Tuesday, September 25, 2018

Excuse Me Senator?

California's beloved Senator Dianne Feinstein displays questionable ethics.

After only about 30 minutes of research, the following information was discovered regarding Senator Feinstein.  Please note, there is nothing that can be readily found to indicate that what is being done is illegal, however, it does bring up ethical questions and cloudy ethics are still part of corruption.  Just because something isn’t illegal doesn’t make it right or ethical.

Around January 6, 2009, Senator Dianne Feinstein introduces a bill into the Senate that is supposed to give $25 billion to the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) – the entity that guarantees your bank deposits.  Should the bank fail, you are supposed to receive your money back up to $250,000.  Now understand that Senator Feinstein has absolutely nothing to do with banking.  She is not on any banking committee or banking-related committee that can be found.  This was supposedly done out of the goodness of her heart.

Within three days of the introduction of that bill, Senator Feinstein’s husband, Richard C. Blum decides to purchase $11 million in stock in a company of which he is chairman of the board – CB Richard Ellis Group – a California real estate organization formed after the San Francisco earthquake of 1906.  Blum is chairman of his own company, Blum Capital Partners, L.P.  He also serves on other boards of directors in California and is also currently a member of the Regents of the University of California.  Again, mind you none of what has been described is illegal.  It is common for people to serve on multiple boards of directors and on boards of regents of state universities.   Neither Blum nor Feinstein are being accused of anything illegal here.

Sometime after Blum makes his $11 million stock purchase, the FDIC (remember them?  The government-run entity that is the beneficiary of a $25 billion bill introduced by Feinstein) awards a contract to CB Richard Ellis in which the FDIC makes CB Richard Ellis the recipient of foreclosed homes that banks unload to get them off their books.  CB Richard Ellis is then able to turn around and sell those foreclosed homes for a profit.  This gives the banks an opportunity to unload REO properties which cost them up to five times the value of the loan in fees and fines, it gives CB Richard Ellis a steady stream of properties that it can unload for cheap and still make profits and it gives stock holders in CB Richard Ellis a boost on their dividends and makes their stock price go up.  The company makes a profit in a bad economy and people are none the wiser.

Now, again, remember, there is absolutely nothing illegal about what has happened here.  Senator Feinstein’s office released a statement saying that the senator had no knowledge of the FDIC’s intent to award the contract to CB Richard Ellis.  But this all does raise some serious ethical questions.  If this were anyone other than a prominent Democrat senator in a Democrat-controlled Senate, the Securities and Exchange Commission might want to have a look at all of this to see if there were any ethical issues in play here.  But it is unlikely that it will happen.

Because this is a look at Senator Feinstein here is something else to consider about the Senator.

Recently, a friend of this reporter wrote a letter to Senator Feinstein and Senator Boxer regarding the AIG bonus taxation bill that was being floated around Capitol Hill.  The friend expressed to the senators his concern about this particular bill being labeled a bill of attainder – in which a select group of individuals are singled out for punishment via legislation instead of the judicial system.  Simply put, it denies the individuals the right to a fair trial, assumes they are guilty and punishes them accordingly.  Bills of attainder are explicitly forbidden by the Constitution, Article I, Section 9, Paragraph 3.  Several attorneys have already examined the language of the bill and have confirmed that it is, in fact, a bill of attainder.

Today, a response was received from Senator Feinstein in which she said the following:

“In response to the $165 million in bonuses that American International Group paid in March 2009, legislation has been introduced in both the Senate and House of Representatives to tax these bonuses in an effort to retrieve them. The Senate version of this legislation, introduced by Finance Committee Chairman Senator Max Baucus (D-MT) known as the "Compensation Fairness Act of 2009" (S. 651) would tax excessive bonuses at a rate of up to 35 percent. I am hopeful that Congressional action will ultimately not be required as roughly $50 million of these bonuses have already been returned.”

