I was wondering why we weren't hearing more about this seedy looking land deal. I know more about scooter libby's cat than I do about a senator who is a party leader, had questionable ties to lobbyist Abramhoff's clients, and seems to have a shady looking business deal that happens to be undeclared.



He could be completely innocent, and all of this just a paperwork error, or coincidence, I just can't believe the media's almost complete silence about an issue that could be newsworthy.

I think your title(Culture of Corruption)more or less explains why not much is being made of it.We see one scandal after another and with time some probably say"Just another day,etc.".Sad and perhaps the wrong answer but to be truthful,I can't even count the corruption(we already know about)cases.Anyone keeping score?



And add to that ,the fact that some which don't directly qualify for that "honorable"title may even be worse cases.



I ,for one,have posted less as it just seems the same and at times even makes me feel like throwing in the towel.



having said that,journalists should be uncovering and exposing all they can.But you know that ,even if they wanted to,this administration is not exactly willing to open up...even to Congressional committees.

Shady to you maybe but you answered your own question . its a paperwork error. He claimed it as a personal deal when in fact it was a partnership. Its nothing thats why you see nothing.. No harm no foul .



Did you know Hasert is having his own problem with a land deal where something he pushed through the congress made him richer ?



Speaker Hastert's Land Deal Questioned
Group Says Lawmaker Pushed For Highway Funding To Boost His Profits

Hastert Makes $2 Million Off Of His Own Earmark

Reporting from The Blotter, at CBS News:

Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert (R-IL) realized an estimated $2 million dollar profit last year on an Illinois land deal that included acreage near a future interstate highway Hastert pushed to build.

The land was sold just five months after Hastert inserted a $207 million appropriation bill for the Prairie Parkway highway during a closed-door Congressional budget conference.

The deal, representing a 300 per cent return on investment, was reported in Hastert's financial disclosure form filed this week, although the role of a secret trust set up by Hastert to sell the land was not disclosed.

well that explains why he failed to protect the children from a child predator.he was too busy being corrupt.

QUOTE

the role of a secret trust set up by Hastert to sell the land was not disclosed.

[/color]

[color="#660000"]Right there is his main problem . He set up a SECERT trust to hide what was going on .Ried on the other hand didnt.

What makes you think that it was a paperwork error? Is it because he said that's what it was? Are we to take his word for it? I haven't seen enough followup on this to know.



My point isn't to criticize Reid, it is the silence from the news that has me miffed.

Miffed? At what? Lack of attention to mudslinging?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15234219/

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/20...0-11-reid_x.htm

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...1101640_pf.html

Read the last one. It explains the paperwork problem. Reid had a $400,000 investment in land on the outskirts of Las Vegas. The land was transferred to a partnership in which Reid maintained his $400,000 investment.

The issue is that although Reid reported the $400,000 investment and the value of the investment did not change, he did not report that the investment was no longer the actual land itself, but a partnership that held that land.

And this should be a multi-day story because??

Based on these stories, Reid violated senate ethic rules. That doesn't make him a monster but it definately looks shady.



I've also never heard of land that doesn't appreciate after several years. He owns about 75% of 2 parcels, which is transferred to a friends LLC. He reports to the senate that he retained ownership, essentially keeping the senate blind to this deal (why?). Patrick Lane LLC acquires Reid's land (which is the company's only real worth), but Patrick Lane LLC's corporate filings never show Reid acquiring this massive stake in the LLC. It should be in the articles of organization, or the operating agreement. The state of nevada have no record in either (making them blind that their senior senator is involved). Local officials that might have provided speed bumps to the deal, were made aware that a big name is involved(pressure anyone?).



These things seem deliberate to me. Maybe it is no big deal, but it seems that Reid did all of this just to keep his name out of a deal that seems mostly legit (why?) Is there something to the dept. of the interior pressure Reid was applying?



Thanks for the links lee, they shed a little more light on situation.



Where is the mainstream media in all of this? Why did Reid hangup on the AP reporter? There might be more to this.

USA Today, MSNBC, Washington Post - are these not mainstream media? Many others reported this, but I thought three examples would be sufficient.

Ried had one piece of land. Brown had another piece of land next door. To sell both parcels as one parcel, they formed a partnership. The assets of the partnership were the two parcels and under the partnership, Reid and Brown each maintained their parcels. So Reid physically maintained ownership of the parcel, which he did report. He technically should have one year reported $400,000 in land, then the next year reported $400,000 in the partnership.

Shady? Well if that's shady, then this most certainly is also:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...2102210_pf.html

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/06/22/...in1740900.shtml

Nothing will be good enough lee . Many MSM outlets reported on this as you have shown examples of. Its just more throw crap at the wall in hopes something sticks.



Notice stew just passed by the Hasert report that is a real shady story that isnt a paper error.

First of all, a lot GOP haters on talkback would go AP3SH1T if a reply on a topic about bush mentioned clintons name. This topic is about Reid, not Hastert, but I guess the rules are different for lib fans. That's ok, I'm used to it.



My point is not about Reid's possible corruption. It is about the coverage. The newspapers you linked are mainstream, but they are not network. I watch all the news I can, and the only thing I saw about this reid deal was a 5 second mention on msnbc. Your two sets of links even further my point (the cbsnews one on hastert seemed fair enough). In the Reid links, they were sort of matter of fact and explanatory. In the WP link on Hastert, they mentioned watchdog groups and other possible gop scandals before even getting to the premise of the hastert story.



Your links are proof of my point. But even at the end of your cbs link (didn't think I would read to the end, didya?) they quote a real estate expert from hastert's area saying he easily doubled his own money in the vicinity of hastert's holdings because of the extreme growth in the area.



It's also somewhat ludicrous to think that the highway he supported was to make his land appreciate at a drastic rate. That is like saying a highway through rohrerstown will make the value of my house in columbia soar. Let's be realistic.



I didn't want to get into hastert but you forced me off topic (let's get back on please).



I'm just trying not to violate the "MOMMY BUT BILLY" holy edict espoused by my lib buddies here on talkback.



Oh, and by the way. Has anyone here ever form an LLC. Let me tell you, that is one helluva "paper error".

So it was in the mainstream media, but there was not enough attention to the matter for you? Not even on Fox??

I saw the story and read the story several times in several different places. And in case you forgot, last week was heavy coverage of the Amish School Shootings and a Presidential Press Conference the day the story broke.

Your original post asked if this specific Reid error was part of a culture of corruption. I think you have failed to make your case, especially since your facts are in error.

And while a new highway next to existing homes is not necessarily good for home values, that is not the case for undeveloped land that will be next to a new highway. That's why Hastert made $2 million on the land.

The issue with Hastert is that he used his position as Speaker to push through funding for the Prairie Parkway, and he directly benefited from that. When he bought the land, he knew about the plans for the new interstate. So either he should have: a) not bought the land or not pushed through the highway project.

There is nothing wrong with making money, but elected office is supposed to be about public service, not self-service.

To remain on topic - the stroy is not getting much tractgion because most reporters simply do not understand it and it becomes complictaed to explain. Even the AP has woefully missed the boat on this one, not connecting dots that others have - for instance, - the very land Reid bought - he pressured the US government to sell to one of his lobbysists - who later made the land available for sale.

well the ethics committee should look into it and see if he violated any laws or rules and if he did he should be held accountable.

along with all the others who have gotten away with sooo much in the past 6 years.

Inthemaking: Wrong

First, the AP writer is very much interested in connecting the dots. He has written several articles specifically targeting Reid. If he didn't connect the dots, it's not a lack of effort but perhaps just a lack of connections.

Second, the land Reid bought was NOT formerly owned by the US Government.

Third, the creation of the partnership was 5 years ago, and the developer's deal with the Interior Department was 8 years ago.

Fourth, last year, Hastert did not disclose that his land investment near the proposed Prarie Highway was held by a trust and not by him. His lawyers said Hastert only had to disclose his ownership of the property (which he did), not that the property was held by a trust.

\



I was only being facetious. Culture of corruption seems to be Reid's favorite term.



Thanks for staying on topic inthemaking. I love the hypocrisy. This topic never mentioned Hastert once, until the mommy but billies spilled in.



