 |
Caucus of Corruption: The Truth about the New Democratic Majority ORDER NOW!!! On Amazon, Barnes & Noble, or The Conservative Book Club
|
Nancy Pelosi Archives
Pelosi Wants Taxpayers To Pay Cost of Lawmakers' Adult Children's Travel
by Matt Margolis :: June 14, 2007 9:54 AM
After the 2005 showdown over privately-funded travel, and Pelosi's more recent desire to get a larger plane for travelling to and from her district, one would think that the new Speaker would have bigger and less controversal priorities than this:
Pentagon officials are bracing for a fight with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) over her desire to allow lawmakers’ adult children to tag along on taxpayer-funded travel for free.This request comes in contrast to her previous rhetoric.Pelosi wants them to be able to fill the role of lawmakers’ spouses when the latter are unable to make a trip because of health issues or work commitments.
“It has been longstanding policy that, in the absence of a congressional spouse, the adult child of a member of Congress may accompany the member on official U.S. government travel abroad for protocol reasons and without reimbursing the U.S.Treasury,” Pelosi spokesman Nadeam Elshami said. “Speaker Pelosi believes that a modern policy must reflect the professional responsibilities or health realities that might prevent a spouse from participating, and instead permit an adult child to fulfill the protocol needs of the official trip.”
Pentagon officials say the policy is that the Treasury must be reimbursed at commercial rates for children who accompany members on such trips, often called codels.
But taxpayer watchdog groups and ethics advocates said they were surprised Pelosi would seek more perks for members.Does Pelosi want her son to accompany her on trips now?“One of the things she was praised for when she came in was her sweeping reforms on gifts and travel,” said Craig Holman of Public Citizen. “It is very disheartening if she is, in fact, backsliding on this.”
Public Citizen filed a complaint with the IRS last year, saying that family members who receive free travel by accompanying lawmakers should pay taxes on the travel’s value. The complaint focused on privately sponsored travel, but Holman said it should apply to taxpayer-funded travel as well.
0 Comments
Track
del.icio.us
digg it
IM
Facebook
InfoUSA Hired Pelosi's Son After She Became Speaker
by Matt Margolis :: June 5, 2007 11:28 PM
Ronald Kessler has the scoop... Apparently, InfoUSA, a database company that has recently been accused of fraud, hired Nancy Pelosi's son shortly after she became Speaker of the House.
Just four weeks after Nancy Pelosi became speaker of the House this past January, Gupta and InfoUSA hired her son as a senior vice president. He told NewsMax InfoUsa pays him $180,000 a year.$180,000 for a second job? Not too shabby, but not all that surprising for the son of the new Speaker of the House who campaigned against corruption and cronyism last year.Even though his job with InfoUSA is considered full-time, Paul Pelosi continues another full-time job, as a home loan officer at Countrywide Home Loans, part of Countrywide Financial, in San Mateo, a suburb of San Francisco.
While InfoUSA is based in Omaha, Pelosi said he reports to a small InfoUSA office in San Mateo.
In two interviews, Paul Pelosi confirmed that Gupta hired him as senior vice president for strategic development starting Feb. 1, just after Pelosi's mother took the gavel as speaker on Jan. 4. He said his mother is aware of his new job.
A person familiar with the arrangement says Gupta treats Pelosi as a "trophy" and has the Speaker's son accompany him at high profile meetings around the country.
Pelosi denied the suggestion he is being used because of his family ties.
"I don't think that's really what happens," he said.
Nor does he "think" his hiring was related to his mother becoming speaker, he said. But he acknowledged the timing raises a "good question."
"It's interesting, timing-wise," Pelosi said. "I don't see it that way, but I could see why you'd ask the question ... I guess you always wonder why somebody hires you, right?"
Asked how he can hold two full-time jobs at once, Pelosi said Countrywide is satisfied as long as he fulfills his quotas.
Spokesmen for Nancy Pelosi and for InfoUSA did not respond to requests by NewsMax for comment.
MORE: From Dick Morris... FOX News
0 Comments
Track
del.icio.us
digg it
IM
Facebook
Pelosi Earmark Could Financially Benefit Her
by Matt Margolis :: May 7, 2007 6:45 PM
Nancy Pelosi's ethical troubles continue as Speaker of the House:
Republicans are accusing House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of including a provision in a water redevelopment bill that could benefit property her husband owns in San Francisco.The RSC has more details posted here.Aides to the San Francisco Democrat denied any connection, noting that the waterfront improvements were requested by the Port of San Francisco and the four rental properties in question are at least a mile away.
