Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney has been bashing former U.S. Speaker Newt Gingrich for weeks regarding the $1.6 million that the latter took from Freddie Mac – one of the government-owned mortgage behemoths whose irresponsible, government-mandated politically-correct lending helped usher in the sub-prime mortgage collapse.
In fact, Romney’s campaign has run ads against Gingrich highlighting his work on behalf of the agency.
The only problem?
According to a report in The Daily Caller (based in part on information previously published by the Associated Press) several of Romney’s top aides made big bucks lobbying Freddie Mac, too.
One of them – former U.S. Rep. Susan Molinari – specifically worked to block “any meaningful regulation in the years before the housing mortgage giant crashed,” which obviously puts her in the same category as U.S. Rep. Barney Frank (D-Massachusetts). Meanwhile another Romney aide, former U.S. Rep. Vin Weber – made hundreds of thousands of dollars lobbying for the agency.
Taxpayers have already shelled out $153 billion on bailouts for Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, which were taken over by the federal government in 2008. Forgiving the agencies’ remaining debt would cost taxpayers another $100 billion – at least.
“Both Gingrich and Obama have backed massive government overspending, socialized medicine programs, amnesty for illegal immigrants, radical climate change legislation and a host of other left-wing agenda items,” we wrote recently.
Looks like you can add another unfortunate similarity to the mix …
Pic: via Daylife
***
By STFU January 26, 2012 at 8:34 am
And yet the American voter would know none of this if Newt had not forced the release of what so far is a one year tax return.
No one ever got him to release it before, in any of the other elections, and you never heard any of the banisters bring it up. Bet you ass Axelrod was going to ask for it, bet your ass the White House told Murdoch, clear the field or James gets investigated.
The next step after Newt wins Florida, even after everyone throws everything at him, is you take the test this week of the late entrant, many of whom are Mitt supporters and they say, mitt now that Newt has asked for all the Bain files, files about HCA and Romneycare, we are just not sure you can make it.
Newt is the collective middle finger fuck you to the GOP leadership. Romney is the same as tricki, weak leadership thatnif it wins means no problems from the White House.
Other than directing Special Forces and drone attacks, something Bush never did by the way, as he was about old military spending rather than new modern military spending, Barry does not really do much, which is how Congress likes it just fine.
The more Romney turns hater, the same almost any Mormin becomes when you ask about Maroni, magic underwear, planet ownership or rotating sister wives to avoid menstrual syncing, a common problem in harems and polygamy, the more the American voter see what a fucking plutocrat idiot was about to be shoved at us.
Lindsey is now in place to broker a convention candidate, the only thing upsetting about this is I heard the word McCain and it was not a punch line. Romney is now a punchline.
By Justus January 26, 2012 at 8:47 am
Politicians play on the side with the money. They could care less about those of us who take care of the bills.A politician’s party is for the purpose of getting elected only. The only true Party in America is the Dollar!
By eggaday January 26, 2012 at 9:04 am
you need to look at what institutional investors were involved with Freddie Mac.
use EDGAR at the SEC.
the info is easy to find.
it’s surprising and it’s important
By snodgrass January 26, 2012 at 9:45 am
This is why I keep harping on the false paradigm of left-right, Democrat-Republican, liberal-conservative. It’s all an illusion for the masses.
Both parties are equally corrupt. These candidates are equally corrupt. There is no significant difference in governing philosophy between them. There isn’t a single candidate worthy of your vote, but one: Ron Paul.
You don’t have to agree with that; you don’t have to like it. But, you’re going to have to deal with it come November.
By BigT January 26, 2012 at 1:14 pm
It’s only issue if dolts like FITS can bash Republicans w/ it…
Has this Dumbass yet, told us who is repsonsible for the whole housing mess???
When it comes to exposing FITS’ beloved democrats…he’s always got a mouth-full of Frank…while claiming to be a “fiscal” Conservative…yeah right!
