Posted on 10/13/2006 7:12:03 AM PDT by Dems_R_Losers
A lucrative land deal benefiting U.S. Senate minority leader Harry Reid (D., Nev.) deserves full scrutiny by the Senate ethics committee.
In 1998, Reid purchased undeveloped residential property on the outskirts of Las Vegas for $400,000. He bought one lot outright, and a second lot with a partner, Jay Brown. In 2001, Reid sold the land for the same price to a corporation created by Brown. Reid retained an ownership stake in the corporation and continued to pay taxes on the property. There was no written agreement; Brown told the Associated Press that the two had been friends for 35 years and didn't need one.
So the Senate Democratic leader engaged in a seven-figure handshake and didn't feel the need to disclose all the details. Experts on Senate ethics rules say Reid should have disclosed the sale in 2001 on his annual ethics report, and informed Congress of his part-ownership in Brown's corporation. Reid didn't.
After the land was rezoned for a shopping center, the corporation sold it in 2004. Reid received $1.1 million in the sale, turning a neat profit of nearly $700,000 in six years.
While now insisting he did nothing wrong, Reid is also offering to make a "technical change" to his earlier ethics reports if the ethics committee so desires. Simply giving the Democratic leader a mulligan is hardly the way to handle this case. When the Senate debated ethics reforms earlier this year, Reid was out in front to demand the toughest of standards from lawmakers.
"Americans have been shocked and even disgusted by revelations of corruption in our current system by Republican lobbyists, senior Bush Administration officials, members of Congress, and former congressional staff," Reid said in March. "The scandals have shown that some outsiders and insiders believed they could act with impunity."
That's how this case looks, too. Unless Reid comes up with a better explanation for this lack of disclosure, Democrats should not keep him as their leader in the new Congress in 2007.
OK...now I get who you were talking about. So what did Reid do wrong??
I used to think like you about 3 years ago but it's very naive (saying it with a smile on my face)
There are no morals or scruples in the press. If somebody is changing course, it's because they see an opportunity for their career - nothing else.
The Indonesian guys that do the grounds keeping where I live have more morals than those in the press. Nothing to get excited about , but just understand it.
The profit wouldn't show up in the year he converted it to a Partnership holdings, but in the year of final sale when he got his $1 million. This is all about a "sure thing" profit for him so he would deliver political favors. He can't be paid a bribe so you deal him in a deal cheap ($400,000) when you already know the end game for him ($1 million). This is in effect how tyson paid off Bill Clinton for turning his head when they polluted the Arkansas River. Just assign favorable trades (that them make daily as a hedge) to Hillary's trading account and she gets the profit because of her market genius. She claims she learned the commodities market from the Wall Street Journal, but that is impossible because there is nothing in it that would teach her how to even operate in the commodities market. The WSJ only gives prior trading day closing data in the WSJ. But if you give her favorable trades out of your hedge account when all transactions are settled nightly after market close, she "earns" the money and you don't have to do the criminal thing of writing them a bribery check. Life is sweet..............for Reid too.
So he could get laws changed in his favor without a conflict of interest showing up. He used his leadership position to make millions.
At home, where the laws were, the land belonged to another. He had no personal interest.
In the Senate, the land belonged to him so he could sell it later for a profit. No one would have thought anything of it. They didn't know he was getting laws changed to benefit no one but himself.
It would have slipped right by them had there not been a whistle blower.
"There was no written agreement; Brown told the Associated Press that the two had been friends for 35 years and didn't need one."
Anybody in real estate believe this????
What happens if Brown drops dead? Do you think Reid would rish 400,000 + to Brown's family? No way! He did this to HIDE his investment from the entire world!!
Great post.
Below is the video link by the investigative AP reporter on Reid the Crook.
Go to the link and watch the commercial on the left screen in the upper part of the page. Then the story gets really good. Please send this link to your friends and relatives.
AP Video of Harry's real estate deal.
http://www.redorbit.com/news/video/?mid=14339&category_id=2&release_time=2006-10-11&page=
I hope this is just the first in a loooong line of criticisms of Reid!
The House and the Senate are quite different institutions. You should be faxing Frist, not Hastert or Boehner.
I think that if this is nothing to be concerned about, it is because people have not gotten to the bottom of it.
Were it not for a former aide disclosing this, the public would not know about it. If that is all right with you, then we should get rid of the Senate disclosure rules all together, since people who think like you do not apparently want to know of the secretive dealing of their Senators, including those who are keeping matters secret because they have relatives on local commissions who can act in the Senator's interest without anyone knowing about it.
The issue to me is the non-disclosure, and if it turned out to be legit, then why did he hide this? Why did his high-powered lawyer not follow the rules? They had to know that it would come out eventually...that is unless of course they did not want anyone to know that he would profit from the sale while the man's son was involved.
Ethics is more than accounting...its about trust.
And WHO was the whistleblower??? Curious...AP no friend of pubs, so it had to be a DEM.
"Does anyone know exactly what Berger stole? Has that ever been revealed?"
The timing of Berger's odd, risky behavior suggests that the documents pertained to actions taken (or not) in the terrorist arena, leading up to 9/11. A little housecleaning, as far as that precious legacy, in other words.
Jay Brown...MAFIA LAWYER....Harry Reid must be REALLY DIRTY!!!
I wondered about that -- could it be so that he wouldn't be the owner of record when they got the zoning change (I heard on Rush -- whether it was from Rush or a caller I don't recall) that Reid's son was on the board or commission or whatever that handled zoning.
Also, it seems to me I've heard something about their getting something by the EPA that a private citizen wouldn't have had a snowball's chance in hell of getting! Details were never clear to me though -- haven't seen enough about it.
Thanks for clearing it up...in my little mind! LOL!
The LLC was headed up by the mob lawyer.
So he was the one who theoretically received the gift from Reid.
And also, tax liability is different depending on whether you own property outright or through an LLC.
And there is also the idea that if the land had NOT gone up in value, then the absence of documentation of Dirty Harry being a partner in the LLC, he would then not bear any of the liability (such as a loss in value of the land) - and if the land did go up in value then the sub rosa agreement with the mob lawyer was that Dirty Harry would get the big windfall (in other words, the profit was actually a GIFT to a policiticion that the IRS and the senate could not track).
On top of all that, the local newspaper has noted:
"The question is the timing of the land deal itself and its relationship, if any, to the release of other federal land for private development. In theory, such a purchase could be considered something akin to trading with insider knowledge. Reid's influential friends and political allies are often close to those federal land releases."
Without Dirty Harry's name on the deed or the LLC papers, who would know that he pulled levers by using his office to add value to his own land, not the land of some mundane LLC in which Dirty Harry had no apparent financial interest.
PIAPS = Pig In A Pants Suit
LOL!!
LOL!
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.