How The Charges Against Maxine Waters Were Fabricated Out of Next to Nothing

[Hissyspit]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-fiderer/how-the-charges-against-m_b_668752.html

David Fiderer
Banker/Writer
Posted: August 3, 2010 10:49 AM

How The Charges Against Maxine Waters Were Fabricated Out of Next to Nothing

It's not hard to figure out why the allegations against Maxine Waters seem bogus. You simply need to read the 80-page House Ethics Report carefully. In order to concoct a case against her, the authors of the report twisted the meaning of the House Ethics rules and embellished the underlying facts. The report was first published one year ago, but is now being released shortly before the 2010 campaign season. The timing alone makes you wonder.

The specific charge is easy to understand: "Maxine Waters requested a meeting." That's it. That's all of it. No charge that Waters ever interfered with the execution of anyone's legal duties, or that she applied undue pressure on anyone, or that she engaged in any inappropriate financial transactions. Only that she requested a meeting. At worst, she wasted people's time. The meeting, with officials at the Department of Treasury, got no results.

According to the report, Waters violated House Rule 23, Clause 3 because she received some nonexistent "compensation" that accrued from the meeting that went nowhere. The rule states:

"A Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee of the House may not receive compensation and may not permit compensation to accrue to his beneficial interest from any source, the receipt of which would occur by virtue of influence improperly exerted from his position in Congress."
A meeting is not compensation. It's a courtesy. If the meeting did not result in financial gain to Waters, then the rule does not apply. Similarly, neither a request for a meeting, nor an expression of a particular policy concern, is an "improper exertion of influence," which involves some kind of interference with the performance of a government official's duties. The authors of the report twist the meaning of the words in order to fabricate a case out of thin air.

MORE

[JuniperLea]

1. So, I hope Ms. Waters has recourse...

If all this is true, she needs to sue some asses.

[nosmokes]

2. It's racism and sour grapes, but mostly racism. Gotta put that uppity negress

in her place doncha know.

Heaven forbid that any real investigations or prosecutions happen for the war crimes and other criminal activities propagated during the Bush regime. Oh hell naw, we gotta look forward through our oil soaked lenses.

[MadMaddie]

8. Yep and all 8 that are under investigation are black!

She is outspoken and they can't have that.

[defendandprotect]

21. So -- who from inside the Democratic Party is pushing this?

Or did the Repugs make them do it????

[rjwin]

29. this was pushed by the same people who asked

Shirley Sherrod to pull over in her car and resign! Nothing pleases Americans more than seeing blacks thrown under the bus.

[drm604]

42. Nothing pleases some Americans more.

That word "some" is important. There are many of us, including many whites, who are not the least bit pleased.

[defendandprotect]

45. Interesting . . . sadly!

Heard about the Sherrod demand to "pull over" late in the discussion and was

really shocked -- if anything from this administration can shock me anymore?

Obviously, I can agree with the need for decisive action -- but Obama's world

seems to be rather upside down in that regard, as well --

BP/EPA/dispersants vs Sherrod? "The Gulf will bounce back!"

And "racism" from within the administration?

We need a big change in thinking from this administration --

or a new Democratic candidate in 2012, IMO!

[burnsei sensei]

32. As below in society, so above.

Blacks are over-represented among the suspect.

[spanone]

3. fight it maxine, fight it.

[wmbrew0206]

4. I'll hold out judgement until I have a chance to read the whole report

Just from what I know it doesn't look good but I've only hit wave tops on this one.

I think the fact that the House Ethics Committee felt comfortable enough to go forward with the charges says a lot. They normally don't like to go after one of their own unless it is unavoidable.

[EFerrari]

13. What does that have to do with the facts?

The fact is, she asked for a meeting between Paulson and a business association. Among the members of that association was a bank in which her husband has a modest interest. His interest was not a secret but had been disclosed.

This is bs.

[defendandprotect]

22. Agree . . . she didn't request meeting with one bank...it was for an association ...!!!

[wmbrew0206]

34. OK just finished readin that report. The claim that it was not for one bank but for

an association is pretty much BS.

Rep. Waters asked for a meeting with Treasury and this association, however three of the four attendees from that association were not only members of the association but also high ranking corporate officers at OneUnited. At one point during the meeting, one of the attendees stated that OneUnited was the only bank independently represented at the meeting, (page 11, para 24, sentence 3). There were plenty other members of NBA banks and their officers who are in Washington and would probably have liked to been invited to that meeting. Why weren't they if this was a meeting for NBA members and not OneUnited?

