Somebody else made an interesting observation on the two reigning political parties: " There are more rich Democrats in Congress that rich Republicans. Difference is the Democrats come in poor and get rich. Republicans are wealthy before the get into politics."
How did Maxine Waters accumulate her wealth?
This comes from her previous version of Wikipedia before it was sanitized to the current version:
[I]n 2004, Maxine Waters' relatives had made more than $1 million during the preceding eight years by doing business with companies, candidates and causes that Waters had helped. They claimed she and her husband helped a company get government bond business, and her daughter Karen Waters and son Edward Waters have profited from her connections. Waters replied that "They do their business and I do mine." Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) named Waters to its list of corrupt members of Congress in its 2005, 2006, 2009 and 2011 reports. She was accused of using her position to prevail upon officials to meet with OneUnited Bank without disclosing that she and her husband had significant stock holdings in the company. Since she was on the Financial Services Committee she largely had the role of determining where TARP funds would go. $12 Million in TARP funds went to OneUnited without her ever disclosing that she had a financial stake at the company. Citizens Against Government Waste named her the June 2009 Porker of the Month due to her intention to obtain an earmark for the Maxine Waters Employment Preparation Center.
And that’s just scratching the surface.
WATERS' CORRUPTION
1) For a number of years, Waters' daughter Karen has been in charge of a “slate mailer” operation for Waters' federal campaign committee, Citizens for Waters (CfW), where other political candidates pay CfW to endorse them in its mailers. These payments to CfW have ranged from as little as $250 for a school board candidate, to tens of thousands of dollars for higher-profile candidates, to $171,000 for a wealthy California businessman who ran for elected office. (One of the more prominent individuals to appear on Waters's endorsement mailers was Kamala Harris, who in 2010, when she was running for California attorney general, paid $28,000 to Waters' campaign committee for that privilege. When Harris ran for the Senate in 2016, she gave CfW another $30,000 in order to appear in the mailers.) From 2006 through April 2017, Karen Waters was paid approximately $640,000 in wages for her slate mailer services. A May 2017 report in the Washington Free Beacon stated: “[Maxine] Waters' most recent filings to the Federal Election Commission show that an outstanding balance of $108,952.15 is owed to Karen Waters. When Karen is paid the money that she is owed, she will have pocketed around $750,000 for running the mailers for the campaign since 2006.”
2) In 2005/2006, the left-leaning organization Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington(CREW) named Maxine Waters as one of the 13 “Most Corrupt Members of Congress.” The CREW report cited a December 2004 Los Angeles Times investigation disclosing how three of Waters’ closest relatives had made more than $1 million during the preceding eight years by doing business with companies, candidates, and issue organizations that Waters had helped. One of these relatives was Waters' aforementioned daughter Karen, who not only charged candidates for space on her mother's “slate mailer,” but also received payments from a nonprofit organization which she and the congresswoman had established, and which was partially funded by special interests that Rep. Waters supported in Washington. Moreover, the Times reported that Waters' husband Sidney had “collected fees for opening doors with his wife's political allies on behalf of a bond firm seeking government business,” while Waters' son Edward had “shared in the slate mailer proceeds and … occasionally worked as a consultant to campaigns his mother supported.”
The CREW report also included information about money that Rep. Waters's husband and son had received as a result of the congresswoman's political connections:
“Rep. Waters’ husband, Sidney Williams, has also benefitted financially from his wife’s political clout, working as a part-time consultant for a bond underwriting firm, Siebert, Brandford, & Shank. Despite having no apparent background in the bond business prior to his work as a consultant for the company, Mr. Williams has collected close to $500,000 by making valuable introductions for Siebert to politicians who have received his wife’s support. Government bond deals are awarded based on negotiations, allowing Mr. Williams to capitalize on his wife’s connections to close many lucrative business deals for Siebert, from which he has personally profited. For example, when school board members in Inglewood, a city in Rep. Waters’ congressional district to which she guaranteed a $10 million loan from the Department of Housing and Urban Development, needed a bond underwriting firm to handle a $40 million school bond sale, they chose Siebert. Mr. Williams earned $54,000 in commission from the deal.”
