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

To: All

Who is the Stupidest Member of Congress?
CAST YOUR VOTE HERE

Among the top viscerally stupid Democrats in Congress: Democrat NY Cong Yvette Clarke. Imran got her to order expensive tech equipment for her office delivered to his home.

Cong Clarke unblinkingly agreed to all of this. She then approved a $120k "write-off" of the purchases thus making the money and the devices just disappear.

<><>The tax-paid devices tied to NY Democrat Cong Yvette Clarke’s office included some 150 iPhones and iPads.

<><> Priced at $800 each, Democrat Cong Clarke's $120,000 write-off would buy 150 devices.

<><> Cong Clarke's office, according to payroll records, has only 16 employees. Taxpayers might ask why Cong Clarke needed so many electronics for her small staff?

Democrat Cong Clarke's office refused to tell a reporter which staffer signed the form, and why they did not fire the Paki IT at that time, or why they did not alert authorities (not reporting knowledge of a crime IS a crime).

Taxpayers should be aware that Cong Yvette Clarke’s chief routinely called a House help desk to inquire about the write-off process but did not ever convey the highly unusual scale of the dollar figure, the official said.

Stupidly signing off on a falsified invoicing scheme, the equipment Democrat Yvette Clark ordered (then wrote-off) got shipped ..... not to the Congressional office...... but to Imran’s private residence.

Voters for The Stupidest Member should be aware that Democrat Yvette Clark (or high-level staffer with financial responsibility in her office) would have to sign a voucher for each such purchase.

Taxpayers may undoubtedly wonder how Democrat Yvette Clark wouldn’t have noticed (A) that tech equipment was being purchased, (B) in large quantities Democrat Clarke might not plausibly need, (C) but never actually materialized at Cong Clarke's office.

Cong Yvette Clarke describes herself as a "Caribbean-American."

16 posted on 10/05/2017 1:45:54 AM PDT by Liz (Four boxes to defend liberty: soap, ballot, jury and ammo; used in that order.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]


To: All
MEMORY LANE---The House banking scandal
SOURCE Wikipedia

The House banking scandal broke in early 1992, when it was revealed that the United States House of Representatives allowed members to overdraw their House checking accounts without risk of being penalized by the House bank (actually a clearinghouse).

This is also sometimes known as Rubbergate (from the expressions "rubber check" (bounced check) and "Watergate)". The term is misleading because House checks did not bounce; they were honored because the House Bank provided overdraft protection to its account holders, the Office of the Sergeant at Arms covered the House Bank with no penalties.[1] It was also sometimes known as the "check-kiting scandal".

SNIP

The scandal contributed to a perception of corruption and malfeasance and was a contributing factor to major changes in the House, in which 77 Representatives resigned or were ousted in the 1994 election.[3] Four ex-Congressmen, a Delegate, and the former House Sergeant at Arms were convicted of wrongdoing as a result of the investigation that followed.[4]

Among these, former Rep. Buz Lukens (R-OH) was convicted on bribery and conspiracy charges. Former Rep. Carl C. Perkins (D-KY) pleaded guilty to various charges including a check kiting scheme involving several financial institutions including the House Bank. Former Rep. Carroll Hubbard (D-KY) pleaded guilty to three felonies. The former Sergeant at Arms, Jack Russ, pleaded guilty to three felonies.[5]

The House Bank functioned according to rules different from the laws governing deposit institutions. The facility was operated under very loose rules at the time, using a pencil and ledger system rather than a computerized accounting system, and the bank manager did not provide regular account statements to House members, nor were notifications sent to House members in the event they had overdrawn their accounts.

Further contributing to the problem was the fact that the House Bank did not post deposits in a timely manner, often as much as seven weeks after the fact. Thus, while some knowingly took advantage of the system (and were ultimately convicted of wrongdoing)[citation needed] many members of the House who wrote overdrafts were not actually at fault, as it was the House Bank's responsibility to post deposits in a timely manner.

Another practice which contributed to the scandal was that House members were allowed to overdraw their accounts, provided that the overdraft did not exceed the member's next paycheck. Many House members used this practice to take unauthorized advances on their paychecks which they would repay in the future. In a corporate context the practice of drawing money out of the corporation's accounts for personal use is a violation of fiduciary duty to the corporation's shareholders.

Many U.S. banks, like the House Bank, offered overdraft protection to checking account holders. However, the overdrafts in a regular bank's overdraft protection program are always secured by either a line of credit with the bank extended under standard lending protocols (including interest charges, if any), linkage of the protected checking account to another account with the necessary funds to pay the overdraft, such as a savings account, or charges made to a credit card held by the depositor.[6]

Prior to and during the House Bank overdraft scandal, the security for the overdrafts in the House Bank was the Member of Congress' next paycheck, as posted to his or her checking account in a pencil ledger system. In the aftermath of the House Bank overdraft scandal, two federal credit unions, one for the House and one for the Senate now provide banking services to Members of Congress and the general public, with no special treatment for Members of Congress.

These credit unions existed long before the scandal. However, the Office of the House Sergeant-at-Arms had offered a much more convenient clearing house for Members of Congress' checks, and overdraft protection was managed in a much more lenient (and less expensive) manner than through the credit unions or, for that matter, any chartered bank.[7]

In the early days of the scandal, when the media began reporting on the loose practices, Republican Minority Whip Newt Gingrich, along with 7 freshman Republicans referred to as the Gang of Seven or "The Young Turks", made the strategic decision to publicize the scandal in an attempt to sweep congressmen with overdrawn accounts, most of them Democrats, out of power; Gingrich himself had 22 overdrawn checks, one a $9,463 check to the Internal Revenue Service.[8] Jim Nussle, one of the Gang of Seven, came to national attention when he made a speech from the well of the House while wearing a paper bag over his head to protest the "shameful" ethical behavior involved in the scandal.[9]

Gingrich pressured the then Speaker of the House Tom Foley to ensure that the special counsel appointed to investigate the matter informed the voting public of the overdrafts and the identities of all of the Congressmen responsible.[10]

18 posted on 10/05/2017 2:03:41 AM PDT by Liz (Four boxes to defend liberty: soap, ballot, jury and ammo; used in that order.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies ]

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