This does not look good. At best, Rep. Waters was deceived by the NBA folks who used their positions in the organization to benefit their own bank and not their members and she probably should have known better. At worse, Rep. Waters step up this meeting knowing how it would play out and had a large conflict of interest that she chose to ignore.

[defendandprotect]

47. Maybe . . . duped? However, I think they still have to look at what changes may have

occurred -- who profitted -- if anyone?

I'm surprised she went against the advice of Barney Franks, however --

who advised her not to do it --

When you look at Rangel, Maxine Waters, Sherrod -- seems to me like some rw influences

on the Democratic Party are trying to deliver a message -- "black is bad" --

just too much coincidence going on right now --

[wmbrew0206]

53. I am sorry but I don't see any conspiracy.

The Rangel case is pretty open and closed. There are clear violations and as the top Congressman on the Ways and Means Committee to claim ignorance is pretty weak.

Seeing as OneUnited benefited from a bailout, I don't think it is a stretch to say Rep. Water's husband profited. Thus she did.

She should have listen to Barney Frank and left it alone.

[wmbrew0206]

27. Like I said, I want to read the whole report but haven't had the chance yet but

going on the surface, Congressmen rarely go after their own unless it is something pretty blatant. It is much easier for them to give each other a white wash and collect a couple favors for down the road, especially from members from safe districts like Ms. Waters.

Just because she asked for a meeting between Paulson and an association, doesn't mean there was not a conflict of interest. If that association delegation was made up of ten members and nine of them all worked for a bank that needed help, do you think it is possible that the meeting could have also been used to ask for help for that bank? If there were members of the bank on that delegation did Ms. Waters know that? If she did and still requested the meeting, is that a conflict of interest?

Also, I am not sure what you consider modest, but reportedly Water's husband had $250k worth of stock in that bank. I would not call that modest.

Like I said, I have not had a chance to read report, but this "meeting with a bankers association" is basically what the case revolves around from my understanding.

[EFerrari]

31. The referral from the Office of Congression Ethics is on line.

http://oce.house.gov/disclosures.html

[wmbrew0206]

35. Thank you

[pscot]

40. Owning $250K worth of stock

is not the same as netting $250K as a result of her action. Exactly how she stood to profit from her arranging a meeting is not at all clear.

[wmbrew0206]

41. If OneUnited was heavy into sub-prime mortgages or was over leveraged with

exposure in the housing market, it would not be a surprise to see the FDIC come in and take over the bank, thus wiping out all the equity stockholder's had in the bank. Thus Rep. Water's spouse's 250K could be wiped out or greatly reduced.

[pscot]

44. Thus doing the Republicans' light work

I think you're onto something here. Since the collapse, the right has been trying to hang the blame on Freddie and Fannie and their minority lending programs. Of course One United was heavily exposed to both entities, by reason of the communities it served. If they can bring Waters down by this means, it will be seen as a huge justification for the racists on the right. Limbaugh would wet his pants on the air. This is part and parcel with the Sherrod slander. Disgusting shit.

[wmbrew0206]

49. If Rep. Waters did arrange this meeting and knew that most of the association

bankers were all C-level OneUnited Bank execs, then she is in some trouble.

[cascadiance]

5. I remember seeing her name some years back on some sort of "corruption analysis" article...

Wish I could remember where it was. But after seeing the wingnuts go after Charles Rangel for ethics violations before the election, I recall when first hearing about those wondering if they'd go after Ms. Waters as well. Looks like I was right.

And you know they are playing these cards all NOW for a good reason instead of playing them then when probably the same information was available.

Perhaps some out there can try to find that earlier report that questioned her ethics then. Might have some information on why it wasn't followed up then, etc. too.

I think it was a rating of "dirty congress people", which I'm guessing also had some Republicans on it too. Maybe we can fight back with going after some of the Rethugs on that list too, if this is the playbook the wingnuts are working from.

I have to get back to some more important job search stuff now or I'd try to do this.

[SoCalDem]

6. IIRC, it had to do with a bank her husband had connections to

This is the biggest issue for congress/senate people. It's very hand to separate personal from business when one party of a marriage is in the business of making laws that spill over into the business arena of their spouse/grown children/parents etc.

Conflict of interest is the issue, even if money never changes hands in a dark alley.

[cascadiance]

7. If Boxer had the same ethics cloud that Feinstein had with her husband, you KNOW...

the right wing would be going after her NOW too!

Feinstein instead fought back by having one that was heading up her campaign to also help Schwarzenegger win the governorship, so as to avoid putting more of an incentive for Democrats to "allow" her to be outed if a Dem could appoint her replacement instead of Schwarzenegger. It will be interesting to see what happens to this dynamic if we get in Jerry Brown now as governor too.

[defendandprotect]

24. The meeting she arranged was on behalf of an ASSOCIATION...not one bank . ..

[wmbrew0206]

51. Yeah, but 3 of the 4 members of the association were also

C-level officers for OneUnited.

[Hannah Bell]

50. pelosi & her war contractor husband. hypocrites, all of them.

waters' stuff is penny-ante. $250K is the most she stood to lose? and nothing to gain?

then bullshit.

mr. pelosi's war contracts = millions.

same with feinstein's husband.

and probably dozens more with their fingers in various pies.

they all retire rich as hell. corrupt, the whole lot of them.

[alcibiades_mystery]

9. Governing While Black

There seems to be a new epidemic...

[PufPuf23]

10. If Waters goes, DiFi should too.

Waters is persecuted on a technicality; nearly every member of Congress and all incumbents, could be investigated and tried. but Waters is an outsider that is a real person and represents real people.

DiFi helped change Senate ethics laws and her husband, Richard Blum, has shell companies with scant cash flow that received no-bid 8 figure DoD contracts.

[Blue Owl]

17. DuFu can take her crony reefer madness insanity

and shove it.

[burnsei sensei]

33. I was thinking the same thing too.

Feinstein is more guilty of conflict of interest than Waters ever dreamed of being.

[Stinky The Clown]

11. Thanks for that. I'm incredulous how many right here on DU are calling for her and Rangel's heads

For me, Maxine's lone voice in the Senate chamber in 2000 asking for one sorry assed sponsor as our government was being stolen is all I need to keep on supporting her.

And now, some of the people I can assume she was fighting for are against her.

How much more moral high ground will we give away?

[Joe Fields]

43. I am not asking for her head, yet. Rangel is, IMO dirty dirty dirty

and must go. He has abused the power and privilege given by the people to do the people's work. If you support Rangel, then you support corruption by elected officials.

[EFerrari]

12. I knew it.

@ssholes.

[G_j]

14. those slimeballs

Are any dems standing up for Waters? I haven't following this, but I've thought Maxine in the top four, or five, as far great congress people.

[dogday]

19. ***Crickets***

[boston bean]

15. seems like a bunch of bs, from what i've read so far.

So what, she suggested a meeting concerning a bank that her husband is involved in.

big whoop.

[EFerrari]

16. Kick

[glinda]

18. Anyone know who put together this Committee that is doing all of

these Ethics investigations?

[defendandprotect]

25. Yes -- that's what I'm asking . . . who's responsible for this . . .

did it begin under Bush -- ???

Who's on this Committee??

And, keep you eye on the fact that Waters chairs a rather important committee in the house!!

Rangel, I think, stepped down from his -- but also had something to do with finance???

Looks like someone wants them both out -- too much honesty?

I'm waiting for attacks on Markey -- he's been doing quite a job on oil industry/BP -- Gulf!!

[wmbrew0206]

28. It was actually one of Pelosi's creations after she became speaker in '06.

[glinda]

37. Beginning to wonder who is minding the store. Are they aware or unaware of this.

Grave consequences possibly for elections as well as getting anything done.

[wmbrew0206]

38. There have been several complaints about the way the office is set up

and how it handles investigations. After these two high profile cases it might need some tweaking.

[glinda]

48. Tweaking might be a little subtle word.

[defendandprotect]

20. Thank you -- was going to post her reply on this yesterday and got off on something else....

but I was certainly thinking that this is quite suspicious --

especially re election time -- isn't that barred?

Also looks racist to me -- especially combined with the Rangel thing -- a little piling on?

I know Rangel is a heavy drinker and lots of problems -- but two of these things together ...

very odd IMO.

Plus Waters did not ask for a meeting for a bank -- it was on the part of A NUMBER OF BANKS.

Some organization -- not one individual bank!

Glad you're on this Hissy!!

:)


Oh . . . the other thing that makes this suspicious to me is the committees both Waters and

Rangel headed -- !!! Looks like someone desperately wants these people OFF of those

committees??!!!

[laughingliberal]

23. K & R nt

[defendandprotect]

26. K&R

[geckosfeet]

30. The timing alone makes you wonder.

No. Not really.

[pleah]

36. Targeting the real liberals?

Hmmmm possible.

[NoSheep]

39. That's what it looks like to me.

[russspeakeasy]

46. If you throw enough dung at a wall..some of it will leave a stain..

[suffragette]

52. Maxine Waters advocated for minority-owned banks

and it looks to me like there is a concerted effort to use this against her to try to take her down.

It also looks to me to be part of a series:

Acorn: advocating and "organizing a majority consituency of low- to moderate-income people across the United States. The members of ACORN take on issues of relevance to their communities, whether those issues are discrimination, affordable housing, a quality education, or better public services. ACORN believes that low- to moderate-income people are the best advocates for their communities, and so ACORN's low- to moderate-income members act as leaders, spokespeople, and decision-makers within the organization."

Shirley Sherrod: Advocate for small farmers, who brought that history of advocacy into a major agency, the USDA

Maxine Waters: Long-time progressive advocate for civil rights


All notably effective advocates, all smeared in an effort to remove them specifically, to shift away the advocacy and appropriate support their constituencies receive and reduce the likelihood of others willing to risk the same attacks who might otherwise take up these causes.

From 2009:
http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/03/waters_i_didnt_take_improper_action_for_bank.php


Waters: I Didn't Take Improper Action For Bank
By Zachary Roth - March 13, 2009, 2:15PM
Yesterday we noted a report by the New York Times about Rep. Maxine Waters' ties to OneUnited, a bank that got bailout money after Waters set up a meeting between Treasury Department officials and the heads of minority-owned banks, including OneUnited's CEO.

Now Waters is pushing back.

In a statement on her website, Waters asserts that the stories "revealed one thing: I am indeed an advocate for minority banks. Despite my public and consistent advocacy, news reports suggest that somehow I have acted improperly."

The full statement follows after the jump...



http://firedoglake.com/2009/03/13/the-war-on-minority-lending-ny-times-helps-bush-aide-smear-maxine-waters/
The War on Minority Lending: NY Times Helps Bush Aide Smear Maxine Waters
By: Teddy Partridge Friday March 13, 2009 7:00 am
As part of the right-wing effort to blame The Bush Economic Miracle Financial Sector Meltdown on minorities who should have kept in their place rather than tried to join The Ownership Society as owners, a bunch of Bush-era Treasury politicos spun the New York Times into casting scary aspersions on heroic Congresswoman Maxine Waters (D-CA) for her involvement in a meeting with them about minority bank participation in TARP and the recovery.
~~~
An ex-Treasury colleague too afraid to attach his name to the canard being floated about Congresswoman Waters went farther in his accusations against the bank owners, not surprisingly, since the New York Times granted him anonymity:

“They wanted money — cash,” said a former Treasury Department official who attended the meeting but asked not to be named, because he was not authorized to speak to reporters. “That is why they were there. It was very, very explicit.”

Wow! That’s shocking — bankers who wanted cash from the United States Treasury and were unafraid to ask for it in a meeting called to discuss the participation of minority-owned financial institutions in the great shoveling-out-the-door of taxpayer cash. Just imagine: a "very, very explicit" interest in Treasury-managed cash from bank owners! That must have seemed unprecedented to these Bushie lame ducks.

No wonder they felt the need to alert the media, even if they’d rather not have their names used.



http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/03/letters_bolster_waters_claim_on_bank_conflict.php
Letters Bolster Waters' Claim On Bank Conflict
By Zachary Roth - March 13, 2009, 5:08PM

Rep. Maxine Waters is stepping up her campaign to show she took no inappropriate action on behalf of OneUnited bank.

Waters' office has released to TPM two letters sent by the National Bankers Association (NBA), a trade group for minority-owned banks, to the Treasury Department, in reference to a September 2008 meeting Waters had helped set up between NBA and Treasury. The letters appear to back Waters' contention that the meeting, at which OneUnited's CEO reportedly asked explicitly for bailout money, was not set up exclusively to help OneUnited, but rather on behalf of minority-ownded banks more broadly.

That doesn't contradict anything the New York Times reported, it's worth noting. But it does appear to bolster Waters' claim, made in a statement she put out earlier today, that she wasn't looking out for OneUnited's interests above those of other minority-owned banks. Waters has long been an advocate in Congress for minority-owned banks.

Note: there's a link at TPM to the two letters. Do read them.




So we have former Bush treasurers making the allegations (and spinning them for the maximum negative). The NY Times taking up from there and consistently casting Waters in the most negative light over this past year and the OCE, with Goss co-chairing it pressing that Waters be investigated.

I think there are questionable ethics involved here, but those aren't Maxine's.