• Status: Solved
  • Priority: Medium
  • Security: Public
  • Views: 59
  • Last Modified:

Is President Obama money laundering?

Official Money Laundering Definition (Wikipedia):
Money laundering often occurs in three steps: first, cash is introduced into the financial system by some means (“placement”), the second involves carrying out complex financial transactions in order to camouflage the illegal source (“layering”), and the final step entails acquiring wealth generated from the transactions of the illicit funds (“integration”).

Premise:
In 2009 Obama and the Democrats, Democrat controlled House and Senate, passed $819 billion dollars in the Stimulus Bill to stimulate the economy.  In the House no Republican voted for the bill, but in the Senate three Republicans did, Collins, Snow, and Spector.  Spector later that year became a Democrat and the other two voted like Democrats most of the time, so essentially no GOP members supported the bill in both the House and Senate.

In 2009 a solar company called Solyndra receives $500 billion dollars in stimulus money (taxpayer money) so it can continue making and selling solar panels as part of Obama’s green jobs initiative program.  In 2011 this same company declares bankruptcy.  In the meantime top executives go to the White House several times from 2009 to 2011 to lobby the president and to make donations to his campaign, which is essentially taxpayer money.  Hundreds of companies like Solyndra received stimulus money and are funneling the money back to Obama via campaign donations.

Here is the breakdown.  First, money goes out in form of a Stimulus Package; two, companies and corporations receive the money to help them with their business; three, the money comes back to President Obama in a form of a campaign donation.  Pretty slick.

Questions:
1.)      Is Obama essentially money laundering through the Stimulus Bill knowing he will get money back in a form of campaign donations from these companies that receive taxpayer money?
2.)      Should companies and people who receive Stimulus money be allowed to donate to Obama’s campaign?
0
Tlingit
Asked:
Tlingit
  • 6
  • 5
  • 3
  • +4
5 Solutions
 
mark_harris231Commented:
Tlingit,

I understand the analogy you are attempting to make, but the premise is flawed.  Money laundering requires that the monies originate from illegal sources.  That's not the case here.  If anything, it may point to additional regulation of campaign donations.  I say "may", because I'm not familiar enough with the facts beyond what you've presented.  This would seem like a very large loophole not to have been exploited and exposed before now.

Mark
0
 
Mujtaba_Alam_KhanCommented:
I agree with Mark.

But hang on a second. Isn't this one of the reason why the OWS are protesting about, even I mentioned it. It simply isn't about Obama, Democrats and the Republicans alike have given funds to big corporations and instead of them creating new job, they have invest the money in their share-holders, hence raising the price of their Stock. They have of course have reward them back for funding the campaigns.

Well done Obama for selling Democracy to big Corporations.

-Muj ;-|
0
 
carsRSTCommented:
>>Money laundering requires that the monies originate from illegal sources.

Due to citizens united, the president does not have to disclose all donors.  So we don't know exactly who in the "1%" is giving to B Hussein.

What we do know is we have a corrupt White House handing out political favors left and right in the form of a "stimulus."  Bailed out unions, gave loans to companies that did not deserve them.

When do we get to see the criteria determining who gets a waiver on Obamacare?  Tied to political donations?  Who got turned down for a waiver?
0
Free Tool: SSL Checker

Scans your site and returns information about your SSL implementation and certificate. Helpful for debugging and validating your SSL configuration.

One of a set of tools we are providing to everyone as a way of saying thank you for being a part of the community.

 
carsRSTCommented:
>>Money laundering requires that the monies originate from illegal sources.

We do know that Obama has ties to shady people.

See Obama/Tony Rezko and Bill Ayres connection.
0
 
bergertimeCommented:
"This would seem like a very large loophole not to have been exploited and exposed before now."

I would agree with Mark on most of his post except for this line.  What other president has given $500 billon dollars to a private company?  But on a much smaller scale it happens all the time.  Think about welfare.  If I'm on welfare who would I vote for, someone giving me free money or someone who taketh away free money?

And Muj, I thought we had covered this.....no the OWS crowd want free stuff, they want their student loans paid off, they want a house and in a lot of cases it looks like they want to break the law and get arrested.  And yes we know that the OWS don't like to share food with the homeless.  It is truely amazing. Just Wow.

0
 
TlingitAuthor Commented:
I think I just came up with a new term: Obama Laundering -- first, money goes out in form of a Stimulus Package; two, companies and corporations receive the money to help them with their business; three, the money comes back to President Obama in a form of a campaign donation.
0
 
bergertimeCommented:
How is this different than welfare give aways?
0
 
carsRSTCommented:
This is a white house filled with scandals: Solyndra, Fast and Furious, Black Panthers
0
 
TlingitAuthor Commented:
Another Solyndra type company goes bankrupt:

http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/e2-wire/190641-second-energy-dept-backed-company-goes-bankrupt

Is Obama a poor business man?  Would he make it in the business world or would he be fired?  In the end it is not his fault, right?  It's Bush's fault.
0
 
Mujtaba_Alam_KhanCommented:
> And Muj, I thought we had covered this <

Yes we had but like always you failed to read my comment. It's like talking to a wall. So I will ignore ya!

> I think I just came up with a new term <

Brilliant. Now let's apply that to every politician. Forget about the stimulus because there are other ways to give benefits to Corporations & even the Banks and have money in return for campaigns or finds or anything else. Once you go that deep, you will realise how corrupt the Republicans & Democrats are.
Never mind Obama. But you people don't care.