Now again, one has to wonder whether or not members of Congress should have to read the Constitution before planning any kind of bills for introduction.  Corporate executives who work for companies that receive government bailout money are being singled out for punishment via legislation.  Good, bad or indifferent, Congress cannot be permitted to punish these executives without due process.  If the government wants its money back, then there are other means of retrieving it.  This is not a fair use of the income tax system of this country and it additionally proves the ever increasing drone of calls for abolishment of the IRS, elimination of the payroll tax and establishment of an alternative revenue generating method.  The Compensation Fairness Act of 2009 of which Senator Feinstein spoke is not fair, it is a bill of attainder and it violates the Constitution.

Now it is possible to see why liberals have eliminated the teaching for Civics courses in schools…it keeps the Constitution out of the hands of the common people.  The Constitution wasn’t written in legalese, it was written so that the common person could read it and understand it.  But liberals have all but formally banned it from being in schools.  By eliminating civics classes where students are taught about the American legal system, liberals can continue to teach students what liberals want students to learn.  By keeping the Constitution out of the hands of the people, liberals are trying to rewrite the Constitution through legislation and judicial avenues expressly forbidden by the Constitution or that were never intended.

This goes beyond indoctrination – it is the beginnings of fascism.

About the Writer

D. E. Carson is a writer for BrooWaha. For more information, visit the writer's website.
Want to write articles too? Sign up & become a writer!

7 comments on Excuse Me Senator?

Log In To Vote   Score: -3
By D. E. Carson on May 03, 2009 at 01:56 am

"...Christian's are dishonest because Joseph Lieberman lied..."

First of all, I deduct 25 points from your reponse solely because you put an apostrophe in Christians.  (The best you can now hope for is a "C").  Second of all, liberals and Democrats are at least on the same side of the street.  In case you happened to miss it, Joe Lieberman is Jewish.  Your analogy would have worked better if you'd said, "Jews are dishonest because Lieberman lied".  Or if you'd said, "Christians are dishonest because Bill O'Reilly made a mistake."

Improper punctuation:  -25 points

Improper use of analogy: - 6 points

Final Score: 69/100   Grade: D

Good thing I'm not an English teacher -- liberals would absolutely HATE me...oh, wait, they already do.

 Report abuse

Log In To Vote   Score: 5
By John Donnely on May 04, 2009 at 04:26 pm

I voted you down because

 Report abuse

Log In To Vote   Score: -4
By D. E. Carson on May 04, 2009 at 11:45 pm

Feinstein's a liberal.  Liberman is a moderate.  Obama is a radical.  McCain can't make up his mind.  Kennedy is a liberal.  Coulter is a radical.  Hannity is a conservative.  O'Reilly is an independent.  I'm probably more libertarian (note the small "L" there) and Constitutionalist than any thing else.  I believe in the Constitution of the United States of America, unlike that damned fool in the White House and "Benedict Arlen" Specter (I wonder why you never see Arlen and Phil Specter in the same place at the same time.  They sure look a lot alike ya know).

Liberals hate me because they can't handle the truth.  The modern American liberal ideology is about as far away from the dictionary definition of liberal as a group can get.  Congress is a liberal ideology printing press and Obama is a liberal rubber stamp to get every liberal agenda program set into law.  And now with Obama and Specter thinking that whoever replaces Justice Souter needs to be someone with "sympathy for the people" and who isn't from the appellate system and should be a minority I'm convinced now more than ever that the modern American liberal ideology is driving this country straight to hell in the express lane.  By the way Category Five, it was "your guy" Obama who said that Souter's replacement should not come from the appellate system and actually thinks the replacement should be someone with little or no judicial experience.  Let's see Robert Gibbs flounder his way out of THAT one.  There's another person whose photograph appears in the dictionary next to the words: dolt, doofus, idiot, moron, buffoon, poltroon, dunderhead, dunce, blockhead, dumbass, dumbshit, coward, imbecile, sloth, fool, jackass and nitwit.

 Report abuse

Log In To Vote   Score: -3
By D. E. Carson on May 08, 2009 at 12:53 am

Greenpeace:  There's a real quality organization.  Far too many people have performed militant-type protests under the name of Greenpeace that the name has become synonymous with eco-terrorists.

