| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
BoneKracker
Veteran
Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1488
Location: U.S.A.
|
 Posted: Sat Feb 16, 2013 3:06 am Post subject: Democrat Mayor Gambled Away $1 Billion (from where?) |
 |
|
Former San Diego Mayor and big-time Democrat, Maureen O'connor is being prosecuted by the Obama Administration (now that the election is over) for the theft of some of that money from charitable trusts set up in her late husband's estate, although not from the City of San Diego, of course (that would hurt Democrats across Southern California). The prosecutors are too fuzzy about how much she actually blew or where it came from to go down road, of course.
| Quote: | Federal prosecutors said it was impossible to know precisely how much Ms. O’Connor had lost over those years, but she emerged with her fortune gone and her health shattered. She took out second and third mortgages on her La Jolla, Calif., home to pay for the gambling.
The former Southern California political power broker, whose husband, Robert O. Peterson, founded the Jack-in-the-Box fast-food chain, appeared in court in San Diego on Thursday to answer to charges that she had stolen money from her late husband’s foundation to fuel her addiction.
She walked unsteadily into court, leaning on a cane and appearing wobbly and distraught. She teared up as she told reporters, “Those of you who know me here would know that I never meant to hurt the city that I love.”
Ms. O’Connor was not accused of taking money from the city, but the money in her husband’s trust would probably have gone to local charities. “I always intended to pay it back and I still intend to pay it back,” she said. |
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/15/us/over-a-decade-maureen-oconnor-spent-1-billion-on-bets.html
_________________
Oldthinkers unbellyfeel INGSOC.
-- Headline of a document on Winston Smith's terminal in his cubicle at the Ministry of Truth, seen briefly in the background in one scene of the movie rendition of Nineteen Eighty-Four.
Last edited by BoneKracker on Sat Feb 16, 2013 3:47 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
notageek
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 05 Jun 2008
Posts: 78
Location: Bangalore, India
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 16, 2013 3:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
Are you saying Democratic mayors are incapable of making money on their own?
_________________
What looks like a cat, flies like a bat, brays like a donkey, and plays like a monkey? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pjp
Administrator
Joined: 16 Apr 2002
Posts: 16029
Location: Colorado
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 16, 2013 3:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
I'd imagine most from JITB and the rest from investments. Unless she stole a lot more from charities than they're admitting.
_________________
lolgov. 'cause where we're going, you don't have civil liberties.
In Loving Memory
1787 - 2008 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BoneKracker
Veteran
Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1488
Location: U.S.A.
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 16, 2013 4:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
| notageek wrote: | | Are you saying Democratic mayors are incapable of making money on their own? |
I'm saying the Obama Administration is intentionally not investigating thoroughly or prosecuting her for her crimes, to save face for the Democrat Party. Casino records show she spent a Billion dollars there (i.e. charged up a Billion dollars worth of chips, services, etc.). Her attorneys claim, "Yeah, well, she placed a billion in bets, but she actually only lost about $13 million." (And therefore, she didn't need to come up with money from illicit sources to pay for all that, and she only stole about $2 million, which was from charity.)
I say that's bullshit. In no casino I've ever been in does one only lose at a ratio of $13 per $1,000 gambled. The prosecutors are now saying, "Well, we can't say for sure how much of the money she really lost."
Gambling addiction is exactly the kind of thing that people commit enormous financial crimes in order to cover. It's an extremely common motive. They are turning a blind eye to obvious indicators of corruption.
Her finances should be gone over under a microscope, and every single financial transaction the City made under her tenure (e.g., contracts, purchases, etc.) should be scrutinized. I say she was probably on the take big-time, to the tune of tens of millions of dollars per year, with the kickbacks being channeled to her via credit accounts at Casinos. I say failure to properly run this to ground is itself a crime of enormous proportions and an abuse of power by the Democrats. The Federal Government turning a blind eye to this at municipal level also suggest that Democrats are in bed with organized crime as a routine part of their political activities and don't even blink when they see this kind of corruption.
_________________
Oldthinkers unbellyfeel INGSOC.
-- Headline of a document on Winston Smith's terminal in his cubicle at the Ministry of Truth, seen briefly in the background in one scene of the movie rendition of Nineteen Eighty-Four. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BoneKracker
Veteran
Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1488
Location: U.S.A.
