Posted on 10/20/2007 7:03:47 PM PDT by backtothestreets
The REAL "plight" is this Hollyweird Austrian Punk trying to puke up our environment with litigative allegators making erroneous allegations previously arranged by illegitimate Democratick legislators!!!
Bill Simon was so brutally attacked that even Freepers were persuaded to return against him.
I’m not sure if it’s the same case you are speaking about, but a California judge kept a business corruption charge alive against him until after the election, when it was quietly dropped. He is, in fact, an outstandingly honest and moral man, as was his father.
Bush and Rove supported Richard Riordan, a leftist RINO, in the primaries. When Simon won the primary by a 2/3 margin, Bush pretended to support him. But in fact he gave him no support during the campaign, and Gerald Parsky, whom Rove put in charge of the state party, refused to raise any money for him. Even with all that against him, he only lost by a couple of percent.
I don’t know what Bush thought he was doing. Arnold has been a worse governor than Gray Davis, and he has done absolutely nothing to support fellow Republicans or the administration. Nothing, beyond that one convention speech. That was it.
Great Mistake, why not just invoke a state law, screwing more Californians. My question is this: Is Arnold a fruit or a nut?
As I recall, there was a Federal case and a state case. I’m referring to the Fed case (this is all according to my recollection) where he offered to buy a failed S&L. The government asked him to buy more S&Ls than he wanted, and he pointed out that he didn’t have (or did not wish to invest) sufficient capital to replenish the specified reserve requirements for the number of banks the Fed wanted him to buy. The gov’t offered to waive those requirements, and they did so in writing, so he bought them. Almost immediately after he bought the S&Ls, the gov’t shut him down citing the low reserves he had. The gov’t in effect ignored their own offer and literally yanked the rug out from under him. I believe he sued and won, but it was a grueling multi-year case. I don’t know the outcome but I suspect it produced a lot of wear and tear on him.
The state case, again, as I recall, was some kind of pay-phone deal he had a peripheral involvement in that went bad. I remember the details were kind of squirrely, but I thought Simon’s involvement was as a money investor and the actors involved misperformed. Simon, however, was viciously painted as an incompetent businessman as a result of both of these mishaps.
I always thought the S&L case was really galling, the gov’t flat out directly reneged on its own deal that Simon would not have gone into unless he was so induced. These are my understandings.
Look at it as training for the 2008 presidential election.
Thanks......I needed that! But, it does get rather depressing
at times.
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.