PDA

View Full Version : McCain Camp: Is this true?


Steelerstrength
09-24-2008, 01:56 PM
When I was doing a light search for articles on Fanny & Freedie, these two articles came up. I haven't heard much about this, so I'm hoping to find more. If true, McCain should fire Mr. Davis immediately, in accordance with his stated campaign beliefs. If not, then I hope someone can prove these stories to be false. (they do mention the Obama ties to F & F)

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/24/us/politics/w24davis.html?_r=2&hp=&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&pagewanted=print&adxnnlx=1222276554-ooufrXlwcpZdMdLdpWZVDA


http://www.newsweek.com/id/160561/output/print

Does anyone have more information that can shed some light on this subject? Thanks in advance!

revefsreleets
09-24-2008, 02:05 PM
Make ya a deal? He'll fire Davis if Obama drops out of the race, since Obama received money DIRECTLY FROM Feddie Mac...and a TON of it by the looks of things.

http://www.nowpublic.com/world/obama-gets-big-bucks-fannie-mae-freddie-mac

http://blog.case.edu/conservativemovement/2008/09/17/obama_in_bed_with_fannie_mae_and_freddie_mac

Steelerstrength
09-24-2008, 03:15 PM
Make ya a deal? He'll fire Davis if Obama drops out of the race, since Obama received money DIRECTLY FROM Feddie Mac...and a TON of it by the looks of things.

http://www.nowpublic.com/world/obama-gets-big-bucks-fannie-mae-freddie-mac

http://blog.case.edu/conservativemovement/2008/09/17/obama_in_bed_with_fannie_mae_and_freddie_mac

I'm not doubting that Obama received money from someone at F & F. And that is a very good point. Who donated the money? Employees? The company itself? I'd like to know more.

But, I'm also looking at McCain, who is forcefully delivering a message of despise for anyone & everyone involved with F & F, but his Campaign managers company may possibly have been receiving money ($15,000 per month) until last month?

They both look bad, but this looks much worse, at this moment from what we know, for McCain. The two are not a wash, imo. But, I don't see anything changing from either camp based on these issues. I was really hoping someone had more insight on the two specific articles I had asked about, but it doesn't appear that info is yet available.

Thanks for the feedback!

revefsreleets
09-25-2008, 09:51 AM
How can direct PAC funds (lobbyists directly contributing funds into Obama campaign purse) be of lessor consequence than one of McCain's staffers getting money from the same source? One is a direct path, the other is indirect.

You're right, this is not a wash. Obama is directly benefitting from these contributions, while McCain is not, therefore Obama's connections to Freddie Mac are much more dubious.

Strangely, the mainstream media is all but ignoring Obama's connections...why might that be?

tony hipchest
09-25-2008, 10:20 AM
so now it is illegal or wrong to take contributions?

i dont care if obama took money from those crooks.

whats being ignored here is the simple economics of lobbyists.

lobbyists are paying for favors and possible representation of their interests. why would they pay huge money to somebody they already have in their pocket?

if obama has never cast a vote in congress (or just votes "present" all the time), i would say they wasted their money.

anyways, specific dollar amounts and direct paths aside, mccain benefitting from fannie may money appears much more hypocritical than obama benefitting from it.

those are the simplicities the american public in general focus on.

i know your smart, and feel i am rather educated. i bet we can both agree that the general public doesnt delve so deeply into the issues when deciding how to cast a vote.

hell, look at the percentage of people eligible to vote, who dont even bother.

right or wrong, appearances can be deceiving and perception can become reality, and right now it appears mccain is benefitting from something he says he's against.

revefsreleets
09-25-2008, 10:28 AM
anyways, specific dollar amounts and direct paths aside, mccain benefitting from fannie may money appears much more hypocritical than obama benefitting from it.

those are the simplicities the american public in general focus on.

i know your smart, and feel i am rather educated. i bet we can both agree that the general public doesnt delve so deeply into the issues when deciding how to cast a vote.

.

