Feb
28
2013
4

Are there NO ambitious Democrats in California’s 43th district?

None at all?

No, really:

I will concede the seat. I repeat: I WILL CONCEDE THE SEAT. And I hate conceding seats. But it’d be worth it.

Dec
10
2012
1

Maxine Waters to be… Ranking Member on Financial Services.

I kind of feel for Megan McArdle, here; the woman clearly wants to live in a world where both American political parties are serious-minded about the debt, our ongoing fiscal crisis, and the economy in general. Heck, so would I. Unfortunately, we instead live in a world where the Democratic party thinks that it’s a good idea for Maxine Waters to be the Financial Services Committee Ranking Member. This is an… alarming thought, although for right now it’s merely an opportunity for people to show as much disapproval as they personally dare*.

Megan then tries to reach for a silver lining, and discovers that it’s actually molten steel:

The best hope is that this is entirely symbolic, and they figure it’s safe to make her the senior member as long as she won’t actually be in charge of anything. But having put her in a highly visible slot, it will be very difficult to dislodge her in the event that the Democrats retake the house, and Maxine Waters is expected to actually architect new legislation concerning the financial system. And even typing those words strikes terror into my heart.

Well, that’s what happens when people simply unquestionably ACCEPT the word of Democrats that they’re serious-minded people when it comes to the economy. Free hint: serious-minded people would have submitted a budget in the Senate by now.

Moe Lane (more…)

Sep
05
2011
6

Pssst! Maxine Waters (D, CA)!

Just thought I’d let you know: about this?

The CBC is trying to help by organizing job fairs across the country. [Congresswoman] Waters also wants to help by putting more pressure on the big banks to help with mortgages.

“If they don’t come up with loan modifications and keep people in their homes that they’ve worked so hard for, we’re going to tax them out of business,” Waters said.

(more…)

Aug
23
2011
--

#rsrh Rick Santorum: Maxine Waters ‘vile.’

Ayup. Also: idiotic, corrupt, frothing, corrupt, anti-Semitic, corrupt, paranoid, corrupt, politically tin-eared at unnatural (if not Lovecraftian) levels… and did I mention corrupt?

But, yes, definitely vile.  Particularly since Rep. Waters knows full well who is responsible for her constituents’ troubles…

Jan
31
2011
1

#rsrh A handy primer on the Sanchez sisters.

Because it’s going to be confusing.

I hope that this helps.  One heck of a political dynasty that these two are building for themselves, huh? – And here I thought that the Carnahans were… suboptimal.

Moe Lane

*Yes.  It was fun to watch her have to retract that.  No doubt seething all the while.

Dec
17
2010
--

Maxine Waters (D) case delayed via Democratic incompetence?

That’s what the Washington Post reports, at least (H/T: The Daily Caller).  To refresh people’s memories: Rep. Waters used her position on the House Financial Services Committee to intervene on behalf of OneUnited Bank, which happens to be a bank with a personal connection with Waters.  The case was set to go in September, only to be delayed at the last second.  It will be looked at in the next Congress, much to the displeasure of Democrats.

Highlights from the WaPo article:

  • The ostensible reason for the delay of the Waters case is that new information in the investigation was suddenly deemed necessary for a proper prosecution.  Current Ethics chair Zoe Lofgren (D) took this event as an opportunity to try to get two investigators fired; this was blocked by Rep. Jo Bonner (R), who is the current Ranking Member*.
  • Lofgren allegedly mucked up the investigation from the start by not being aggressive on subpoenaing either Rep Waters and/or Rep. Barney Frank (chairman of Finance) and his staff.
  • Lofgren also allegedly encouraged an unseemly haste to the proceedings, from trying to lock in a pre-election trial date to cutting investigators’ allotted time to present their case by four-fifths.
  • By all accounts, Lofgren had also not prepared herself or her committee for a scenario where Rep. Waters was prepared to fight the charges; thus creating a leadership crisis when Waters did not make a deal.

(more…)

Nov
22
2010
3

Maxine Waters trial delay.

There was an interesting development in the Rep. Maxine Waters ethics trial last Friday: the charges were abruptly sent back to Ethics’ investigative subcommittee for review… and ‘mum’ was, as they say, the word as to why.  Oh, Rep. Waters immediately claimed vindication – which she would probably do if they were loading her onto a tumbrel – but there hasn’t been much chatter about this.  There may not be for a while, assuming that more details of the story don’t break today.

However, there is one aforementioned detail, courtesy of the NYT, courtesy of Contentions: apparently the charges are being reviewed because of a new set of emails, which purportedly “show that [Rep. Waters' chief of staff Mikael] Moore[*] was actively engaged in discussing with committee members details of a bank bailout bill apparently after Ms. Waters agreed to refrain from advocating on the bank’s behalf.”  Again, Rep. Waters’ staff is claiming that said emails actually will vindicate her; again, that’s pretty much what they’d say any which way.  Right now, about the only consensus is that it’s unlikely that the Waters trial will actually take place during the 111th Congress. (more…)

Oct
13
2010
3

Democrats: Foreclosure crisis due to banker conspiracy.

