what corruption ?

AR182

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 9, 2000
18,654
87
0
Scottsdale,AZ
i have seen some posters here refer to the bush administration as being corrupt.....

i admit i haven't been following the news like i should (too damn depressing) but i'm not aware that the bush administration has been charged with anything related to corruption.....

can somebody please cite any charges that have been brought against the bush administration....

i have stated here that i voted for bush & also agreed with the invasion of iraq.......but his administration have done some things that have made me shake my head......ie.....not tackling the border situation aggressively enough....not anticipating iran & syria's roll in iraq after the invasion......not communicating enough to the american people about the progress in iraq (similar to fdr's fireside chats during ww2)...not properly answeing the media's attacks against him & his administration.......etc.

but for posters here to label his administration as corrupt without any proof weakens your points as a poster, imo.....
 

THE KOD

Registered
Forum Member
Nov 16, 2001
42,497
260
83
Victory Lane
no more corrupt that past administrations.

I like to concentrate on Congress. Thats where the stinkers are
hiding out.
 

StevieD

Registered User
Forum Member
Jun 18, 2002
9,509
44
48
72
Boston
AR, I am not sure what Clinton has been charged with in the way of corruption. I know a Special Prosecuter looked high and low to find anything and did investagate a ton of charges, DTB would know better than myself, but other than the BJ Fiasco I don't think he could pin anything on Clinton. Thankfully, we no longer have that Special Prosecuter to look into every clain against the Bush and a Republican Congress would most likely never look too deeply into one of their own. Although the 62-2 vote shows you the faith they have in him.
 

AR182

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 9, 2000
18,654
87
0
Scottsdale,AZ
Thankfully, we no longer have that Special Prosecuter to look into every clain against the Bush and a Republican Congress would most likely never look too deeply into one of their own.



sorry stevie, i don't buy your explanation.....

i haven't heard any charges by credible democrats......& i believe if there was any corruption in the bush administration you would be hearing chirping by the dems.....
 

smurphy

cartographer
Channel Member
Jul 31, 2004
19,910
135
63
16
L.A.
I'm not sure what category you would the Plame case into. If the parties involved are guilty, then that's pretty bad corruption there.
 

DOGS THAT BARK

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 13, 1999
19,485
161
63
Bowling Green Ky
Plame case--the only thing he is charged with is lying under oath--and I believe you were one of those calling for prison time, correct me if I'm wrong--Think a minute and then explain why you think one person should get time and other remain in office as president---this should be interesting :)

Stevie do you want personal corruption--or administrative corruption--don't have enough bandwidth to put up both ;)
 

smurphy

cartographer
Channel Member
Jul 31, 2004
19,910
135
63
16
L.A.
No, I've actually not commented on the Plame case before. I don't know much about it. Sorry. If Cheney was in any way responsible for outing a CIA agent because of politics, then I would think that's yet another reason why he sucks ass as VP. Any one else in the administration responsible should certainly be fired and held to the letter of the law.

I haven't gone with the corruption angle anyway. What's been damaging to the country is the incompetence of the administration. There's also what I would consider to be clear conflicts of interest regarding relationships with Haliburton, relatives of Bin Laden, etc. - but I don't know to what extent these things have compromised the country. Perhaps a lot, perhaps very little - I don't know.
 

StevieD

Registered User
Forum Member
Jun 18, 2002
9,509
44
48
72
Boston
Well, it depends where you stand on the war in Iraq If you think it was well planned and is a success and is worth the lives and maimed soldiers and that 5 billion dollars a month could not be better spent then I guess you would not be concerned with the Bush connection to the Carlye Group who seems to profit from every move this administration makes. Look into James Baker and the Ports deal and you will even find a Bush connection. You wonder why he approved the deal he claimed he didn't know anything about.
 

Chadman

Realist
Forum Member
Apr 2, 2000
7,501
42
48
SW Missouri
Maybe a good addition to this thread - it's a very fair question and challenged me - is to put up a definition and go from there. Here's one, others can probably add their own. I personally think this one is appropriate for people in public office or those who have a role in public policy. The last line is a little over the top for a general discussion, but the first part is appropriate in my mind.
-------------------

In broad terms, political corruption is the misuse of public office for private gain. All forms of government are susceptible in practice to political corruption. Degrees of corruption vary greatly, from minor uses of influence and patronage to do and return favours, to institutionalised bribery and beyond. The end-point of political corruption is kleptocracy, literally rule by thieves, where even the external pretence of honesty is abandoned.
? en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruption
 