Uh oh...here we go again. What sense does this make? McCain indirectly (well, really not benefitting at all, since he's merely taking advice from someone on FM's payroll, not on the payroll himself) "benefitting" is WORSE than Obama being the second biggest recipient of FM PAC money.

There isn't even a Bizzaro Universe where this makes any sense.

Pehaps you don't understand the concept of lobbying? I just don't know...the point is, you've got this all backwards. At best, McCain is showing himself to be a maverick again, buy going against the entity that is paying one of his aides. At worst McCain is showing himself to be a maverick again by, well, by taking on the entity that is paying one of his aides.

The American people are being duped. The media is heavily scrutinizing McCain's loose and indirect ties to FM, and ignoring Obama's tight and direct ones. What do you expect them to think if they are only working with less than half the story?

lamberts-lost-tooth
09-25-2008, 10:49 AM
I appreciate the tone of the discussion in this thread....

Just wanted to add this to what Rev and Steelerstrength are talking about.

Franklin Raines, CEO Fannie Mae from 1999-2004, is the individual most responsible for the subprime mortgage crisis. It was on Mr. Raines' watch that Fannie Mae went bankrupt.

He was accused of manipulating earnings statements so he could be paid bonuses to which he was not entitled.....and now he has been recently taking calls from Barack Obama's presidential campaign seeking his advice on mortgage and housing matters.

During an interview with the associated press...Raines said that he had gotten a couple of calls from the Obama campaign on general housing and economy issues.

Perhaps a far more important tie to this crisis.....is that of Jim Johnson, the former Fannie Mae chairman who was part of the $10.6 BILLION dollar fradulant accounting scandal...investigated by the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight Commitee in 2004.... had to resign as head of Obama's vice presidential search team..
http://www.transworldnews.com/NewsStory.aspx?id=47760&cat=14

Mr. Johnson and Mr. Raines aren't the only figures in the subprime mortgage scandal to be connected to the Obama campaign...... Jamie Gorelick was vice chairman of Fannie Mae from 1997 to 2003 and benefited from bogus, inflated bonuses during the accounting scandal...and rumored to be an attorney general candidate in an Obama administration,...... Penny Pritzker, Mr. Obama's national finance chairman has been connected with packaging bad loans with good ones at her now defunct Superior bank in suburban Chicago with over $1 billion is uninsured loans...1,406 people lost their life savings....but fortunately for Pritzker she is ranked as the 89th richest person in the United States.

All of these people directly related to Obamas campaign directly benifited from this crises with incredible personal profit.

tony hipchest
09-25-2008, 11:00 AM
The American people are being duped. The media is heavily scrutinizing McCain's loose and indirect ties to FM, and ignoring Obama's tight and direct ones. What do you expect them to think if they are only working with less than half the story?ok. so are you saying it woulda been good if obama rejected FM's contributions?

there are rich crooks who make contributions all across the board.

dirty money is everywhere in america. you and i both know this.

for me, specifically, its a not issue. its about as important as obama being muslim, biden being catholic, mccain thinking islam is the devil, and palin thinking... well i guess she thinks dinosaurs and man co-existed. whatever.

fixing this mess is what im concerned about. driving while watching the rearview mirror isnt the way to go about it.

revefsreleets
09-25-2008, 11:01 AM
Interesting...now it doesn't matter?

tony hipchest
09-25-2008, 11:17 AM
Interesting...now it doesn't matter?"now?"

it didnt to me then, either. atleast not in the grand scheme of things.

personally i dont care where candidates get their campaign contributions. for me surrounding oneself with the best people is MUCH more important and that has ALWAYS been my stance.

im not sure what youre getting at, but if you wanna bring up past quotes of mine i will be more than glad to address them.

revefsreleets
09-25-2008, 11:22 AM
If surrounding yourself with good people is important, Obama has much to answer for.

lamberts-lost-tooth
09-25-2008, 11:27 AM
ok. so are you saying it woulda been good if obama rejected FM's contributions?

there are rich crooks who make contributions all across the board.

dirty money is everywhere in america. you and i both know this.

for me, specifically, its a not issue. its about as important as obama being muslim, biden being catholic, mccain thinking islam is the devil, and palin thinking... well i guess she thinks dinosaurs and man co-existed. whatever.

fixing this mess is what im concerned about. driving while watching the rearview mirror isnt the way to go about it.