-Muj ;-|
0
 
behendersonCommented:
I hope that you are not trying to say that no Republican receives money from companies that they are responsible for creating legislation for, because that is a load of crap, Republicans get all kinds of money from companies that they create favorable legislation for.

Not only that, but you, as a Republican and opponent of campaign finance reform favor that arrangement.  So don't advocate something out of one side of your mouth and complain about it out of the other side of your mouth.  Campaign finance controls are either good and reasonable or they are not. In the past it has been pretty clear that you support not.  So grab a beer and celebrate because government is working the way that you would like it to.
0
 
TlingitAuthor Commented:
>>Once you go that deep, you will realise how corrupt the Republicans & Democrats are.

I agree.  Both parties are corrupt.

>>Never mind Obama. But you people don't care.

The problem with this is that Obama actually said he was going to change the way Washington did business and he was directly talking about things like this that he is currently involved in, and this could be the reason a lot of Independents and Democrats are no longer supporting him.

>>Not only that, but you, as a Republican and opponent of campaign finance reform favor that arrangement.

This has nothing to do with finance reform.  This has to do with a totally different issue: How the Stimulus Bill is being handled.  This is taxpayer money, almost a trillion dollars of taxpayer money that could be coming back into the Obama campaign.  He has raised $86 million dollars in donations with a low approval rating, his closest opponent has not even raised half of that amount.  A lot of Independents that supported him in 2008 are no longer supporting him along with democrats.  He even has a drop in blacks and hispanics.  Where is all this money coming from in such a poor economy?  Only the very wealthy can afford to go to his fundraisers because the amount it costs to get into them.
0
 
TlingitAuthor Commented:
The following is excerpt from Changing Washington, I guess part of Obama's campaigns slogans of 2008, "Change We Can Believe In," or something like that.  I want to emphasize the second paragraph where it states: "The Administration has emphasized the importance of greater transparency, accountability, oversight, and risk management as approaches to restore citizen trust in the government’s ability to effectively use public dollars."

Changing the way Washington works.   President Obama committed to “changing the way Washington works” by focusing on reforms to the core business processes in government, especially the budget process, the contracting system, and the regulatory system.  For example, his emphasis on reforming government contracting requires more competition, more fixed-price contracts, better contract management, and more accountability.  In his most recent radio address, he says he is committed to fixing the budget process so it addresses rather than skirts hard decisions.  He also has placed an emphasis on stronger ethical standards for his appointees and greater transparency in interactions with lobbyists.

Focusing on fiscal responsibility, accountability and oversight.  The Administration has emphasized the importance of greater transparency, accountability, oversight, and risk management as approaches to restore citizen trust in the government’s ability to effectively use public dollars.  This has been most evident in the implementation of the Recovery Act with the creation of the Recovery Act Transparency Board, and the President’s statements that he will cut $100 million in administrative costs and $2 trillion in spending in a line-by-line review of the government.

Has he built that trust with the American people?

Here is the link to the full article.

http://www.businessofgovernment.org/blog/presidential-transition/changing-washington-obamas-first-100-days
0
 
carsRSTCommented:
>>Has he built that trust with the American people?

No one trusts Obama.  His own party members are now running away from him when he shows up in their area.

0
 
beetosCommented:
Cars, I love you brother.  You too Tling and Mr. Berger.

I just hope your heads don't explode on Nov. 6th 2012.
0
 
carsRSTCommented:
>>I just hope your heads don't explode on Nov. 6th 2012.

Not all is lost.  The world is getting back its most famous community organizer.

0
 
Mujtaba_Alam_KhanCommented:
> His own party members are now running away from him when he shows up in their area. <

That's because he is giving too much into the Republicans & the Tea Party.

-Muj ;-|
0
 
carsRSTCommented:
>>That's because he is giving too much into the Republicans & the Tea Party.

Give us some examples, Muj.

0
 
behendersonCommented:
This has nothing to do with finance reform.  This has to do with a totally different issue: How the Stimulus Bill is being handled.  

Well that is a load of hooey.  Look at the top and the very premise of the money laundering "argument."  The idea is absolutely contingent upon the idea that a corporation is giving a politician money as a quid pro quo for legislation that benefits it financially.  Well as far as you have ever been concerned that is the most wonderful thing in the world and no one should ever do anything to stop it.  So kick back grab a beer and celebrate because Obama and every single solitary Republican in office right now are getting all kinds of cash from Companies who are getting all kinds of deals that benefit them financially.  Haven't you ever heard of an earmark???   Orrin Hatch has and so have the rest of the Republicans in office... the Democrats too.   That is what you wanted so don't piss and moan about it now.  

If the post was a post saying that stimulus money was being spent unwisely then you might have a point, but it wasn't, so you don't.  This whole post is saying that when a legislator gets money from a company and gives that company money in the form of legislation that benefits that company financially that is money laundering.  Well, it probably is, but that is what you wanted and that is what you have so don't piss and moan now.   Why do you think people wanted McCain Feingold finance reform??? So companies could not buy legislation.  You opposed it so don't piss and moan when they do with Obama or any single one of the Republicans in office right now, who have all requested special earmarks for companies that give them money.
0
 
TlingitAuthor Commented:
Thanks for everyones input.
0

Featured Post

Vote for the Most Valuable Expert

It’s time to recognize experts that go above and beyond with helpful solutions and engagement on site. Choose from the top experts in the Hall of Fame or on the right rail of your favorite topic page. Look for the blue “Nominate” button on their profile to vote.

  • 6
  • 5
  • 3
  • +4
Tackle projects and never again get stuck behind a technical roadblock.
Join Now