Republicans, who raised the issue more than two weeks after the bill passed the House, offered no evidence of benefit to Paul Pelosi's real estate holdings.
"I don't have any facts to say anything untoward has been done here," said Rep. Jeb Hensarling, R-Texas, chairman of the Republican Study Committee.
"She should explain to the American people what the earmark is all about and convince people there's no financial benefit to her," he said.
John Hart, a spokesman for Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., said that "on its face it appears to be a conflict of interest."
Pelosi's project was part of the $15 billion Water Resources Development Act that passed the House April 19 by 394-25 and pays for hundreds of projects around the country.
Pelosi's measure would authorize $25 million to improve San Francisco port areas, and also would put some areas off limits to navigation so cruise ships could dock.
Her investor husband gets rental income from four buildings in a nearby commercial district.
UPDATE: NRO writer Stephen Spruiell has some interesting new information.
According to new House ethics rules that Speaker Pelosi herself championed back in January, members sponsoring earmarks have to sign a form stating that neither they nor their spouse has any financial interest in the provision. A spokesman for the House Transportation and Infrastructure committee tells National Review Online that Pelosi signed such a statement for the earmark in question.Pelosi spokesman Drew Hammill did not return a call seeking comment for this article, but he told an AP reporter that it is “speculative at best” that Pelosi would see a financial gain as a result of this earmark. The problem with such logic is that most future financial gains, especially in real estate, are speculative in nature. Advocates for tougher rules governing earmarks argue that such potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed.
[...]
Pelosi fully disclosed her husband’s investments. The only question is whether she acted properly when she certified that she had no financial interest in the waterfront redevelopment project, given the possibility, however “speculative,” that it could cause the value of her husband’s property to rise.
0 Comments
Track
del.icio.us
digg it
IM
Facebook
Pelosi's Syria Trip A Felony?
by Matt Margolis :: April 6, 2007 1:58 PM
Robert F. Turner at the Wall Street Journal says so.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi may well have committed a felony in traveling to Damascus this week, against the wishes of the president, to communicate on foreign-policy issues with Syrian President Bashar Assad. The administration isn't going to want to touch this political hot potato, nor should it become a partisan issue. Maybe special counsel Patrick Fitzgerald, whose aggressive prosecution of Lewis Libby establishes his independence from White House influence, should be called back.Read on.The Logan Act makes it a felony and provides for a prison sentence of up to three years for any American, "without authority of the United States," to communicate with a foreign government in an effort to influence that government's behavior on any "disputes or controversies with the United States." Some background on this statute helps to understand why Ms. Pelosi may be in serious trouble.
0 Comments
Track
del.icio.us
digg it
IM
Facebook
Failure To Disclose...
by Matt Margolis :: January 29, 2007 10:52 AM
Two years ago there was a mad rush by members of both parties to amend travel reports and get all their disclosures in order after Democrats made a stink about privately-funded travel and late disclosures... Well, apparently Nancy Pelosi, Rahm Emanuel and Evan Bayh left out some important information from their reports which they have just now decided to rectify..
U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and two other prominent Democrats have failed to disclose they are officers of family charities, in violation of a law requiring members of Congress to report non-profit leadership roles.Naturally, they each claim their failure to disclose the information was "an oversight," not their own corruption...Rep. Rahm Emanuel of Illinois, the fourth-ranking House Democrat, and Sen. Evan Bayh of Indiana also did not report they serve as family foundation directors, according to financial disclosure reports examined by USA TODAY.
All three foundations are funded and controlled by the lawmakers and their spouses, and do not solicit donations from outside sources.
[...]
Members of Congress and top executive branch officials are required to file yearly reports on their personal finances, including any positions they hold with businesses or non-profits. At least 16 other lawmakers from both parties have reported holding similar positions, records show.
Pelosi spokesman Brendan Daly said Friday the speaker will amend her reports. He said it "was an oversight" that she had not listed her position dating back to 1992.It should be noted that Democrats were critical of Senator Bill Frist for the exact same thing.
[...]
Bayh spokeswoman Meghan Keck said it was "simply an oversight" that he did not disclose his charity role. Bayh has since amended his reports, Keck said.Emanuel, chairman of the House Democratic Conference, does not believe the law requires him to disclose his foundation post, spokeswoman Kathleen Connery said. "We believe we're following the instructions of the (ethics) committee exactly right, but if we're not, we'll amend our report," she said.
