McCain aide’s firm was paid by Freddie Mac

[Bob Juch]

One of the giant mortgage companies at the heart of the credit crisis paid $15,000 a month to a firm owned by Senator John McCain’s campaign manager.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26859857/

[Bob78164]

One of the giant mortgage companies at the heart of the credit crisis paid $15,000 a month to a firm owned by Senator John McCain’s campaign manager.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26859857/

This is another story that McCain has made bigger than it might otherwise have been because when asked about it earlier, he flatly denied it. At best, he got his facts wrong.

When will McCain learn that it is a really bad idea for presidential candidates to shoot from the hip? If elected, can we trust him to learn that lesson before entering the White House?

George Will put it fairly persuasively. Inexperience can be cured by experience. Poor temperment, on the other hand . . . . --Bob

[flockofseagulls104]

One of the giant mortgage companies at the heart of the credit crisis paid $15,000 a month to a firm owned by Senator John McCain’s campaign manager.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26859857/

Maybe you missed it Bob, But Obama is apparently the second largest recipient of Fannie and Freddie money, even though he has't yet served a full term. I guess you can't report everything. But it would be nice if you are going to report, you'd be a little more fair and balanced.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,423701,00.html

[Bob Juch]

One of the giant mortgage companies at the heart of the credit crisis paid $15,000 a month to a firm owned by Senator John McCain’s campaign manager.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26859857/

Maybe you missed it Bob, But Obama is apparently the second largest recipient of Fannie and Freddie money, even though he has't yet served a full term. I guess you can't report everything. But it would be nice if you are going to report, you'd be a little more fair and balanced.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,423701,00.html

Of course they gave him political contributions; they were trying to get him on their side. It didn't work. That's a whole different thing than paying the director of McCain's campaign. Some might call that an out and out bribe.

[flockofseagulls104]

One of the giant mortgage companies at the heart of the credit crisis paid $15,000 a month to a firm owned by Senator John McCain’s campaign manager.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26859857/

Maybe you missed it Bob, But Obama is apparently the second largest recipient of Fannie and Freddie money, even though he has't yet served a full term. I guess you can't report everything. But it would be nice if you are going to report, you'd be a little more fair and balanced.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,423701,00.html

Of course they gave him political contributions; they were trying to get him on their side. It didn't work. That's a whole different thing than paying the director of McCain's campaign. Some might call that an out and out bribe.

huh? Have some more Kool Aid, Bob.

[themanintheseersuckersuit]

One of the giant mortgage companies at the heart of the credit crisis paid $15,000 a month to a firm owned by Senator John McCain’s campaign manager.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26859857/

Maybe you missed it Bob, But Obama is apparently the second largest recipient of Fannie and Freddie money, even though he has't yet served a full term. I guess you can't report everything. But it would be nice if you are going to report, you'd be a little more fair and balanced.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,423701,00.html

Of course they gave him political contributions; they were trying to get him on their side. It didn't work. That's a whole different thing than paying the director of McCain's campaign. Some might call that an out and out bribe.

Good morning members of the Congressional Black Caucus. I am humbled to come here today to reaffirm the friendship and partnership between Fannie Mae and the Congressional Black Caucus. Fannie Mae is determined to keep tearing down the barriers to deliver on the American dream and that means we need to work together with the CBC. So many of you have been good friends to Fannie Mae and our mission. You've been friends through thick and thin. We have indeed come upon a difficult time for Fannie Mae. There is much to be done inside my company and I humbly ask you to help us and to help me. If there are areas where we are missing. If there are areas where we could do better, we'd like to hear it from our friends and I'd be so bold as to say our family first.

It is true that Fannie Mae has lent more money to more minorities and more underserved individuals than any single company in history.

We will work hard inside our company to resolve the serious matters before us to put our house in order and to forge a new future. And all the while you will see Fannie Mae reaching out and listening to the caucus. Over a century of endeavor you have earned the reputation as the conscience of Congress. In many ways I want to tell you today you are also the conscience of Fannie Mae. Keeping us on course to serve those who need serving the most.

[Bob Juch]

Maybe you missed it Bob, But Obama is apparently the second largest recipient of Fannie and Freddie money, even though he has't yet served a full term. I guess you can't report everything. But it would be nice if you are going to report, you'd be a little more fair and balanced.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,423701,00.html

Of course they gave him political contributions; they were trying to get him on their side. It didn't work. That's a whole different thing than paying the director of McCain's campaign. Some might call that an out and out bribe.