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 16, 2013 4:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
| pjp wrote: | | I'd imagine most from JITB and the rest from investments. Unless she stole a lot more from charities than they're admitting. |
There is a reason her husband didn't simply leave his fortune to her. He was probably well aware of her gambling addiction. She claims it developed as a result of his death, but it's more likely he forced her to keep it under control. Instead of just willing her everything, he put most of it in trust and paid somebody to manage them and see that the bills were paid, to pay her an allowance, to see to her needs, and to control her doling out of a certain amount of money to charities.
That's why she had to mortgage property to get cash, and that's why she could pilfer only two paltry million (out of a billion spent) from the trust. As to where the rest of it came from, that implications are obvious, given that she was a long-standing political figure.
But this administration isn't going to seriously investigate a Democrat for corruption unless it is somehow of benefit to this President.
_________________
Oldthinkers unbellyfeel INGSOC.
-- Headline of a document on Winston Smith's terminal in his cubicle at the Ministry of Truth, seen briefly in the background in one scene of the movie rendition of Nineteen Eighty-Four. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pjp
Administrator
Joined: 16 Apr 2002
Posts: 16029
Location: Colorado
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 16, 2013 4:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
I would think La Jolla, SD and or CA would have enough interest to notice that much missing, and certainly to pursue if that's how she obtained the money. States are going after very old back taxes for extremely small sums in comparison. And CA needs the money.
_________________
lolgov. 'cause where we're going, you don't have civil liberties.
In Loving Memory
1787 - 2008 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BoneKracker
Veteran
Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1488
Location: U.S.A.
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 16, 2013 4:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
| pjp wrote: | | I would think La Jolla, SD and or CA would have enough interest to notice that much missing, and certainly to pursue if that's how she obtained the money. States are going after very old back taxes for extremely small sums in comparison. And CA needs the money. |
It's not "missing". You don't understand how corruption works. It's not about politicians stealing money from the government coffers. It's about politicians taking bribes or kickbacks for causing the government money to flow to people who want it.
Some company who wants the city's $20 million a year contract for waste removal finds a way to channel a million to somebody who can influence the selection process, and the investment is well worth it. A city the size of San Diego probably spends $3 Billion a year. She gambled this money away over a decade or more (I haven't looked, but like 15 years perhaps).
The money isn't "missing" to anybody but the crooks who paid it to her. Such "payments" are naturally done is the most untraceable fashion possible. That's why you see Democrats in trouble for magically having some house in the tropics nobody knows about, or being taken on free trips to resorts in Asia, or magically having a house built or property purchased at suspiciously low prices, or having massive "charitable trusts" set up that they will "manage" after their retirement (tax free, of course).
_________________
Oldthinkers unbellyfeel INGSOC.
-- Headline of a document on Winston Smith's terminal in his cubicle at the Ministry of Truth, seen briefly in the background in one scene of the movie rendition of Nineteen Eighty-Four. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pigeon768
l33t
Joined: 02 Jan 2006
Posts: 667
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 16, 2013 6:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
| BoneKracker wrote: | | It's not "missing". You don't understand how corruption works. It's not about politicians stealing money from the government coffers. It's about politicians taking bribes or kickbacks for causing the government money to flow to people who want it. |
If she spent a billion dollars at a casino, that means a billion dollars was given to her at some point. She owes income tax on that billion dollars. Those tax dollars are missing.
At least, I think that was the point.
_________________
My political bias. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BoneKracker
Veteran
Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1488
Location: U.S.A.
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 16, 2013 7:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
It's worse than that. If she can't prove where that money came from, then it means a whole lot of people probably got screwed over by corrupt government dealings (good competitors who lost on contracts and would have given taxpayers more for their money, people who were the victims of unfair decisions of various types like zoning, permitting, regulatory non-compliance that was ignored systematically, crime that was ignored systematically, and who knows what else).
We need a crack-down on government corruption, but when it has reached the highest office in the land, who's going to do it? Eric Holder?
_________________
Oldthinkers unbellyfeel INGSOC.
-- Headline of a document on Winston Smith's terminal in his cubicle at the Ministry of Truth, seen briefly in the background in one scene of the movie rendition of Nineteen Eighty-Four. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Muso
l33t
Joined: 22 Oct 2002
Posts: 655
Location: The Holy city of Honolulu
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 16, 2013 8:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
A democrat spends other people's money on a fiscal black hole. This is as surprising as the Sun rising in the East or gravity working as discovered.