Stanley Brand, a former House general counsel, said the 1978 federal ethics law does not allow lawmakers to omit their positions with family non-profits.Pelosi and other Democrats made ethics and greater transparency of how they do business a top priority in the 2006 elections. When the Democratic-controlled Congress convened Jan. 4, the House changed its ethics rules but did not specifically address financial disclosure forms.
The Senate passed an ethics bill earlier this month that would boost penalties for knowingly filing false financial disclosure statements.
"Despite all the ethics reforms, there's still no enforcement," said Melanie Sloan, a former federal prosecutor and head of the liberal-leaning Citizens for Ethics and Responsibility in Washington.
Filing a false report could be prosecuted as a felony, Sloan and Brand said, but prosecutions are rare. Last year, then-Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist failed to report his role in a family charity. He updated his disclosure form and wasn't punished.
0 Comments
Track
del.icio.us
digg it
IM
Facebook
Tunagate: Democrats Corrupted By Power Within First Five Days
by Matt Margolis :: January 12, 2007 8:56 PM
It didn't take long... only a few days, for the Democrats to be corrupted by power. And it should come as no surprise that the Ethics Queen Nancy Pelosi would be a part of it. Democrats have been passionately urging for a minimum wage hike, yet, a company in Nancy Pelosi's district benefited from an exemption in the minimum wage bill passed by the House this week.
House Republicans yesterday declared "something fishy" about the major tuna company in House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's San Francisco district being exempted from the minimum-wage increase that Democrats approved this week.Republicans who voted for the bill were shocked to learn of the exemption, which they were unaware of because Democrats wanted to rush bills through the House with little debate during their "first 100 hours.""I am shocked," said Rep. Eric Cantor, Virginia Republican and his party's chief deputy whip, noting that Mrs. Pelosi campaigned heavily on promises of honest government. "Now we find out that she is exempting hometown companies from minimum wage. This is exactly the hypocrisy and double talk that we have come to expect from the Democrats."
On Wednesday, the House voted to raise the minimum wage from $5.15 to $7.25 per hour.
The bill also extends for the first time the federal minimum wage to the U.S. territory of the Northern Mariana Islands. However, it exempts American Samoa, another Pacific island territory that would become the only U.S. territory not subject to federal minimum-wage laws.
One of the biggest opponents of the federal minimum wage in Samoa is StarKist Tuna, which owns one of the two packing plants that together employ more than 5,000 Samoans, or nearly 75 percent of the island's work force. StarKist's parent company, Del Monte Corp., has headquarters in San Francisco, which is represented by Mrs. Pelosi. The other plant belongs to California-based Chicken of the Sea.
"I was troubled to learn of this exemption," said Rep. Mark Steven Kirk, Illinois Republican. "My intention was to raise the minimum wage for everyone. We shouldn't permit any special favors or exemptions that are not widely discussed in Congress. This is the problem with rushing legislation through without full debate."
Naturally, Pelosi's spokeswoman claimed that Pelosi, "has not been lobbied in any way by StarKist or Del Monte." But, who really believes that?
Rep. John Shadegg (R-AZ) says the exemption is unethical.
Del Monte Foods Co. (NYSE:DLM) subsidiary Starkist Tuna employs three-fourths of the work force in American Samoa. Del Monte is based in San Francisco, Pelosi's home district.In a press release, Shadegg noted, "Within the first five days of taking power, the Speaker of the House has inserted an 'earmark' providing a special benefit to a company in her home town."The minimum wage is $3.62 per hour in American Samoa, and would remain so under the bill, Shadegg said. The House bill, which would raise the U.S. minimum wage from $5.15 per hour to $7.25 per hour, did include the Northern Marana Islands.
Shadegg said the Samoan/Starkist exemption is fishy.
"Simply put: It is unethical to provide a special benefit to a company in any member of Congress' hometown," he said. "For Democrats to act in such a manner so early on in their tenure is hypocritical at best, and criminal at worst," said Shadegg.
CONNECTING THE DOTS: Nancy Pelosi's husband allegedly owns $17 million in Del Monte stock! More here.