Good morning members of the Congressional Black Caucus. I am humbled to come here today to reaffirm the friendship and partnership between Fannie Mae and the Congressional Black Caucus. Fannie Mae is determined to keep tearing down the barriers to deliver on the American dream and that means we need to work together with the CBC. So many of you have been good friends to Fannie Mae and our mission. You've been friends through thick and thin. We have indeed come upon a difficult time for Fannie Mae. There is much to be done inside my company and I humbly ask you to help us and to help me. If there are areas where we are missing. If there are areas where we could do better, we'd like to hear it from our friends and I'd be so bold as to say our family first.

It is true that Fannie Mae has lent more money to more minorities and more underserved individuals than any single company in history.

We will work hard inside our company to resolve the serious matters before us to put our house in order and to forge a new future. And all the while you will see Fannie Mae reaching out and listening to the caucus. Over a century of endeavor you have earned the reputation as the conscience of Congress. In many ways I want to tell you today you are also the conscience of Fannie Mae. Keeping us on course to serve those who need serving the most.

That was apparently the CEO trying to curry favor. So what's your point?

[Weyoun]

Of course they gave him political contributions; they were trying to get him on their side. It didn't work. That's a whole different thing than paying the director of McCain's campaign. Some might call that an out and out bribe.

Good morning members of the Congressional Black Caucus. I am humbled to come here today to reaffirm the friendship and partnership between Fannie Mae and the Congressional Black Caucus. Fannie Mae is determined to keep tearing down the barriers to deliver on the American dream and that means we need to work together with the CBC. So many of you have been good friends to Fannie Mae and our mission. You've been friends through thick and thin. We have indeed come upon a difficult time for Fannie Mae. There is much to be done inside my company and I humbly ask you to help us and to help me. If there are areas where we are missing. If there are areas where we could do better, we'd like to hear it from our friends and I'd be so bold as to say our family first.

It is true that Fannie Mae has lent more money to more minorities and more underserved individuals than any single company in history.

We will work hard inside our company to resolve the serious matters before us to put our house in order and to forge a new future. And all the while you will see Fannie Mae reaching out and listening to the caucus. Over a century of endeavor you have earned the reputation as the conscience of Congress. In many ways I want to tell you today you are also the conscience of Fannie Mae. Keeping us on course to serve those who need serving the most.

That was apparently the CEO trying to curry favor. So what's your point?

That Obama actually took the money? I mean, he hangs out with Jim Johnson and Franklin Raines. McCain actually co-sponsored a bill trying to reign in Fannie and Freddie; Obama was against it.

I like this board better when Frank has a game going - then I completel forget about posts like the above even being here...

[danielh41]

This was issued by the McCain campaign and can be found on their website: http://www.johnmccain.com/mccainreport/ ... c0c2d88376

A Partisan Paper of Record

Today the New York Times launched its latest attack on this campaign in its capacity as an Obama advocacy organization. Let us be clear about what this story alleges: The New York Times charges that McCain-Palin 2008 campaign manager Rick Davis was paid by Freddie Mac until last month, contrary to previous reporting, as well as statements by this campaign and by Mr. Davis himself.

In fact, the allegation is demonstrably false. As has been previously reported, Mr. Davis separated from his consulting firm, Davis Manafort, in 2006. As has been previously reported, Mr. Davis has seen no income from Davis Manafort since 2006. Zero. Mr. Davis has received no salary or compensation since 2006. Mr. Davis has received no profit or partner distributions from that firm on any basis -- weekly, bi-weekly, monthly, bi-monthly, quarterly, semi-annual or annual -- since 2006. Again, zero. Neither has Mr. Davis received any equity in the firm based on profits derived since his financial separation from Davis Manafort in 2006.

Further, and missing from the Times' reporting, Mr. Davis has never -- never -- been a lobbyist for either Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac. Mr. Davis has not served as a registered lobbyist since 2005.

Though these facts are a matter of public record, the New York Times, in what can only be explained as a willful disregard of the truth, failed to research this story or present any semblance of a fairminded treatment of the facts closely at hand. The paper did manage to report one interesting but irrelevant fact: Mr. Davis did participate in a roundtable discussion on the political scene with...Paul Begala.

