Posted on 03/27/2009 9:25:39 AM PDT by Jim Robinson
President Obama continued collecting money for his 2010 Senate re-election campaign even after he resigned his seat from Illinois, including a maximum $2,300 donation the day after Christmas from a top executive of a Wall Street firm that had received a government bailout.
Four contributions - $4,800 in all - were donated to the Obama 2010 fund on Dec. 26, according to Federal Election Commission reports.
The money came from some of Mr. Obama's top presidential fundraisers: Bruce A. Heyman, managing director at Goldman Sachs, which received a $10 billion bailout last year; Steven Koch, vice chairman at Credit Suisse First Boston; and John Levi, a lawyer at the law and lobbying firm of Sidley Austin LLP.
The donations are legal, but the timing is unusual because Mr. Obama formally left the Senate on Nov. 16 and already had a surplus in his Senate campaign treasury.
Under federal election law, Mr. Obama and five other former members of Congress now serving in his Cabinet or the White House can retain congressional campaign funds for years, even if they don't plan to run for Congress again. They can spend the money for any political purpose.
Mr. Obama's transportation secretary, former Rep. Ray LaHood, Illinois Republican, has given $60,000 of his leftover funds to help reduce the campaign debt of his son's failed run for state office. White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, a Democrat who represented Illinois in the House, is one of three administration figures with at least $1 million left over in their congressional campaign funds, FEC records show.
"Other than converting the money to personal use, which is the one thing they can't do, these campaigns can basically operate as political slush funds," said Meredith McGehee, policy director at the nonpartisan Campaign Legal Center.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com:80 ...
bttt
Was Blago Obummer’s shill or was it Rezko?
It’s the democrat way, break the law, take your seat and forget about it.
http://www.rightmichigan.com/story/2009/2/25/95012/4337
Well, well, well. On top of everything else, Barry is such a sleazebag in his financial doings.
Zero truly has no shame.
http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/09/21/baracks-wall-street-problem-is-now-americas/
From the article..
Barack Obama has a major Wall Street and Washington problem that the media so far is refusing to acknowledge or explore. He is in the pocket of the Wall Street firms and mortgage security companies that are at the center of the collapse of the real estate bubble. He is closely tied to at least two of the Fannie Mae principals. As Ricky Ricardo would say, “Barack, you got some splaining to do.”
Citi-FRAUD
Crisis? What crisis?
Commentary: Citi’s Pandit and B of A’s Lewis diverge in damage control
By MarketWatch
Last update: 9:19 a.m. EDT March 10, 2009Comments: 116
NEW YORK (MarketWatch) — Vikram Pandit, the chief executive brought in to manage the troubled Citigroup Inc., is sticking to his well worn line that not only is the bank in fine shape, its main problem is that its undervalued.
“Despite the steps we’ve taken to strengthen our capital base, I am, like you, disappointed with our current stock price and the broad-based misperceptions about our company and its financial position,” Pandit wrote in a memo to employees Monday. “I don’t believe it reflects the strengths of Citi (C:
2.81, -0.14, -4.7%) ; our newly strengthened capital base, our unique global franchise.” Read Citi memo.
To Pandit, Citigroup’s $1 share price is the result of investors who are mistaken about Citigroup’s ability to ride out the recession. He claims Citi has been profitable so far in 2009, but it’s a hollow hope that almost fully ignores four separate government interventions at a cost or commitment of close to $400 billion and a dilution of existing shareholders.
Up to a third of Citi could be owned by the federal government under the latest bailout announced a few days ago.
The reality at Citigroup is so bad that Bank of America Corp. (BAC:
7.58, -0.12, -1.6%) chief executive Ken Lewis has defended his bank by distinguishing its performance against Citigroup. He suggests B of A will not need more government money and that the bank’s acceptance of $20 billion to buttress its acquisition of Merrill Lynch & Co. was a strategic mistake that eroded confidence.
Another small detail, Lewis says, B of A made $4 billion last year. It’s a claim Citi, which lost $32 billion, can’t make.
Neither bank is in an enviable position. Pandit’s multiple claims that Citi is stable are undermined by the multiple rescues required to prevent panic. Bank of America’s misstep with Merrill has proven nearly as costly.
It may be “broad-based misperceptions” to Pandit, but it’s reality to investors in these institutions.
- David Weidner
Either purposely or incompetently The Resident cut a real bad deal for you the taxpayer already on Citi-fraud. Coincidence?
Look who is movin on up to the Treasury! Coincidence?
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123732747181462245.html
US of Citi-fraud, Coincidence??
http://www.americablog.com/2009/02/united-states-of-citibank.html
I get to the point where my brain cannot take in any more corruption. Nothing surprises me. Real news would be if Obama or any of his cohorts would do something honorable.
[Sandy Burglar Excuse/ON] “Sloppy...it’s just being sloppy”[Sandy Burglar Excuse/OFF]
Armed robbery is a more honorable line of work.
bump!
Yawn... move along folks. Nothing to see here. Please move along...
Jeez, is there an honest bone in his body?
Classic Illinois politics. "This brand new highway brought to you by Governor Blagojavich..."" Shit, didn't Obama need congress to approve the mortgage deal? Has anyone EVER heard of an American president grandstanding about a Federal program? We are in for a long four years as Illinois political style destroys the American presidency...
Just like Hillary getting a massive book contract before swearing in, the dems observe the letter, not the spirit of the law. They, like all politicians, prattle on about how much better they are than everyone else, and yet they can only behave according to restrictive laws--anything else is just fine. They don't seem to understand the value of policing oneself, of doing the right thing not because the law says so, but because it's the right thing to do.
Kind of explains their view of the rest of us, and why they strive every single day to control our behavior.
I think if the federal prosecutor squeezes either Rezko or Blagojevich hard enough they will produce evidence and testimony—requiring corroborating witnesses or documents—to force Obama out of office and maybe into jail. Patrick Fitzgerald wants to be in the history books.
Are the FOOLS that voted for this low down community organizer, Chicago thug going to wake up and realize that he hates this country and everything it stands for? His one goal is to destroy it and make himself and his friends wealthy beyond our wildest imaginations. Apparently the leaders of other countries see it but our MSM and dumb a*ses are either in on it or dumb as a box of rocks.
Yawn... move along folks. Nothing to see here. Please move along...
_____________
WTH is that supposed to mean?????
I'm sure some "journalist" will ask him about it at the next staged press conference.
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.