0 Comments
Track
del.icio.us
digg it
IM
Facebook
Pelosi Voted Against Prohibiting Gifts From Lobbyists
by Matt Margolis :: January 18, 2006 2:55 PM
Recently, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi has had a number of press conferences where she spoke of lobbying reform and address ethical issues, including banning House members from accepting gifts from lobbyists... Her rhetoric is laughable considering she voted against a ban on gifts lobbyists back in 1995!!!
In November of 1995, Rep. Pelosi voted against a provision "to prohibit registered lobbyists from giving gifts to members, officers, or employees of the House and Senate," and was joined by the number-two Democrat in the House, Steny Hoyer.
UPDATE: Today, Rep. John Boehner (R-OH) issued the following comments in response to recent statements from Pelosi and other Democrats on the need for passage of lobbying reform measures in the United States Congress:
"When I hear Democratic Party leaders throwing around terms like 'culture of corruption,' I have to think: 'You oughta know.'"Yes, Republicans are outraged by the actions of Jack Abramoff. But we're outraged, in part, because our standards are higher than the standards that were held by the Democratic majority we replaced after 1994. We are repulsed at Abramoff and his crimes, in part, because they remind us of the corruption we uprooted and stamped out when we took the majority away from the Democrats a decade ago.
"Minority Leader Pelosi, who has served in Congress since 1987 and was part of the last Democratic majority, should recall that corruption well. It wasn't that long ago that gifts and personal loans from S&L interests to a Democratic committee chairman, made in hopes of winning favorable treatment from regulators, resulted in a half-trillion dollar scandal and a $125 billion tab for the American taxpayer. Nor was it that long ago that the Democratic chairman of the House Administration Committee stood idly by while drugs were being dealt from the House Post Office, hundreds of Members of Congress were bouncing checks and floating themselves zero-interest loans from the House Bank, and lobbyists were being given assigned parking spots on the Capitol grounds. Nor was it that long ago that the Democratic chairman of the Ways & Means Committee was trading taxpayer-purchased stamps for personal cash, leading to his conviction and jail time in 1993.
"An honorable majority responds to its stumbles with contrition, reform, and an effort to fix that which is broken. This is precisely the path Speaker Hastert and Chairman Dreier have charted for our majority in recent days. I applaud the Speaker for his leadership, and challenge Minority Leader Pelosi to join Republicans in our effort to change the way Congress works."
1 Comments
Track
del.icio.us
digg it
IM
Facebook
Murtha Could Face Ethics Probe
by Matt Margolis :: November 18, 2005 8:20 PM
While the big story right now is about Rep. John Murtha's call for a pullout from Iraq within 6 months, it appears Murtha is going to have some big problems soon...
Republican lawmakers say that ties between Rep. John Murtha (D-Pa.) and his brother’s lobbying firm, KSA Consulting, may warrant investigation by the House ethics committee.The calls come as Murtha, a former Marine and pro-military Democrat, has made headlines this week by coming out in support of a rapid withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq.
According to a June 13 article in The Los Angeles Times, the fiscal 2005 defense appropriations bill included more than $20 million in funding for at least 10 companies for whom KSA lobbied. Carmen Scialabba, a longtime Murtha aide, works at KSA as well.
KSA directly lobbied Murtha’s office on behalf of seven companies, and a Murtha aide told a defense contractor that it should retain KSA to represent it, according to the LA Times.
In early 2004, Murtha reportedly leaned on U.S. Navy officials to sign a contract to transfer the Hunters Point Shipyard to the city of San Francisco, according to the San Francisco Chronicle. A company called Lennar Inc. had right to the land, and Laurence Pelosi, nephew to House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), was an executive with the firm at that time.
Murtha also inserted earmarks in defense bills that steered millions of dollars in federal research funds toward companies owned by children of fellow Pennsylvania Rep. Paul Kanjorski (D).
House Republican Joe Wilson of South Carolina said, “If there is a potential pattern where Congressman Murtha has helped other Democrats secure appropriations that also benefited relatives of those Members, I believe this would be something that merits further review by the ethics committee.”
Another GOP lawmaker, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said Murtha “is playing footsie with his brother’s lobbying firm using taxpayer money.”This Member said Republicans have considered filing an ethics complaint against Murtha, although the preference among GOP insiders is for the ethics committee to look into this issue on its own authority, as it did in the previous Congress in initiating an investigation into former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Texas).
Even some Democrats privately acknowledged that a preliminary probe of Murtha by the ethics panel is possible next year, although the chances of a full-blown investigation are still unclear.