Come on guys, hit lee41 with it. Justa, used, cecil even.



mommy but billy anyone?



Okay, since you brought it up.



I find it appalling that a congressman would try to get funding for a parkway in an area of the country that has the fastest growth. Especially grotesque is the way he bought real estate in a time frame where almost everyone buying real estate is making a killing (I've over tripled my money on a property in lancaster county myself in that time).



Also, according to the cbs link, a local real estate professional reported making the same kind of profit hastert made.





My main point was highlighted by my generous link provider. It is also echoed by the remarks made here. The tone of media and posters here are basically Reid denies any wrongdoing. Therefore it was just an error. His word is good enough. Hastert, however is totally different. They mention the land purchase, then several other pubbies that might be shady, and then we go right to watch groups. Why don't we believe hastert if we believe reid?



I know most won't see it this way, but there is actually more proof of wrongdoing by reid than hastert. In Hastert's case, we have to insinuate his motive for the purchase or the parkway. In Reid's case, there is paperwork (let you and I try to explain away an error like that). And for anyone who has dealt with starting an LLC and keeping track of capital investments, you would know that this error would have been caught a long time ago.



Back to my point. Wouldn't you want parity in your news coverage?

He's a Democrat, nothing to see here. Move along.

there are tons of crooks that jr boy put in place that will be held accountable for starting a war so that their corporate sponsors could make money.

they are going to be held acountable first because their crimes against humanity are so horrific.

we are going to get them and then we will go after the small fries.

Reid bought land. The entire time he owned the land, it was listed in his financial disclosure. What was not listed was that his land ownership was actually in a partnership from 2001 - 2004.

Hastert bought land. The entire time he owned the land, it was listed in his financial disclosure. What was not listed was that his land ownership was actually in a trust from (I believe) 2004 - 2005.

That's apples to apples. Hastert says he did nothing wrong. So did Reid.

Are they both wrong?

I never said Hastert's financial disclosures were in error. I had issue with how he used his role as Speaker to push through funding for the Prairie Highway from which he directly benefited.

Reid bought property AFTER the Interior Department released adjoining land to a developer.

The point is you are grasping at straws stew.

So Stew, did you watch NBC Nightly News? Did you read the New Era Editorial?

BTW: that editorial mis-stated a few things:

1. It was not a $1.1 million windfall.
2. If the assets of the partership was the land in question, and Reid had a stake in the partnership equal to the original land purchase price, how is it that Reid did not own the land for 3 years?

Reid said today he is amending his disclosure forms.



I guess that applies to Hastert too. Of course, Hastert's lawyers said Hastert did nothing wrong.

This is so cute that on a topic about Reid - everything must be compared to Hastert, "But mommy - he did it too."

So - would someone please tell us about the Christmas parties at Hastert's home that he shuffled campaign money to finance? Or was that $3,300 "clerical error" a Reid thing - since the topic has moved to a side by side comparison of Reid to Hastert.

Reid bought land. The entire time he owned the land, it was listed in his financial disclosure. What was not listed was that his land ownership was actually in a partnership from 2001 - 2004.

Hastert bought land. The entire time he owned the land, it was listed in his financial disclosure. What was not listed was that his land ownership was actually in a trust from (I believe) 2004 - 2005.

So ITM, let's have one standard here. Did Hastert do anything wrong? He did the same thing that Reid did, which was to claim he personally owned land that was actually held by another entity.

I realize you would prefer not to have a comparison to Hastert, because now you are faced with a difficult choice: condemn the action and condemn what a Republican did, or excuse the action and excuse what a Democrat did. So far, you have opted only to condemn the Democrat while excusing the Republican.

Are you up for the challenge, or would you prefer to hide from reality?

all i can say is that if bigstew is that pistoff about harry reid think about how he must feel about jr bushboy starting a war based on lies where hunnerts of thosands of innocents were killed and maimed.

and the massive amount of corruption in iraq by haliburton.

why i betcha stewie is fuming , right stew?LOL

sure ya are.LOL

No sonny its not he did it to. The difference is Hasert used his position to push through funding for something he directly benifited from. While some want to make it look like its the same thing its not.

