Chrysler Deal Highlights The Democrats’ Culture Of Corrpution

You may get tired of hearing this, but it needs to be repeated over and over and over. Back in 2006, the Democrats campaigned on a Republican culture of corruption. Their claim was that they would bring back transparancy and fairness to Washington D.C.

Well, the Dems lied to us. They are more immersed in a culture of corrpution than the Republicans ever were, even more than they claimed the Republicans were. Now, we can see that this culture of corruption extends all the way to Barack Obama and the White House.

The Chrysler bankruptcy deal was supposed to sail through with no problems and Fiat would be the new majority owner at the end. But, the Obama administration didn’t count on a group of Indiana pension funds looking critically at the deal and finding out what was really going on.

This whole deal with Chrysler was about paying off union supporters at the expense of Joe and Jane Average American.

From the Dow Jones Newswires:

Fiat would initially own 20% of the new company, though it would have the option of increasing its stake to as much as 51%. A United Auto Workers health-care trust would initially get a 55% stake, while the U.S. and Canada, which are lending Chrysler $4.9 billion during the bankruptcy, would own 8% and 2%, respectively. Senior lenders owed $6.9 billion would receive $2 billion, giving them a recovery of about 29 cents on the dollar. The Indiana funds own about $42 million of the senior debt. The UAW’s health-care trust has an unsecured claim against Chrysler for about $10.5 billion. In addition to the equity stake in Chrysler that the trust, an unsecured creditor, would receive, it would also get a $4.5 billion note under the plan.

In other words, the UAW, a junior creditor, would be given preference over the Indiana pension funds, part of the senior lenders group. This is why the Supreme Court has temporarily blocked the sale, to look at the legality of this situation.

Giving junior lenders preference over senior lenders is wrong. This is clearly an attempt by the Obama administration to pay off their leftist union supporters through the sale of Chrysler and screw over hard-wroking Americans in the process.

(BTW, didn’t Obama promise to get the automakers back on their feet? Why is he now so hot about selling them off?)

The concept of fairness and the due process clause in the Constitution dictate that senior lenders must be tended to first and junior lenders after that. Obama is trying to turn that around. In other words, he is changing the rules in mid-stream so that his supporters get the greater benefit at the expense of everyone else.

The Democrats’ culture of corruption now adds to Nancy Pelosi, Tim Geithner, Charlie Rangel, William Jefferson and Todd Blagovich the name of Barack Obama.

You can access the complete article on-line here:

Pension Funds Ask High Court To Delay Chrysler Sale
Mark H. Anderson
Dow Jones Newswire via Wall Street Journal
June 8, 2009

And another good analysis can be found on-line here:

Don’t Like the Game? Change the Rules
Glenn Beck
Fox News
June 8, 2009

More Evidence Of Obama’s Talks With Blagojevich, The Talks Obama Claims Never Took Place

Ever read the novel 1984 by George Orwell? If you haven’t, you should. Why? Because something is happening right now that should scare anyone who has ever read that novel. Someone is trying to rewrite history.

According to Wikipedia, the following is the role of the Ministry Of Truth from Orwell’s 1984:

The Ministry of Truth is involved with news media, entertainment, the fine arts and educational books. Its purpose is to rewrite history and change the facts to fit party doctrine, for propaganda effect. For example, if Big Brother makes a prediction that turns out to be wrong, the employees of the Ministry of Truth go back and rewrite history so that any prediction Big Brother previously made is accurate. This is the “how” of the Ministry of Truth’s existence. Within the novel Orwell elaborates that the deeper reason for its existence is to maintain the illusion that the party is absolute. It cannot ever seem to change its mind (if, for instance, they perform one of their constant changes regarding enemies during war) or make a mistake (firing an official or making a grossly misjudged supply prediction), for that would imply weakness and to maintain power the party must seem eternally right and strong.

So, how does that apply to today’s real world? Well, when the Blagojevich scandal broke in Illinois, there were immediate questions about whether or not Barack Obama or any of his staff were involved in any way. Evidence began to surface.