AR182

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 9, 2000
18,654
87
0
Scottsdale,AZ
Well, it depends where you stand on the war in Iraq If you think it was well planned and is a success and is worth the lives and maimed soldiers and that 5 billion dollars a month could not be better spent then I guess you would not be concerned with the Bush connection to the Carlye Group who seems to profit from every move this administration makes. Look into James Baker and the Ports deal and you will even find a Bush connection. You wonder why he approved the deal he claimed he didn't know anything about.

stevie or anybody else.....

my intention in starting this thread was not to put anybody on the spot....but to see what i'm missing about this administration....

but it seems to me that alot of the accusations that you & others are making is pure conjecture.....

concerning the haliburton /chaney connection.... if chaney completely divested himself from haliburton i don't see anything wrong with it......

i'm not aware of the carlyle group & the bush administration connection....can somebody explain this to me (please make it short....lol)....

concerning the port deal......from what i have read.....the arguments are not along party lines & that bill clinton also was involved......

chadman.....

thanks for the definition.....but i'm pretty sure that most of us are aware of the broad definition of the word.......

but i'm looking for proof of corruption in the bush administration.....since people here & at other forums are freely using this word in describing this presidency.....

chadman......btw, do you or did you once own another sports forum. (i posted there one year).....your name seems awfully familar to me...but not sure....if yes....do you still own it /is it still in existence ?
 

StevieD

Registered User
Forum Member
Jun 18, 2002
9,509
44
48
72
Boston
http://www.rense.com/general17/kdks.htm

As America's military involvement abroad deepens, profits are increasing for the Carlyle Group -- and, it turns out, for thousands of California civil servants.

The Carlyle who, you ask?

The Carlyle Group, as in a secretive Washington, D.C., investment firm managing some $14 billion in assets, including stakes in a number of defense- related companies.

Carlyle counts among its chieftains former Defense Secretary (and deputy CIA Director) Frank Carlucci, former Secretary of State James Baker and, most notably, former President George Bush.

Until October, the Carlyle Group also maintained financial ties with none other than the family of Osama bin Laden, but those links were severed when it was agreed that the relationship was becoming a tad embarrassing for all concerned.

What is not well known is that Carlyle's profits also benefit the 1.2 million members of the California Public Employees Retirement System, or CalPERS, the largest public pension fund in the United States.

CalPERS has about $730 million invested in Carlyle itself and in various Carlyle funds. It owns 5.5 percent of the Carlyle Group in a minority equity stake and has an option to double that holding during the next two years.

"We're not too keen on discussing anything related to the political nature of the people at Carlyle," said Pat Macht, a spokeswoman for the fund. But she noted that "Carlyle is among the top five largest private equity partners of CalPERS."

Senior Carlyle officials are scheduled to brief CalPERS' investment committee later this month in Sacramento on the performance of the company's assets.

The Carlyle Group has cultivated and enjoyed a decidedly low profile for the past 14 years. Yet it has succeeded in attracting to its ranks not just a who's who of Republican bigwigs but also a dazzling array of international politicos.

John Major, the former British prime minister, is a Carlyle adviser, as are former Philippine President Fidel Ramos and former Thai Premier Anand Panyarachun. So is a former president of Germany's Bundesbank and a former head of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.

Connected? That's an understatement where Carlyle is concerned.

And because the Carlyle Group remains privately held, it is not required to disclose details of its investments or business activities. It is commonly known, though, that the firm favors the defense and aerospace sectors, with a wide array of investments in Pentagon affiliates.

"Their defense holdings are quite extensive," said Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch, a Washington public interest law firm. "Because of their investments, they are a major contractor for the Pentagon."

Among Carlyle's holdings is United Defense Industries, a maker of armed vehicles and weapons, which filed in October to raise up to $300 million in an initial public offering of its shares.

Judicial Watch filed suit last week to obtain documents shedding light on Carlyle business activities undertaken by President Bush's father, who reportedly met with bin Laden's family in Saudi Arabia at least twice prior to the Sept. 11 attacks. He also has had dealings with a variety of foreign governments.

"The appearance is awful," Fitton said. "For the father of our current president to be doing business with foreign governments, there is a clear conflict of interest."

Carlyle spokesman Chris Ullman said the elder Bush does little more than give speeches on Carlyle's behalf when abroad and does not call up his son to lobby for Carlyle's business interests.

Ullman also said there is nothing improper about the Carlyle Group's phenomenal political connections throughout the world.

"These are all former government officials who have chosen to team with us in various capacities," he said. "I stress the fact that they are former government officials."

Critics of the Carlyle Group have grown increasingly vocal in recent weeks, particularly over the perception that a private organization with unmistakable links to the White House is benefiting from America's military action in Afghanistan.