_________________
If I had a dollar for every time capitalism was blamed for the problems caused by government, I'd be a fat filmmaker with a baseball cap |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wildhorse
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 16 Mar 2006
Posts: 148
Location: Estados Unidos De América
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 17, 2013 12:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
| You guys are just envious, because Oblabla conveys so much esemplastic charisma. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
richk449
Guru
Joined: 24 Oct 2003
Posts: 345
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 17, 2013 12:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
| BoneKracker wrote: | | But this administration isn't going to seriously investigate a Democrat for corruption unless it is somehow of benefit to this President. |
I don't really know anything about how this works, but do the politicians in the executive branch really make decisions like this? I am sure that they get involved in setting strategy and priorities, but wouldn't the investigation and decision on what to pursue be undertaken by career bureaucrats in a local office? People who had their jobs long before Obama took office?
I don't doubt that there is political influence on the process, but it can't be as explicit as "don't investigate democratic politicians" or it would be all over the press. The corruption is probably more of the "if you want to be promoted, you will choose your priorities wisely" type. Which doesn't seem strong enough to prevent an investigation here if there is a case to be made.
But ... I haven't read any details, so I could be totally wrong. Just asking. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BoneKracker
Veteran
Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1488
Location: U.S.A.
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 17, 2013 1:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
| richk449 wrote: | | BoneKracker wrote: | | But this administration isn't going to seriously investigate a Democrat for corruption unless it is somehow of benefit to this President. |
I don't really know anything about how this works, but do the politicians in the executive branch really make decisions like this? I am sure that they get involved in setting strategy and priorities, but wouldn't the investigation and decision on what to pursue be undertaken by career bureaucrats in a local office? People who had their jobs long before Obama took office?
I don't doubt that there is political influence on the process, but it can't be as explicit as "don't investigate democratic politicians" or it would be all over the press. The corruption is probably more of the "if you want to be promoted, you will choose your priorities wisely" type. Which doesn't seem strong enough to prevent an investigation here if there is a case to be made.
But ... I haven't read any details, so I could be totally wrong. Just asking. |
I'm sure that's typically the case, but that the political appointees exert influence in strategically important and politically sensitive cases. Remember, this is the same Administration that told Federal Prosecutors not to pursue voting intimidation cases against black people.
_________________
Oldthinkers unbellyfeel INGSOC.
-- Headline of a document on Winston Smith's terminal in his cubicle at the Ministry of Truth, seen briefly in the background in one scene of the movie rendition of Nineteen Eighty-Four. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bogamol
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 01 Nov 2009
Posts: 84
Location: Detroit, Michigan - The Home of Rock and Roll
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 17, 2013 2:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
| richk449 wrote: | | BoneKracker wrote: | | But this administration isn't going to seriously investigate a Democrat for corruption unless it is somehow of benefit to this President. |
I don't really know anything about how this works, but do the politicians in the executive branch really make decisions like this? I am sure that they get involved in setting strategy and priorities, but wouldn't the investigation and decision on what to pursue be undertaken by career bureaucrats in a local office? People who had their jobs long before Obama took office?
I don't doubt that there is political influence on the process, but it can't be as explicit as "don't investigate democratic politicians" or it would be all over the press. The corruption is probably more of the "if you want to be promoted, you will choose your priorities wisely" type. Which doesn't seem strong enough to prevent an investigation here if there is a case to be made.
But ... I haven't read any details, so I could be totally wrong. Just asking. |
See also Kwame Kilpatrick.
Specifically see corruption charges involving Synagro.
See also nepotism in the Kilpatrick administration.
_________________
Yo momma's so classless she's a Marxist utopia! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
richk449
Guru
Joined: 24 Oct 2003
Posts: 345
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 17, 2013 2:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
Being from a suburb of Detroit (which is not the home of rock and roll, by the way), I am well aware of the Kwame example. But doesn't that just prove my point? Kwame was overtly corrupt, and it did in fact end up as headlines in the press. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bogamol
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 01 Nov 2009
Posts: 84
Location: Detroit, Michigan - The Home of Rock and Roll
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 17, 2013 3:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
| richk449 wrote: | | Being from a suburb of Detroit (which is not the home of rock and roll, by the way) |
The hell it's not!  Respect the D!