David Axelrod said unambiguously during an interview with ABC News that Barack Obama had spoken with Gov. Blagojevich about filling the vacated Senate seat. There were also two news stories from KHQA (connecttristates.com), (one by Carol Sowers on Novemebr 5th, the other by Alexis Hunt on November 8th) that mentioned the meeting although those two stories have since been scrubbed from the connecttristates.com website.

There was also mention of contact between Barack Obama and Rod Blagojevich in the Chicago Tribune. That story has not been scrubbed as of this writing and can be found here:

Governor Mum On Obama Seat
Monique Garcia and Rick Pearson
Chicago Tribune
October 30, 2008

And just in case this story gets scrubbed as well, here is the screen shot of the relevent text:

So, why am I taking the time and effort to expose all of this? Because of the reasons being given for these reports and statements being retracted.

KHQA issued the following statement:

“KHQA TV wishes to offer clarification regarding a story that appeared last month on our website ConnectTristates.com. The story, which discussed the appointment of a replacement for President Elect Obama in the U.S. Senate, became the subject of much discussion on talk radio and on blog sites Wednesday. The story housed in our website archive was on the morning of November 5, 2008. It suggested that a meeting was scheduled later that day between President Elect Obama and Illinois Governor Blagojevich. KHQA has no knowledge that any meeting ever took place. Governor Blagojevich did appear at a news conference in Chicago on that date.”

Now, look carefully at what you just read. “KHQA has no knowledge that any meeting ever took place.” And yet, they allowed two news stories to run for over a month leading their readers to believe that such a meeting did take place. It wasn’t until after Barack Obama’s name came up in connection with Blagojevich that KHQA decided that they weren’t able to confirm anything. Prior to that, they had no problem at all running a story they had no confirmation on.

And the same thing with David Axelrod. It wasn’t until after Barack Obama’s name came up in connection with Blagojevich that Obama or Axelrod himself tried to “correct” the record. Prior to that, they were perfectly okay with allowing the story to stand as is.

Of course, that leaves us with the Chicago Tribune from which we read:

“I just don’t want to jinx him and I don’t like the karma of me thinking that far ahead,” Blagojevich said of Obama’s prospects in Tuesday’s election. The governor added, “We have had some discussions about a process which we’ll share … if all goes well.”

We’ll see if this article gets scrubbed too. But clearly, if the Obama camp wanted to get the story straight from the get-go, they would not have waited this long to make all of these retractions.

That is why we should keep this in mind about the Ministry of Truth:

[The Party] cannot ever seem to change its mind (if, for instance, they perform one of their constant changes regarding enemies during war) or make a mistake (firing an official or making a grossly misjudged supply prediction), for that would imply weakness and to maintain power the party must seem eternally right and strong.

And Orwell’s words:

“The past was erased, the erasure was forgotten, the lie became truth.”

John Fund: Obama Was Mute On Illinois Corruption; Who Is The “Specifically Named Individual?”

I am not sure if Patrick Fitzgerald meant for it to happen, but as more people research the criminal complaint against Rod Blagojevich, more tidbits of information come out, many of which were unexpected and quite possibly deeply embarrassing to those who would like to appear as if they weren’t involved in anything.

John Fund doesn’t directly say this, but his column in the Wall Street Journal sets up the scenario for just such a story. From his column:

This week Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich was arrested on charges that he conspired to sell Barack Obama’s U.S. Senate seat, among other misdeeds. At first the president-elect tried to distance himself from the issue: “It is a sad day for Illinois. Beyond that, I don’t think it’s appropriate for me to comment.” But it quickly became clear that Mr. Obama would have to say more, and yesterday he called for Mr. Blagojevich to resign and for a special election to fill the vacant Senate seat. What remains to be seen is whether this episode will put an end to what Chicago Tribune political columnist John Kass calls the national media’s “almost willful” fantasy that Mr. Obama and Chicago’s political culture have little to do with each other. Mr. Kass notes that the media devoted a lot more time and energy to investigating the inner workings of Sarah Palin’s Wasilla, Alaska, than it has looking at Mr. Obama’s Chicago connections.

