Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

CBS Voted Against Ben Barnes Before They Voted For Him (new info on conflict of interest)
Captains Quarters Blog ^ | Sept. 11, 2004 1:29 PM | Captain Ed

Posted on 09/11/2004 12:24:02 PM PDT by litany_of_lies

Dan Rather interviewed former Texas legislator and Lieutenant Governor Ben Barnes in order to establish that Barnes used undue influence to get George Bush into the Texas Air National Guard. Rather didn't mention the fact that Barnes has been a major contributor to the Democrats and to the Kerry campaign; over the past five years, he has generated almost a half-million dollars for the DNC and John Kerry, as I reported earlier. Rather treated Barnes as a reluctant witness instead of the partisan he is.

However, CBS News did not always treat Barnes with such kid gloves. New Jersey blogger Just Dan notes that as late as June, CBS looked at Barnes more critically as a potential beneficiary of a John Kerry victory:

The Kerry campaign has begun tracking major fundraisers using a Trustee Leader Board, CBS News has learned. While keeping tabs on fundraisers is nothing new, the twist is that the Kerry campaign is tracking donations to the Democratic National Committee, not to the campaign itself.

...

[S]everal donors, who spoke to CBS News on the condition of anonymity, said that the money was being carefully tracked by the Kerry campaign, most likely for recognition should Kerry win the presidency. In a sign of the campaign's involvement, last week's Leader Board memo was sent around by the Kerry campaign itself.

CBS knew that Kerry campaigners had already taken a large interest in keeping track of the big-money contributors, and Beth Lester specifically mentions Barnes: As of last week, according to information received by CBS News, 20 donors have given and/or raised more than $250,000, enough to earn them the designation of Trustee. Of those, eight have actually raised more than $500K. Those half-millions include Texas lobbyist Ben Barnes, Wall Street financier Stan Shuman, Iranian American PAC Board of Trustees member Hassan Nemazee and Texas lawyer Mark Iola. Eventually, says a source inside the process, the over-$500K raisers will have a special name designation but no moniker has been chosen yet.

...

Although the Kerry campaign's tracking is perfectly legal, Larry Noble of the Center for Responsive Politics notes that tracking donors is a sign that "campaigns, political parties and donors do all understand that this is a system of giving and getting rewards for giving." And, Noble continues, "Kerry, like Bush, plans to acknowledge these people if he wins the election. And that could be in the form of government appointments, ambassordorships, favorable hearings on administration policies."

The possible impropriety between major donors and major appointments is not lost on anyone. After CBS News obtained a copy of the memo, several donors were alerted by the DNC and members of the Kerry campaign. Some of those donors then asked to have their names removed from the list and to remain anonymous to avoid even the appearance of impropriety in the future, said one donor whose name remains on the list.

Whatever else CBS says or doesn't say about Ben Barnes, they cannot claim ignorance about his status as a major contributor to Kerry and the DNC. Dan Rather needs to explain why an issue which CBS felt was important news regarding Barnes' expectations from his heavy contributions did not warrant exploration in the context of his accusations against Kerry's opponent. CBS viewers deserved to have that context presented to them in order to properly weigh Barnes' accusations.

Posted by Captain Ed at 01:29 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Government; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: barnes; benbarnes; cbs; cbsnews; contributions; dnc; kerry; rather
This isn't mere incompetence due to cloudy judgment blind partisanship. It's way beyond that, and I believe at some point that it's actionable.
1 posted on 09/11/2004 12:24:04 PM PDT by litany_of_lies
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: litany_of_lies
Let's try again--made an error in setting off paragraph in middle of text--

+++++

CBS knew that Kerry campaigners had already taken a large interest in keeping track of the big-money contributors, and Beth Lester specifically mentions Barnes:

As of last week, according to information received by CBS News, 20 donors have given and/or raised more than $250,000, enough to earn them the designation of Trustee. Of those, eight have actually raised more than $500K. Those half-millions include Texas lobbyist Ben Barnes, Wall Street financier Stan Shuman, Iranian American PAC Board of Trustees member Hassan Nemazee and Texas lawyer Mark Iola. Eventually, says a source inside the process, the over-$500K raisers will have a special name designation but no moniker has been chosen yet.