Stay on topic. This is about the coverage. I said in the beginning Reid could be innocent. I just thought it was worth more snooping is all. The reality is that a lot of you can't debate or discuss politics without jumping off topic and going to attack and defend mode.

Thanks for inviting me in big stooge.

You come on here stating you feel that there should be MORE news coverage on this issue, which turns out NOT to be an issue at all.

It is no wonder you like the right wing pervs. You like them yru and gin up ANYTHING to take the focaus off your dirty diapers.

Poor pathetic little man you are.

Thanks for coming. You made my point perfectly. Nice rhetoric.

If you think Reid's land deal should get more coverage and snooping, and Hastert did the same thing, then you should think Hastert's land deal should also get more coverage. But I doubt that is really the case. In fact, it seems your complaint about lack of coverage - even after numerous examples of mainstream coverage - is something more than a simple search for the truth.

Its a non story stew why cant you understand that ? The reality is you and other republicans are grasping at any straw that comes along, in the hopes it will get the republican leadership out of the headlines .



Did you hear Hasert is blameing his current troubles on a left wing whichhunt ? Only problem with that is its the FBI looking into his corrupted butt. A FBI thats controlled by the republicans.

First of all, I am a libertarian.



Second, this topic is about Reid. Start your own topic about Hastert. I brought up the topic because I believe the coverage to be slanted, and Reid's favorite term is "culture of corruption"





Now stop making this so easy.

There has not been almost complete silence about this issue in the media. So I guess your question has been answered and we can all ignore this post.

But you are wrong by comparison. Not just in the tone of the coverage, but the ratio on the amount of stories are very lopsided.

Lopsided - compared to what? Actually, I didn't think you wanted to make any comparisons, or at least we were not supposed to compare Reid to Hastert.

Ive seen many republicans in the past year claim they arent republicans and i dont blame them.



What is it that you want everyone to say to make you feel good ?

You can check some of my first posts, I've been libertarian for quite some time. But I love how you generalize anyone with a different view.





And I already feel good. America and its leadership are the greatest in the world and in history. Our economy is more robust than any in the world. I, and almost everyone I know are doing better than we ever have. I have finally left my union job in construction for good as my business is starting to take off. Thank you George, the tax cuts made the difference.



My future is in my own two hands, no need to cry blaming politicos for my dismal existance (understand?).

stew...did it ever occur to you that the coverage only seems lopsided to you because there are so many more corrupt repubs than dems???









ummm...first of all china is doing far better than we are and they are a commie country.

as for you tax cuts ...we will be paying the money back jr borrowed to finance that for generations.

if you run your new biz like jr runs the country, ie borrowing and spending on things you don't need, and giving price breaks to rich people who don't need it, you will be bankrupt in no time.

you are doing better because jr has mortagaged the future which, once again, someone else will have to fix and then you will blame them.(sigh)

oh...the ret of the country isn't as wealthy as lanc county so they aren't doing so well under dumbya.

in case you didn't know.

Unproven assumption on your part. Where's the proof?

It seems to me that power is the source of corruption, not political affiliation. I can remember quite a few corruption cases among democrats, too.

Stew: You were right. Coverage is lopsided. An analysis of CNN transcripts showed 17+ mentions of Reid's land deal. 2 for Hastert's.

I agree with stew. The prosperity that most people enjoy goes unnoticed by most americans. almost everyone has 1 or 2 cars, multiple tvs, and at least one computer at home. no other country has it this good.

You need help stew. Your answer has nothing to do with your problem of not understanding you are grasping at straws on this thread.



So you are in business well then sonny care to tell us the name that business ? Or do you have a secret one like a few other ones who claim they have a business on here .?















A dog could get credit in this country . Being in hock up to your eyeballs isnt a good thing.



The economy is real good for the rich but its not so good on the middle class and the poor. You are fooling yourself if you believe anything different.

Why, you got some money to spend? I would gladly accept it.



Who are you referring to? I am not stupid enough to tell a bunch of hate mongers my place of business. It took me too long and a lot of hard work to get where I am today (I love them taxcuts) so you and yours can vandalize me. Besides, what's that have to do with that?