I agree with you in principal Tony...however...if Obama does get into office....I will be very worried about people like Franklin Raines & Penny Pritzker.

...and that is not a knock against Obama as much as its fear of people of the ilk of Raines and Pritzler getting their hands on our already shaky economy

lamberts-lost-tooth
09-25-2008, 11:28 AM
"now?"

personally i dont care where candidates get their campaign contributions. for me surrounding oneself with the best people is MUCH more important and that has ALWAYS been my stance.


....and again...that is what worries me.

tony hipchest
09-25-2008, 11:42 AM
If surrounding yourself with good people is important, Obama has much to answer for.doesnt everybody?

it is true that you are judged by the company you keep, and everyone has kept bad company. but im living in the "here and now", and trying not to navigate the highways by looking in the rearview window. i wanna see things through the windshield going forward. i wanna see good co-pilots capable of navigating the rocky roads.

LLT notes all of obamas ties to FM but has still refused to even aknowledge the existance of "foreclosure phil" gramm.

i get that obama placed calls to the former CEO for general housing advice. who better to call? were the calls taken inside prison? jim johnson was hired to interview potential veep candidates. not actually be the veep. all these crooks are people who maximized capitalism in america to the fullest. some toe the line, and some definitely cross it. some swim in the gray areas.

c'mon, youre a nascar and a chad knaus fan. i wouldnt care if he got busted cheating and banned for life. if i ever needed help fixing my car, i would definitely seek is advice, if it were available to me. its common sense.

who's advice should obama seek on housing issues? the CEO of mcdonalds?

its kinda like that movie "catch me if you can". huge crook becomes a govt employee in fraud detection and prevention. :noidea:

i understand that no candidate on this big of a stage will be able to 100% distance themself from crooked money. it the nature of the beast.

revefsreleets
09-25-2008, 11:50 AM
I'm not a Knaus fan. I defend him in the sense that I defend everyone in the garage: They all cheat.

But trying to elevate Obama by the company he keeps is the ultimate irony. For Christ's sake, he hangs with a dude that wants to kill whitey!

tony hipchest
09-25-2008, 12:30 PM
I'm not a Knaus fan. I defend him in the sense that I defend everyone in the garage: They all cheat.

But trying to elevate Obama by the company he keeps is the ultimate irony. For Christ's sake, he hangs with a dude that wants to kill whitey!so by that you can infer that obama wants to kill whitey? that some pretty shakey logic.

the whole reverend argument is pretty much grasping at straws. thats why i rarely bring up mccains pastor. plus attending church on sundays hardly constitutes "surrounding oneself with".

ok, so youre not a knaus fan. i would still take the advice of the most cheatingest, lying, heavilly fined crew cheif in nascar when it came to fixing my car. i think you get the point.

in fact, you built upon my point. crew chiefs in the garage are much like politicians in washington.

they all lie and cheat. (except the penske guys of course:wink02:- why do you think the successful ones keep getting fired and they suck thereafter :huh: )

revefsreleets
09-25-2008, 12:54 PM
So, the company you keep only matters situationally? I see, I see...
In other words, it matters when it's casting a negative light on a candidate, you know, oh....say...John McCain, but really doesn't matter nearly as much if the shadowy and controversial and polarizing characters in question are cavorting with Obama.

tony hipchest
09-25-2008, 01:20 PM
So, the company you keep only matters situationally? I see, I see...
In other words, it matters when it's casting a negative light on a candidate, you know, oh....say...John McCain, but really doesn't matter nearly as much if the shadowy and controversial and polarizing characters in question are cavorting with Obama."in other words"????

you mean like the ones you chose to put in my mouth? thats not very fair debate or discussion. if you need clarification just ask. :cool:

Steelerstrength
09-25-2008, 02:31 PM
How can direct PAC funds (lobbyists directly contributing funds into Obama campaign purse) be of lessor consequence than one of McCain's staffers getting money from the same source? One is a direct path, the other is indirect.