++++

Sorry for the error.

2 posted on 09/11/2004 12:27:55 PM PDT by litany_of_lies
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: litany_of_lies
I believe at some point that it's actionable.

Me too. I expect the Justice Department to get to this right after they're finished with Sandy Berger.

3 posted on 09/11/2004 12:27:57 PM PDT by Jeff Chandler (Thank you Rush Limbaugh-godfather of the New Media.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: litany_of_lies
Here is some good dirt about Barnes' association with the Sharpstown scandal (probably the biggest political scandal in Texas history) in the '70s. He's not a credible witness.

The 

Handbook of Texas Online


SHARPSTOWN STOCK-FRAUD SCANDAL. Texas went through one of its traditional and periodic governmental scandals in 1971-72, when federal accusations and then a series of state charges were leveled against nearly two dozen state officials and former state officials. Before normalcy returned, Texas politics had taken a slight shift to the left and had undergone a thorough housecleaning: the incumbent governor was labeled an unindicted coconspirator in a bribery case and lost his bid for reelection; the incumbent speaker of the House of Representatives and two associates were convicted felons; a popular three-term attorney general lost his job; an aggressive lieutenant governor's career was shattered; and half of the legislature was either intimidated out or voted out of office. The scandal centered, initially, on charges that state officials had made profitable quick-turnover bank-financed stock purchases in return for the passage of legislation desired by the financier, Houston businessman Frank W. Sharp. By the time the stock fraud scandal died down, state officials also had been charged with numerous other offenses-including nepotism and use of state-owned stamps to buy a pickup truck.

In the 1972 electoral aftermath, incumbent Democrats were the big losers, although at the top level of officialdom it was a matter of conservative Democrats being replaced by less conservative Democrats. Using the scandal as a springboard, less conservative Democrats and Republicans carried the "reform" battle cry and also gained a stronger foothold in the legislature. Democrats, defensively, charged that the whole scandal atmosphere in Texas was a national Republican plot, originated in the Nixon administration's Department of Justice. But before the smoke cleared, Will Wilson, an ex-Democratic Texas attorney general, by then one of the top Texas Republicans in the federal government, was hounded from his position as chief of the criminal division of the Department of Justice because of his own business dealings with Sharp.

The political tumult that was to become known as the Sharpstown stock fraud scandal started out meekly, though symbolically, on the day Texas Democrats were gathering in Austin to celebrate their 1970 election victories and inaugurate their top officials. Attorneys for the United States Securities and Exchange Commission, late in the afternoon of January 18, 1971, filed a lawsuit in Dallas federal court alleging stock fraud against former Democratic state attorney general Waggoner Carr, former state insurance commissioner John Osorio, Frank Sharp, and a number of other defendants. The civil suit also was filed against Sharp's corporations, including the Sharpstown State Bank and National Bankers Life Insurance Corporation. But it was deep down in the supporting material of the suit that the SEC lawyers hid the political bombshells. There it was alleged that Governor Preston Smith, state Democratic chairman and state banking board member Elmer Baum, House Speaker Gus Mutscher, Jr., Representative Tommy Shannon of Fort Worth, Rush McGinty (an aide to Mutscher), and others-none of them charged in the SEC's suit-had, in effect, been bribed. The plot, according to the SEC, was hatched by Sharp himself, who wanted passage of new state bank deposit insurance legislation that would benefit his own financial empire. The SEC said the scheme was for Sharp to grant more than $600,000 in loans from Sharpstown State Bank to the state officials, with the money then used to buy National Bankers Life stock, which would later be resold at huge profits as Sharp artificially inflated the value of his insurance company's stock. The quarter-of-a-million-dollar profits were, in fact, made. But they weren't arranged by Sharp, the SEC said, until after Governor Smith made it possible for Sharp's bank bills to be considered at a special legislative session in September 1969, and Mutscher and Shannon then hurriedly pushed the bills through the legislature. (Smith later vetoed the bills on the advice of the state's top bank law experts, but not until he and Baum had made their profits on the bank loan-stock purchase deal.)