I really, really wish that I was making this up, actually:


For those without video, it shows Rep. Maxine Waters (D, CA-35) of the House Financial Services Committee… actually, summarizing this piece is almost impossible. The CNBC folks try their best to get some sort of coherent information out of Rep. Waters, and this is what they gleaned: (more…)

Sep
09
2010
--

Boxer pot aide should have gone with different drug.

You have probably read or heard by now that one of Senator Barbara Boxer’s used-to-be-senior-aides got busted for trying to bring pot into Capitol Hill. I say ‘used-to-be’ because they fired him, of course: aside from the bad image generally, as the Politico article notes Sen. Boxer is currently being a War on Some Drugs warrior when it comes to pot legalization. Now, I will not pretend that I do not have a certain rough sympathy for the fellow, coupled with a healthy contempt for his underlying arrogance. As someone privately commented to me on the matter, it must be pretty bad having to got to work for a Senator like Boxer every day: you’d almost need a painkiller. And/or a powerful anti-nauseant. As this is thus only indirectly Sen. Boxer’s fault, I’m not inclined to rake her personally over the coals for this.

However, I would like to know why she’s buying her own contraband – to wit, purchasing the endorsement of a woman who is up on ethics charges for using her position to profit family members. And no, I’m not joking or exaggerating. (more…)

Aug
24
2010
1

Jan Schakowsky (D, IL-09) saves Shorebank after all.

Back in May it was reported that the failing, yet politically-connected Shorebank in Illinois was to be bailed out.  The bank actually closed last Friday, but was resurrected yesterday and turned into a new bank – one that will of course have no obvious relationship to Rep. Jan Schakowsky (IL-09), who lobbied very strenuously to save Shorebank… even though it’s not based in her district.  It is, however, the bank that Schakowsky’s convicted felon husband Robert Creamer used to partially extricate himself from the consequences of his fraud scheme; the bank provided critical assistance to Creamer that allowed him to avoid default – which would have beneficial effects on his sentencing a decade later*.  There is a strong whiff of this transaction being part of a quid pro quo – with the latter half being paid off, well, right about now.

If you’re wondering why Jan Schakowsky can get away with having her and her husband being  tied up in a dirty bank deal without censure by the House of Representatives, while Rep. Maxine Waters is currently facing ethics charges for her and her husband’s involvement with OneUnited, the answer’s easy: Schakowsky is white, and is thus simply fundamentally real to Democratic leadership in a way that no African-American Member of Congress could hope to be to them.  It should not be a surprise that House ethics investigations are being allowed to continue only against those legislators whose seats are considered locked-in by the Democrats anyway.

Yes, let me clear: I’m explicitly calling the House Democratic leadership a bunch of racists.  They are, you know.  And it’s never more obvious than when you consider the things that they don’t do, when they don’t have to.

Moe Lane

PS: Joel Pollak is the GOP candidate for IL-09, and he’s been all over this topic.  I’ve met him: he’s a good guy.  Check him out.

(more…)

Jul
31
2010
--

Maxine Waters will have what Charlie Rangel’s having.

Come, I will conceal nothing from you: I have long considered Maxine “Why is this woman on Financial Services?” Waters to be one of our dumber Members of Congress – which is impressive, given that we have people like Al Franken, Barbara Boxer, Arlen Specter, Shirley Jackson-Lee, and Russ Carnahan in it – but I may have to revise that.  It is now being reported that Rep. Waters “has chosen to go through an ethics trial, like the one lined up for New York Rep. Charles Rangel, rather than accepting charges made by an ethics subcommittee.”

Given that Rangel has just been told that he won’t be subject to any kind of sanction other than a finger-wagging even when he is found guilty*, this actually makes perfect sense.  Why accept the charges, and thus admit wrongdoing?  Maybe the committee won’t prove anything – and even if they do, the Democrats on the committee will bail out their fellow party-members anyway, so there’s no downside.  No harm, no foul, no problem, no need to accept responsibility – and no more of this nonsense about how the Democrats were going to drain the swamp.

DEMOCRATS DO NOT DRAIN SWAMPS.  That’s because swamps are wetlands, and thus must be protected by the full power of the federal government.

Moe Lane

*I see no need to pretend.  Heck, neither do the Democratic members of the House ethics committee, apparently.

Crossposted to RedState.

Dec
21
2009
--

Your “NO! Really? Who would have thought it?” headline of the day.

Banks with political ties got bailouts, study shows

(Via Drudge)  Oddly enough, Reuters completely forgot to mention any particularly egregious examples.  This one in particular: you’d think that they would have wanted to do some actual reporting on skulduggery.

OneUnited Bank in Massachusetts got aid after Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) inserted language into the bailout bill that effectively directed Treasury to give the bank special consideration. Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) also helped the bank, in which her husband held shares, by arranging a meeting between government officials and a group including OneUnited’s chief executive. The bank got $12.1 million last December, but it has made only a single dividend payment. It has now missed payments in three straight quarters, and it is not required to make up the missed payments.

You’d think.

Site by Neil Stevens | Theme by TheBuckmaker.com