And it doesn't stop there. A lot of documents are going to have to come out that the White House doesn't want to release, and there may be a price to pay. But the price to pay for not releasing them is much, much higher, politically speaking.
I think you've bought into the hype, which is understandable, since I bought into myself for a few days there. There are no "documents" the WH needs to worry about, nor does Enron's participation in energy policy meetings cause a problem for Cheney. Those meetings were completely unrelated to Enron's collapse. And those "regular folks" you mention "suffered" only because they were dumb enough to put their money into an enterprise whose numbers were telegraphing trouble for many months prior to the demise of the company, as FR poster innocentbystander pointed out on this thread yesterday. Read his comments and then see if you still think "regular folks" were taken.
Enron was a one week story. We already see the media backing off. It's over.
I never said it did. I said that creating the appearance that there is something to hide causes a problem for the president.
Read his comments and then see if you still think "regular folks" were taken.
I've read them, and while I don't claim to be an expert, my initial reaction is that his argument is a little ridiculous. While some people might well have decided to sell based on falling stock prices, the truth is, the freeze occurred prior to the lies about Enron's finanical condition being exposed, and the 401(k) shareholders were prevented from protecting themselves in light of those revelations. Those folks were used to help artificially prop up the stock price, and then were prevented from getting out in the public market. I don't think it's unreasonable for people who believe in the free market to find that questionable at best, and possibly actionable.
Enron was a one week story. We already see the media backing off. It's over.
It would be nice if you were right, but I really think this is wishful thinking. Time will tell.
From the Washington Post
Enron Also Courted Democrats
Chairman Pushed Firm's Agenda With Clinton White House
By Dan Morgan
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, January 13, 2002; Page A01
Democrats are savoring the chance to use embattled Enron Corp.'s Republican ties to embarrass the Bush administration at upcoming congressional hearings. But Republicans might turn the tables, to some extent at least, because Enron has courted and supported prominent Democrats as well.
According to internal Enron documents and the recollections of former employees, Chairman Kenneth L. Lay had the ear of top Democrats in the 1980s and '90s. He and his colleagues used that access to promote the company's interests with the Clinton administration and key congressional Democrats.
In a White House meeting in August 1997, for example, Lay urged President Clinton and Vice President Gore to back a "market-based" approach to the problem of global warming -- a strategy that a later Enron memo makes clear would be "good for Enron stock."
The following February, Lay met with Energy Secretary Federico Peña to urge White House action on electricity legislation favored by Enron. Peña "suggested that President Clinton might be motivated [to act] by some key contacts from important constituents," according to another Enron memo.
Taking the cue, Lay, one of 25 business executives on Clinton's Council on Sustainable Development, wrote to the president the same day.
Check the rest of the story. This may not be over soon, but if it isn't I have a feeling it will be at the Democrats' own perile.