The state officials denied all the charges, asserting that they had obtained the bank loans and made the stock purchases purely as business transactions unrelated to the passage of Sharp's bank bills. But as the spring of 1971 droned into summer, political pressure mounted on Smith, Baum, Mutscher, and Shannon-even on Lieutenant Governor Ben Barnes, who had been connected in several tangential ways to Frank Sharp, his companies, and the bank bills. By the fall of 1971, when Mutscher and his associates were indicted, the politics of 1972 had begun to take shape. Incumbents moved as far away as possible, politically, from the "old system" and the current state leaders. New candidates came forward, some of them literally with no governmental experience, under a "throw the rascals out" banner.

Mutscher, Shannon, and McGinty were tried in Abilene, on a change of venue from Austin because of adverse pretrial publicity, in February and March 1972. The indictment charged the three men with conspiracy to accept a bribe from Sharp, and District Attorney R. O. (Bob) Smith of Austin said during the trial that Governor Smith was an unindicted coconspirator. Prosecutors acknowledged from the start that the case would be based entirely on circumstantial evidence, which produced legal technicalities inexplicable to laymen. But the jury needed only 140 minutes on March 15, 1972, after exposure to hundreds of pounds and hours of evidence, to find the Mutscher group guilty. The next day, at the request of the defendants, Judge J. Neil Daniel assessed punishment at five years' probation.

The conviction of the Abilene Three dramatically advanced the momentum of the "reform" movement, coming less than three months before primary elections, at which more legislative seats were contested than in any year since World War II.qv (Redistricting decisions by the federal courts added to the high percentage of electoral challenges, but the Sharpstown scandal generally was credited as the main factor.) In statewide races "reform" candidates also dominated. The Democratic governor's race saw two newcomers-liberal legislator Frances (Sissy) Farenthold of Corpus Christi and conservative rancher-banker Dolph Briscoe of Uvalde-run far ahead of Governor Smith, who was seeking a third term as governor, and Lieutenant Governor Barnes, whose seemingly inexorable rise to political prominence was ended when his reputation was tainted by the scandal. Briscoe defeated Farenthold in the runoff and later was elected governor; but Republican candidate Henry Grover of Houston and Raza Unida Partyqv candidate Ramsey Muñiz of Waco drew enough votes to make Briscoe Texas's first "minority" governor. For the state's second top executive branch job, voters chose moderate Houston newspaper executive William P. Hobby, Jr., over seven other Democratic candidates as lieutenant governor-also on a "reform" theme. Reform-minded moderate Democrat John Luke Hill of Houston, a former secretary of state, left a successful private law practice to defeat the popular three-term attorney general, Crawford C. Martin,qv who had been criticized for his handling of the stock fraud scandal and for his own relationship with Frank Sharp. The Democratic primary and the general election of 1972 also produced a striking change in the legislature's membership, including a half-new House roster and a higher-than-normal turnover in the Senate. Most of the newcomers were committed to "reform" in some fashion, regardless of their ideological persuasion. The voters simultaneously indicated that their confidence in the legislature had been restored to some extent, because they approved in November 1972 an amendment allowing the legislature to sit as a constitutional convention in 1974. The convention failed by three votes on July 30, 1974, to approve a proposed new constitution for the voters to consider (see CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION OF 1974).

