Pelosi Paid Husband With PAC Funds

[red states rule]

Another example of liberal hypocrisy. Where is the liberal media on this story? I thought San Fran Nan was going to "drain the swamp"



EXCLUSIVE: Pelosi paid husband with PAC funds
$99,000 for rent, utilities, accounting fees

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has directed nearly $100,000 from her political action committee to her husband's real estate and investment firm over the past decade, a practice of paying a spouse with political donations that she supported banning last year.

Financial Leasing Services Inc. (FLS), owned by Paul F. Pelosi, has received $99,000 in rent, utilities and accounting fees from the speaker's "PAC to the Future" over the PAC's nine-year history.

The payments have quadrupled since Mr. Pelosi took over as treasurer of his wife's committee in 2007, Federal Election Commission records show. FLS is on track to take in $48,000 in payments this year alone - eight times as much as it received annually from 2000 to 2005, when the committee was run by another treasurer.

Lawmakers' frequent use of campaign donations to pay relatives emerged as an issue in the 2006 election campaigns, when the Jack Abramoff lobbying scandal gave Democrats fodder to criticize Republicans such as former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay of Texas and Rep. John T. Doolittle of California for putting their wives on their campaign and PAC payrolls for fundraising work.

Last year, Mrs. Pelosi supported a bill that would have banned members of Congress from putting spouses on their campaign staffs. The bill - which passed the House in a voice vote but did not get out of a Senate committee - banned not only direct payments by congressional campaign committees and PACs to spouses for services including consulting and fundraising, but also "indirect compensation," such as payments to companies that employ spouses.

"Democrats are committed to reforming the way Washington does business," Mrs. Pelosi said in a press release at the time. "Congressman [Adam] Schiff's bill will help us accomplish that goal by increasing transparency in election campaigns and preventing the misuse of funds."

Last week, Mrs. Pelosi's office said the payments to her husband's firm were perfectly legal, insisting she is compensating her husband at fair market value for the work his firm has performed for the PAC. But ethical watchdogs said the arrangement sends the wrong message.

http://www.washtimes.com/news/2008/o...-spouses-firm/

[Immanuel]

Last week, Mrs. Pelosi's office said the payments to her husband's firm were perfectly legal, insisting she is compensating her husband at fair market value for the work his firm has performed for the PAC. But ethical watchdogs said the arrangement sends the wrong message.

Legal, ethical, at fair market value or not this sends the wrong message. It is a conflict of interest and just like the Bush Admin's sleeping with Halliburton, good ole Nancy should not have allowed this to happen.

Immie

[red states rule]

Legal, ethical, at fair market value or not this sends the wrong message. It is a conflict of interest and just like the Bush Admin's sleeping with Halliburton, good ole Nancy should not have allowed this to happen.

Immie

VP Cheney has nothing to do with Haliburton. He no longer works for them

Pelosi however, is paying her husband with PAC money - something she publicly said she was opposed to. This from the women who said how she was going to clean up Congress. Hello William Jefferson, and Charlie Rangel

[Immanuel]

VP Cheney has nothing to do with Haliburton. He no longer works for them

Pelosi however, is paying her husband with PAC money - something she publicly said she was opposed to. This from the women who said how she was going to clean up Congress. Hello William Jefferson, and Charlie Rangel

Honestly, I don't care whether or not VP Cheney had anything at all to do with Halliburton at the time. The government was funnelling very lucrative contracts to Cheney's former company. It stunk to high heaven and beyond.

Immie

[red states rule]

Honestly, I don't care whether or not VP Cheney had anything at all to do with Halliburton at the time. The government was funnelling very lucrative contracts to Cheney's former company. It stunk to high heaven and beyond.

Immie

Halliburton got the contracts becuase they are the only company that prvides the services they offer

Halliburton, founded in 1919, is one of the world’s largest providers of products and services to the energy industry. With nearly 50,000 employees in approximately 70 countries, the company serves the upstream oil and gas industry throughout the life cycle of the reservoir - from locating hydrocarbons and managing geological data, to drilling and formation evaluation, well construction and completion, and optimizing production through the life of the field.


