Daily Kos

UPDATED - Will the Left Lead the Charge on Feinstein?

Mon Apr 02, 2007 at 10:41:17 AM PDT

Will the political left in positions of power lead the charge to investigate the possible wrongdoings of Diane Feinstein in her capacity as chairperson or ranking minority member of the Senate Subcommittee on Military Construction?

They'd better or the GOP is going to rip the Democrats to shreds with it.

I haven't been on this blog much, so I don't know if this percolating scandal was aired in here last week.

Metroactive News (in an investigation which was partially funded by the Investigative Fund of the Nation Institute) has uncovered the fact that billions of dollars of federal contracts have landed in the businesses of Diane Feinstein's husband, Richard C. Blum.

Now if this was a Cheney we were talking about, or some other Republican in elective office, we'd all be screaming our heads off for an investigation and resignation or impeachment, wouldn't we?

Metro News, a California based publication and website, did the correct thing in investigating the actions of Senator Feinstein and reporting them accurately.  There is a whole laundry list of connections between the subcommittee she chaired or sat upon as ranking minority member until last week, and huge defense contracts that were awarded to her husband's companies, Perini Corp. and URS Corp.

Billions of dollars.

$185 million to reinforce roofs of military buildings in Iraq.  

$600 million for services for U.S. Army bases that included anti-terrorism force protection.

$42 million for a maintenance facility for the C-17 Hickam Air Base in Hawaii.

All of this money, and more, was appropriated by a senate subcommittee chaired and sat upon as ranking minority member by Diane Feinstein and awarded to companies owned by her husband.

And it gets worse -

The MILCON subcommittee is not only in charge of supervising military construction, it also oversees "quality of life" issues for veterans, which includes building housing for military families and operating hospitals and clinics for wounded soldiers. Perhaps Feinstein is trying to disassociate herself from MILCON's incredible failure to provide decent medical care for wounded soldiers.

There is scarce to no coverage of these facts so far today.  I saw a crawl on the TV, and there is NOTHING in the New York Times or LA Times yet.  There is, to date, only a little coverage on leftblogs, according to a quick search.

Unless these matters are investigated and reported on in an honest way, Feinstein, and the Democrats in the legislative majority, are going to look like overworked voo-doo dolls when the GOP gets done pinning everything that's going bad in this country on them.

Face it - If Diane Feinstein's last name was Cheney, we'd be foaming at the mouths like rabid wolves.  If Feinstein's hubbie worked for Halliburton we'd be screaming "Off with Their Heads!"

I guarantee you if Democrats don't lead the charge the GOP is going to take up the call for a full-scale investigation of the hawkish senator from California and they are going to load every bit of scandal and malfeasance, every whiff of corruption that is wafting around Washington D.C. at this moment, onto the backs of Diane Feinstein and the Democratic majority in the House and the Senate.

I guarantee you that if we don't all call for and receive a coherent and honest assessment of accountability and responsibility that the GOP is going to take Diane Feinstein apart slowly enough to scuttle the Democratic candidate for president next year.

The GOP will bludgeon Clinton's or Obama's bid to death using the carcass of Feinstein's career unless the Democrats and the political left takes this seriously.

This scandal is in Kos's backyard - He needs to weigh in on it and do the correct thing, even though Feinstein is a Democrat.

And so do we all.

UPDATE: Thanks to standingup who has provided a link in the commentary to the original Metroactive news item in which there more extensive quotes by watchdog groups, including by the executive director of the Center for Public Integrity.  Thanks to standingup for providing this link and commentary below.

ADDITIONAL UPDATE:  Please see bolded revisions in the diary that pertain to Diane Feinstein's status as chairperson or ranking minority member due to the problems several commentors experienced in understanding the meaning or intention of my diary.  I hope the revision helps clear the way for them to acknowledge the validity of my main points - that Democrats should lead the charge to investigate Diane Feinstein if she's misused her senatorial privileges and responsibilities and that we all need ethical leaders on both sides of the aisle and that investigation may be in order when either Republicans or Democrats use their power illegally or unethically.

Tags: Dianne Feinstein, Richard Blum, Senate, Senate Subcommittee on Military Appropriations (all tags) :: Previous Tag Versions

Permalink | 159 comments

  •  Agreed. (4+ / 0-)

    With one caveat...... it's not a case of Valerie sending her husband on a junket.