You're right, this is not a wash. Obama is directly benefitting from these contributions, while McCain is not, therefore Obama's connections to Freddie Mac are much more dubious.

Strangely, the mainstream media is all but ignoring Obama's connections...why might that be?

Your post peaked more curiousity, so I checked with the federal Election Commission. Here what the official filings report:

McCain:
http://www.fec.gov/DisclosureSearch/mapApp.do?cand_id=P80002801&searchType=&searchSQLType=&searchKeyword=

Obama:
http://www.fec.gov/DisclosureSearch/mapApp.do?cand_id=P80003338&searchType=&searchSQLType=&searchKeyword=

So officially Obama does not accept PAC donations. Some may view this as semantics, others as legal documentation.

I'll see if any other pertinent information can be easily found, then share. :thumbsup:

revefsreleets
09-25-2008, 06:21 PM
Check his SENATE disclosure. That was where the Freddie Mac money came from. 2nd on the list of recipients...he must have done some good work for them.

And, Tony, you got caught, fair and square. McCain's company matters, and Obama's doesn't. You said it yourself, not me...

tony hipchest
09-25-2008, 06:41 PM
And, Tony, you got caught, fair and square. McCain's company matters, and Obama's doesn't. You said it yourself, not me..."fair and square"??? :chuckle:

you think you caught me, but you havent. i choose my words rather wisely. notice the word "keep" is in present and future tense.

ive already stated im not looking in the rearview mirror. ive already stated mccains and obamas religious council is not a big issue with me. ive never made an issue of mccains manwhoring and partying days while a young naval officer in Fla. just like ive never made an issue with obamas drug experimentation as a youth.

i would be living in a glass house casting stones if i did that.

paling and gramm are the main company i am refering to, and i think ive been pretty straight forward about that.

holy cow! palin is about a trainwreck when she opens her mouth and that's so even being compared to joe "gaffe" bidden.

and gramm? wow, gramm.... that is the white elephant that shall not be mentioned.

Steelerstrength
09-25-2008, 06:52 PM
Check his SENATE disclosure. That was where the Freddie Mac money came from. 2nd on the list of recipients...he must have done some good work for them.

And, Tony, you got caught, fair and square. McCain's company matters, and Obama's doesn't. You said it yourself, not me...

I've been checking, and still can't find any PAC money. I need your kind assistance. Do you mind forwarding a link? Much appreciated.

revefsreleets
09-25-2008, 07:36 PM
I've been checking, and still can't find any PAC money. I need your kind assistance. Do you mind forwarding a link? Much appreciated.
I'll ignore the not so subtle patronizing tone, as well as the fact that my first post on this thread HAD links, and go ahead and provide more. In fact, I'll cut and paste so we don't have to keep re-establishing the same FACTS over and over again.

http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2008/09/update-fannie-mae-and-freddie.html

(I went down to Hillary Clinton, since that seems to have certain poetic justice to it)

Update: Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Invest in Lawmakers

Published by Lindsay Renick Mayer on September 11, 2008 11:26 AM | Permalink (http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2008/09/update-fannie-mae-and-freddie.html) | Comments (21) (http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2008/09/update-fannie-mae-and-freddie.html#comments)

When the federal government announced two months ago that it would prop up mortgage buyers Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, CRP looked at (http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2008/07/top-senate-recipients-of-fanni.html) how much money members of Congress had collected since 1989 from the companies. On Sunday the government completely took over the two government-sponsored enterprises, and we've returned to our data to bring you the updates, this time providing a list of all 354 lawmakers who have gotten money from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/summary.php?cycle=A&type=P&id=D000000163) (in July we posted the top 25). These totals are based on data released electronically from the FEC on Sept. 2 and include contributions to lawmakers' leadership PACs and candidate committees from the floundering companies' PACs and employees. Current members of Congress have received a total of $4.8 million from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, with Democrats collecting 57 percent of that. This week we also wrote about how much money lawmakers had invested of their own money in the companies (http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2008/09/congressmen-may-have-lost-17-m.html) last year--a total of up to $1.7 million.