Of course, a Pelosi aide was quick to blame this whole thing on Republicans.
Jennifer Crider, a Pelosi aide, dismissed the allegation that the Minority Leader was involved in anything improper as “absolutely ludicrous, and an attempt to divert from the real issue that Mr. Murtha is attempting to engage in debate on a critically important topic — U.S. policy in Iraq. The real story here is the Republican strategy to try to discredit at Congressman Murtha” while he is pushing for a U.S. pullout from Iraq.Republicans acknowledge that Murtha’s Iraq statement — coming from a Member with strong military credentials — is driving their renewed focus on the ethics questions surrounding the veteran Democratic lawmaker.
It certainly does put his past hawkish stance in perspective...
2 Comments
Track
del.icio.us
digg it
IM
Facebook
Pelosi Calls For Investigation Into Her Own Whip
by Matt Margolis :: October 22, 2005 11:57 AM
Roll Call reports that Nancy Pelosi has called for an investigation "into how the House Administration Committee, led by Rep. Bob Ney (R-Ohio), decided to award a lucrative 2002 licensing agreement to a company with ties to Jack Abramoff."
Pelosi claims that Ney gave the company, Foxcom Wireless, preferential treatment... However, records show it was House Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer's staff which "brokered an early meeting for the company with committee staff."
Pelosi seems so determined to attack Republicans with an ethics witch hunt, that she didn't even realize that she just called for an investigation into her own Whip.
A spokesman for Ney suggested that Pelosi had been unwise in calling for an investigation into a matter that would involve Hoyer, a fellow member of Democratic leadership."Extensive internal documentation on this project has been available to any member who wished to see it," said the spokesman, Brian Walsh. "It is surprising that Ms. Pelosi chose not to do so before launching this attack. She might want to reconsider that decision and review our documents."
But Jennifer Crider, a spokeswoman for Pelosi, said Republicans were simply seeking to deflect attention from themselves.
Typical Democrat strategy. When their ethical problems, illegal activities, and shady deals come to light, they just accuse Republicans of using them as smokescreens for their own problems...
Pelosi should have used more than one source... The Washington Post story failed to mention Hoyer's connection... which is not even new information... A source told Roll Call this past March that "Bob Bean, who was [Rep. Steny] Hoyer’s [D-Md.] staff director at the time, weighed in on behalf of making sure that Foxcom got equitable consideration. Bean came to me to personally suggest steps like weighing the preferences of the telecom companies.”
It is also worth nothing that, according to the recent Roll Call article, "public disclosure reports do not show that Abramoff lobbied for Foxcom at the time of the wireless agreement," and Abramoff was not hired by the company to lobby until 2003.
0 Comments
Track
del.icio.us
digg it
IM
Facebook
Nancy Pelosi's PACs Broke The Law
by Matt Margolis :: October 2, 2005 1:07 PM
Hmm... why wasn't this big news?
Two political action committees linked to House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi have been charged with attempting to circumvent to legal limits on campaign giving, the Federal Election Commission has ruled.According to the March 2004 FEC finding, Pelosi appears to have violated the same kind of arcane campaign finance regulation that spurred the indictment of House Majority Leader Tom DeLay this week.
So, is Nancy going to be indicted now?
LINKS: March 26, 2004 FEC Ruling...
ALSO: Pelosi PAC fined $21,000 by federal elections officials...
2 Comments
Track
del.icio.us
digg it
IM
Facebook
Another Pelosi Crony
by Matt Margolis :: September 27, 2005 3:54 PM
Today, Nancy Pelosi and Rep. Henry Waxman introduced the Anti-Cronyism and Public Safety Act, which, in their words, "would prohibit the President from appointing unqualified individuals to critical public safety positions in the government."
As one of the loudest critics in Congress of the federal government's response to Hurricane Katrina, Nancy claimed that the Katrina response was "plagued by cronyism."
I can't understand how Nancy can talk tough on cronyism considering her record. Perhaps Nancy could answer some questions on why she's pushing out Jane Harman as the lead Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, and putting in Alcee Hastings, especially since Hastings is one of only six in American history to be impeached as a federal judge.
It seems that cronyism and corruption take precedent in the Democratic Party is rampant, even when it comes to something as serious as our nation's intelligence capability.
2 Comments
Track
del.icio.us
digg it
IM
Facebook
Nancy's Illegal Contributions
by Matt Margolis :: August 31, 2005 4:02 PM
This is comes from February of 2004, my guess is you haven't heard much about it in the mainstream media...
