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.
And he also used restricted funds to pay bonuses. Let's stick with "alleged crook" until he's drummed the hell out of office, though, at which time we can enjoy his criminal trial.
He'll be wearing an orange jumpsuit before too long
I'd pay to see that BUT....I will never happen ..the dems will spin the hell out of this the MSM will hush it all up and of course OUR side will wimp out as usual trying to be nice guys about it all. We haven't fough back in 2 years in my opinion.
Yea bu twill ANY Republican get the balss to go after hin on this ..I doubt it .we let way way too much slide.We need to use Dems tactics sometimes and play hard ball with these creeps.
Ooooo, you ask an excellent question DC.
What if he "bought" it "on the cuff" from the seller?
And, I have a question as well.
At what point might his confederates in this obious land scheme be charged with criminal conspiracy?
.
The fix is in to put Hillary in the leadership position...Reid ought to call up Weldon perhaps to commiserate together!
Bill Frist's family is heavily involved with taking HCA private right now; he'd better have his own p'and q's in good order!
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.