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

To: Ready4Freddy; lonestar
George Bush had $606,000 put up in the original purchase price of $46 million. He received an additional 10% share conditioned upon when the original investors recouped their investment plus interest. His distribution of the proceeds at the sale of the Rangers was about $15 million.

Now where were there any illegal actions taken in the Ranger deal? If so then you've blamed everyone from the Attorney General, State Legislature, City of Arlington officials, County Officials, Federal DOJ and most likely others as being complicit in an illegal activity, whatever it is.

102 posted on 09/21/2003 8:26:23 AM PDT by deport (Man with one clock knows the time..... man with two clocks doesn't know the time)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies ]


To: deport; Ready4Freddy; lonestar
George Bush had $606,000 put up in the original purchase price of $46 million.

-------------------------

The $606,000 was also a gift. From an earlier topic here:

-----------------------

Carlyle Group, the powerful investment house with close links to the Bush family, is facing acute embarrassment after the emergence of sardonic remarks the company founder made about the president.

In a talk to investors, David Rubenstein said George W Bush did little but tell dirty jokes while on the board of a company owned by Carlyle, and that he wouldn't have appeared in the top 25m people he would have suggested for president of the US.

Carlyle employs the first President Bush and a host of other luminaries including John Major and former US defence secretary Frank Carlucci. It has been the target of conspiracy theorists for its high-level political connections and its work as a defence contractor.

Mr Rubenstein said Mr Bush was hired to be a non-executive director of Caterair, the world's largest airline food business that Wall Street dubbed Craterair, in the early 1990s.

"Somebody came to me and said: 'Look there is a guy who would like to be on the board. He's kind of down on his luck a bit. Needs a job… could you put him on the board? Pay him a salary and he'll be a good board member and be a loyal vote for the management and so forth,'" he said in a speech to a Los Angeles pension fund. Of Mr Bush's performance, he added: "He … came to all the meetings. Told a lot of jokes. Not that many clean ones. And after a while I said to him, after about three years: 'You know, I'm not sure this is really for you… because I don't think you're adding that much value. You don't know that much about the company.'"

---------------------------

This was at least the second board of directors of large corporations Bush was installed in on the same basis. George Jr. showed little talent and no initiative. Daddy buddies and the self-protective social stratum kept feeding him lucrative jobs and money until they finally found him something so certain and easy that he couldn't fail with it. ...down on his luck. One of these feeds provided him the $606,000 through stock options.

Had I been Bush, I would have been embarrassed to show my face in public. Was it legal> Yes. But there's more to a life of substance than legality. This is one among numerous reasons I have absolutely no use for the Bush.

George Bush is still being supported by people making excuses for him here which would never be acceptable if he weren't George Bush. He exists on a type of charity and always has. He's a hot house plant and it shows. Talking about his ever been in successful business is a joke.

104 posted on 09/21/2003 11:32:51 AM PDT by RLK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies ]

To: deport
"George Bush had $606,000 put up in the original purchase price of $46 million."

You meant $86 mil, of course. I should have said 'essentially no $$$', since his contro was far less than 1% of the purchase price. But it was big buckskis to him - he had to borrow it from a bank in Midland. It's certainly not uncommon in LPs for the GP to have a disproportionate share of earnings, but getting an extra 10% for what was essentially a foregone conclusion is an unusually mighty fine deal.

I never suggested that any of the deals were illegal, deport, nor do I think you're suggesting that anything not illegal is OK.

- Illegal? Probably not. Even the fact that ~$1 mil of Dubya's share came from refusing to pay the court-ordered settlement for land condemnations isn't illegal.
- Approved by voters? Yes, but by a decidedly uninformed electorate. None of the glossy brochures or ads ever mentioned that the City was going to give TBA, including the land, to the owners after 12 years.
- SOP? Sure, unfortunately. These kinds of deals are common, as are Arlinton mayors who become rich after dealing w/ the Rangers.
- Smarmy? Guess it depends on what side of the 'give a coupla million dollars and public land to RWG as corporate welfare' fence you fall on.

105 posted on 09/21/2003 11:37:02 AM PDT by Ready4Freddy (Veni Vidi Velcro)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | 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