But howdy anyway, neighbor. 
| richk449 wrote: |
I am well aware of the Kwame example. But doesn't that just prove my point? Kwame was overtly corrupt, and it did in fact end up as headlines in the press. |
I think it's an extreme example but I don't think corruption is usually overtly corrupt. I think Kwame was overtly doing what Bonekracker asserted everyone else was doing, but in such a way that was apparent that corruption was happening. I think the difference is that Kwame saw nothing wrong with it (and after decades of Coleman Young, why would he?) and therefore executed it in the open.
_________________
Yo momma's so classless she's a Marxist utopia! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
richk449
Guru
Joined: 24 Oct 2003
Posts: 345
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 17, 2013 3:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
| bogamol wrote: | | richk449 wrote: | | Being from a suburb of Detroit (which is not the home of rock and roll, by the way) |
The hell it's not! Respect the D! |
Eh, I would have gone with http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5_9aTc0T86M, rather than dudes from New York in makeup.
| Quote: | | But howdy anyway, neighbor. |
Well, not anymore. I got the hell out of there. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bogamol
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 01 Nov 2009
Posts: 84
Location: Detroit, Michigan - The Home of Rock and Roll
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 17, 2013 4:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
Touche'
_________________
Yo momma's so classless she's a Marxist utopia! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BoneKracker
Veteran
Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1488
Location: U.S.A.
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 17, 2013 5:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
New York is corrupt. Chicago is corrupt. New Orleans is corrupt. Atlanta is corrupt. LA is corrupt. The list goes on. What's the obvious thing they've all got in common? They are Democrat lairs and spawning grounds.
_________________
Oldthinkers unbellyfeel INGSOC.
-- Headline of a document on Winston Smith's terminal in his cubicle at the Ministry of Truth, seen briefly in the background in one scene of the movie rendition of Nineteen Eighty-Four. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pjp
Administrator
Joined: 16 Apr 2002
Posts: 16029
Location: Colorado
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 17, 2013 6:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| BoneKracker wrote: | | If she can't prove where that money came from |
I haven't followed the details (other than seeing headlines). Seems amazing she could manage that much in kickbacks without getting caught. That said, what has happened that she has to prove where it came from?
_________________
lolgov. 'cause where we're going, you don't have civil liberties.
In Loving Memory
1787 - 2008 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BoneKracker
Veteran
Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1488
Location: U.S.A.
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 12:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
| pjp wrote: | | BoneKracker wrote: | | If she can't prove where that money came from |
I haven't followed the details (other than seeing headlines). Seems amazing she could manage that much in kickbacks without getting caught. That said, what has happened that she has to prove where it came from? |
She got caught stealing $2 million from her late husband's trust. The investigation of that led to the discovery that she had spent a billion dollars at casinos over the last X years (a decade or so, I imagine). That raises obvious questions, because she simply did not have access to that kind of money, but this DoJ will apparently not be looking into the matter. Now, if it were Jesse Jackson, Jr., or somebody else on Obama's "Enemies List", they'd be right up the ass with a microscope.
_________________
Oldthinkers unbellyfeel INGSOC.
-- Headline of a document on Winston Smith's terminal in his cubicle at the Ministry of Truth, seen briefly in the background in one scene of the movie rendition of Nineteen Eighty-Four. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pjp
Administrator
Joined: 16 Apr 2002
Posts: 16029
Location: Colorado
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 1:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
Interesting. And I don't think you've addressed this point, but why wouldn't some part of California be interested in pursuing the corruption portion and going after the estate to recover whatever money it can? The estate and any companies they can prove were involved. Seems like a lot of money to be had there.
_________________
lolgov. 'cause where we're going, you don't have civil liberties.
In Loving Memory
1787 - 2008 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BoneKracker
Veteran
Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1488
Location: U.S.A.
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 4:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
Some probably are interested, but they are ruled by Democrats (some of whom are probably continuing the very same "business relationships"), and besides, the Feds have jurisdiction over the evident aspect of the crimes, because the money was transferred out of state. See how that works? Unless there is a thorough Federal investigation, there's just a lot of smoke, but nobody will ever know about the fires. This will serve to get her out of the way where she won't do The Party any further harm by being so amateurish and flagrant.
_________________
Oldthinkers unbellyfeel INGSOC.
-- Headline of a document on Winston Smith's terminal in his cubicle at the Ministry of Truth, seen briefly in the background in one scene of the movie rendition of Nineteen Eighty-Four. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Off the Wall