We all knew that the leftist-leaning media was in the tank for Obama. What the media didn’t know was how badly it would all explode on them if something like the Blagojevich scandal came up. Now, the media looks at least as silly as Blagojevich does since they can no longer claim to be the “watchdogs of government.” If I had watchdogs who were so incompetent as to miss this, I’d have them put down and get new watchdogs. If the media had done their job during the 2008 campaign, we’d have known about the corruption in Illinois long before any of this happened.

More:

Mr. Obama has an ambiguous reputation among those trying to clean up Illinois politics. “We have a sick political culture, and that’s the environment Barack Obama came from,” Jay Stewart, executive director of the Chicago Better Government Association, told ABC News months ago. Though Mr. Obama did support ethics reforms as a state senator, Mr. Stewart noted that he’s “been noticeably silent on the issue of corruption here in his home state including, at this point, mostly Democratic politicians.”

Yes, it is that Democratic Culture of Corruption that the Democrats refuse to clean up. The hypocrisy of the Dem party is staggering.

But this also sets up a new story that comes from the criminal complaint filed by the FBI against Rod Blagojevich. Section 101 of the complaint states:

b. ROD BLAGOJEVICH asked what he can get from the President-elect for the Senate seat. ROD BLAGOJEVICH stated that Governor General Counsel believes the President-elect can get ROD BLAGOJEVICH’s wife on paid corporate boards in exchange for naming the President-elect’s pick to the Senate. Governor General Counsel asked, “can [the President-elect] help in the private sector. . . where it wouldn’t be tied to him? . . . I mean, so it wouldn’t necessarily look like one for the other.” ROD BLAGOJEVICH’s wife suggested during the call that she is qualified to sit on corporate boards and has a background in real estate and appraisals. ROD BLAGOJEVICH asked whether there is something that could be done with his wife’s “series 7″ license in terms of working out a deal for the Senate seat. ROD BLAGOJEVICH stated that he is “struggling” financially and does “not want to be Governor for the next two years.” c. ROD BLAGOJEVICH said that the consultants (Advisor B and another consultant are believed to be on the call at that time) are telling him that he has to “suck it up” for two years and do nothing and give this “motherf*cker [the President-elect] his senator. F*ck him. For nothing? F*ck him.” ROD BLAGOJEVICH states that he will put “[Senate Candidate 4]” in the Senate “before I just give f*cking [Senate Candidate 1] a f*cking Senate seat and I don’t get anything.” (Senate Candidate 4 is a Deputy Governor of the State of Illinois). ROD BLAGOJEVICH stated that he needs to find a way to take the “financial stress” off of his family and that his wife is as qualified or more qualified than another specifically named individual to sit on corporate boards. According to ROD BLAGOJEVICH, “the immediate challenge [is] how do we take some of the financial pressure off of our family.” Later in the phone call, ROD BLAGOJEVICH stated that absent getting something back, ROD BLAGOJEVICH will not pick Senate Candidate 1. HARRIS re-stated ROD BLAGOJEVICH’s thoughts that they should ask the President-elect for something for ROD BLAGOJEVICH’s financial security as well as maintain his political viability. HARRIS said they could work out a three-way deal with SEIU and the President-elect where SEIU could help the President-elect with ROD BLAGOJEVICH’s appointment of Senate Candidate 1 to the vacant Senate seat, ROD BLAGOJEVICH would obtain a position as the National Director of the Change to Win campaign, and SEIU would get something favorable from the President-elect in the future.

Well, who are these people?

Senate Candidate #1 is Valerie Jarrett, an Obama advisor who also served as Daley’s Chief of Staff. Jarrett is very close to the Obamas.

Senate Candidate #4 is either Dean Martinez, Bob Greenlee or Louanner Peters, all of whom are Deputy Governors of Illinois.

Who is the “specifically named individual?” That answer comes from Truthteller at No Quarter Blog.

It is Michelle Obama, the soon-to-be First Lady of the United States of America.

