Ed Kelly , the inspector general was conducting an investigation into fannie and freddie and their part of the housing mess, which of course leads directly to Rahm's time on the board in 2000 and 2001, when Obama up and fired Kelly as IG, demoting him to an auditor. Obama also denied a freedom of information request by the chicago tribune to take a look at the minutes of the freddie board when Rahm was on it. He claimed it was commercial info even though it was federal government entity when rahm was on the board.
Rahm "can't remember" what happened when he was on the board.
Obama was able to demote Kelly because of a loophole in a law written and co-sponsored by none other than Rahm, the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008.
Obama never replaced the fired inspector general, 16 months and counting and lo and behold on christmas eve gave fannie and freddie a blank check for bailouts through 2012. Fannie and freddie are responsible for 6 trillion in loans.
No oversight, no accountability, no congress, no FOIA.
A bit of background about Rahm's time spent on the freddie board-
Rahm Emanuel's profitable stint at mortgage giant
The board met no more than six times a year. Unlike most fellow directors, Emanuel was not assigned to any of the board's working committees, according to company proxy statements. Immediately upon joining the board, Emanuel and other new directors qualified for $380,000 in stock and options plus a $20,000 annual fee, records indicate.
On Emanuel's watch, the board was told by executives of a plan to use accounting tricks to mislead shareholders about outsize profits the government-chartered firm was then reaping from risky investments. The goal was to push earnings onto the books in future years, ensuring that Freddie Mac would appear profitable on paper for years to come and helping maximize annual bonuses for company brass.
The accounting scandal wasn't the only one that brewed during Emanuel's tenure.
During his brief time on the board, the company hatched a plan to enhance its political muscle. That scheme, also reviewed by the board, led to a record $3.8 million fine from the Federal Election Commission for illegally using corporate resources to host fundraisers for politicians. Emanuel was the beneficiary of one of those parties after he left the board and ran in 2002 for a seat in Congress from the North Side of Chicago.
The board was throttled for its acquiescence to the accounting manipulation in a 2003 report by Armando Falcon Jr., head of a federal oversight agency for Freddie Mac. The scandal forced Freddie Mac to restate $5 billion in earnings and pay $585 million in fines and legal settlements. It also foreshadowed even harder times at the firm.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/obama/chi-rahm-emanuel-profit-26-mar26,0,5682373.storyAs Cenk said-
That’s Politics 101.
Now I wouldn’t be in favor of it if they didn’t make legitimate points. But they do make legitimate points. And those are good questions. Rahm has to answer them. But on a political level, this is the kind of thing you’ve gotta do to say “you know what, you can’t only appease the right wing. I have to make sure that I appease the right wing and the left wing.” Especially because the left wing elected you, they’re the ones who gave you the votes.
So if it wiped the smug smile off of Rahm Emanuel’s face, and his dismissive attitude about all the people who voted for Barack Obama, well then it’s a great step in the right direction.
And don’t think it doesn’t have consequences — Jane Hamsher is catching massive heat from the left for doing this. How dare you join up with a right winger, how dare you damage Democrats politically.
Listen. If you don’t have the stones to go after the Democrats, they’re never going to listen to you. They don’t listen to reason, they listen to power. So Jane’s approach is definitely the right approach. As long as she’s got her ducks in order, and she’s not going with nonsense, she’s going with real concerns, that’s definitely the way to go.
Okay, that’s hard ball. And if you’re not willing to play it, you’re going to lose on every policy issue and on every political issue.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Et-hdHe7kew&feature=player_embeddedPlease explain the dead wrong in pushing for an investigation, using Norquist to draw attention to a backdoor, no oversight, additional tax payer bailout of fannie and freddie.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