A controversial fundraising committee run by House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) was slapped with a $21,000 fine by the Federal Election Commission for enabling Pelosi to funnel more than $100,000 in illegal contributions to Democratic candidates in late 2002 as she was vying to become Democratic leader.Despite the fine, Pelosi has not shuttered her second political action committee, new campaign finance reports show. Instead, she used the remaining $140,000 in the Team Majority PAC to subsidize other fundraising expenses, such as the $300,000 salary of her top fundraiser and the cost of renting an MCI Center luxury box for an event at a Simon & Garfunkel concert.
Meanwhile, the new reports show that at least two other Democratic candidates were penalized for accepting contributions from the Pelosi committee in the weeks before the 2002 elections.
Talk about sneaky...
Pelosi ran afoul of campaign finance regulations in late 2002 when she started a second leadership PAC in order to circumvent the $5,000 annual donation limits.“The law is pretty simple: You can’t use a second PAC as a ploy to get around the contribution limits,” said Ken Boehm of the National Legal and Policy Center.
After the FEC began looking into the new account, Team Majority PAC asked the nearly three dozen Democrats who had received excessive contributions from the fund to return the money.
The PAC also gave more than $100,000 back to individual donors who had contributed to the committee.
Pelosi also funneled money to her campaign treasurer's think tank back in 2003:
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi of San Francisco has pushed through $1 million in federal funds for a think tank started by her longtime adviser and campaign treasurer, former Lt. Gov. Leo T. McCarthy, sparking concerns that she is rewarding a supporter with taxpayer money.
...
Pelosi's office confirmed Thursday that the San Francisco Democrat, who was elected House minority leader in November, obtained the $1 million for the USF center, without requiring McCarthy and USF to go through the normal application process for such grants. But Pelosi said the program got the money on its merits, not because of any political ties to the congresswoman.
0 Comments
Track
del.icio.us
digg it
IM
Facebook
Double Jeopardy for Nancy
by Matt Margolis :: July 5, 2005 2:21 PM
Not only did she take trips paid for by "outside sponsors" back in the nineties... but she only last week got around to filing reports for those trips..
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) filed delinquent reports Friday for three trips she accepted from outside sponsors that were worth $8,580 and occurred as long as seven years ago, according to copies of the documents.The filing is among hundreds of revisions from members of both parties who have amended missing or incomplete reports as scrutiny of lawmaker travel has intensified.
The most expensive trip was not reported on Pelosi's annual financial disclosure statement or on the travel disclosure form that is required within 30 days of a trip.
...
The unreported trip was a week-long 1999 visit to Taiwan, paid for by the Chinese National Association of Industry and Commerce, for "meetings with government, military and business officials," according to a filing Pelosi signed June 30. The flights cost $3,400 each for Pelosi and her husband. The hotel cost was $940. The sponsor, which has picked up trips for leaders of both parties, paid $300 for meals.
Many of the 34 lawmakers who participated in the trips given by the Taiwanese groups — the Chinese National Association of Industry and Commerce (CNAIC) and the Chinese International Economic Cooperation Association (CIECA) — met with high-ranking government officials while in Taipei. However, CNAIC and CIECA did not declare their lobbying activities with either the Senate’s public-records office or the Justice Department.
Filing the reports late doesn't make the situation any better, according to House ethics rules, "members cannot accept trips paid for by foreign agents."
That includes you, Nancy.
0 Comments
Track
del.icio.us
digg it
IM
Facebook
Democrats Also Got Tribal Donations
by Matt Margolis :: June 3, 2005 8:31 PM
The Washington Post has the story...
But Abramoff didn't work just with Republicans. He oversaw a team of two dozen lobbyists at the law firm Greenberg Traurig that included many Democrats. Moreover, the campaign contributions that Abramoff directed from the tribes went to Democratic as well as Republican legislators.Among the biggest beneficiaries were Capitol Hill's most powerful Democrats, including Thomas A. Daschle (S.D.) and Harry M. Reid (Nev.), the top two Senate Democrats at the time, Richard A. Gephardt (Mo.), then-leader of the House Democrats, and the two lawmakers in charge of raising funds for their Democratic colleagues in both chambers, according to a Washington Post study. Reid succeeded Daschle as Democratic leader after Daschle lost his Senate seat last November.
Rep. Patrick J. Kennedy (D-R.I.) also received $128,000 in donations between 1999 and 2004.