Way to go! You hit that nail on the proverbial head.

so do ya thinks maybe those union wages had something to do with it???oh no, lemme guess, and this is just a wild guess but as a free marketeer you wish that you were paid 3 bucks an hour less in a non-union job right???

out of principal of course, right.LOL

well shucks gee wiz stew...do the math.in your non-union job you would not have made enough to get a tax cut from jr but your emplyer would have.

again if you run your biz like jr boy ran the country you will be out of biz in no time.

what don't you understand about death-spiral financing???

What a wacko. Where did you get all those assumptions.



I don't know where you learned your math, but if I look at my returns it is black and white. And why are you so upset about my union membership?



death-spiral financing- I guess I don't need to understand a liberal kneejerk desperation term.



These libs just don't understand how Bush's economy is working so well. It drives them nuts, so they say stuff like, "We'll be doomed later, trust me."



I heard the same stuff during the reagan years, yet here we are.

stewie...you sir are destined for failure. here's why..it ain't a liberal concept to not borrow and spend needlessly. it is a conservative concept.

yeah stew read something sometime and you will see that lil jr is financing your "prosperity" on borrowed money.here's what you should do. to be just like your idiotic prezdent....go out and borrow all the money you can so that all you can pay back is the interest.

then go out and sell your product or service to the millionaires at a steep discount and then gouge everyone else to make up the difference.

as for yer union membership what a hoot...

your union got you better wages than some stingy republican boss would have paid you.

and as freemarketeer that you are that must gall you to have to take all that extra money thanks to the liberals.

and then you whine about the liberals while taking money from a union job.

you should take a course on economics 101.

the worst thing in the world is to borrow so much money that you can barely afford to pay the interest on the debt.

oh...just fer you stew...jr. is borrowing the money from the hated ay-rabs and commie china.

i guess that makes dumbya a liberal.LOL

by the way stew...reagan and jrs old man borrowed and spent like drunkin sailors. it did not work out very well at all.

in fact , if you knew yer history you would know that bill clinton fixed the dreadful economic mess reagan and daddy0 left us with.

and he did it by raising taxes on the very walthy.

it worked .

thank bill clinton for balancing the budget and giving us a booming economy.

thank the liberals for giving you unions instead of stingy republicans who won't raise the minimum wage but give themselves fat pay raises.

you sound a tad bit lik an ingrate to me.LOL

Did anyone understand libertarian?



I guess I am just an optimist. I am happy with my country. I am doing better than ever. I doing better than my parents and grandparents, and so is the whole country. Reagan and the Bushes have done outstanding jobs for America, and our generation and many to come are benefitting.



And why does it sound like you are impugning my union membership? I am still a member, and a proud member. I am just not a hypocritical zombie sheep member like some, who think if your not a lib, then your anti-union. I like to think for myself thank you.





I love how libs defend clinton. If something bad happens 1 day after he left office, he had nothing to do with it, but yet bush's booming economy 6 years after clinton, and they still give billy the credit.



Can anyone figure out how our tax revenue has increased after bush gave all that money to those billionaires?

Wait one zipperhead minute. You are a proud union member who has his OWN business. Well then tell us stew is your business a union shop .I mean since the owner is a proud union member surely anyone who workes for you is offered to be a union member.



Stew you are so full of hot air.








.

reagan and the bush's gave us debt and borrowing. borrowing to pay interest only on the money.that gives people who don't pay attention the false sense of security.

ask a grown up what happens when you mortgage your house to the hilt and then payback only the interest and then borrow more money to pay the interest.

that's what reagan and the bush's did.reagan sold it as a way to reduce the deficit, and it did not do as advertised.

jrs daddy called it voo-doo economics until he sold out.he was right of course it was voodoo and it made the debt and deficit worse.

the deficit was eliminated under clinton.but it must be hard to give him credit.

jr basically gave the super rich a huge tax cut and then borrowed the difference from the arabs and the commie chinese.

now you are going to have to pay back that money and so are your children and your grandchildrem

you may be doing great but your fellow americans, which you probably don't give a crap about being a libertarian, are not.

wait til november 7 buddy boy and you will see how america feels about bush and the republicans.

you can then come back and tell me how well america is doing.

i guess