All Recipients of Fannie Mae and Freddie MacCampaign Contributions, 1989-2008
Name Office State Party Grand Total Total from
PACs Total from
Individuals Dodd, Christopher J S CT D $165,400 $48,500 $116,900 Obama, Barack S IL D $126,349 $6,000 $120,349 Kerry, John S MA D $111,000 $2,000 $109,000 Bennett, Robert F S UT R $107,999 $71,499 $36,500 Bachus, Spencer H AL R $103,300 $70,500 $32,800 Blunt, Roy H MO R $96,950 $78,500 $18,450 Kanjorski, Paul E H PA D $96,000 $57,500 $38,500 Bond, Christopher S 'Kit' S MO R $95,400 $64,000 $31,400 Shelby, Richard C S AL R $80,000 $23,000 $57,000 Reed, Jack S RI D $78,250 $43,500 $34,750 Reid, Harry S NV D $77,000 $60,500 $16,500 Clinton, Hillary S NY D $76,050 $8,000 $68,050

Steelerstrength
09-25-2008, 08:08 PM
I'll ignore the not so subtle patronizing tone, as well as the fact that my first post on this thread HAD links, and go ahead and provide more. In fact, I'll cut and paste so we don't have to keep re-establishing the same FACTS over and over again.

http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2008/09/update-fannie-mae-and-freddie.html

(I went down to Hillary Clinton, since that seems to have certain poetic justice to it)

Update: Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Invest in Lawmakers

Published by Lindsay Renick Mayer on September 11, 2008 11:26 AM | Permalink (http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2008/09/update-fannie-mae-and-freddie.html) | Comments (21) (http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2008/09/update-fannie-mae-and-freddie.html#comments)

When the federal government announced two months ago that it would prop up mortgage buyers Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, CRP looked at (http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2008/07/top-senate-recipients-of-fanni.html) how much money members of Congress had collected since 1989 from the companies. On Sunday the government completely took over the two government-sponsored enterprises, and we've returned to our data to bring you the updates, this time providing a list of all 354 lawmakers who have gotten money from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/summary.php?cycle=A&type=P&id=D000000163) (in July we posted the top 25). These totals are based on data released electronically from the FEC on Sept. 2 and include contributions to lawmakers' leadership PACs and candidate committees from the floundering companies' PACs and employees. Current members of Congress have received a total of $4.8 million from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, with Democrats collecting 57 percent of that. This week we also wrote about how much money lawmakers had invested of their own money in the companies (http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2008/09/congressmen-may-have-lost-17-m.html) last year--a total of up to $1.7 million.

All Recipients of Fannie Mae and Freddie MacCampaign Contributions, 1989-2008
Name Office State Party Grand Total Total from
PACs Total from
Individuals Dodd, Christopher J S CT D $165,400 $48,500 $116,900 Obama, Barack S IL D $126,349 $6,000 $120,349 Kerry, John S MA D $111,000 $2,000 $109,000 Bennett, Robert F S UT R $107,999 $71,499 $36,500 Bachus, Spencer H AL R $103,300 $70,500 $32,800 Blunt, Roy H MO R $96,950 $78,500 $18,450 Kanjorski, Paul E H PA D $96,000 $57,500 $38,500 Bond, Christopher S 'Kit' S MO R $95,400 $64,000 $31,400 Shelby, Richard C S AL R $80,000 $23,000 $57,000 Reed, Jack S RI D $78,250 $43,500 $34,750 Reid, Harry S NV D $77,000 $60,500 $16,500 Clinton, Hillary S NY D $76,050 $8,000 $68,050



Everything has been cool, and unfortunately through computers, I cannot express my sincerety. I really could not find PAC money, and your link shows $6000 in PAC money. Total contributions are much different than PAC money. Individual contributions are much different. That's why in my earlier post I said "semantics" in regards to who contributed. That is exactly why I posted the link to the factual government reportings.

If you want to respectively share facts, I'm in. Straight out, I'm not into the bullshit back & forth. My tone has been far from patronizing. However, yours, only in this last post, was. Not cool. I sincerely thought we were conducting a civil conversation, something I wish to continue. No inuendo at all. :peace:

revefsreleets
09-26-2008, 09:04 AM
I could care less about your tone or whatever...it's completely irrelevant...I'll just ignore it from here on out and stick to the topic.

So are you refuting the fact that Obama recieved political contributions from Freddie Mac? Hair splitting aside, how is it okay for him to directly receive funding, but not okay for McCain to not receive funding?

This only makes sense if you are completely biased against McCain...

Steelerstrength
09-26-2008, 12:50 PM
I could care less about your tone or whatever...it's completely irrelevant...I'll just ignore it from here on out and stick to the topic.

So are you refuting the fact that Obama recieved political contributions from Freddie Mac? Hair splitting aside, how is it okay for him to directly receive funding, but not okay for McCain to not receive funding?

This only makes sense if you are completely biased against McCain...

One can only look to the factual reportings when not an expert on political contributions. That is exactly what I have done, without invoking personal opinion.

I would appreciate anything factual that you can present that documents who contributed the donations. I don't know. Was it the rank and file? Or was it indeed the executives? The contributions listed states they are from "Individuals".

They both received money from "Individuals" of Fannie May & Freddie Mac. Obama received much more. (126,000) compared to McCain (21,000) so both have received donations. My opinion is that this is bad for McCain and worse for Obama. But, when you throw in the fact that McCain Campain Manager Davis, received $15,000 per month until last month (for two years) , when the Fed's took over, that's additionally, and not subsequently, bad as well. (Davis is still factually documented in corporate filings as the Treasurer)

We can kindly disagree regarding our opinion of these issues.

It is also a point of interest, at least to me, that McCain officially received $1.27 million from PAC money, during his Presidential Campaign, and Obama has received $0.

revefsreleets
09-26-2008, 01:00 PM
But Obama refused to take public money, so he could fill his coffers as full as he liked. It's also perfectly apropos at this juncture to point out that he vowed TO take public funding before he flopped and decided NOT to. That's well documented by the way...he did so because it means he now has unlimited funds with which to draw from...essentially McCain is capped at 84.1 million, and Obama can spend whatever he raises. That's particularly dubious because he earlier promised that he would ONLY accept public funding in an agreement he struck with the McCain camp.

What's more, less than 1% of McCains funds have come from PAC's...I'd say that's hardly enough to make him beholden to any special interest groups.

Besides, PAC's are usually most helpful in congressional races. Public funding is what's used in the last two months of the race, and the money comes from checking that little box on your tax returns.

So when you compare apples to apples, you have one guy using the system that every other candidate has since Watergate, and another guy lying about accepting that system, then gaining a huge financial advantage from that flip-flop.

One other thing...Obama pledged that his election would be funded by small contributions: $5, $10, $20...truth is that 55% of his contributions are over $200, so that's a bit of a fudge, too.

Vis
09-26-2008, 01:31 PM
Not using public money means more for the bailout doesn't it?

revefsreleets
09-26-2008, 01:47 PM
Not using public money means more for the bailout doesn't it?

Again, the puyblic money comes directly from the taxpayers when we check the little box to donate $3 to the Presidential campaign fund.

Vis
09-26-2008, 01:49 PM
And if it's not all used, where does it go?

revefsreleets
09-26-2008, 01:53 PM
Good question...probably just gets divided up in the next election. Obama is the first candidate not to use it...