QUOTE(xmedia2004 @ Sep 22 2005, 08:31 AM)
Actually, you presented a document signed some time after he became VP stating he would give to charity 433,000 stock options which he stated on National Press he did not have.
Its kind of convienent how you just disregard whatever doesnt support your point of view.
[sigh]
legal doc for stock options - signed jan 18, 2001as of the a couple days before becoming vp he no longer had control of them and was not tied in any way to them. He will neither profit or lose by their fate, and he has absolutely no way of getting them back. Again this was already addressed.
deferred payment plan legal doc - signed dec 18, 1998again already addressed. It pays him out over a 5 year period starting in 2000. And face it - in 1998 bush was anything but a sure bet as prez.
Cheneys insurance policy legal doc - signed jan 20, 2001this is what insulates cheney from anything that occurs to hali - they tank he still gets paid - they profit he does not see anything extra - his pay stays the same
QUOTE(INTERPRETATION @ EXEMPTIONS AND WAIVER GUIDANCE CONCERNING)
Disqualifying financial interests. For purposes of 18 U.S.C. 208(a) and this part, the term financial interest means the potential for gain or loss to the employee, or other person specified in section 208, as a result of governmental action on the particular matter. The disqualifying financial interest might arise from ownership of certain financial instruments or investments such as stock, bonds, mutual funds, or real estate. Additionally, a disqualifying financial interest might derive from a salary, indebtedness, job offer, or any similar interest that may be affected by the matter.
OFFICE OF GOVERNMENT ETHICS - SourceChaney does not stand to gain or lose anything with hali - there is no conflict of interest.
QUOTE
I would think the statements of the Congressional Research Service would carry some legitamacy. These statements are binding legal documents and any misinforamtion subject to perjury.
DISREGARDED
What you posted were the views of Mr. LAUTENBERG during a debate on NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE REFORM ACT, which i am sure he believed to be true and are not legally binding. It does not mean they are true as legally binding documents have proven otherwise. The only thing conclusive in the analysis done by the Congressional Research Service was that cheney must report his defered earnings and stock options still held in his name regardless as to whether or not he has control over them or they have been gifted away: which he does other wise none of us would have so much detail on how much he has.
Again this was dealt with
QUOTE
Chaney was on Meet the Press denying the stock option he signed away some considerable time after he became V.P.
DISREGARDED
This alone is grounds for impeachment hearings to be blunt.
again not disregarded and already addressed
Meet the press interview occured on Sept. 14, 2003, as the documents posted above clearly show he had severed ties well before that.
QUOTE
LOGCAP is history although does show no bid contracts awarded to a contractor that contributed a lot of money to campaign fund of president past and future.
From what I can find Hally has only competitively won one LOGACP contract.
and none since its exCEO became VP
DISREGARDED
they have won two through comptetive bidding processes - one 1992 and one in 2002. They were awarded a split logcap even though they lost by clinton in 1997. We can agree to disagree about what constitutes a legit bid. The only thing I will say is that under your bid def the vast majority (well over 90%) of govt bids since JFK in the 60's are not competitively bid across all dept.
QUOTE
Why does Chaney recieve a salary from Hally larger that VP.
DISREGARDED
hes a better negotiator? The pres of hally is gay and though cheney was hotter? I have no idea. I know that i was paid nerely 15% more than my peers at my last job and i had the same if not less experience. The only reason my peers could come up with was my bootay. Not that i am denying that asset, I am also a good interviewer and have a very good work history as well. So take your pick. Whatever you got - work it.
And again, when cheney was hired the idea of a repub being prez was anything but a sure bet. the country was boomin and everybody loved clinton in the US and world wide. I can see them hiring him for defense contacts and paying more for that, but to suggest that years down the road he would be VP? Thats ludicrous.
QUOTE
But I guess this is all about Republican/Democrat bullshit in you eyes. Since you keep pulling up Clinton from to deflect Hally critiscism.
in many ways yes. but in order to demonstrate what your trying to do, you also have to show that it in all likelyhood would not have occured otherwise. By showing that this is a trend across administrations of opposing parties it moves the arguement towards a flaw in the system. Not a flaw in cheney. I am sure that hally understands the power of the incumbant in their situation, and I hold nothing against them for exploiting that flaw to its fullest extent. And i am sure that any other corp would do exactly the same thing. I do hold clinton/bush responsible for not fixing it which no one (repub, dem, cpi, left, right, neutral, other contractors, etc) seems to be interested in doing.
Maybe its a hegelian dialect perpertrated by gore
the future You cant prove it will, I cant prove it wont. So why argue about it?
