Corruption claimed in Harry Reid deal

World Net Daily ^ | 10/11/06

[Solamente]

I agree! It's always darkest before The Rove!

[Libloather]

It's always darkest before The Rove!

Good one...

I AM SO OUTTA HERE!

[cricket]

a footnote. . .John Hinderaker at powerline /powerlineblog.com/ concludes on the distinctions here of Reid deal:

(. . .)Is there anything wrong with this? Not necessarily. You can make easy money by buying land on the outskirts of a fast-growing town like Las Vegas. It helps if you have the influence to get zoning changed, but, to be fair, there's nothing wrong with re-zoning land to permit commercial development as a community grows outward.

It does appear, though, that Reid clearly violated Senate ethics rules by failing to disclose the existence of the LLC and his partnership with Brown. He reported the income, but not the relationship. I suspect the reason for Reid's reticence is explained by the AP's description of his friend's history.

Basically, Reid lent his name and perhaps his influence to a business deal, in return for which he was cut in to the tune of $700,000. That would create a considerable obligation on Reid's part toward his business partner--a partner he chose not to disclose, and whose name apparently keeps coming up in organized crime investigations. Is that corruption? You can decide for yourself. ( link)

So, yes; these things are done; but Reid, distinguishes himself by the 'unfortunate'. . .in typical Demrat style. .

[sweetiepiezer]

bttt

[Y0K]

I've already emailed Sen. Frist and thanked him for his assistance in getting the fence bill passed. And, as a BTW asked him to make some sort of announcement regarding the ethics of Sen. Reid, seeing how the DemoCraps are bloviating all over the place regarding this perverted Rep Foley who by the way resigned which might be a wonderful thing for Reid to do.