    Barbara Jordan = the anti Pelosi

    by Ghost of Frank Zappa on Mon Apr 02, 2007 at 10:40:14 AM PDT

  •  Well, I think "Lead the Charge" (6+ / 0-)

    is rather strong language, as (to me, anyway) it implies a presumption of guilt.

    However, yes, if there is reason to believe that an investigation should be conducted, then the Democrats should do the investigating.

    Not that there's a lot of extra time in between investigations of 'Thuglicans, specifically, Bushies, and I'd hate to see a Feinstein investigation take precedence over anything else that Congress is currently holding hearings on.  All of that stuff just seems a lot more urgent, somehow.

    Choosing the lesser of two evils is still choosing evil. -- teacherken

    by Mehitabel9 on Mon Apr 02, 2007 at 10:42:20 AM PDT

  •  Metroactive and newsmax (10+ / 0-)

    are not exactly reliable sources.

    When McCain talks he sounds like an evil Mr. Rogers.

    by clonecone on Mon Apr 02, 2007 at 10:44:37 AM PDT

    •  Metroactive Is. (3+ / 0-)

      Recommended by:
      Doug in SF, TastyCurry, planyourday

      And Newsmax is the other side.

      If you read the items, both liberal and conservative watchdog groups are very concerned about this.

      •  Newsmax is just lies & propaganda (0+ / 0-)

        Citing Newsmax can never help establish any point.

        A liberal is a conservative who's been hugged.

        by raatz on Mon Apr 02, 2007 at 01:20:58 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I Cited Newsmax (0+ / 0-)

          because the article quoted (direct quotes) three watchdog groups:

          One conservative -

          "This was a critique from the left," Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch, a conservative public interest group, told Cybercast News Service. "These were left-leaning papers. The fact that she stepped down from the committee lends credibility to the charges."

          One liberal -

          The matter should be probed further, said Kenneth Boehm, chairman of the National Legal and Policy Center, a conservative government watchdog group. However, he isn't that confident in the Senate's ability to police itself.

          Another liberal -

          Meanwhile, Melanie Sloan, executive director of the liberal watchdog group Citizens for Responsible Ethics in Washington, reportedly said the Feinstein matter could eclipse other congressional scandals.

          With three watchdog groups communicating concern relating to Feinstein's ethics and legality pertaining to this matter, I'm surprised that there is such an interest in discrediting my diary on this website.

          •  If I read something that's from Newsmax . . . (0+ / 0-)

            . . . it makes me think it's untrue.

            It's not a credible source. Period.

            So, again, it's the citation to Newsmax that discredits your diary.

            I'm just trying to offer friendly advice. Thanks for listening.

            A liberal is a conservative who's been hugged.

            by raatz on Mon Apr 02, 2007 at 01:44:05 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

  •  Glad to read that she has at least resigned. (5+ / 0-)

    Thanks for this post.  Better to hear bad news from your friends rather than your enemies.  When members of Congress have a conflict of interest thru marriage, they should own up and get off those committees.  This includes Jerry Weller, Republican congressman of Illinois who is married to a legislator in Guatemala, yet sits on the subcommittee for Western Hemisphere in the House.

    Is this story getting much play in Calif?

  •  Agreed. (2+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    Patricia Taylor, dennisl

    Will the political left lead the charge to investigate the possible wrongdoings of Diane Feinstein in her capacity as chairwoman of the Senate Subcommittee on Military Construction?

    They'd better or the GOP is going to rip us to shreds with it.

    "They'd" better.

    I stand by my original analogy between the Joker and bin Laden and the Riddler and Hussein. -- Greasy Grant

    by TheBlaz on Mon Apr 02, 2007 at 10:49:34 AM PDT

  •  Feinstein has always been able to shed (8+ / 0-)

    charges stemming from Blum's profiteering. I would predict she will again. She projects a nanny leadership that apparently well suits a majority of California voters. Damned if I know why (leftist San Franciscan here) but don't sell her teflon short. She's a toughie.

  •  Until Dianne has been proven quilty, I stand (9+ / 0-)

    behind her. We don't know the facts and we had better wait and see what really went down before we tar and feather her. Whats up with all this????

    "Though the Mills of the Gods grind slowly,Yet they grind exceeding small."

    by Owllwoman on Mon Apr 02, 2007 at 10:55:31 AM PDT

  •  Diane was a minority member of the committee (5+ / 0-)

    until very recently. None of these articles suggest she did anything actually illegal or unethical. Cheney has the ability to arrange for no-bid contracts. Diane didn't.

