Those who live in glass houses should not throw stones.
"...and put our economy back in line with our values."
Now just what the heck is that supposed to mean? John Edwards sued doctors because there was money in it, not out of any belief in "values".
I'm surprised that he can even get the 'v' word past his lips after the recent "Raunchfest"
John # 1 and his wife also served on a charity board WITH Lay, even AFTER the FRAUD CHARGES WERE BROUGHT.
Not true. Enron money went mostly to frontrunners, but both sides received plenty. In the House, the two largest recipients of Enron money are Shela Jackson (is this Mars) Lee, and Ken (little Lord) Benson, both democRATs.
LOL......the son of a mill MANAGER, complaining about the man who sat on the board of Terraaayyyzzaaa's foundation.
Inquiring minds want to know.
Hope you won't be holding your breath waiting for the media to report it, however.
Want him arrested fast or convicted? Prosecutors had him under wraps. They just took their time and tied a nice tight noose. Nice work in my book.
Edwards could not have picked a less significant issue.
Ah, John...the Bush Justice Department, spearheaded by a U.S. Attorney appointed by Dubya, just got Ken Lay indicted. And meanwhile, our Democrat state attorney general, Bill Lockyer, who rather infamously broadcast his desire to make Kenny Boy somebody's prison wife, is apparently still trying to find the grand jury room. Talk is cheap.
First, he's opening up the Dems to questions regarding Lay's connections to the Clinton administration, and why it did nothing to halt the corporate corruption scandals before they got out of hand.
Secondly, anyone familiar with cases involving complicated issues such as Lay's would understand why investigations take so long. I guess scamming millions and bankrupting doctors based on channeling the spirit of brain-damaged children in front of a jury is a little quicker.
I'm interning at a law firm as a clerk, and John Edwards should certainly know better than this. I've been pulling files for panel orders all summer - 5 figure suits which will likely be settled - and even those cases take several months to a few years, simply because of all the paperwork. Preparing an airtight federal indictment case with 11 charges is certainly going to take a while, John - implying that Bush is dragging his heels for a former contributor is ludicrous, slanderous, and an outright lie.
Dems were insisting all along that the Bush admin would be soft on Enron, wouldn't aggressively prosecute, etc. So now that virtually all of the Enron execs have been indicted, they are saying it didn't happen fast enough or that it proves Bush kept bad company. All this coming from the defenders of Clinton, who saw several of his direct busines partners jailed for fraud and embezzlement. This is why I'm no longer a Democrat - I detest their shameless, 24/7 spinning, changing the argument when the first argument is proven false.
Bush just can't win. The Democrats claim that he could have arrested Osama Ben Laden long ago but that he's putting it off for political reasons.
This is a totally irresponsible thing for him to say, but it sure makes for a pretty soundbite, doesn't it?
Gee, a trial lawyer like Eddie should realize that the prosecution only gets ONE chance to convict someone in a criminal case. It certainly makes more sense, then, to take the necessary time to build a solid case against Lay than to rush into an indictment and a trial without a solid case and see him go free. Of course, if there had been a speedier indictment followed by an acquittal, Eddie would have been whining about that too.
CALL THE LAWYERS !!
Lest Edwards forgets, a Democrat, namely one DNC Chairman Senator Christopher Dodd (D-CT) was almost singlehandedly responsible for shephering legislation through Congress to remove the barriers to accounting firms (like Arthur Anderson) from serving as both auditors and advisors to the same company.
He also removed protections for defrauded investors to recover their money and proposed deregulation in the guise of tort reform. I am sure plenty of Republicans supported it (see Billy Tauzin), but is was spearheaded by a Democrat. Lieberman was in bed with this legislation as well, but not to the extent Dodd was.
From http://multinationalmonitor.org/hyper/mm0196.12.html, 1/96:
A BITTER LEGISLATIVE FIGHT erupted last year over securities "reform," a measure which will make it difficult for investors to recover their money when defrauded by financial swindlers. The man most responsible for winning approval for the bill, which passed last December over President Clinton's veto, was Senator Christopher Dodd of Connecticut, the chair of the Democratic National Committee.
Dodd is the second biggest recipient of contributions from business groups pushing the securities legislation -- namely Wall Street, accountants and high-tech firms -- raking in more than $80,000 between 1991 and 1995. Last October, Ben Stein wrote an article for the American Spectator in which he recounted a conversation he had with an accountant at a Washington fundraiser: "'You must love Chris Dodd,' I said. 'He's been fighting for you guys for a long time. You must have given him a ton of money.' 'A ton,' he said eagerly. 'But he earned it'."
Democratic support for the bill was initially tepid, but Dodd lined up at least 10 votes. Dodd carries special weight with colleagues because, as head of the DNC, he controls the flow of campaign money which will be made available to Democratic senators up for re-election in 1996.
Dodd's spokesperson, Marvin Fast, says charges that the senator was working on behalf of his campaign contributors are "absolute bunk." Fast adds, "He [Dodd] took action because there was a problem in the industry. It was a bipartisan solution because people on both sides of the aisle recognized that the problem existed."
From PBS of all places:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/regulation/congress/
Although President Clinton vetoed the bill, called the Private Securities and Litigation Reform Act of 1995, asserting that it would close the courthouse door on investors with legitimate claims, the Senate -- led by Sen. Christopher Dodd (D-Conn.), chairman of the Democratic National Committee -- overturned the president's veto in December 1995. Sen. Dodd received almost a quarter of a million dollars in political donations from the accounting industry in the 1995-96 election cycle, although he was not up for re-election.
"Chris Dodd, here he is chairman of the Democratic Party, but he's also the leading advocate in the U.S. Senate on behalf of the accounting industry," says Charles Lewis of the Center for Public Integrity. "And he helps overturn the veto of his own president, who installed him as Democratic chairman. Dodd might as well have been on the accounting industry's payroll. He couldn't have helped them any more than he did as a U.S. Senator."
From Pittsburglive.com
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/tribune-review/opinion/datelinedc/s_16479.html
"Eight committees on Capitol Hill began their attempt to unravel the web of criminal deceit that ensnared Enron and its accountancy firm of Arthur Andersen. Dodd, Andersen's protector, once known as "The Sensual Senator," a role he abandoned for fatherhood recently, has for the past seven years also been well paid by the accountancy and securities industry generally. Of course, as his integrity further declined, so his campaign funds prospered to about $200,000 a year.
If Enron's CEO Ken Lay is indicted, it would only be seemly for Dodd to be charged as an accessory before the event.
Even for pudgy Dodd that is a lot of free lunch money, and another substantial reason why his Democratic Party can't hang the Enron scandal on the Republican Party.
DODD'S FLIP
In 1995, Chris Dodd, with Democrats in the House of Representatives, took the lead in defeating legislation that would have prevented a company's accountant, such as Arthur Andersen, from also serving as its business consultant. This year, Dodd changed course and became a bold advocate for the small shareholder. He has introduced legislation reversing his past efforts while hoping for silence about his deceptions."
Even though Edwards is too young to remember, the Private Securities and Litigation Reform Act of 1995 was supported by Kerry, effectively screwing the shareholder in order to favor his big corporate special interest friends. And Johnny Chung LOVED Kerry.......