Amnesty International: Ooh, good one there.  An organization that has repeatedly pointed fingers at the United States saying that we are not interested in human rights yet says nothing about people like Hugo Chavez and Fidel Castro.

Human Rights Watch: A group that posted a list of what it considers "Human Rights" which are not rights at all but are privileges that come from living in a country that is not run by a despotic dictator who believes his purpose in life is to have total power.  These privileges are the reason people immigrated to America.

ACLU:  Ah, yes.  The Anti-Christian Litigation Unit.  Exactly when will this organization begin defending the rights of people to live their Christian values?  They should have been the first in line to defend Carrie Prejean for sticking up for her beliefs.  Instead they have been deafeningly quiet because they don't want to piss off the gays and lesbians who are among the largest contributing groups to the ACLU.  Civil liberties should extend to everyone in America, not just people who fork over mega-bucks to buy support for the ACLU.  I could spend all night writing about how hatefully biased against Christians, conservatives and the general right the ACLU is, but I don't have that kind of time.

Code Pink:  A bunch of misguided women (and men who care to join them) who think that peace is the absence of war.  They couldn't be more wrong, but then trying to tell them the truth about peace is like talking to a brick wall.  They also claim to believe in social justice which translates as: "Screw rich white people for all they have because lazy, worthless slugs deserve to have the government support them for their entire life because Superior Being forbid that they actually have to work for a living!"

Green Party USA:  Just a cursory glance at their website makes one nausious.  They have bought into Al Gore's junk environmental science and now they want to propogate other misleading lies about George W. Bush.  So far, no one has conclusively proved the bumper sticker mantra "Bush Lied People Died" however, the every time I turn on news (and I don't mean Fox News, I'm talking regular news) or read the news wires, people are beginning to write articles that not only call Obama a bold-faced liar, but they actually prove it.  The best way to tell if Obama is lying is to watch him closely.  If you see his mouth moving, then he's lying.  The second clue is if you see the teleprompter in front of him, he's lying.  If you don't see the teleprompter and his mouth is moving, then he's just a blithering idiot who can't string more than three words together.

So there you have it.  Your so-called "liberal" causes debunked.

Okay, Deano.  Your turn.

 Report abuse

Log In To Vote   Score: -3
By D. E. Carson on May 08, 2009 at 12:57 am

And yet, I've still managed to prove that Obama is a moron based solely on his actions and inexperience and nothing else.  Too bad those who called Bush a moron based their misguided opinion their superficial hatred of the man and had no concrete evidence and facts to back it up.

 Report abuse

Log In To Vote   Score: 1
By Marian Levy on June 10, 2009 at 03:55 pm

D.E. Carson has more than a bit of plagiarism here with his facts taken from Project Censored.

 Report abuse

Log In To Vote   Score: 1
By Joan Westin on December 02, 2009 at 02:12 pm

America is a representative democracy and when the representatives forget they represent the people, people remind them who the representatives represent. Some of the people bullied by businesses, then disenfranchised by their representatives and paid officials do it with the keyboard, some do it by violence. So businesses and representatives and officials, its your choice what’s on your radar screen. Represent the people and you have nothing to worry about. Represent only big money and for-profit corporations, and you have to worry about people pushed to desperation, that you forgot or didn’t care that you also represent. People whose sad and desperate stories are written about in exposes such as these.

I am not a proponent of senseless violence. I do understand when victims are pushed into violence when their representatives and paid officials fail to help the victims. That makes sense to me. America was founded in violence after exhausting all other means to get her relief against her oppressors. Every American should always remember that in how they conduct themselves. When violence does happen from the victims, I say when I hear about it, the business or representative or official had it coming. If called to jury duty I would never find a victim guilty who resorted to violence only against an individual in a business that wronged them or the representative or official that wronged them after exhausting all other legal means.

So people, all businesses, representatives and officials, I am not surprised when things get ugly for you when you wrong someone. It is the American tradition.

What is needed is more speech. Not less.

 Report abuse

Add A Comment!

Click here to signup or login.

Rate This Article

Your vote matters to us