Freddie Got Fingered

Rick Davis is still an equity partner of his lobbying firm. He may not receive cash income, but it is an asset that he owns. His wealth grows with his firm's wealth/income. To say he received no income is like saying Bill Gates is not worth the $50billion in stock he has because he doesn't receive a salary from MS. Utter Bunk. Rick Davis directly benefits from the income his firm receives, whatever the source.

I'm a huge Obama supporter and think McCain would be terrible for the US. But. But, shouldn't we be focusing on the candidates? Obama's defense Re Rezko? He never did him any favors. So let's focus on McCain. Did he ever do favors for Freddie or Fannie? Would McCain know that a friend is profiting from his public association with McCain, a Senator?

Please, for the good of the country, let's vote on issues. Isn't it enough that McCain is an avowed de-regulator? There does not seem to be any proof that McCain did favors for Davis, or even received any benefits from Davis. It was DAVIS being paid, not McCain.

If there is further fault on McCain though, it's, as Tapper points out, it's rank HYPOCRISY. Keep the focus on the candidates (lest we be talking about the Wrights of the world).

"So to be consistent, you are going to ignore all conflicts of interest because that would force you criticize McCain? "

Ummm... I'm actually aware of the levels of conflicts of interest on both campaigns (hence the Obama list). Were you?

"What did Davis's firm do for $15K a month? ... Why did McCain abandon after his efforts at reform after osponsoring a bill once? "

They lobbied - you get paid for the effort, not the result. As to McCain's sponsorship/efforts at reform -- my understanding is that opposition from the Dems (Dodd and others) made it clear the original reform bill wouldn't go further. It's a good question - has anyone asked him or his campaign?

"I am drawing a distinction between a guy who was on the VP search team and a guy who was the campaign manager. ... You seem to want everyone treated the same regardless of the depth of their involvement in the campaign is. "

You're still looking only at FM as if that's all that matters. Obama's campaign manager has ties to various companies, his deputy campaign manager and various advisers were registered lobbyists. Don't they have influence on issues of importance?

"Yes, actually I do. Either be consistent, and want to know all the connections to all the business lobbying on both sides of the campaigns, or let it go. Ex., in a time of high energy costs and uncertainty, do you think lobbying for energy companies doesn't pose a potential conflict in crafting energy policy/legislation?"

So to be consistent, you are going to ignore all conflicts of interest because that would force you criticize McCain?

"1) But I don't see evidence of corruption. You're bootstrapping that because FM paid a lobbying firm who's founder had/has connections to McCain, there's corruption. Show me proof -- where's a vote that reflected this? where's the quid pro quo? As for conflict of interest, see above."

What did Davis's firm do for $15K a month?

Why did McCain abandon after his efforts at reform after cosponsoring a bill once?

2)I'm not finding a different culprit - "I'm asking you to hold everyone to the same standard. Lobbying is part of government - it's how citizens and businesses and every group in between advocates their position with their elected official. You're drawing an arbitrary distinction that special interests/lobbying related to McCain campaign is bad, but special interests/lobbying related to Obama campaign is OK. "

I am drawing a distinction between a guy who was on the VP search team and a guy who was the campaign manager.

You seem to want everyone treated the same regardless of the depth of their involvement in the campaign is.

I don't know what you are all so worried about. A few lobbyists and corporate moguls at his elbow is nothing to fret over. Mr. McCain is a man of principle! He said so. He is a war hero for GODS SAKE! He gets to be angry and self righteuos about his sacrfice for the REST of his LIFE, and we need to NEVER FORGET that 35 years ago he suffered for all of us!!

We might as well accept that he is, at the moment, the closest living example to Jesus Christ that we have. Wake up people- he is our country's savior! And we need to wake up and smell the proverbial coffee before it is too late. EVERYTHING he does is for the love of his fellow citizens- just like JESUS! Like when he dumped his first wife and abandonded his children to hook up with a younger super rich trophy wife with a famiily fortune built on liquor distribution-THAT was for the love of his country!! Or when he was indicted for the last financial meltdown that rocked our country-Mr. McCain was one of the Keating Five as you may recall- he was personally indicted for influence peddling to bankers making illegal and fraudulent use of our money. That was for the love of his country too! And who could forget when Mr. McCain voted AGAINST having a day set aside to honor Martin Luther King!? Now if that isn't LOVE of your country, really, WHAT WAS IT?! And if you should have any more doubt that EVERYTHING Mr. McCain does is for the LOVE of his country-- well, just LOOK at the most important decision of his entire campaign- the choice of our next Vice President! Wow. Mr. McCain chose, out of love for ALL of us, a person who will step in and stand as our nation's COMMANDER IN CHIEF (just in case the 72 year old 4 time cancer victim with early warning signs of mild onset of senile dementia should have some unfortunate health "event" occur for example).

She is SO INCREDIBLY CAPABLE she needs to be SHIELDED from the press!! No doubt Mr. McCain did this to PROTECT us all from her AWESOMENESS!! She is a PITBULL IN LIPSTICK! Oh my GOD that is SO EXCITING!! MR McCain keeps saying he just cannot WAIT to introduce "Sarah" to Washington! And now I CAN"T WAIT EITHER!! Mr. McCain chose her as the MOST capable, the most prepared, the best and brightest person out of an entire country of potential candidates. She MUST BE INCREDIBLE! I know, because EVERYTHING Mr. McCain does is for the LOVE of his country. He said so, and I believe him.

"You think the Fannie Mae connection was something unimportant to be clear about?" ... Yes, actually I do. Either be consistent, and want to know all the connections to all the business lobbying on both sides of the campaigns, or let it go. Ex., in a time of high energy costs and uncertainty, do you think lobbying for energy companies doesn't pose a potential conflict in crafting energy policy/legislation?

"...when presented with evidence of corruption and conflict of interest your first instinct is to deny it happened. Your second instinct is to find a different culprit. " --

1) But I don't see evidence of corruption. You're bootstrapping that because FM paid a lobbying firm who's founder had/has connections to McCain, there's corruption. Show me proof -- where's a vote that reflected this? where's the quid pro quo? As for conflict of interest, see above.

2)I'm not finding a different culprit - I'm asking you to hold everyone to the same standard. Lobbying is part of government - it's how citizens and businesses and every group in between advocates their position with their elected official. You're drawing an arbitrary distinction that special interests/lobbying related to McCain campaign is bad, but special interests/lobbying related to Obama campaign is OK.

"And you had the gall to chastise people about "critical thinking"."

Yep - I do.

"Were they supposed to also report on the Davis Manfort connections and contracts?"

You think the Fannie Mae connection was something unimportant to be clear about?

It seems odd to me that when presented with evidence of corruption and conflict of interest your first instinct is to deny it happened. Your second instinct is to find a different culprit.

And you had the gall to chastise people about "critical thinking".

"Ryan - Try 2003, not 2006."

So McCain waited until May 2006 to join a bill that was intro'd in 2003.

Ryan - Try 2003, not 2006.

from GovTrack -

S. 1508 [108th]: Federal Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2003 -

7/31/2003--Introduced.
Federal Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2003 - Amends the Housing and Community Development Act of 1992 to establish in the Department of the Treasury the Office of Federal Enterprise Supervision. Transfers to the Director of such Office supervisory and regulatory authority over specified government sponsored enterprises (Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac) from the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight of the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and from the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development. Prohibits merger or consolidation of such Office or its functions.
Requires: (1) the Director to ensure that the enterprises operate in a financially safe manner and remain adequately capitalized; and (2) that each enterprise have prior approval of the Director before implementing a new program.
Sets forth operating, administrative, and regulatory provisions of the Director, including provisions respecting: (1) assessment authority; (2) authority to limit nonmission-related assets; (3) minimum and critical capital levels; (4) risk-based capital test; (5) capital classifications and undercapitalized enterprises; (6) enforcement actions and penalties; and (7) reporting

Ryan C -

Where's the lie? The campaign noted Rick Davis' ties to Homeownership Alliance. They noted when he was last registered as a lobbyist. Were they supposed to also report on the Davis Manfort connections and contracts?

If that's now the level of disclosure required, will Obama campaign follow - identifying every manager/employer, companies from whom they're on leave, and the companies past and current client list? Where should we start:
- David Axelrod (ASK Public Strategies, clients included AT&T and Commonwealth Edison),
- Steve Hildebrand deputy campaign manager (an evironmental group), - adviser Robert Sussman who lobbied for Cinergy, Reliant and regional energy companies,
- John Podesta (Podesta Group) head of transition team
- adviser Daniel Shapiro who lobbied for the American Petroleum Institute

Or other advisers like Daschle (now w/Alston Bird), Mark Keam, the lead Democratic lobbyist at Verizon; Jimmy Williams, vice president of government affairs for the Wine & Spirits Wholesalers of America, etc ...

Unfortunatly this economic crisis is much bigger than either Candidate. we need to stop pointing the finger and come up with a solution, if there is one. This country is facing some very big problems outside of the mortgage meltdown. We are up to our eyeballs in debt, our dams, bridges, and infrastructure has outlived their expected life span and many are things are just being held together with band aids.
Both parties are at fault here. What are we going to do about it?
I personally don't think we will pull out of this. We haven't seen the worst yet.

Jake

I have to take exception to something here.

Here is a national story that is likely fundamentally wrong. The Times has likely perpetrated an offense against Davis and McCain.

How is that "unnamed sources" can be used to impeach someone without recourse?

Where's the justice in that?

How do we know that this wasn't simply a Kos staff member talking to the Times?

Why could that not be as likely as what they assert?

I despise impeachment in anonymity. If you have something like this to say in a major news source then it ought to be done under one's own aegis or it is simply not true.

False statements need recourse.

"Davis Manfort earned ~$3 m over the course of 10 years (1998-08) -- if that's how FM tried to buy access to McCain, perhaps they should have spent more."

What did Fannie Mae get for $15K a month from 2005 to last month?

"Then he might not have cosponsored the much cited oversight bills of 2005"

His cosponsorship of the oversight bill happened in May of 2006.

In Feb of 2006, Obama intro'd a bill he authored for regulating the mortgage industry.

Neither bill went anywhere.

"A campaign manager is still an employee, right? He's paid to do a job."

When you call them an employee you give the impression that his influence is equal to a receptionist or an office manager. He is the campaign's manager.

"You want to believe that Davis was hired for Homeownership Alliance solely to get access to McCain, go ahead"

No. I think Davis's firm was paid $15K a month for access.

His work with the homeownership alliance (which seems to be part of the GOP media structure, even with Habitat for Humanity included) is just the tip of the iceberg.

If the Abramhoff investigation (which is still nailing people) proved anything, its that Republican corruption runs deep and runs far.

You want to believe a campaign that lied about his relationship in the first place then attacks the people reporting these facts.

and FYI -

Davis Manfort earned ~$3 m over the course of 10 years (1998-08) -- if that's how FM tried to buy access to McCain, perhaps they should have spent more. Then he might not have cosponsored the much cited oversight bills of 2005.

Ryan -

A campaign manager is still an employee, right? He's paid to do a job.

You want to believe that Davis was hired for Homeownership Alliance solely to get access to McCain, go ahead - I think there can be other reasons, prime among them his connections to the Republican party b/c of his work on the Reagan, Dole and 1st McCain campaign. Yes, shocking- people hire people who know Congressmembers to lobby.

You want to think that hiring Davis Monfort is solely to get access to McCain (the chain being hire the firm, somehow link to a man who's on leave for 18 mos, and then link to the guy he's now working with), go ahead. I think there can be other reasons - prime among them the fact that FM/FM was one of the top purchasers of lobbying services in DC and had contracts large and small with a great number of lobbying organizations.

It would be funny to laugh at McCain's antics if there weren't so much at stake.

He could actually get elected. And he is clueless. And if he died in office, his Vice President is clueless.

Like I said, McCain is funny and all. But I won't laugh until I see Obama elected on November 4th.

"There's a substantial difference between a candidate/campaign directly working with someone (ex., Johnson) and a campaign employee's business (from which he is separated and not receiving compensation) working with someone. "

So now Rick Davis is just a campaign employee?

He's not the campaign manager of McCain?

So Rick Davis, McCain's campaign manager, receiving MILLIONS from Fannie Mae with the direct accusation that this was to buy access to McCain is unimportant.

But a guy helping with the VP search and having no other role in the campaign is the worst scandal ever?

Is that the smoke you are blowing?

Nothing is more important than this.

Face the financial crisis,
Tell the root cause,
Claim your credit with actions,

It is a big joke that everyone knows what happens and how it happens and no one did anything about it.

I used to respect the NYT but after this campaign cycle - no more. There's a substantial difference between a candidate/campaign directly working with someone (ex., Johnson) and a campaign employee's business (from which he is separated and not receiving compensation) working with someone.
Even while acknowledging that David himself hasn't been a registered lobbyist for years, the NYT goes for the implication that he's in the pocket with FM/FM. [Do they seriously think that his firm should refuse business because of how it makes the McCain campaign look?]

The NYT should know better. Or, if their reasonign was consistent, apply the same disdain/indignation at all the Congresspeople, lawyers/lobyists (including those working with/for Obama), etc who had ties to FM/FM. I haven't seen that -- Dodd/Obama/et al get a pass, while Davis is now crucified?

Worse, is the persistent description of Homeownership Alliance as a group designed to lobby against regulation --- their charter explicitly said no lobbying of Congress or the Administration; their members include a broad band of realty, financial, and consumer groups -- including Habitat for Humanity. Tax credits for ownership, housing cost assistance, development of affordable housing ... these are bad things?

So now the Dems are up in arms that a McCain staffer worked for a few years on educating the public on the value of ownership and advocated for helping them find avenues of doing so?

If that's wrong, then huge swaths of the Dem party should be tarred and feathered. And their platform changed - we're for the people ... as long as you let us be the ones in charge.

Even more dispiriting is the fact that so many people (commentators, voters) aren't even trying to think rationally any more. Critical thinking is out the window.