Quantcast

WHO WOULD HAVE THOUGHT? . . . Indicted Goldman exec was major Dem donor

~ The Rebel ~ 2011/10/28 00:17:42
Rajat Gupta, the former head of McKinsey & Co. and Goldman Sachs who pleaded not guilty today in his insider trading case, was a major Democratic donor, according to FEC data.

Gupta has given to various Democratic candidates and committees, totaling just over $100,000 since 1990.

Read More: http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/1011/Indict...

You!
Add Photos & Videos

Top Opinion

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • wolf sloan 2011/10/28 03:52:14
    wolf sloan
    +1
    yeah,big surprise
  • Jezey™ 2011/10/28 03:15:10
    Jezey™
    +2
    All I can do on this one is a double facepalm! Seems as long as Obama does it, it is just dandy! Hypocrisy at it's finest!
    double facepalm obama dandy hypocrisy finest
  • Doc. J 2011/10/28 03:14:06
    Doc. J
    And of course NO donor for the Republicans has EVER broken finance laws......

    Criminals....do not have a political party. They come from BOTH sides of the isle.

    NEXT!
  • Cogs 2011/10/28 01:12:28
    Cogs
    Well yeah. Wall Street owns both parties. Sucks, but you'd have to be intentionally clueless for that to be a "who would have thought?!" sort of surprise.
  • Eddie L~PWCM~JLA 2011/10/28 01:01:23
    Eddie L~PWCM~JLA
    +2
    All of these democrat TURDS need to be defeated.
  • Mark In Irvine 2011/10/28 00:26:29 (edited)
    Mark In Irvine
    i don't have time to list all the Republicans and GOP-donors who have been indicted for one thing or another ... not to mention that one president who had to resign in disgrace because he was involved in burglary of the Democratic Headquarters and the burglary of the office of the doctor or a critic who was a former-Marine/DOD/Rand analyst ...
  • babaji5... Mark In... 2011/10/28 00:38:01
  • Mark In... babaji5... 2011/10/28 00:51:37
    Mark In Irvine
    quick info ...

    The Watergate scandal was a political scandal during the 1970s in the United States resulting from the break-in of the Democratic National Committee headquarters at the Watergate office complex in Washington, D.C. and the Nixon administration's attempted cover up of its involvement. Effects of the scandal eventually led to the resignation of Richard Nixon, the President of the United States, on August 9, 1974; his was the only resignation of a U.S. President. The scandal also resulted in the indictment, trial, conviction and incarceration of several top Nixon administration officials.

    The affair began with the arrest of five men for breaking and entering into the Democratic National Committee (DNC) headquarters at the Watergate complex on June 17, 1972. The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) connected the payments to the burglars to a slush fund used by the Committee for the Re-Election of the President, a fundraising group for the Nixon campaign.[1][2] As evidence mounted against the president's staff, which included former staff members testifying against them in an investigation conducted by the Senate Watergate Committee, it was revealed that President Nixon had a tape recording system in his offices and that he had recorded many conversations.[3][4] ...














    quick info ...

    The Watergate scandal was a political scandal during the 1970s in the United States resulting from the break-in of the Democratic National Committee headquarters at the Watergate office complex in Washington, D.C. and the Nixon administration's attempted cover up of its involvement. Effects of the scandal eventually led to the resignation of Richard Nixon, the President of the United States, on August 9, 1974; his was the only resignation of a U.S. President. The scandal also resulted in the indictment, trial, conviction and incarceration of several top Nixon administration officials.

    The affair began with the arrest of five men for breaking and entering into the Democratic National Committee (DNC) headquarters at the Watergate complex on June 17, 1972. The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) connected the payments to the burglars to a slush fund used by the Committee for the Re-Election of the President, a fundraising group for the Nixon campaign.[1][2] As evidence mounted against the president's staff, which included former staff members testifying against them in an investigation conducted by the Senate Watergate Committee, it was revealed that President Nixon had a tape recording system in his offices and that he had recorded many conversations.[3][4] Recordings from these tapes implicated the president, revealing that he had attempted to cover up the break-in.[2][5] After a series of court battles, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the president had to hand over the tapes to government investigators; he ultimately complied.

    Facing near-certain impeachment in the House of Representatives and a strong possibility of a conviction in the Senate, Nixon resigned the presidency on August 9, 1974.[6][7] His successor, Gerald Ford, issued a pardon to President Nixon after his resignation.

