Skip to main content

View Diary: Who yelled "NOOO!" when Obama denounced Congressional insider trading? (180 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  aren't they supposed to have (10+ / 0-)

    blind trusts just because of this? when did that change? or is that only for presidents?

    •  I don't know (31+ / 0-)

      but one would think so, no? And yet there's this:

      Environmentalists note that in December 2010, according to Boehner’s financial disclosure forms, he invested $10,000 to $50,000 each in seven firms that had a stake in Canada’s oil sands....
      No conflict of interest there....
      •  i'd read that... (7+ / 0-)

        i'm not at all confident that anybody in washington or big companies adhere to law and ethics.

        i ask about the blinded trusts because i remember something about the Clintons and this kind of thing and hearing that they didn't know what investments they had because, i think, they were in blinded trusts... at least i think i remember it.

        there is so much info and so much said, it is hard to keep it all straight.

        •  Blind trust information (5+ / 0-)

          PDF file:

          I bolded a section for emphasis.

          Initially, it should be noted that there is no federal statute which expressly requires that particular federal officials place assets into a “blind trust” upon entering public service with the Federal Government.  Rather, the use of a “blind trust” is one of several methods of conflict of interest avoidance under federal law and regulation.  There are now uniform statutory requirements for the establishment and maintenance of blind trusts, and federal officials who are to use such devices, either voluntarily or as a remedial measure for identified conflicts of interest, must receive from their supervisory ethics office prior approval of the proposed trustee and the trust instrument to qualify the blind trust for ethics purposes.

          Mother Teresa: "If we have no peace, it is because we have forgotten that we belong to each other."

          by Amber6541 on Thu Jan 26, 2012 at 07:31:03 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  Your memory is fine (5+ / 0-)

          Yes, there was something about their money being in a blind trust.

          I, also, do not remember the context (did it have to do with the Whitewater land deal?), but I remember a phrase like 'my/our money is in a blind trust - we had to do that when I became president.'

          Things were different in those days.

          Then came the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act which overturned the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933... signed in the fall of 1999 by Bill Clinton, no less, sad to say..., all regulations were removed..., Wall Street and Big Banks became "too large to fail" and toxic assets were involved, not to mention questionably "legal" mortgages.

          Read the first two paragraphs of the info on the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, then search your memory banks for which businesses profited when we had to bail them out....

          And Congress Critters have been making huge profits ever since.

          R=Darrell Issa isn't the only one who's made a bundle.  By some calculations he's made the most, but by someone else's calculations for one or more of the last ten years, D=John Kerry was at the top of that list (which makes me immediately suspicious that Kerry profited from his meek prez loss in '04 and lack of willingness to go after e-voting machine companies)....  Kerry used to be a firebrand in his youth.  Now...?  Not.

          What about Gore's meekness in 2000 that started some of us (me, for sure) down the road to depression over the political situation in this country..., which has only gotten worse since what I journaled about during the 2000 prez "debates" came to pass (that Dumbya would start a war with Iraq to finish his daddy's war, that we'd go into a recession - and when the pundits were done giving the "debate win" to Dumbya, I really let loose in my journaling because I didn't see how anyone could think he'd won and I didn't see how anyone would vote for a person who was so obviously lacking in intelligence.  Wow.  I was hopelessly naive on the number of people who would vote for someone so stupid!  Imagine my horrified reaction when that happened a second time, and under questionable voting circumstances....

          Something is going on in the background in DC, which is why we're now stuck being forced to buy private corporate medical insurance in the future, among other things.  Forcing us to spend our own money that profits a corporate insurance program, and being levied a fine if we don't, is a new provision that came about as a result of the legislation for Medicare Part D that said 'buy private insurance or else' - no fines levied - so they kicked it up a notch and created a penalty for not buying corporate insurance by law; it may be unconstitutional for Congress Critters to make a law that forces us to contribute to a profit-driven corporation.  That part has been quietly going through the judicial system since the law was passed.

          Yeah, I know.  Sounds too, too CT.  It's the only answer possible because of the refusal to impeach or even investigate (let alone prosecute) the lying war criminals, and it's the only answer as to why our Congress Critters of both parties (Shame on the Dems, in particular, between '09-10!!!) totally ignored our pleas and demands for a single-payer medical program that could have easily been taken over by Medicare since the infrastructure for that already exists and it's running efficiently (and costs less to administer than it costs for the private sector corporate insurance costs where executives make great yearly bonuses even when their companies fail).

          I do not buy the excuse "well, this is the best we can do for now; we'll change it later."  Do it right the first time or don't do it at all....!

          I'm sick of attempts to steer this nation from principles evolved in The Age of Reason to hallucinations derived from illiterate herdsmen. ~ Crashing Vor

          by NonnyO on Thu Jan 26, 2012 at 07:45:02 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Oh, come on--if Kerry made big bucks (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            ladywithafan, marina, Woody

            it's likely because he started off with nearly the most bucks of anybody in Congress.

            The more you have, the easier it is to get more.

            Occam's razor.

            As a Floridian and someone who was in Duval County in 2000, I am keenly sensitive to issues about electoral integrity, but I find it extremely unlikely that either Kerry or Gore abandoned the fight in exchange for money.  Gore, in fact, pursued the case all the way to the Supreme Court, though he made some dumb mistakes along the way, probably in response to Bill Daley, erstwhile chief of staff, spouting defeatist bullshit in his ear a la Wormtongue.

            As for Kerry, this is a man who was already very rich who had wanted to be President since he was 10 years old.  Unless you have real evidence, I consider your claim here unfounded.

            Being ignored is the difference between being a one percenter and an American.--sweeper

            by SouthernLiberalinMD on Thu Jan 26, 2012 at 01:16:36 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

        •  Blind trusts but not deaf trustees. n/t (0+ / 0-)

          I'm asking you to believe. Not in my ability to bring about real change in Washington ... *I'm asking you to believe in yours.* Barack Obama

          by samddobermann on Fri Jan 27, 2012 at 07:09:49 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  I specifically checked Boehner for squirm (5+ / 0-)

        When Obama said that. Either he's a really good poker player or he was zoned out at the moment…"wait, what?"

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site