Again, let us be clear: The New York Times -- in the absence of any supporting evidence -- has insinuated some kind of impropriety on the part of Senator McCain and Rick Davis. But entirely missing from the story is any significant mention of Senator McCain's long advocacy for, and co-sponsorship of legislation to enact, stricter oversight and regulation of both Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- dating back to 2006. Please see the attached floor statement on this issue by Senator McCain from 2006.

To the central point our campaign has made in the last 48 hours: The New York Times has never published a single investigative piece, factually correct or otherwise, examining the relationship between Obama campaign chief strategist David Axelrod, his consulting and lobbying clients, and Senator Obama. Likewise, the New York Times never published an investigative report, factually correct or otherwise, examining the relationship between Former Fannie Mae CEO Jim Johnson and Senator Obama, who appointed Johnson head of his VP search committee, until the writing was on the wall and Johnson was under fire following reports from actual news organizations that he had received preferential loans from predatory mortgage lender Countrywide.

Therefore this "report" from the New York Times must be evaluated in the context of its intent and purpose. It is a partisan attack falsely labeled as objective news. And its most serious allegations are based entirely on the claims of anonymous sources, a familiar yet regretful tactic for the paper.

We all understand that partisan attacks are part of the political process in this country. The debate that stems from these grand and sometimes unruly conversations is what makes this country so exceptional. Indeed, our nation has a long and proud tradition of news organizations that are ideological and partisan in nature, the Huffington Post and the New York Times being two such publications. We celebrate their contribution to the political fabric of America. But while the Huffington Post is utterly transparent, the New York Times obscures its true intentions -- to undermine the candidacy of John McCain and boost the candidacy of Barack Obama -- under the cloak of objective journalism.

The New York Times is trying to fill an ideological niche. It is a business decision, and one made under economic duress, as the New York Times is a failing business. But the paper's reporting on Senator McCain, his campaign, and his staff should be clearly understood by the American people for what it is: a partisan assault aimed at promoting that paper’s preferred candidate, Barack Obama.


Statement by Senator John McCain, May 25, 2006:

Mr. President, this week Fannie Mae's regulator reported that the company's quarterly reports of profit growth over the past few years were "illusions deliberately and systematically created" by the company's senior management, which resulted in a $10.6 billion accounting scandal.

The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight's report goes on to say that Fannie Mae employees deliberately and intentionally manipulated financial reports to hit earnings targets in order to trigger bonuses for senior executives. In the case of Franklin Raines, Fannie Mae's former chief executive officer, OFHEO's report shows that over half of Mr. Raines' compensation for the 6 years through 2003 was directly tied to meeting earnings targets. The report of financial misconduct at Fannie Mae echoes the deeply troubling $5 billion profit restatement at Freddie Mac.

The OFHEO report also states that Fannie Mae used its political power to lobby Congress in an effort to interfere with the regulator's examination of the company's accounting problems. This report comes some weeks after Freddie Mac paid a record $3.8 million fine in a settlement with the Federal Election Commission and restated lobbying disclosure reports from 2004 to 2005. These are entities that have demonstrated over and over again that they are deeply in need of reform.

For years I have been concerned about the regulatory structure that governs Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac--known as Government-sponsored entities or GSEs--and the sheer magnitude of these companies and the role they play in the housing market. OFHEO's report this week does nothing to ease these concerns. In fact, the report does quite the contrary. OFHEO's report solidifies my view that the GSEs need to be reformed without delay.

I join as a cosponsor of the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005, S. 190, to underscore my support for quick passage of GSE regulatory reform legislation. If Congress does not act, American taxpayers will continue to be exposed to the enormous risk that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pose to the housing market, the overall financial system, and the economy as a whole.

I urge my colleagues to support swift action on this GSE reform legislation.

[Bob Juch]

Here's what Newsweek has to say:

http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs/stumper/ ... anged.aspx

[danielh41]

Here's what Newsweek has to say:

http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs/stumper/ ... anged.aspx

This isn't anything new; it's just a rehash of the New York Times story that McCain's campaign is denying. The media's more subtle bias toward Gore in 2000 and Kerry in 2004 didn't work, so they are being much more blantant about it this time around...

Media Campaigns Hard for Obama
By Tony Blankley


The mainstream media have gone over the line and are now straight-out propagandists for the Obama campaign.

While they have been liberal and blinkered in their worldview for decades, in 2007-08, for the first time, the major media consciously are covering for one candidate for president and consciously are knifing the other. This is no longer journalism; it is simply propaganda. (The American left-wing version of the Völkischer Beobachter cannot be far behind.)

And as a result, we are less than seven weeks away from possibly electing a president who has not been thoroughly or even halfway honestly presented to the country by our watchdogs -- the press. The image of Obama that the press has presented to the public is not a fair approximation of the real man. They consciously have ignored whole years of his life and have shown a lack of curiosity about such gaps, which bespeaks a lack of journalistic instinct.

Thus, the public image of Obama is of a "man who never was."

I take that phrase from a 1956 movie about a real-life World War II British intelligence operation to trick the Germans into thinking the Allies were going to invade Greece rather than Sicily in 1943. Operation Mincemeat involved the acquisition of a human corpse dressed as "Major William Martin, R.M.," which was put into the sea near Spain. Attached to the corpse was a briefcase containing fake letters suggesting that the Allied attack would be against Sardinia and Greece.

To make the operation credible, British intelligence concocted a fictional life for the corpse, creating a letter from a lover and tickets to a London theater -- all the details of a life, but not the actual life of the dead young man whose corpse was being used. So, too, the man the media have presented to the nation as Obama is not the real man.

The mainstream media ruthlessly and endlessly repeat any McCain gaffes while ignoring Obama gaffes. You have to go to weird little Web sites to see all the stammering and stuttering that Obama needs before getting out a sentence fragment or two. But all you see on the networks is an eventually clear sentence from Obama. You don't see Obama's ludicrous gaffe that Iran is a tiny country and no threat to us. Nor his 57 American states gaffe. Nor his forgetting, if he ever knew, that Russia has a veto in the U.N. Nor his whining and puerile "come on" when he is being challenged. This is the kind of editing one would expect from Goebbels' disciples, not Cronkite's.

More appalling, a skit on NBC's "Saturday Night Live" last weekend suggested that Gov. Palin's husband had sex with his own daughters. That show was written with the assistance of Al Franken, Democratic Party candidate in Minnesota for the U.S. Senate. Talk about incest.

But worse than all the unfair and distorted reporting and image projecting are the shocking gaps in Obama's life that are not reported at all. The major media simply have not reported on Obama's two years at New York's Columbia University, where, among other things, he lived a mere quarter-mile from former terrorist Bill Ayers. Later, they both ended up as neighbors and associates in Chicago. Obama denies more than a passing relationship with Ayers. Should the media be curious? In only two weeks, the media have focused on all the colleges Gov. Palin has attended, her husband's driving habits 20 years ago, and the close criticism of the political opponents Gov. Palin had when she was mayor of Wasilla, Alaska.

But in two years, they haven't bothered to see how close Obama was with the terrorist Ayers.

Nor have the media paid any serious attention to Obama's rise in Chicago politics. How did honest Obama rise in the famously sordid Chicago political machine with the full support of Boss Daley? Despite the great -- and unflattering -- details on Obama's Chicago years presented in David Freddoso's new book on Obama, the mainstream media continue to ignore both the facts and the book. It took a British publication, The Economist, to give Freddoso's book a review with fair comment.

The public image of Obama as an idealistic, post-race, post-partisan, well-spoken and honest young man with the wisdom and courage befitting a great national leader is a confection spun by a willing conspiracy of Obama, his publicist (David Axelrod) and most of the senior editors, producers and reporters of the national media.

Perhaps that is why the National Journal's respected correspondent Stuart Taylor wrote, "The media can no longer be trusted to provide accurate and fair campaign reporting and analysis."

That conspiracy not only has Photoshopped out all of Obama's imperfections (and dirtied up his opponent McCain's image) but also has put most of his questionable history down the memory hole.

The public will be voting based on the idealized image of the man who never was. If he wins, however, we will be governed by the sunken, cynical man Obama really is. One can only hope that the senior journalists will be judged as harshly for their professional misconduct as Wall Street's leaders currently are for their failings

[Bob Juch]

I guess we'll have to see what the FBI investigation comes up with.