    See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... fr more info

    also:

    http://www.historyplace.com/u...
    http://crimemagazine.com/taxo...
    http://whitehousetapes.net/ex...
    http://classes.lls.edu/archiv...
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
    http://www.presidentprofiles....

    now ... STFU
    (more)
  • babaji5... Mark In... 2011/10/28 00:57:16
  • Mark In... babaji5... 2011/10/28 01:05:03
    Mark In Irvine
    you are apparently the only person in the English-speaking world that is not already aware of this ... your ignorance is not my burden of proof ...
  • babaji5... Mark In... 2011/10/28 01:09:01
    babaji5150~solo
    +3
    C'mon dickweed,... you said "he was involved in burglary of....."

    You're not getting off that easy. Show your proof that he was involved in a burglary.
  • Mark In... babaji5... 2011/10/28 01:19:48
    Mark In Irvine
    he knew about it and covered it up ... read the transcripts of the David Frost interview with Nixon ...
  • babaji5... Mark In... 2011/10/28 01:34:49
  • Mark In... babaji5... 2011/10/28 01:36:12
    Mark In Irvine
    you obviously are a stickler for evidence and incontrovertable proof ...
  • babaji5... Mark In... 2011/10/28 01:38:43
    babaji5150~solo
    +2
    Purveyor of truth and I despise liars.
  • Mark In... babaji5... 2011/10/28 01:45:26
    Mark In Irvine
    thank you for your military service, but, with all due respect, you are a few bullets shy of a full cylinder ...
  • babaji5... Mark In... 2011/10/28 02:07:40
    babaji5150~solo
    +1
    No, it happens to be the law, and falsely accusing someone of burglary is a serious offense.
    The media has vilified Nixon for 40 years and brainwashed the public into the same lie.
    In the end, he was guilty of doing the same thing that nearly every President has done since dirt.
    This happens on a daily basis now, but in the form of cyberspace and hacking into other's Email accounts.
    The current administration is presently guilty of covering up TWO scandals but that's not getting much exposure.
    0bie's day is coming, though, and it will make Watergate seem like a parking ticket.

    I prefer automatics.
  • Mark In... babaji5... 2011/10/28 00:52:08
    Mark In Irvine
    better to be a smart-ass than a dumbmass ...
  • babaji5... Mark In... 2011/10/28 00:58:29
    babaji5150~solo
    +4
    Waiting,.....
  • Mark In... babaji5... 2011/10/28 01:05:24
    Mark In Irvine
    you are apparently the only person in the English-speaking world that is not already aware of this ... your ignorance is not my burden of proof ...
  • Mark In... babaji5... 2011/10/28 01:18:32
    Mark In Irvine
    April 13, 1977: Frost Demonstrates Nixon’s Early Complicity in Watergate Conspiracy In his first interview session with former President Richard Nixon about Watergate (see April 13-15, 1977), David Frost moves from the erased Watergate tape (see November 21, 1973) to Nixon’s damning conversation with Charles Colson about “stonewalling” the Watergate investigation. This time around, Frost is far more prepared and ready to deal with Nixon’s tactics of obfuscation and misdirection than in earlier interviews (see April 6, 1977).

    Surprise Information - Nixon is unaware that Frost knows about his conversation that same day with Colson (see June 20, 1972). Along with what is known about his conversation with Haldeman, the Colson conversation puts Nixon squarely in the midst of the conspiracy at its outset. More important than Frost’s command of the facts is Frost’s springing of a “surprise card” (Frost researcher James Reston Jr.‘s words) on Nixon at the beginning of the Watergate sessions. Nixon obviously must contend with the questions of what else Frost knows, and how he would ask about it. As Frost details excerpts from the Colson conversation, about “stonewalling” and “hav[ing] our people delay, avoiding depositions,” Reston watches Nixon on the monitor. Reston will later reca...

















    April 13, 1977: Frost Demonstrates Nixon’s Early Complicity in Watergate Conspiracy In his first interview session with former President Richard Nixon about Watergate (see April 13-15, 1977), David Frost moves from the erased Watergate tape (see November 21, 1973) to Nixon’s damning conversation with Charles Colson about “stonewalling” the Watergate investigation. This time around, Frost is far more prepared and ready to deal with Nixon’s tactics of obfuscation and misdirection than in earlier interviews (see April 6, 1977).