    Unless you have evidence that Feinstein in writing specs that only her husband's company can satisfy, you don't have much here.

    The Watermelon - a comedy about how really weird things can happen! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qDimaB95fK0

    by lorelynn on Mon Apr 02, 2007 at 11:12:37 AM PDT

    •  Blum and No-Bid Contracts from Our Government (1+ / 0-)

      Recommended by:
      standingup

      According to Wikipedia -

      As of December 2006, according to SEC filings and www.fedspending.org, three corporations in which Blum's financial entities own a total of $1 billion in stock won considerable favor from the budgets of the Department of Defense and the Department of Veterans Affairs:

      While the often reviled Haliburton has won few contracts in a no bid situation, over 50 percent of Blum's contracts were awarded on a no-bid basis.

  •  California is a community property state. (1+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    mattes

    Does federal law prohibit prohit a senator from voting for legislation in committee that may directly benefit her husband?  If so, she should have abstained from voting on that legislation.  

    •  Section 404 of the New Act (1+ / 0-)

      Recommended by:
      TastyCurry

      S. 1: Commission to Strengthen Confidence in Congress Act of 2007

      Known as the Legislative Transparency and Accountability Act of 2007.

      This legislation was overwhelmingly passed by the Senate on January 18, 2007.

      The section, in part, as it may pertain to Blum and Feinstein may be

      SEC. 404. PROHIBITION ON FINANCIAL GAIN FROM EARMARKS BY MEMBERS, IMMEDIATE FAMILY OF MEMBERS, STAFF OF MEMBERS, OR IMMEDIATE FAMILY OF STAFF OF MEMBERS.

           Rule XXXVII of the Standing Rules of the Senate is amended by adding at the end the following:

           `15. (a) No Member shall use his official position to introduce, request, or otherwise aid the progress or passage of a congressional earmark that will financially benefit or otherwise further the pecuniary interest of such Member, the spouse of such Member, the immediate family member of such Member, any employee on the staff of such Member, the spouse of an employee on the staff of such Member, or immediate family member of an employee on the staff of such Member.

           `(b) For purposes of this paragraph--

                 `(1) the term `immediate family member' means the son, daughter, stepson, stepdaughter, son-in-law, daughter-in-law, mother, father, stepmother, stepfather, mother-in-law, father-in-law, brother, sister, stepbrother, or stepsister of a Member or any employee on the staff (including staff in personal, committee and leadership offices) of a Member; and

                 `(2) the term `congressional earmark' means--

                       `(A) a provision or report language included primarily at the request of a Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, or Senator providing, authorizing or recommending a specific amount of discretionary budget authority, credit authority, or other spending authority for a contract, loan, loan guarantee, grant, loan authority, or other expenditure with or to an entity, or targeted to a specific State, locality or Congressional district, other than through a statutory or administrative formula-driven or competitive award process;

      •  Is their evidence that Feinstein introduced an (1+ / 0-)

        Recommended by:
        hypersphere01

        "earmark" as defined above?

        •  I Don't Know. Perhaps a lawyer who reads this (1+ / 0-)

          Recommended by:
          TastyCurry

          can confirm.

          It seems to be, as described above, in this part of the section -

          a provision or report language included primarily at the request of a Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, or Senator providing, authorizing or recommending a specific amount of discretionary budget authority, credit authority, or other spending authority for a contract, loan, loan guarantee, grant, loan authority, or other expenditure with or to an entity

          .

          insofar as Feinstein, as Senator, authorized spending on contracts given to her husband's companies.

          Am I reading the legislation incorrectly?

          •  Please cite a specific earmark introduced this (2+ / 0-)

            Recommended by:
            Hornito, hypersphere01

            session by Feinstein.

            You're raising concerns about earmarks, and citing a brand-new law prohibiting them.

            Are you suggesting we, in the progressive Blogs, lead the charge against Feinstein based on retroactive application of law?

            You raised a big ruckus here last summer with your "soft anti-semitism" innuendo against Kosaks who were critizing Lieberman.

            Is this a new concern, Mrs. Taylor?

            •  It is a New Concern (1+ / 0-)

              Recommended by:
              TastyCurry

              because I saw a crawl on it on TV this morning.

              I don't know if there is a specific earmark.  Does anyone else?

              I'm sure there are other ethics rules and even laws covering cronyism and the use of federal funds.

              According to information commented below, Peter Bryne (who has written for such publications as Scientific American and Mother Jones) did an investigative report on this issue and no mainstream media is picking up the item.

              But now, it seems, it's shown up on a CNN crawl.

              Which means it is emerging as an issue and unless Democrats choose to look at it, it may well be blown up by Republicans and we'll never get an honest look at it.

              I am a Connecticut resident who worked as a volunteer on Howard Dean's presidential.  I didn't get taught to stick my head in the sand by the people who trained me during my brief foray into election politics.

              I hate corruption and I love ethics.

              I didn't vote for Lieberman, by the way.

              Sometimes I feel like I'm the only person not an operative who even visits this website anymore.

              •  Thanks for bringing this to our ATTN, but (1+ / 0-)

                Recommended by:
                lorelynn

                its not incumbent on us to spearhead an attack on a Democratic Senator -- that's doing work for the GOP -- it isn't even clear that she's done anything unethical, much less illegal.

                Again, it's the innuendo thing with you.

                You cite a 2007 Bill in reference to allegations of past behavior.  Neither you nor the author you cite in the article provide any evidence that Feinstein ever engaged in earmarking, even though up until this year it was completely legal.

                What do you want us do -- run every Democrat out of office who ever had a family member with an interest in a defense contract?  

                Not without something to indicate unethical or illegal behavior.

                I'm sorry, I wouldn't even do that to a Republican.  

      •  "Will" versus "May" (3+ / 0-)

        Recommended by:
        leveymg, mr crabby, hypersphere01
        1. (a) No Member shall use his official position to introduce, request, or otherwise aid the progress or passage of a congressional earmark that will [my emphasis] financially benefit or otherwise further the pecuniary interest of such Member, the spouse of such Member, the immediate family member of such Member, any employee on the staff of such Member, the spouse of an employee on the staff of such Member, or immediate family member of an employee on the staff of such Member.

        If Sen. Feinstein votes to fund a project, then there is a chance that it may be awarded to URS or Perini by the DoD or VA.  But there is no guarantee that the contract will be awarded to URS to Perini.

        In any case, this bill isn't even the law yet, so I'm unclear on the relevance to the situation.

    •  Unless she's psychic... (1+ / 0-)

      Recommended by:
      hypersphere01

      I don't know how she would know that the DoD or VA would award the contracts to URS or Perini.  Let's be clear here, URS and Perini are the 5th and 11th largest engineering and construction companies in the country.     In order to avoid voting on contracts that could eventually go to her husband's companies, she'd probably have to never vote of any appropriations.  For a Defense-heavy state like California, that would be a heavy blow.

  •  i smell a concern troll (4+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    johnny rotten, leveymg, rgdurst, Leta

    Don't fight it son. Confess quickly! If you hold out too long you could jeopardize your credit rating. --Brazil (1985)

    by hypersphere01 on Mon Apr 02, 2007 at 11:27:21 AM PDT

  •  Alright, this article is a mess. (7+ / 0-)

    Feinstein did not chair the committee - she was ranking minority member. When her party became the majority, she stepped down.

    I wonder why this article leaves out the salient facts?

    The Watermelon - a comedy about how really weird things can happen! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qDimaB95fK0

    by lorelynn on Mon Apr 02, 2007 at 11:27:41 AM PDT

    •  Feinstein Was Chairperson and Ranking Member (2+ / 1-)

      Recommended by:
      raatz, TastyCurry
      Hidden by:
      Shane Hensinger

      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.

      according to the article by Peter Byrne.

      •  Nope, that's a flat out lie. Period. (7+ / 0-)

        MInority party members do not chair committees. Period. Anyone who says she was chair is lying. She was ranking minority member - that's it.

        The Watermelon - a comedy about how really weird things can happen! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qDimaB95fK0

        by lorelynn on Mon Apr 02, 2007 at 11:41:27 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Do They Chair or Co-Chair (1+ / 0-)

          Recommended by:
          jenifera

          Subcommittees?

        •  Before using "lie" check facts (4+ / 0-)

          The US senate had a Democratic Majority for the period described, Jeffords left the Republican fold and Dems were in the leadership until Jan. 03.

          So Feinstein may well have been the chair of the committee.

          •  That isnt' what the article says. (1+ / 0-)

            Recommended by:
            hypersphere01

            As previously and extensively reviewed in these pages, Feinstein was chairperson and ranking member of MILCON for six years,

            Feinstein was ranking minority member. Not chair.

            The Watermelon - a comedy about how really weird things can happen! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qDimaB95fK0

            by lorelynn on Mon Apr 02, 2007 at 12:27:11 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  She resigned as chairperson last week. (1+ / 0-)

              Recommended by:
              jenifera

              Feinstein became chairperson this past January, after serving as ranking minority member for years.

              •  Thank you. That is accurate. (0+ / 0-)

                The article is bullshit.

                From 2005:

                http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

                Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-Tex.), chairman of the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on military construction and veterans affairs, said she had just been informed of the $1 billion fiscal 2005 shortfall.

                "We can never fall short on our promises to those who have sacrificed so much," Hutchison said.

                From 2006:

                http://veterans.senate.gov/...

                April 26, 2006

                The Honorable Kay Bailey Hutchison, Chairman

                The Honorable Dianne Feinstein, Ranking Member

                Subcommittee on Military Construction and Veterans Affairs

                Committee on Appropriations

                United States Senate

                Washington, DC 20510

                Dear Chairman Hutchison and Ranking Member Feinstein:

                We strongly urge the Appropriations Subcommittee on Military Construction and Veterans Affairs to demonstrate this nation's commitment to its veterans by providing a much-needed increase in the Fiscal Year 2007 appropriation for the Department of Veterans Affairs' Medical and Prosthetics Research Program.

                The Administration's proposed FY07 budget for the direct costs of VA research is $399 million, a $13 million cut from the current year’s level of $412 million. The proposed level of direct funds does not keep pace with inflation and will compel VA to cut numerous projects.

                Therefore, we support a FY07 funding level of $432 million, in order to cover inflation, sustain current VA research and development commitments, and allow critical new research initiatives to move forward.

                The Watermelon - a comedy about how really weird things can happen! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qDimaB95fK0

                by lorelynn on Mon Apr 02, 2007 at 12:43:52 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

            •  No one can be both.... (4+ / 0-)

              The two positions "Chairperson" and "Ranking Member" are representative of the perspectives of their parties.

              Never, in fact, or in conception, could someone be both.  Computer languages have inclusive or exclusive and/or functions, English does not. So, we can assume, from a fair reading, that the articles writer meant that she held the two positions at different times.  And the Dems were in the majority in 2002.
              -----------

              We are missing the diarist's point here.  I am the last person who would want Feinstein to leave the Senate, especially since it would change the majority.  But that does not mean this seeming impropriety should be ignored.

              according to the article some of the contracts were no bid.  There was plenty of opportunity to influence the direction of the contract awards.  

              Feinstein should be treated exactly like any other member of congress, neither protected nor vilified because of her party affiliation.

              •  Thank You (2+ / 0-)

                Recommended by:
                jenifera, standingup

                for this clarification and your support of a discussion on ethics.

                •  You're smearing a Demo senator; not discussing (0+ / 0-)

                  ethics. You want to discuss ethics, find an article that doesn't begin with a misleading statement and end with a partisan assessment.

                  The Watermelon - a comedy about how really weird things can happen! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qDimaB95fK0

                  by lorelynn on Mon Apr 02, 2007 at 01:03:24 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Is Melanie Sloan (4+ / 0-)

                    Recommended by:
                    Cho, Patricia Taylor, jenifera, extradish

                    of CREW smearing her too?  

                    Melanie Sloan, executive director of Citizens for Responsible Ethics in Washington, remarks, "There are a number of members of Congress with conflicts of interest. [California Republican Congressman John T.] Doolittle, for example, hired his wife as a fundraiser, and she skimmed 15 percent off of all campaign contributions. Others, like [former] Speaker [Dennis] Hastert and Cong. [Ken] Calvert were earmarking federal money for roads to enhance the value of property held by their families.

                    "But because of the amount of money involved," Sloan continues, "Feinstein's conflict of interest is an order of magnitude greater than those conflicts."

                    •  Great - where does that say Feinstein was chair (0+ / 0-)

                      for the past six years?

                      The Watermelon - a comedy about how really weird things can happen! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qDimaB95fK0

                      by lorelynn on Mon Apr 02, 2007 at 01:37:32 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Not (2+ / 0-)

                        Recommended by:
                        jenifera, extradish

                        chair for six months.  Okay, the diarist typed it up wrong in her post but when you read the article she was referring to it states that part of the time Feinstein was the chair and the rest of the time she was the ranking minority member.  You are not refuting anything but a minor point.  

                        •  Wrong. It leads by lying and saying she was chair (0+ / 0-)

                          and ranking member for six years. It's a lie. Why are you defending a lie? and why would the author, if his intent was honest, phrase her titles in a misleading fashion?

                          You know the answer as well as I do - the intent of this article (in which he also misleadingly states she set the agenda for years - the chair does that, not the ranking member) was to mislead people as Patricia was mislead.

                          The Watermelon - a comedy about how really weird things can happen! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qDimaB95fK0

                          by lorelynn on Mon Apr 02, 2007 at 01:48:00 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                      •  And aside (1+ / 0-)

                        Recommended by:
                        jenifera

                        from that, do you care to answer the question that I asked or do you concede?  

                        •  Any lie in an opening paragragh is a (0+ / 0-)

                          major point. The second sentence misleads the reader into believing that Feinstein was chair for the past six years. If it was a minor point, it wouldn't be worth adding.

                          http://www.metroactive.com/...

                          SEN. Dianne Feinstein has resigned from the Military Construction Appropriations subcommittee. As previously and extensively reviewed in these pages, Feinstein was chairperson and ranking member of MILCON for six years, during which time she had a conflict of interest due to her husband Richard C. Blum's ownership of two major defense contractors, who were awarded billions of dollars for military construction projects approved by Feinstein.

                          The Watermelon - a comedy about how really weird things can happen! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qDimaB95fK0

                          by lorelynn on Mon Apr 02, 2007 at 01:58:18 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                    •  Melanie Sloan (0+ / 0-)

                      carries a lot of weight with me.

                      The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. - 9th Amendment

                      by TracieLynn on Mon Apr 02, 2007 at 07:10:41 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

              •  Fooled Patricia who asked about co-chairing. (0+ / 0-)

                The statement is misleading. Feinstein has not spent the past six years as chair. She has spent the past six years as Ranking member. Period.

                In 2001, she was chair for a few months. She apparently became chair in February and stepped down a few weeks later.

                The Watermelon - a comedy about how really weird things can happen! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qDimaB95fK0

                by lorelynn on Mon Apr 02, 2007 at 01:02:17 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  I Was Asking a Question. (1+ / 1-)

                  Recommended by:
                  standingup
                  Hidden by:
                  lorelynn

                  I was not fooled.

                  I read the header correctly, I believe, to begin with, and I believe that Byrne was stating that Feinstein served as ranking minority member and chairperson of the committee at various times.

                  Why the distraction?

                  •  Liar. It doesnt' say "at various times' (0+ / 0-)

                    As previously and extensively reviewed in these pages, Feinstein was chairperson and ranking member of MILCON for six years, during which time she had a conflict of interest due to her husband Richard C. Blum's ownership of two major defense contractors, who were awarded billions of dollars for military construction projects approved by Feinstein

                    The Watermelon - a comedy about how really weird things can happen! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qDimaB95fK0

                    by lorelynn on Mon Apr 02, 2007 at 01:53:23 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

        •  Dems were in the majority . . . (0+ / 0-)

          . . . after Jeffords switched in 2001.

          A liberal is a conservative who's been hugged.

          by raatz on Mon Apr 02, 2007 at 01:28:03 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  Will someone please give Patricia (0+ / 0-)

        a donut for lying? What she just wrote is completely false, in other words, a lie.

        •  Give me (1+ / 0-)

          Recommended by:
          jenifera

          a break.  Why don't you provide a little better evidence of where she has lied before you start calling for someone to be troll rated.  

        •  The Dems controlled the Senate in 2001 & '02 ... (2+ / 0-)

          Recommended by:
          Patricia Taylor, standingup

          ... after Jeffords switched.

          I have problems with this diary because of the citation to Newsmax. But I think you owe the diarist an apology.

          A liberal is a conservative who's been hugged.

          by raatz on Mon Apr 02, 2007 at 01:27:02 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I agree (3+ / 0-)

            Recommended by:
            Patricia Taylor, jenifera, arodb

            the diarist should have linked to the first article written by the Metroactive.  I contains quotes on the investigation by two respected watchdog organizations.   Of course that requires people to take the initiative to read those articles before they begin making refutations.  

            The first article quotes the directors of Project on Government Oversight and CREW who have apparently looked at the investigation and had these remarks:

            This investigation examined thousands of pages of documents, including transcripts of congressional hearings, U.S. Security and Exchange Commission filings, government audits and reports, federal procurement data and corporate press releases. The findings were shared with contracting and ethics experts at several nonpartisan, Washington, D.C.-based government oversight groups. Danielle Brian, executive dire