Senate. That is falsifying an official statement according to Federal law.
Last edited by bhk; 10-17-06 at 12:59 AM.
#61
DVD Talk Legend
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Right of Atilla The Hun
Posts: 19,749
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quite possibly. All though your "more than the precentage of proftis" is the silliest thing I've heard in a while.
And surprise! He blames republicans for smearing him(as he's announcing that he's getting a do-over on his filing

The original source for the AP story was actually one of his former advisors who smelled something fishy. It appears that the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy(TM) has infiltrated the highest levels of the opposition party.
Last edited by bhk; 10-17-06 at 01:48 AM.
#62
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Dayton, OH
Posts: 89
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
#63
DVD Talk Hero
Originally Posted by bcbaum
#64
DVD Talk God
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 68,522
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by JasonF
Thanks for posting that. The more I find out about this "scandal," the less convinced I am that there's any "there" there. It looks like Reid may have committed a technical violation by not disclosing that the nature of his ownership of the land had changed. But he disclosed the underlying asset, which is the important thing. And, more importantly, it does not appear that he used his Senatorial position for personal profit.
#65
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Originally Posted by chess
Awesome post. "Scandals"...with quotes...as if they're not REALLY scandals. 
Blaming election season...and why not, you've already blamed everyone else...well, except for the corrupt and perverted Republican majority. Yes!, it's an election year PLOY! Nevermind that Republican "ethical challenges" have been ongoing and systematic for years...and nevermind that the folks "in charge" have had ample opportunity (like years' worth) to get their collective act together.

Blaming election season...and why not, you've already blamed everyone else...well, except for the corrupt and perverted Republican majority. Yes!, it's an election year PLOY! Nevermind that Republican "ethical challenges" have been ongoing and systematic for years...and nevermind that the folks "in charge" have had ample opportunity (like years' worth) to get their collective act together.
You don't think it's a coincidence that all these "scandals" are coming up around election season? Really? Honestly? Seriously? Don't be so naive...
#66
DVD Talk Legend
Originally Posted by bcbaum
#67
DVD Talk Legend
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 20,804
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Mordred
Thanks a bunch. Now I feel dumb for even trying to get bhk to acknowledge simple accounting facts. There is no vast right wing conspiracy, just some dumb reporter trying to break a story when there wasn't one.
#68
DVD Talk Legend
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Right of Atilla The Hun
Posts: 19,749
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Amending filings for "doing nothing wrong"? OK. Oh and he added two more deals to the amended filings.
Perhaps Wesley Snipes can amend his filings and stay out of jail.
Perhaps Wesley Snipes can amend his filings and stay out of jail.
#69
DVD Talk Limited Edition
Democrat member of page board has announced other allegations (not about Foley) are being investigated.
No word on if they are Dems or Reps. Anyone want to take a wild guess?
No word on if they are Dems or Reps. Anyone want to take a wild guess?

#70
DVD Talk Legend
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Right of Atilla The Hun
Posts: 19,749
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No word on if they are Dems or Reps. Anyone want to take a wild guess?
#72
DVD Talk Limited Edition
Originally Posted by bhk
Kolbe is already being investigated. I suspect the unknown one(s) would be dems otherwise this guy would have spilled his or her name already.
#73
DVD Talk Hero
#74
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
well, since the midterm election thread has been locked but there are still outstanding races I will put my response here. I would like to add that the people of NOLA just reelected William Jefferson (D-LA) to another term. The man is probably going to be indicted soon but the people there have reelected him to another term. Terrible. I am glad that the Democratic Party in LA stripped him of their endorsement and hopefully, the Democrats in Congress strip him of his senority/committee assignments, etc. If Ms. Carter had been elected, she probably could serve for life. Some of the other politicans that endorsed Mr. Jefferson probably thought they could run if and when he is indicted.
The other race is the Bonilla/Rodriguez run off in TX-23 on Dec 12. The race has tightened as the DCCC has gone in with money and ads. Bonilla has come out swinging with some very negative ads. I still think that Bonilla will win because of the expected low turnout but this newly reconfigured district is heavily Hispanic and may eventually elect a Democrat once Bonilla leaves.
The other race is the Bonilla/Rodriguez run off in TX-23 on Dec 12. The race has tightened as the DCCC has gone in with money and ads. Bonilla has come out swinging with some very negative ads. I still think that Bonilla will win because of the expected low turnout but this newly reconfigured district is heavily Hispanic and may eventually elect a Democrat once Bonilla leaves.