The six wealthiest tribes that had hired Abramoff's group were the Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians, the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians, the Saginaw Chippewa Indian Tribe, the Chitimacha Tribe of Louisiana, the Coushatta Tribe of Louisiana and the Tigua Indian Reservation.
But, who's missing from this story? Nancy Pelosi... The NRCC tells us that according to FEC reports, "Pelosi accepted $2,000 from the Saginaw Chippewa Indian Tribe on November 19, 2003, as well as $1,000 from the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians on August 14, 2002."
0 Comments
Track
del.icio.us
digg it
IM
Facebook
Pelosi Blames Republicans For Her Travel Problems
by Matt Margolis :: May 11, 2005 5:47 PM
I guess an ethical violation is not an ethical violation when a Democrat does it... Thats is, according to Nancy Pelosi...
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said Wednesday that Democrats cannot be considered in the same category as Republicans when it comes to ethics problems. “It is not an issue of members of our Caucus having the same sort of a problem,” she said. “Make no mistake — there is a drastic difference between the timing of reporting things and ethical behavior.”
Make no mistake — The Washington Post has more from Nancy.
"Where there were many technical violations on some of the travel about the timeliness of reporting or this or that, they say, 'Let's look at the travel,' instead of looking at the entire culture of it," Pelosi said. "Some of the travel is legitimate, and some of it is part of this other culture of gifts and entertainment that the public has a right to resent, and that must be changed."
Make no mistake — Nancy is a hypocrite...
0 Comments
Track
del.icio.us
digg it
IM
Facebook
Pelosi A Hypocrite For Ethics Stance
by Matt Margolis :: May 4, 2005 9:56 AM
House Republicans called Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi a hypocrite yesterday for not demanding investigations into new ethics questions that have arisen about the travel of her fellow Democrats."She demanded an investigation into [Majority Leader] Tom DeLay, but hasn't said a word about these Democrats who have done the same thing," said Rep. Patrick T. McHenry, North Carolina Republican. "If she doesn't call for investigations into her fellow Democrats, then it's clear she's being a hypocrite."
Republicans are wondering why the California representative won't ask for investigations into Democratic Reps. Norm Dicks of Washington, Bennie Thompson of Mississippi, James E. Clyburn of South Carolina and Neil Abercrombie of Hawaii, all of whom face questions about accepting travel paid for by lobbyists.
The Democrats have also block an investigation Jim McDermott, who actually did something illegal. We should expect nothing less from the Democrats, hypocrisy seems to be part of their platform.
0 Comments
Track
del.icio.us
digg it
IM
Facebook
Yeah Right, "Human Error"
by Matt Margolis :: April 30, 2005 10:31 AM
Stephanie Tubbs-Jones has finally provided records of her questionable trip to Puerto-Rico back in 2001...
Rep. Stephanie Tubbs Jones, the Ohio Democrat who sits on the House ethics committee, has provided a sworn statement and canceled checks as proof that a trip she took to Puerto Rico wasn't improperly paid for by a lobbyist, as her official paperwork initially stated.The June 2001 trip was actually paid for by Todo Puerto Rico con Vieques (TPRV), a group formed to protest the U.S. Navy's bombing range in Vieques, according to the sworn statement by group representatives.
Thats what the records say now... but, the original travel disclosure forms files with the House clerk stated that "D.C. lobbyist firm Smith, Dawson & Andrews had paid the $3,366 tab for Mrs. Jones and her husband to travel to the Puerto Rican island of Vieques in the Caribbean."
One has to wonder if cancelled checks and sworn statements are really just cover for what could be easily considered blatant hypocrisy...
As we all know by now, House ethics rules prohibit registered lobbyists from paying for members' travel. She is confident that she has complied with all ethics rules on that trip. Jones maintains that the original report that was filed was a result of "human error."
A spokeswoman in Mrs. Jones' office blamed the conflicting information on "human error" but declined to provide proof that the trip was paid for by Todo Puerto Rico con Vieques, rather than D.C. lobbyist Smith, Dawson & Andrews.Mrs. Pelosi also refused to provide any such documentation, and testily dismissed questions yesterday about the matter.
Pelosi, has been highly critical of Tom DeLay for so-called ethics violations.. The other day House Republicans called on Pelosi to provide documentation to prove that the lobbyist firm did not pay for that trip to Puerto RIco... Pelosi refused.