No Quarter notes that Michelle “was appointed to to the Board of TreeHouse Foods, a WAL-MART vendor, on June 25, 2005, even though she did not have experience in the private sector previous to the appointment.” A link to that news story is here:

Michelle Obama’s Ties To Wal-Mart Cut
Lynn Sweet
Chicago Sun-Times
May 23, 2007

Those ties were cut in 1987 due to Wal-Mart’s ongoing conflict with organized labor and the Obama campaign didn’t want the conflict of interest. But even so, Michelle got quite a bit of cash out of the deal. According to the above article, compensation was “$51,200 from TreeHouse in 2006. She leaves the board with an option to buy 2,266 TreeHouse shares at a strike price of $29.65. Shares closed at $28.10 Tuesday.”

So, why is this relevent? No Quarter quotes Section 87 of the criminal complaint:

87. By law, after the President-elect’s resignation of his position as a U.S. Senator, which was effective on November 16, 2008, ROD BLAGOJEVICH has sole authority to appoint his replacement for the two years remaining of the President-elect’s Senate term. See 10 ILCS 5/25-8. During the course of this investigation, agents have intercepted a series of communications regarding the efforts of ROD BLAGOJEVICH, JOHN HARRIS, and others to misuse this power to obtain personal gain, including financial gain, for ROD BLAGOJEVICH and his family. In particular, ROD BLAGOJEVICH has been intercepted conspiring to trade the senate seat for particular positions that the President-elect has the power to appoint (e.g. the Secretary of Health and Human Services). ROD BLAGOJEVICH has also been intercepted conspiring to sell the Senate seat in exchange for his wife’s placement on paid corporate boards or ROD BLAGOJEVICH’s placement at a private foundation in a significant position with a substantial salary. ROD BLAGOJEVICH has also been intercepted conspiring to sell the Senate seat in exchange for millions of dollars in funding for a non-profit organization that he would start and that would employ him at a substantial salary after he left the governorship.

No Quarter goes on to say:

Blagojevich, in other words, assumed Obama would appoint his wife to a Board for the political favor of selecting Valerie Jarrett for the Senate seat. Blagojevich is not a stupid man. Indeed, he only assumed Obama would participate in this “pay to play” scheme, for he knows Obama is acutely aware how the game is played in Illinois and in Chicago. This explains why Blagojevich mentions Michelle Obama and her lack of qualifications to serve on the Board of TreeHouse Foods when he discusses how Obama could appoint Mrs. Blagojevich to a Board for the political favor of appointing Jarrett to the US Senate seat. Michelle, after all, was appointed to sit on the Board of TreeHouse foods AFTER Obama was elected to the US Senate. Moreover, Michelle Obama’s salary at The University of Chicago nearly TRIPLED after her husband gained the power to submit earmark requests on her employer’s behalf. Just appoint the spouse to a Board and increase his or her salary if you need a political favor from an Illinois politician. That is how the “play to pay” game is played.

Now, this in no way says that Michelle Obama is involved in the Blagojevich scandal. But it does show how scandals like this can bring certain facts and information to light that the people involved do not necessarily want brought out. Michelle Obama’s high-paid employment at jobs for which she had no experience is a prime example of such information.

I am sure that Barack Obama would have preferred that this remain covered and hence his desire to remain “mute,” because now it puts his wife and her business affairs into a spotlight that cannot be turned off. If something comes up from Michelle’s past to haunt them, it is not something that either one of them can claim they had no knowledge of.

You can access the two articles on-line here:

John Fund: Obama Was Mute On Illinois Corruption
John Fund
The Wall Street Journal
December 11, 2008

Michelle Obama Is The “Specifically Named Individual” On Page 64 Of The Affidavit Submitted By FBI
No Quarter Blog
December 9, 2008

So, Who’s Corrupt Now?

It isn’t just pundits on the right who are asking this question and pointing out the obvious. Even the leftist-leaning MSNBC has now acknowledged that the Blagojevich scandal may have opened up some flood gates that cannot be easily closed.

In a “First thoughts” editorial, Chuck Todd, Mark Murray, Domenico Montanaro, and Carrie Dann look at some major points of the issue:

*** So who’s corrupt now? Since his election last month, Obama and his team have masterfully choreographed every cabinet announcement, press conference, and meeting for maximum effect — until yesterday, that is. On a day when the agenda was a meeting with Al Gore on energy and climate change, all hell broke lose after Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich (D) was arrested for allegedly offering Obama’s Senate seat for some kind of payment in return. It didn’t tell us anything new about Blagojevich (he had been straddling the ethical line for some time), or Illinois politics (Blago could become the state’s fourth governor in 40 years to go to prison), or even Obama (who is in no way implicated in the government’s report). But it does begin to advance a GOP argument that the Democrats — who campaigned against a Republican “culture of corruption” — are no longer so innocent themselves. Are the ethical and legal issues that have recently dogged some Democrats (William Jefferson, Tim Mahoney, Charlie Rangel) beginning to approach what we saw in the last few years from Republicans (Larry Craig, Duke Cunningham, Mark Foley, Bob Ney, Don Sherwood, Ted Stevens, etc.)? And while the term “culture of corruption” gets thrown around a lot, the fact is that a state possibly having four governors go to prison in 40 years is most definitely a culture of corruption. … *** The impact on Obama: As for the scandal’s impact on Obama, no doubt that it will be embarrassing for him and his incoming administration, even though the president-elect isn’t implicated here (in fact, the affidavit makes it crystal clear that Obama and his team weren’t willing to play ball). We’re probably going to see a top Obama aide — Rahm Emanuel, Valerie Jarrett? — on tape with Blagojevich. And that shouldn’t be too surprising (after all, why wouldn’t you return your governor’s phone calls in this post-election period?) But Obama also didn’t help himself with his initial comment yesterday on the matter. Unlike other Illinois Democrats, he didn’t condemn Blagojevich’s actions, if true. Instead, he said he was “saddened and sobered” by the news, adding that it wasn’t appropriate to comment on the issue. But then he later did comment, saying, “I had no contact with the governor or his office and so we were not, I was not aware of what was happening.” Yet that contradicted an interview last month by Obama adviser David Axelrod, who said that Obama had spoken with Blagojevich about the vacancy. Axelrod issued a statement last night saying that he was “mistaken” in that interview. Team Obama’s initial response yesterday to the scandal seemed par for the course: During his two years on the campaign trail, Obama often swung and missed on his initial statement regarding a controversy — Bitter-gate and Jeremiah Wright come immediately to mind — before finding a better response 24 to 48 hours later. … *** Why didn’t Dems do something earlier? Republicans have themselves a talking point they will constantly throw in Obama’s face (and Rahm’s and Axe’s), simply because they are all Chicago pols. This means Obama will always have to look more transparent than usual and, well, less Chicago-y. The one criticism, by the way, that really could stick to the entire Illinois Democratic political establishment: passivity. It was a running joke for years that Blago had a corrupt side, so why didn’t more Democrats step up. Sure, politics is politics, and sometimes you have stand by folks who you THINK are corrupt but you can’t prove it since no one wants to sound like Joe McCarthy. Still, the passivity here is something that will likely tug at many Illinois Democrats. Could they have done something sooner?

MSNBC, an outfit that tried everything in its power to hide vital information about Barack Obama during the campaign, is being forced into reporting the contradictions of people like David Axelrod. Even now they are trying to shield Obama and in this editorial made the claim that “the affidavit makes it crystal clear that Obama and his team weren’t willing to play ball.” That’s not entirely true. There were several references in the affidavit that suggest Obama aids were in some sort of negotiation with Blagojevich. Section 107 notes specifically that an option involving “Change to Win” would not have Obama’s “fingerprints” all over it. If there were no involvement by the Obama team, why would anyone be worrying about “fingerprints” of Obama’s involvement?

Those are the three major points so far. I am sure that as more information comes to light and we learn the names of people like “Advisor A” and so forth, that the major points will change or simply be magnified into larger issues.

But the part about “Obama will always have to look more transparent than usual and, well, less Chicago-y” is absolutely true. He is under a microscope now, moreso than ever.

You can access the complete article on-line here:

First Thoughts: So Who’s Corrupt Now?
Chuck Todd, Mark Murray, Domenico Montanaro, and Carrie Dann
MSNBC.com
December 10, 2008