    Surprise Information - Nixon is unaware that Frost knows about his conversation that same day with Colson (see June 20, 1972). Along with what is known about his conversation with Haldeman, the Colson conversation puts Nixon squarely in the midst of the conspiracy at its outset. More important than Frost’s command of the facts is Frost’s springing of a “surprise card” (Frost researcher James Reston Jr.‘s words) on Nixon at the beginning of the Watergate sessions. Nixon obviously must contend with the questions of what else Frost knows, and how he would ask about it. As Frost details excerpts from the Colson conversation, about “stonewalling” and “hav[ing] our people delay, avoiding depositions,” Reston watches Nixon on the monitor. Reston will later recall: “His jawline seemed to elongate. The corners of his mouth turned down. His eyes seemed more liquid. One could almost see the complicated dials in his head turning feverishly. It was a marvelously expressive face. The range of movement both within the contours of the visage and with the hands was enormous.” Frost concludes with the question, “Now, somewhere you were pretty well informed by this conversation, weren’t you?” After some fumbling and half-hearted admissions of some knowledge, Nixon begins justifying his actions in the conspiracy: “My motive was not to cover up a criminal action, but to be sure that as any slip over—or should I say slop over, a better word—any slop over in a way that would damage innocent people or blow it into political proportions.” [Reston, 2007, pp. 124-126]

    Pinning Nixon down on CIA Interference - Frost asks about the conversations of June 23 (see June 23, 1972), when Nixon told his aides to have the CIA interfere with the FBI’s investigation of the burglary. Nixon tries dodging the point, emphasizing how busy he was with other matters that day and quibbling about the definition of the phrase “cover-up,” but finally says that he had no criminal motive in ordering the CIA to stop the FBI from investigating the matter of the Mexican checks found in Watergate burglar Bernard Barker’s bank accounts. He was merely engaged in political containment, he says, and besides, two weeks later, the FBI traced the checks to a Mexican bank anyway (see Before April 7, 1972 and August 1-2, 1972). Nixon emphasizes his instructions to then-FBI director L. Patrick Gray to move forward on the investigation (see July 6, 1972). (Later, Nixon staff member Jack Brennan will admit that they had almost convinced Nixon to admit to the illegality of the June 23 orders, but Nixon had demurred.)

    'You Joined a Conspiracy that You Never Left' - It now falls to Frost to confront Nixon with the strictures of the law and the evidence that he had broken those laws. Frost says, “But surely, in all you’ve just said, you have proved exactly that that was the case, that there was a cover-up of criminal activity because you’ve already said, and the record shows you knew, that Hunt and Liddy [E. Howard Hunt and G. Gordon Liddy, the leaders of Nixon’s “Plumbers”] were involved… you knew that, in fact, criminals would be protected.” Nixon protests, “Now just a moment,” but Frost says, “Period.” Frost lectures Nixon on obstruction of justice, saying: “The law states that when intent and foreseeable consequences are sufficient, motive is completely irrelevant.… If I try to rob a bank and fail, that’s no defense. I still tried to rob a bank. I would say you tried to obstruct justice and succeeded in that period” between June 23 and July 6. Nixon retorts that he does not believe Frost knows much about the details of the obstruction of justice statutes, but fails to move Frost, who has been carefully instructed in the obstruction statutes all week. Frost eventually says: “Now, after the Gray conversation, the cover-up went on. You would say that you were not aware of it. I was arguing that you were part of it as a result of the June 23 conversation.” Nixon repeats, “You’re gonna say that I was a part of it as a result of the June 23 conversation?” Reston later writes, “It was a crucial moment, a moment that took considerable courage for David Frost.” Frost replies: “Yes.… I would have said that you joined a conspiracy that you never left.” “Then we totally disagree on that,” Nixon retorts. Reston later writes: “No journalist in America, I concluded, would have had the courage of Frost in that vital moment. But therein lay the failing of American journalism. For Frost here was an advocate. He was far beyond the narrow American definition of ‘objective journalism.’” [Time, 5/9/1977; Reston, 2007, pp. 124-126]

    ~ ~ ~

    April 13, 1977: Interviewer Frost Proves Nixon Lied about Knowledge of Watergate Cover-Up In his Watergate interview with former President Richard Nixon (see Early 1976 and April 13-15, 1977), David Frost continues from his earlier questioning about Nixon’s involvement in the Watergate conspiracy (see April 13, 1977) to the events of March 21, 1973 (see March 21, 1973). Now that Nixon’s status as a co-conspirator from the outset has been established, Frost wants to know why Nixon claims not to have known about the illegal aspects of the cover-up, or about the blackmail demands of Watergate burglar E. Howard Hunt, until this date. Nixon is cautious, claiming only that he learned of Hunt’s blackmail demands on March 21, and refusing to acknowledge that he knew anything about the $400,000 in payouts during the eight months preceding (see June 20-21, 1972).

    Springing the Trap - Frost circles back, hoping for a flat confirmation: “So March 21 was the first day you learned about an illegal cover-up?” Nixon carefully says that March 21 was the day he learned of the “full import” of the cover-up, only having heard “smatterings” beforehand and being reassured by then-White House counsel John Dean that no White House personnel were involved. Frost springs his trap: “In that case, why did you say in such strong terms to [White House aide Charles] Colson on February 14, more than a month before, ‘The cover-up is the main ingredient, that’s where we gotta cut our losses. My losses are to be cut. The president’s losses got to be cut on the cover-up deal’” (see February 14, 1973). Nixon’s face betrays his shock. “Why did I say that?” he asks rhetorically, trying to gather himself. He fishes around for excuses, quickly settling on media reports at the time that tossed around charges of conspiracies, “hush money” payouts, and promises of executive clemency. That’s all he was referring to in the February 14 conversation, he says: the cover-up itself had to be avoided at all costs. Frost researcher James Reston, Jr. later writes, “It was an exquisite lie, a superb time warp.”

    Error Goes Unnoticed - Only later do Reston and other research team members realize that no such stories had appeared in the media by February 14; in fact, allegations of a cover-up never made it into print until after burglar James McCord wrote his letter to Judge John Sirica on March 19 warning the judge of involvement of “higher-ups” in a conspiracy of silence (see March 19-23, 1973). No one had written publicly of any executive clemency deals until the subject was broached during the Senate Watergate investigative hearings (see February 7, 1973). But few of the millions who will see the interview will have the grasp of the chronology of events necessary to realize the extent of Nixon’s dishonesty.

    Second Colson Bombshell - Frost reminds Nixon of his conversation with Colson of February 13 (see February 13, 1973), the day before, when they had discussed which Nixon official will have to take the fall for Watergate. Former campaign director John Mitchell couldn’t do it, the conversation went, but Nixon wants to know about Mitchell’s former deputy, Jeb Magruder. “He’s perjured himself, hasn’t he?” Nixon asked Colson. Frost asks Nixon, “So you knew about Magruder’s perjury as early as February the thirteenth?” Nixon bobs and weaves, talking about events from the year before, how Mitchell and Colson hated each other, how Colson and Ehrlichman hated each other. Frost brings Nixon back on point by reading another quote from the February 13 conversation, where Nixon says that “the problem” will come up if “one of the seven [indicted Watergate burglars] begins to talk…” Frost asks, “Now, in that remark, it seems to be that someone running the cover-up couldn’t have expressed it more clearly than that, could he?” Frost wants to know precisely what the phrase “one of the seven begins to talk” means. Nixon argues, but Frost refuses to be distracted. How can it mean anything else except “some sort of conspiracy to stop Hunt from talking about something damaging?” Frost asks. Nixon retorts, “You could state your conclusion, and I’ve stated my views.”

    Nixon's Own Words Prove Knowledge, Complicity - Frost proceeds to pepper Nixon with his own quotes proving his knowledge and complicity, nine of them, a barrage that leaves Nixon nearly breathless. Nixon finally accuses Frost of taking his words out of context. Frost’s final quote is from an April 21 meeting where Nixon told aides John Dean and H. R. Haldeman, “Christ, just turn over any cash we got.” [Reston, 2007, pp. 126-134] After the taping, Nixon asks his aides about the Colson transcripts: “What was that tape? I’m sure I never heard that tape before. Find out about that tape.” [Time, 5/9/1977]

    http://www.historycommons.org...
    (more)
  • babaji5... Mark In... 2011/10/28 01:23:28
    babaji5150~solo
    +3
    You keep digging yourself in further.

    SHOW PROOF that Nixon was involved in any burglary or attempted burglary.

    That was your claim,... now back it up.
  • Mark In... babaji5... 2011/10/28 01:25:30 (edited)
    Mark In Irvine
    apparently you consider "involved" not to include the criminal cover-up ... that's your choice, but it doesn't make you right on the facts ...
  • HOMBRE 2011/10/28 00:19:19
    HOMBRE
    +4
    Oh NO. Not another buddy of Obama.Who could of guessed LOL

News & Politics

2013/05/23 21:45:10

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals