O Noooooooo! NEW McCain Lies! Big Ones! This Can't Be Good. Can It?

[Michael Tee]

McCain's campaign manager continued to receive payments from Freddie Mac through to the end of last month:

<<Two reports tonight, one from the New York Times, and the other from Newsweek, contradict John McCain's earlier statement that his campaign manager Rick Davis had no involvement with mortgage giant Freddie Mac, one of the companies at the heart of the current financial crisis, for the last several years. The Times reports:

 <<   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 from the end of 2005 through last month, according to two people with direct knowledge of the arrangement. The disclosure contradicts a statement Sunday night by Mr. McCain that the campaign manager, Rick Davis, had no involvement with the company for the last several years. Mr. Davis's firm received the payments from the company, Freddie Mac, until it was taken over by the government this month along with Fannie Mae, the other big mortgage lender whose deteriorating finances helped precipitate the cascading problems on Wall Street, the people said...>>

I guess the first thing we're going to hear from McCain is what he REALLY meant when he said three nights ago that "Rick Davis had no involvement with Freddie Mac for the last several years."  CLEARLY, he did not mean that Rick Davis had no involvement with Freddie Mac for the last several years.

We await with interest sirs' illuminating exposition of the true meaning of those words and how the REAL meaning is so clear that only a twisted and perverted America-hater like yours truly could EVER EVER claim that they really meant that Rick Davis had no involvement with Freddie Mac for the last several years.

sirs?  Don't let us down now, sirs.  PLEEEEZE tell us, what is the REAL meaning of "Rick Davis had no involvement with Freddie Mac for the last several years?"

Inquiring minds need to know.

Oooops, sorry!  Almost forgot the attribution - - today's Hufpo.

[BT]

Mr. Davis took a leave from Davis & Manafortfor the presidential campaign, but as a partner and equity-holder continues to benefit from its income. No one at Davis & Manafort other than Mr. Davis was involved in efforts on Freddie Mac?s behalf, the people familiar with the arrangement said.

A Freddie Mac spokeswoman said the company would not comment.

Jill Hazelbaker, a spokeswoman for the McCain campaign, did not dispute the payments to Mr. Davis?s firm. But she said that Mr. Davis had stopped taking a salary from his firm by the end of 2006 and that his work did not affect Mr. McCain.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/24/us/politics/w24davis.html?bl&ex=1222315200&en=47c6f0e27b93a6ef&ei=5087%0A

And naturally your sources spoke on the condition of anonymity

[sirs]

Naturally

[Brassmask]

So, if Davis was leaving, why demand $15,000 a month?

[Xavier_Onassis]

This is how we know who belongs to or is an agent of the Oligarchy: they get paid $15,000 a month or some similarly impressive sum, usually from several sources, for doing essentially nothing.

When their deals are discovered, the rule is for all concerned to play dumb, remain mute, or play dead.

[BT]

So, if Davis was leaving, why demand $15,000 a month?

His company was paid that. He wasn't.

Davis's company is in effect in a blind trust. He is on leave of absence with no salary. This from a source with a name.

[Brassmask]

So, if Davis was leaving, why demand $15,000 a month?

His company was paid that. He wasn't.

Davis's company is in effect in a blind trust. He is on leave of absence with no salary. This from a source with a name.

But the homeownership alliance thing was over, so why does he or his company need to be paid $15,000 dollars a month?  Is it a gift?  Why'd that guy who approved it at Freddie Mac say that he felt he couldn't say no to John McCain's campaign manager?

[BT]

But the homeownership alliance thing was over, so why does he or his company need to be paid $15,000 dollars a month?

Do we know whether that was part of the original contract, a deferred payment arrangement to allow it to fit into yearly budgets?

And if it was a new contract, wouldn't that fall on the guy at Freddie Mac who approved it?

[Brassmask]

But the homeownership alliance thing was over, so why does he or his company need to be paid $15,000 dollars a month?

Do we know whether that was part of the original contract, a deferred payment arrangement to allow it to fit into yearly budgets?

And if it was a new contract, wouldn't that fall on the guy at Freddie Mac who approved it?

And Rick Davis, the guy whose company received it.

[Michael Tee]

He's done nothing at all to advance whatever nefarious schemes Freddie was up to.  His hands are clean.  And every month, $15,000 finds its way into his company's bank account and he himself does not know WTF it's for.

Just like Insane doesn't know how many houses he has.  But pays a quarter mill a year for domestic help.

I guess Republicans think that the voters are so fucking stupid they can continue to get away with their "Who, me?" bullshit.  Like nobody can put 2 + 2 together except them.

All of the posts from BT and his little echo in this thread are just desperate attempts to avoid the obvious: 
McCain claims that NOW (after two or three decades of spectacular inaction) he is going to take on a corporate den of thieves - - who he didn't even see a week ago; but his own campaign manager is still getting $15,000 a month from them.

Now who, other than a lame-brained moron, would really fall for that in the real world?

"blind trust," "corporate account," "hasn't worked for them since the end of the Second World War" - - all of these bullshit distractions just don't fool anybody.  People are fed up.  They get the essentials.  The essentials are:
1.  Freddy Mac is a bunch of fucking crooks;
2.  Insane's campaign manager is a fucking crook;
3.  Insane is a fucking crook.

How long do you think they can hide behind, "I said this but I clearly meant that;" "They're my wife's houses;" "It's a blind trust;" "It's his company's account;" "I was on a leave of absence"?

It looks bad and it smells bad.  These guys are in full flight mode.  They're running away from their own President.  They're running away from their own Party.  ("I'm a maverick.  Honest.  a Maverick.  Not a Republican.  a Maverick!)  They're running away from their own actions ("I was on leave! I had nothing to do with it.  It was a blind trust!")  They're running away from their own words.  ("I said the fundamentals of our economy are strong, but I didn't mean the fundamentals of our economy are strong.")   They're even running away from their own money and houses ("They're my wife's houses!"   "It's my company's money!")

It's real bad when a guy spends more time dreaming up bullshit defences and excuses than he does running his own campaign.  The public can sense the desperation, and smell the smoke.  That's why the polls are running Obama's way.  Qui s'excuse, s'accuse.   Sad but true.

If you guys can't see the writing on the wall, you must be truly blind.

[Xavier_Onassis]

3.  Insane is a fucking crook.

(proviso: Viagra might be required for this to be true)

Why don't they just rename it the Maverick Party, lose the elephant and replace it with a Longhorn steer?

[BT]

Let me give you an example of deferred payments.

We are in the midst of a Clean Water Act lawsuit.

This small city has run up legal fees of close to 1 million dollars fighting developers who file spurious motion after motion to run up the bill.

We are paying the law firm no more than 25k a month no matter what the actual billing.

We are extimating we will be paying these fees approxiamately 9 months after the trial is over. The lawyers will be done, bu still being paid.

Because they are deferred payments, interest free. Because we had to budget these payments against the tax rate.

And i don't see why Freddie Mac couldn't have had the same arrangement.

[Michael Tee]

What is the point of the explanation of deferred payments?

The fact is that McCain's campaign chief has earned a shitload of money lobbying for Freddie Mac, a corporation that is a very big part of the problem in Washington.  Part of that shitload is coming down the pipe every month to Rick Davis.   Freddie Mac can turn off the tap any time and save themselves a ton of money.  What's Rick Davis gonna do about it, sue them?  At this point in time, he's basically dependent on the good will of the FM executive.  Piss them off and they can turn off the tap any time.  He's been in this position for years, too.

McCain's in bed with Davis.  Davis is in bed with Freddie.  Freddie and others like him have fucked the American people to the tune of at least $700 billion known to date.  When McCain says he is going to clean up the problem of companies like Freddy and lobbyists like his campaign manager, he is just not believable.  He is all too obviously a major part of the problem.  If you still don't see it, I am sorry, I just can't help you.

[BT]

What is the point of the explanation of deferred payments?

To offer a plausible explanation for the payments after the work was done.

Which if true would show that McCain's staff was not lying.

[Michael Tee]

To offer a plausible explanation for the payments after the work was done.

Which if true would show that McCain's staff was not lying.

======================================================

They were lying when they said Davis had no recent involvement with Freddy.  A monthly cheque for $15K is a pretty substantial involvement, as is the desire to keep them coming in, especially after he's held up his end of the bargain and can't do a god-damn thing about it if Freddy decides to turn off the tap.  He's got every inducement to be nice to Freddy if he wants that $15K to come in on time every month.