[Rhodes22-list] POLITICAL - analysis Eds post

[Jb]

McCain had also carried a little water for Keating in Washington. While in 
the House, McCain, along with a majority of representatives, co-sponsored a 
resolution to delay new regulations designed to curb risky investments by 
thrifts like Lincoln.


If McCains wife didn't have major investments in Keatings company this might 
be on the up& up but she did. That's not helping a constituent in a proper 
fashion.

Ed, do you really think after someone says there going to squeal, that they 
wouldn't back off?      He's not stupid.



> ''The appearance of it was wrong,'' McCain said recently. ''It's a wrong
> appearance when a group of senators appear in a meeting with a group of
> regulators, because it conveys the impression of undue and improper
> influence. And it was the wrong thing to do.''  John McCain



If he knew it was the wrong thing to do, why did he do it....the 2nd time?
Why were 3 anymore guilty than 5. They all "backed off" once they heard the 
term criminal.


Conclusion:
John McCain was in it up to his neck.

Jb









----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Tootle" <ekroposki at charter.net>
To: <rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org>
Sent: Friday, October 10, 2008 3:56 AM
Subject: [Rhodes22-list] POLITICAL - analysis of Jay B.'s post, Peter L.'s 
comment


>
> Jay B., Peter L., Herb, and all...
>
> “I remember that scandal well. McCain was involved up to his neck.  McCain
> is no better than Keating ...he should have gone to jail also.  He just 
> got
> away with it ... again, our legal system at work.”  Jay B.
>
> “McCain helped destroy thousands of people’s finances during the S&L 
> crisis
> and we paid.” Peter L.
>
> "McCain later explained that he thought it was the right thing to do,
> because Keating was a constituent.
>
> “One of our jobs as elected officials is to help constituents in a proper
> fashion,'' McCain said. ''ACC (American Continental Corp.) is a big 
> employer
> and important to the local economy. I wouldn't want any special favors for
> them. . . .   ''I don't want any part of our conversation to be 
> improper.''
> William Black, deputy director of the Federal Savings and Loan Insurance
> Corp.
>
> ''To be blunt, you should charge them or get off their backs,'' John Glenn
> told the regulators. ''If things are bad there, get to them. Their view is
> that they took a failing business and put it back on its feet. It's now
> viable and profitable.”  John Glenn
>
> Then Patriarca made a stunning comment, according to transcripts released
> later. ''We're sending a criminal referral to the Department of Justice,''
> he said. ''Not maybe, we're sending one. This is an extraordinarily 
> serious
> matter. It involves a whole range of imprudent actions. I can't tell you
> strongly enough how serious this is. This is not a profitable 
> institution.''
>
> ''The criminality surprises me,'' Senator DeConcini said. ''We're not
> interested in discussing those issues. Our premise was that we had a 
> viable
> institution concerned that it was being overregulated.''  “The statement
> made DeConcini back off.”
>
> ''Again, I was troubled by the appearance of the meeting,'' McCain said
> later. ''I stated I didn't want any special favors from them. I only 
> wanted
> them (Lincoln Savings) to be fairly treated.''
>
> The Arizona Republic, a Phoenix newspaper said, “But McCain made a 
> critical
> error.  In spinning his side of the Keating story, McCain adopted the
> blanket defense that Keating was a constituent and that he had every right
> to ask his senators for help. In attending the meetings, McCain said, he
> simply wanted to make sure that Keating was treated like any other
> constituent.”
>
> Jay said, “He took campaign contributions to keep regulators off Keating’s
> back.”  No evidence of the judgment made.  It cost a lot for political
> campaigns.  The only question should be was contribution legal?
>
> ''The appearance of it was wrong,'' McCain said recently. ''It's a wrong
> appearance when a group of senators appear in a meeting with a group of
> regulators, because it conveys the impression of undue and improper
> influence. And it was the wrong thing to do.''  John McCain
>
> Conclusion:  If a business has government issues, it is entitled to
> assistance in dealing with those issues from appropriate legislators.  It 
> is
> possible that the regulations or interpretation of those regulations is
> wrong.  Until the criminal charges were announced, the legislators, and 
> that
> means all of them were just doing their jobs.  In all this it should be
> noted in capital letters that they backed off after they were told of
> impending criminal charges.
>
> Peter L. should note that once McCain was appraised the conduct involved 
> was
> wrong, i.e., criminal, he backed off and walked away.  Obama still does 
> not
> back off his relationship with a Terrorist.  That is an important
> difference.
>
>
>
> -- 
> View this message in context: 
> http://www.nabble.com/POLITICAL---Peter-and-Robert-tp19896352p19916149.html
> Sent from the Rhodes 22 mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to 
> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
> __________________________________________________
>