Because the Carlyle Group is partly owned by CalPERS, the company's fortunes are shared not just by the political elite -- is there really such a thing as a former politician? -- but also by hundreds of thousands of California bureaucrats and school officials.

CalPERS' investment in Carlyle has steadily earned between 20 and 30 percent per year in returns -- not too shabby considering the recent performance of publicly listed companies.

On the other hand, CalPERS is watching closely now that the Carlyle Group has quietly become a player in Bay Area real estate circles -- a move that could cost the company a bundle following the implosion of commercial property values.

In San Francisco, Carlyle bought and subsequently sold a 25-story office tower at 180 Montgomery St. The company also bought and rapidly discarded office space in Pleasanton and Redwood City, and recently acquired additional office space in Sunnyvale, San Jose, Brisbane and Mountain View.

"We've been pretty busy," Ullman said of Carlyle's Bay Area real estate deals.

As for CalPERS, he said the Carlyle Group values its relationship with its California co-owners.

"Their participation is very important to us," Ullman said. "They're an important part of our team. We're going to do our best to make sure their money is invested wisely."

And in light of current events, CalPERS has every reason to expect the returns to be enormous.
 

JCDunkDogs

Registered User
Forum Member
Sep 5, 2002
956
5
0
L.A. Area
More definitions, these from Black's Law Dictionary, 6th Ed., p. 345:

Corrupt: Spoiled; tainted; vitiated; depraved; debased; morally degenerate. As used as a verb, to change ones morals and principles from good to bad.

In my opinion, most of these are a matter of one's opinion (if that's not too redundant).

Black's defines "Corruption" as follows:

"An act done with an intent to give some advantage inconsistent with official duty and the rights of others. The act of an official or fiduciary person who unlawfully and wrongfully uses his station or character to procure some benefit for himself or for another person, contrary to duty and the rights of others. See Bribe; Extortion."
 

Chadman

Realist
Forum Member
Apr 2, 2000
7,501
42
48
SW Missouri
AR182: Yes I owned a few sports gambling forums and still have an interest in a couple of sites, but very little time to work with them these days due to coaching and driving to my job.

My problems with this administration and corruption deal with the financial gain that I think has been realized by the members of this administration and the people that support it financially. I have listed many items in these forums about the connections in the business and lobbying world of Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Snow, Rove, Libby, etc. I honestly believe that this administration is the most politically corrupt I have ever seen. I agree that there are democrats that also go down this road, but I have never seen such a blantant and ongoing campaign as this administration. Do I even need to get into the convicted and indicted Republican leaders on display right now? But that was not your question.

Cheney is a very corrupt man IMO. He was an elected official that was named Secretary of Defense, then went to work for Halliburton with little experience in leading a company of the magnitude of Halliburton. Why? The connections he could bring in. And the contracts flowed in to his company BIG TIME. Halliburton proved to be a very nice company, as they allowed him to head up the Vice Presidential candidate search for President Bush. He could find no one more qualified than himself to take on that role, so he then became the VP. Then the war, then Halliburton is rewarded even more handsomely than ever - with no bid contracts. How can anyone possibly say there is nothing suspicious in this scenario? People are just not being honest or facing facts, in my opinion, if they do.

What else for Mr. Cheney? Let's see. He invites big oil and energy companies to the White House to help shape the energy policy for our country. Inviting the wolves into the chicken coop to decide what's best for the chickens. Thanks, Dick. What happens to the profits of these companies? Records are broken for profits by an American company, multiple times. Admittedly, there were some other factors that played into this, but I don't think they did anything except better position themselves to profit, do you? Why would they? The role of the CEO's of these comanies are quite clear - to maximize shareholder value. And Cheney and Bush are quite tied to this industry from past and current connections, aren't they?

Rumsfeld and defense contractors, among others. Snow and the failed ports deal. Wolfowitz and the World Bank, firing of all people the managers of the corruption watch departments - along with most of the other management in the organization. You think he has any control over where any of the finances of that organization goes?

There are others in key roles I am leaving out for brevity. Corruption is not conviction. It's committing the acts, and a way of doing business. It's using the office and your position for personal gain, or rewarding those that help you get the position.

This is my opinion. And I think common sense would tell a person that it has more reality that bias. The people in here that argue so strenously against my opinions (not people like DTB who is thoughtful and fair) like Ctown and Charles usually get around to the point that "all politicians are liars and are corrupt to get where they are." I suggest this is not a defense for the actions they take. It does not make it right, and we have a right to expect more from our leaders when it slaps us in the face, for crying out loud.
 
Bet on MyBookie
Top