In the Current Zeitgeist™, racism can be found in the very air we breathe. Some of the most obvious and glaring examples of racism go completely unnoticed to the witless, small-minded CONservative eye, but for us enlightened ones who engage our Prog-Vision™, no act of racism goes unnoticed.
Take for example the two-year rethuglikkkan witch hunt over alleged "ethics violations" of one of our very best highly esteemed Elitists, Maxine "dirty" Waters. Originally, Maxine "dirty" Waters was charged with meddling in minority-owned OneUnited, who ultimately received $12 million through the federal Troubled Asset Relief Program to help offset losses from investments in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Waters’s actions occurred during the height of the financial crash, when many banks were facing difficulties because of investments in the federal housing agencies.
It sounds bad, but bear in mind her intentions. She was only doing it for The Chul'rens™. Read on.
In a House Ethics panel memorandum, it went something like this:
Quote:[...]the Statement of Alleged Violation asserts that the day after the Department of Treasury and the Federal Housing Finance Agency took action that threatened the viability of OneUnited Bank (OneUnited), a bank on whose board Respondent’s husband had previously served and in which Respondent’s husband held a significant investment, Respondent arranged for a meeting between executives from OneUnited and officials at the Department of Treasury. At the meeting between the OneUnited executives and Treasury officials, the executives asked Treasury for $50 million in funding for OneUnited. Treasury officials informed the executives that Treasury was not legally authorized to provide such funding. Following this direct request for funding by OneUnited executives, Respondent determined that it would be ethically improper for her to advocate on behalf of OneUnited. Despite previously instructing her Chief of Staff to work with the OneUnited executives, Respondent failed to instruct her Chief of Staff that he should not advocate on behalf of the bank. Respondent’s Chief of Staff in fact continued to do so even after Respondent determined that she could not do so.
This was just a slight oversight; nothing to get ones' panties into a knot over. Everyone fails at something, and if you're a Prog, failure is a good thing! It leads to higher levels of acheivment when impaling others to reach the top. Just look at
The memo goes on to note that Waters’ chief of staff was heavily involved in proposing legislative solutions and communicating with other congressional staff about those solutions. And most notably, Waters’ chief of staff was thanked by OneUnited executives for helping to raise $17 million in private funding — in addition to the $12 million in TARP bailout money that OneUnited eventually secured after the Waters-brokered meeting.
The memo also responds to Waters’ claim that she did not benefit from her intervention:
Quote:[…]the fact that the value of Respondent’s shares of OneUnited stock did not change after receipt of TARP funds does not show that Respondent did not benefit from OneUnited’s receipt of TARP funds. This retention of value is the benefit Respondent received….the Investigative Committee concluded that OneUnited was under eminent threat of failure, and that Representative Waters, through her husband, had a significant financial interest in OneUnited, which would have been worthless if the bank had failed…this created the appearance that Respondent was improperly using official resources for her own narrow financial interest.”
This is mighty damning if you were anything less than a Prog Elitist. You could even end up in jail for something like this, or worse, being sentenced to sniff Bawney Fwank's underwear for a year.
Nevertheless, there is the question of Waters' grandson, chief of staff Mikael Moore, violated House rules by continuing to work on OneUnited’s behalf even after Waters informed him of her husband’s interest and instructed him not to do so.
Moore is publicly testifying Friday that he did not know of Waters’s husband’s investment in the bank when he intervened on its behalf in September 2008. The panel is currently deliberating whether to press ahead with a finding that his claims are not credible and he should face sanctions.
I'm sure by now, comrades, you're holding your noses just the same as you would when you pull that big '0' lever for Dear Leader™ for another FOR MORE EARS!
But wait! There's more!
Quote:A House ethics panel has determined there is no evidence that Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) violated congressional rules when she called Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson in 2008 on behalf of minority-owned banks, despite her husband’s financial stake in one troubled institution.
The finding concludes an investigation into Waters’s actions that was disrupted by allegations of misconduct within a previous committee probing her conduct. A new panel created to review Waters’s actions ultimately took the highly unusual step of hiring an outside lawyer to conduct the inquiry.
At a rare public hearing Friday, members of the committee indicated they were prepared to accept the findings of the outside lawyer. The attorney, Billy Martin, found that Waters believed she was intervening on behalf of all minority-owned banks—and not directly on behalf of OneUnited Bank of Boston, in which her husband held stock.
He therefore found no evidence that she knowingly violated House rules. When she learned that OneUnited, on whose board her husband once sat, was seeking federal bailout funds, she ended her involvement, Martin concluded.