Our Business

Halliburton consists of two divisions: Drilling and Evaluation and Completion and Production. As of December 31, 2007, these two divisions accounted for over 15 billion dollars in Revenue

http://www.halliburton.com/Default.a...337&pageid=706

[KitchenKitten99]

If you worked for a company that treated you well and was the best in the industry, then you moved on to work for government, wouldn't you view them as favorable because you want to promote a business that is already successful?

WoM is the best advertising for any company. I know I would be favorable to the companies I have worked for in the past, that had treated me well.

[red states rule]

If you worked for a company that treated you well and was the best in the industry, then you moved on to work for government, wouldn't you view them as favorable because you want to promote a business that is already successful?

WoM is the best advertising for any company. I know I would be favorable to the companies I have worked for in the past, that had treated me well.

VP Cheney has nothing to do with awarding the contracts

Now if you want to see an elected politican sending contracts to friends and family look no further then Diane Feinstein. She was caught sending huge contracts to her hubby's companies. The liberal media ignored that story

She had to step down form her committee chair - stiff punishment there eh?

[Immanuel]

Halliburton got the contracts becuase they are the only company that prvides the services they offer

Halliburton, founded in 1919, is one of the world’s largest providers of products and services to the energy industry. With nearly 50,000 employees in approximately 70 countries, the company serves the upstream oil and gas industry throughout the life cycle of the reservoir - from locating hydrocarbons and managing geological data, to drilling and formation evaluation, well construction and completion, and optimizing production through the life of the field.


Our Business

Halliburton consists of two divisions: Drilling and Evaluation and Completion and Production. As of December 31, 2007, these two divisions accounted for over 15 billion dollars in Revenue

http://www.halliburton.com/Default.a...337&pageid=706

Tell me you are not going to take Halliburton's word for it!!!!

Puh-lease!!!

Halliburton got the contracts because no one else was allowed to bid on the contracts.

A clear payback if I have ever seen one.

Immie

[red states rule]

Tell me you are not going to take Halliburton's word for it!!!!

Puh-lease!!!

Halliburton got the contracts because no one else was allowed to bid on the contracts.

A clear payback if I have ever seen one.

Immie

The you tell me of another oil serving company with the resources of Halliburton

[Immanuel]

If you worked for a company that treated you well and was the best in the industry, then you moved on to work for government, wouldn't you view them as favorable because you want to promote a business that is already successful?

WoM is the best advertising for any company. I know I would be favorable to the companies I have worked for in the past, that had treated me well.

Of course I would want to. But, understanding that this has the appearance of being a conflict of interest, I would take every step possible to avoid such a conflict. If Halliburton was the best qualified company, then let them bid on the contract.

Instead this was done as a no bid contract and if I remember my history... Halliburton raped the U.S.

Immie

[manu1959]

Legal, ethical, at fair market value or not this sends the wrong message. It is a conflict of interest and just like the Bush Admin's sleeping with Halliburton, good ole Nancy should not have allowed this to happen.

Immie

how many no bid contracts were awarded to halliburton bechtel etc.....under clinton......do you know why there are no bid contracts.....

[Immanuel]

how many no bid contracts were awarded to halliburton bechtel etc.....under clinton......do you know why there are no bid contracts.....

Honestly, no, I do not know why.

However, the fact remains that the deal between the U.S. Government and Halliburton appeared to be a "payback". Even if it were not, the President should have opened up the bidding and allowed other companies to bid on the contract. The whole deal may very well have been on the up and up... but that is besides the point... it looks like a payback and anyone who is ethical will avoid such appearances.

As for "under Clinton", can you show any ties between Clinton and Halliburton? Did Halliburton fund the Clinton campaign or something like that?

Immie

[namvet]

I mailed to the DC madam. and added "just another nail in your coffin".

[red states rule]

I mailed to the DC madam. and added "just another nail in your coffin".

The idiots in San Fran will vote her back in. Do not ask me why

[Immanuel]

The idiots in San Fran will vote her back in. Do not ask me why

That is easy. They will vote her back in because she is an incumbent and has a hell of a lot of power in Congress. They will not give that up.

Immie