You don’t fool anyone…and just like everybody you love…Obama will go down (no pun) too..in Nov…
No matter how much FITS works against his opponents…
By Larry the Lobbyist January 26, 2012 at 5:24 pm
http://www.npr.org/2012/01/26/145920709/gingrich-fights-against-the-lobbyist-label
Gingrich Fights Against The Lobbyist Label
by Peter Overby
Audio for this story from All Things Considered will be available at approx. 7:00 p.m. ET
January 26, 2012
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
There is no place in the contract that provides for lobbying. I have never done any lobbying.
- Newt Gingrich
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
If he wants to be the first president who’s a registered lobbyist, we’d love it.
- Howard Marlowe, president of the American League of Lobbyists
In the race for the Republican presidential nomination, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich continues to fend off accusations that he should wear the scarlet “L” — for “lobbyist.” This week, he released two of his consulting contracts and said they didn’t call for any lobbying.
Like many other former lawmakers, Gingrich was advocating for paying clients, while not officially registering as a lobbyist.
The two contracts disclosed this week came from Gingrich’s work for Freddie Mac, the mortgage giant. Between 1999 and 2007, Freddie Mac paid his firm $1.6 million.
The contracts say he was advising and discussing — not lobbying — at least not in the legal sense of the word.
“There is no place in the contract that provides for lobbying. I have never done any lobbying,” Gingrich said at a debate Monday night.
Gingrich deliberately avoided registering as a lobbyist, which would make public his clients and their payments to him.
“In fact, we brought in an expert on lobbying law and trained all of our staff. And that expert is prepared to testify that he was brought in to say, ‘Here is the bright line,’” Gingrich said.
That expert is Thomas Susman, now the head lobbyist for the American Bar Association. He says his work for Gingrich is no secret.
“He said that I could go public with my representation back when I first worked for him,” Susman says.
But Susman’s version doesn’t quite match Gingrich’s. He’s sure he gave Gingrich some advice about the federal lobbying law, but not enough that he remembers doing so.
“I’m sure I would have, because that was what my expertise and involvement had been,” he says.
But Susman says he can’t remember actually doing so. And besides, that really wasn’t Gingrich’s focus.
“He was involved with a number of clients of his group at the state level, with state legislators and state officials. And that was where he was most concerned,” Susman says.
Promoting Part D
Gingrich is also defending his advocacy of the Medicare drug benefit known as Part D.
On Thursday, rival Mitt Romney’s campaign brought out former New Hampshire Republican Rep. Jeb Bradley, who told reporters about a meeting with Gingrich before the congressional vote on Part D in 2003.
“I’ll tell you, that day that I met with Newt, he was lobbying,” Bradley said.
Gingrich says he promoted Part D as a citizen, not a paid lobbyist. He cited the need for better diabetes treatment as an example at Monday night’s debate.
“I publicly favored Medicare Part D for a practical reason. And that reason is simple: The U.S. government was not prepared to give people anything — insulin, for example — but they would pay for kidney dialysis,” he said.
But while Gingrich long supported the drug benefit, it’s also true that Novo Nordisk, a company that specializes in diabetes treatment, was a $200,000-a-year member of his Center for Health Transformation.
Lobbyist Loathing
This stance of “do no lobbying” has defined Gingrich’s post-Congress career.
The assertion shows up on the website of the Center for Health Transformation and in one of the Freddie Mac contracts.
But lobbyists rarely use the L word in their contracts. Susman remembers the so-called engagement letters used by his old law firm.
“We’d use such terms as advocacy, including advice and counsel, including organizing. But probably not use the word lobbying in it,” he says.
Susman is active in a push to make the lobbying industry more transparent.
So is political scientist James Thurber, who heads up an institute on lobbying at American University. Thurber says there should be disclosure by so-called senior advisers — the former lawmakers, like Gingrich, who don’t formally register as lobbyists.
“They don’t have to be called lobbyists, but let’s find out who they are,” Thurber says.
And even some lobbyists want more transparency for their industry. An association called the American League of Lobbyists is working on a reform proposal.
The league’s president, Howard Marlowe, says he wishes Gingrich wouldn’t run away from the profession.
“If he wants to be the first president who’s a registered lobbyist, we’d love it,” Marlowe says.
But for now, Gingrich and other politicians seem pretty sure that a registered lobbyist is about the last candidate voters would want.