« GOP DONORS CONTRIBUTING TO EMBER’S CAMPAIGN; HOCKEY GAME SCHEDULED IN HELL LATER TONIGHT | Home | MDE REALITY CHECK: ALAN FINE RECEIVED CONTRIBUTION FROM AN ACTIVE REPUBLICAN COMMITTEE »
MDE EXCLUSIVE: DFL LEGISLATOR FAILS TO DISCLOSE CONFLICT OF INTEREST?
By Michael B. Brodkorb | August 21, 2006
Check back later tonight for a post exposing a potential huge conflict of interest for a DFL legislator. I haven't spent much time focusing on legislative races, but this information is just too good!
I'm trying to talk with the legislator before I post the information.
Tags: Uncategorized
Topics: Uncategorized | 16 Comments »
16 Responses to “MDE EXCLUSIVE: DFL LEGISLATOR FAILS TO DISCLOSE CONFLICT OF INTEREST?”
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
August 21st, 2006 at 3:23 PM
It’s good to hear you’re checking with the legislator first.
Personally, I really need Alan Fine’s contact info and I can’t find it anywhere. If anyone has it and can post a email or campaign phone number, it would be much appreciated.
August 21st, 2006 at 5:03 PM
Did you check with Fine?
August 21st, 2006 at 6:25 PM
Any chance it was Dean ‘the sander’ Johnson’s lying to his fellow pastors about the conversations with Supreme Court Justices on legislation he was trying to block that the pastors probably wanted to have pass?
August 21st, 2006 at 6:53 PM
Speaking of conflicts of interest, anyone think Mike Hatch representing the State against the lawsuit filed by one of the first groups to endorse his candidacy, SEIU, against the constitutionality of the Maple Grove hospital is a conflict of interest? Are we supose to think he will fairly represent the state’s interest at the expense of his biggest supporters?
August 21st, 2006 at 7:15 PM
I know! It’s Dick Cheney’s huge stock options and funnelling of no-bid contracts to Halliburton, all while receiving deferred compensation!
Oh, that’s right. Cheney’s immune from criticism here. Oh, well. Bring on your next tempest in a teapot, then.
August 21st, 2006 at 7:26 PM
Leave it to a union to oppose building a hospital.
August 21st, 2006 at 7:29 PM
OMG Brian, you’ve had to resort to yelling Halliburton. Don’t let the facts hit you in the a$$ on the way out the door — Halliburton received so-called no-bid contracts throughout the Clinton administration along with the company Democrat Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s husband, Richard Blum, runs. See, eg.,
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2003/04/27/BA284459.DTL
August 21st, 2006 at 7:30 PM
I’m Brian Hanna:
Bush lied people died. Bush lied people died. Bush lied people died. Bush lied people died. Halliburton! Halliburton! Halliburton!Halliburton! Halliburton! Halliburton!
August 21st, 2006 at 7:34 PM
I’m with you, P.I.M. Hatch has had so many conflicts both ethical and legal that the one you cite you is just another of his game playing dirty tricks. No news there though!
August 21st, 2006 at 7:55 PM
Don’t you just love idiots like this? They try to deflect attention from real issues with stupid, non-sensical, old, tired, retreat “Dick Cheney controls all aspects of the Federal Goverment and is really the puppetmaster” crap. It’s time for a new mantra because this one is getting really old.
August 21st, 2006 at 9:03 PM
Boy, you know when it stings, because they sure do howl!
Cheney’s war profiteering is argueably impeachable.
// “As this C.R.S. report shows,” Lautenberg said, “The ethics standards for financial disclosure is clear. Vice President Cheney has a financial interest in Halliburton.”
On Sept. 14, Cheney said on the NBC News program “Meet the Press” that “Since I left Halliburton to become George Bush’s vice president, I’ve severed all my ties with the company, gotten rid of all my financial interest. I have no financial interest in Halliburton of any kind and haven’t had, now, for over three years.” //
http://money.cnn.com/2003/09/25/news/companies/cheney/index.htm
There’s also Nine. Billion. Dollars. Missing. In Iraq. Under the fiscal management of the Republicans.
// WASHINGTON (CNN) — Nearly $9 billion of money spent on Iraqi reconstruction is unaccounted for because of inefficiencies and bad management, according to a watchdog report published Sunday. //
http://edition.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/01/30/iraq.audit/
August 21st, 2006 at 9:05 PM
Chris: // Bush lied people died. Bush lied people died. Bush lied people died. Bush lied people died. Halliburton! Halliburton! Halliburton!Halliburton! Halliburton! Halliburton! //
Even Chris has seen the light.
August 21st, 2006 at 9:09 PM
OMG, Chris, the article you referenced completely demolishes your point.
// Feinstein spokesman Howard Gantman similarly dismissed any ethics concerns, saying none of the contracts is voted on by the Senate. “We have checked with the Ethics Committee to make sure there is no conflict of interest, and have been told there are no conflicts,” Gantman said.
By the way, we questioned the office of Rep. Henry Waxman, the Los Angeles Democrat and House Government Reform Committee member whose protest recently halted the awarding of a defense contract to Vice President Dick Cheney’s old company, Halliburton.
“That’s a fundamentally different situation,” said Waxman’s chief of staff, Phil Schiliro. His boss objected to a Halliburton subsidiary being awarded a no-bid contract to repair Iraqi oil fields because the firm had just paid $2 million to settle a claim that it had overcharged the government on an earlier contract, Schiliro said.
“The government didn’t allow any other bidders to compete for the contract, and gave Kellogg Brown & Root (the Halliburton subsidiary) the kind of contract it had just abused,” Schiliro said. //
Dude, you just spanked yourself!
August 21st, 2006 at 9:54 PM
Brian,
My point is that Dianne Fienstein’s husband is the head of a very large company that also receives no-bid contracts like Halliburton. Again, Halliburton received the same kind of no-bid contracts throughout the Clinton administration. There is a good reason for no-bid contracts too. It’s a lot more efficient to award certain contracts to companies which are capable of delivering the services needed without going through the bureaucratic process of bidding, which delays the delivery of critical products and/or services.
If you trust a single word that Henry nostrilitis Waxman says, that’s your problem not mine.
By the way, I didn’t say that there was anything unethical about Feinstein’s husband heading that company. But if you’re going to shout Halliburton to the rooftops, you better shout Feinstein’s husband too.
Also, if Halliburton overcharged, they rightly paid the government back. I went to Marshall Fields and was overcharged, are you going to make a Federal case out of it, Brian?
August 21st, 2006 at 9:55 PM
P.S. to Brian, I love the Dude reference. Didn’t you star in the movie “Dude, Where’s my Brain?”
Sorry, I couldn’t resist.
August 22nd, 2006 at 7:41 AM
CHris: // Also, if Halliburton overcharged, they rightly paid the government back. //
Whoah… hahhahahahhahahahahaha!
First you spank yourself, and then this? Ho, that’s rich!