The final impact of the stock fraud scandal on Texas politics occurred during the regular session of the legislature in 1973. The lawmakers, led by new House Speaker Marion Price Daniel, Jr.,qv of Liberty, a moderate and son of a former governor, with active support from Attorney General Hill and Lieutenant Governor Hobby and with verbal encouragement from Governor Briscoe, passed a series of far-reaching reform laws. Among other subjects, the legislation required state officials to disclose their sources of income, forced candidates to make public more details about their campaign finances, opened up most governmental records to citizen scrutiny, expanded the requirement for open meetings of governmental policy-making agencies, and imposed new disclosure regulations on paid lobbyists.

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Charles Deaton, The Year They Threw the Rascals Out (Austin: Shoal Creek, 1973). Sam Kinch, Jr., and Ben Procter, Texas under a Cloud (Austin: Jenkins, 1972). Vertical Files, Barker Texas History Center, University of Texas at Austin. Tracy D. Wooten, "The Sharpstown Incident and Its Impact on the Political Careers of Preston Smith, Gus Mutscher and Ben Barnes," Touchstone 5 (1986).

Sam Kinch, Jr.

Recommended citation:
"SHARPSTOWN STOCK-FRAUD SCANDAL." The Handbook of Texas Online. <http://www.tsha.utexas.edu/ha ndbook/online/articles/view/SS/mqs1.html> [Accessed Wed Sep 8 23:21:34 US/Central 2004 ].

4 posted on 09/11/2004 12:31:10 PM PDT by Paleo Conservative (Do not remove this tag under penalty of law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: litany_of_lies

lol. That's the MONEY paragraph! Thanks for catching it. I am emailing it out right now.


5 posted on 09/11/2004 12:36:27 PM PDT by Huck (What's the typography, Kenneth?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: litany_of_lies

LOL--I love the title!


6 posted on 09/11/2004 12:39:56 PM PDT by Huck (What's the typography, Kenneth?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paleo Conservative

Bump for later reading.


7 posted on 09/11/2004 12:47:57 PM PDT by RatSlayer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Paleo Conservative
In statewide races "reform" candidates also dominated. The Democratic governor's race saw two newcomers-liberal legislator Frances (Sissy) Farenthold of Corpus Christi and conservative rancher-banker Dolph Briscoe of Uvalde-run far ahead of Governor Smith, who was seeking a third term as governor, and Lieutenant Governor Barnes, whose seemingly inexorable rise to political prominence was ended when his reputation was tainted by the scandal.

Why should that matter? It was over 30 years ago. (/sarcasm)

BUT SUBSTANTIVELY, BARNES WAS OUT OF OFFICE by November 1972. How could he exert pressure in 1973 as I believe is alleged?

And even leading up to the election in 1972 if that is when the alleged "influence" occurred, if he was (obviously) seen as plagued by scandal, how much influence could he have really had.

Will crosscheck against CBS transcript and web page.

8 posted on 09/11/2004 1:02:28 PM PDT by litany_of_lies
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Huck

Noted. I didn't catch the significance of "Iranian American PAC"--would you say that's the guys who want the mullahs deposed, or the ones who want to protect them?

ANSWER: (FROM irananianamericanpac.org)

"· Iranian nationals and residents should not be subject to blanket requirements for purposes of the INS special registration program because such requirements burden Americans of Iranian descent"

"· To the extent it is deemed necessary to apply registration requirements to broad categories of Iranians, such categories should be defined as narrowly as possible, and be consistent with legitimate security concerns"

TRANSLATION: Let terrorists have free reign to come and go as they please.


9 posted on 09/11/2004 1:08:15 PM PDT by litany_of_lies
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: litany_of_lies; Paleo Conservative

No go. Barnes' influence that he denied under oath but changed his tune about for the benefit of CBS took place in 1968 or so before the scandals broke.

Doesn't change the fact that he's lying now because he supposedly wasn't lying then.


10 posted on 09/11/2004 1:13:03 PM PDT by litany_of_lies
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: litany_of_lies

save


11 posted on 09/11/2004 1:18:05 PM PDT by rolling_stone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson