It is currently Fri Apr 19, 2024 5:40 AM


All times are UTC - 7 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1 post ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Apr 21, 2009 1:22 PM 
Trolling like there is no tomorrow!
Trolling like there is no tomorrow!
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2005 11:22 AM
Posts: 3609
Location: DFW
EQ1: Ghaani (retired)
WoW: Gabbath (retired)
Rift: Gabbath (retired)
SWOR: Gabbath/Gh'anni (retired)
Feinstein sought $25 billion for agency that awarded contract to spouse
Quote:
On the day the new Congress convened this year, Sen. Dianne Feinstein introduced legislation to route $25 billion in taxpayer money to a government agency that had just awarded her husband's real estate firm a lucrative contract to sell foreclosed properties at compensation rates higher than the industry norms.

Mrs. Feinstein's intervention on behalf of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. was unusual: the California Democrat isn't a member of the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs with jurisdiction over FDIC; and the agency is supposed to operate from money it raises from bank-paid insurance payments - not direct federal dollars.

Documents reviewed by The Washington Times show Mrs. Feinstein first offered Oct. 30 to help the FDIC secure money for its effort to stem the rise of home foreclosures. Her letter was sent just days before the agency determined that CB Richard Ellis Group (CBRE) - the commercial real estate firm that her husband Richard Blum heads as board chairman - had won the competitive bidding for a contract to sell foreclosed properties that FDIC had inherited from failed banks.

About the same time of the contract award, Mr. Blum's private investment firm reported to the Securities and Exchange Commission that it and related affiliates had purchased more than 10 million new shares in CBRE. The shares were purchased for the going price of $3.77; CBRE's stock closed Monday at $5.14.


Why is she still able to to do this? Remember she had to resign from one committee when it was discovered that she had awarded military contracts to her husband's companies. Senate ethics rules state that members must avoid conflicts of interest as well as "even the appearance of a conflict of interest." Yes, she is an easy target because her husband is such a power broker in California, with his company owning or him being on the board of so many companies, that the Senator can't do anything that will benefit one of his companies. But when she states that she had no idea that his company would benefit, that doesn't pass my smell test.


Top
Offline Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1 post ] 

All times are UTC - 7 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Theme created StylerBB.net
Karma functions powered by Karma MOD © 2007, 2009 m157y