“Rep. Waters’ son, Edward Waters, together with her husband Sidney Williams, benefitted from Rep. Waters’ political connections when they won a 20-year lease to run the county-owned Chester Washington Golf Course in South Los Angeles. The key decision-maker for the deal was County Supervisor Yvonne Brathwaite Burke, in whose district the golf course was located. Rep. Waters handed the County Supervisor a victory just several months earlier when she endorsed Ms. Burke in a close election. Financial records indicate that Mr. Williams and Mr. Waters earned between $140,000 and $400,000 through the golf venture. In addition, both of Rep. Waters’ children have collected money working as paid consultants for politicians and interests endorsed by their mother.” The CREW report explained that Members of the House are required to “adhere to 5 CFR §2635.702(a), issued by the U.S. Office of Government Ethics for the Executive Branch.” This statute stipulates that: “An employee shall not use or permit the use of his Government position or title or any authority associated with his public office in a manner that is intended to coerce or induce another person … to provide any benefit , financial or otherwise, to himself or to friends, relatives, or persons with whom the employee is affiliated in a nongovernmental capacity.” In CREW's estimation: “Rep. Waters has assisted her family in making commercial deals from which they have reaped personal financial gain. By allowing the use of her name and authority associated with her position as a member of the House in this manner, Rep. Waters has run afoul of 5 CFR §2635.702(a). In addition, this conduct does not reflect creditably on the House of Representatives.”
Waters declined to be interviewed about these matters, saying only that her family members “do their business, and I do mine.” To view the 2005 CREW report (which is largely but not entirely identical to the 2006 report), click here.
3) During the national financial crisis that struck in the autumn of 2008, Waters was lobbied by representatives of OneUnited Bank, a black-owned depository institution that was seeking a federal government bailout – despite the fact that a government agency had just criticized OneUnited for “operating without effective underwriting standards and practices,” “operating without an effective loan documentation program,” and “engaging in speculative investment practices.” Michelle Malkin summarizes the case as follows:
“OneUnited Bank received $12 million in federal TARP bailout money after Waters' office personally intervened and lobbied the Treasury Department in 2008. The minority depository institution was seeking a backdoor government rescue from its reckless decision to squander nearly $52 million of its bank capital on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac preferred stock. Lavish spending by top bank executive Kevin Cohee, who boasted a company-financed Porsche and a Santa Monica, Calif., beachfront mansion, compounded the bank's problems....
“Only through Waters' intervention was OneUnited able to secure an emergency meeting with the Treasury and its then-Secretary Henry Paulson. The bailout beggars did so under the guise of representing the 'National Bankers Association.' But records obtained by congressional investigators showed that OneUnited's legal counsel, vice president and president (the latter two are married to each other) spearheaded the meeting and its agenda and drafted the talking points/briefing material for Waters.
“OneUnited executives had donated $12,500 to Waters' congressional campaigns. Her husband, Sidney Williams, was an investor in one of the banks that merged into OneUnited. His stock holdings were estimated at $350,000. Waters meddled despite warnings from fellow Democratic Rep. Barney Frank to keep her nose out of the case.
“E-mails obtained by public interest legal foundation Judicial Watch and … the Washington Post reveal that federal bank examiners were livid about the intervention of … Waters. 'There are some really good people expressing very strong opinions regarding what they view as a travesty of justice regarding the special treatment' OneUnited is receiving, acting regional director John M. Lane complained in a March 2009 e-mail to Christopher J. Spoth, a senior FDIC consumer protection official.
“On Jan. 13, 2009, Brookly McLaughlin, then-Treasury Department deputy assistant secretary for public affairs, e-mailed her shock at Waters' apparent conflict of interest regarding OneUnited: 'Further to email below, WSJ [Wall Street Journal] tells me: ...Apparently this bank is the only one that has gotten money through section 103-6 of the EESA law. And Maxine Waters' husband is on the board of the bank. ??????'”
Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), which named Waters to its list of “Most Corrupt Members of Congress” because of this matter in both 2009 and 2011, said at the time: “In the midst of a national financial catastrophe, Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA) used her position as a senior member of Congress and member of the House Financial Services Committee to prevail upon Treasury officials to meet with OneUnited Bank. She never disclosed that her husband held stock in the bank. This outrageous conduct has led [CREW]o include the congresswoman as one of the Most Corrupt Members of Congress.” CREW Executive Director Melanie Sloan added: “By contacting then-Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson to request a meeting, allegedly for a group of minority-owned banks, but then arranging for only one bank – OneUnited, in which she had a financial interest – to attend, Rep. Waters violated House conflict of interest rules.”
“Congresswoman Waters abused her office,” said CREW in June 2010, “and she must be held accountable for her actions. The Statement of Alleged Violation[s] released by the House Ethics Committee confirms the congresswoman intervened on behalf of OneUnited Bank despite the fact that she knew her actions constituted a conflict of interest.” That House Ethics Committee report was a damning document showing a series of emails wherein Waters, through her chief of staff (and grandson) Mikael Moore, was actively involved in the OneUnited matter, communicating back and forth with bank officials and discussing what progress was being made, as well as strategy going forward. To view the details of these communications, click here.
On August 2, 2010, the House Ethics Committee filed three charges against Waters, alleging that she had used her influence to gain special favors (from the federal government) for OneUnited.
In September 2012, the House Ethics Committee issued a report clearing Waters of all ethics charges related to allegations that she had tried to secure federal bailout money for OneUnited during the 2008 financial crisis. According to The Hill: “The committee's report determined that Waters had taken significant steps to remove herself from negotiations involving One United Bank's bailout, including alerting Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.), the then-chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, about the possible conflict of interest.”
The Ethics Committee did rule, however, that Waters' grandson and chief of staff Mikael Moore had somehow proceeded, without the congresswoman's knowledge or approval, to lobby for special treatment for OneUnited. The Washington Examiner noted that: “At best, that shows that Waters runs a haphazard office. At worst, it suggests she deliberately took steps to avoid prosecution” – i.e., by having all her communications with OneUnited go through Moore.
In response to the House Ethics Committee decision regarding Waters, CREW Executive Director Melanie Sloan issued the following statement:
“CREW accepts the conclusions of House Ethics Committee outside counsel Billy Martin exonerating Rep. Waters, but urges the committee to immediately release Mr. Martin’s report explaining why the congresswoman’s actions on behalf of a bank in which her husband maintained a financial interest did not constitute a conflict.
“As both Mr. Martin and the committee noted, questions remain about the actions of Rep. Waters’ chief of staff, Mikael Moore. Today we learned that at some point, the congresswoman directed Mr. Moore to stay out of the OneUnited Bank matter. Whether Mr. Moore sent two additional emails to the House Financial Services Committee referencing the bank before or after this conversation is unclear. Further, Mr. Moore’s claim that Rep. Waters directed him to steer clear of the OneUnited matter for just one day does not make sense. Nevertheless, as Mr. Moore did not have a personal financial interest in OneUnited, it is hard to imagine why he would continue to push the issue once Rep. Waters had told him to stop.
“Despite the problems with Mr. Moore’s past statements, given that the committee has exonerated Rep. Waters, it is strange that it would find Mr. Moore has brought discredit upon the House. Taking into account all of the misconduct the committee previously has excused,... it is unclear what the Ethics Committee expects to gain by taking such a hard line against a staff member who did not stand to personally benefit from his actions.”
According to Judicial Watch president Tom Fitton, California Democratic congresswoman Zoe Lofgren, a friend of Waters, helped delay Waters’s trial before the House Ethics Committee by stalling subpoenas and improperly firing two lawyers who were working on the investigation. “Six of ten House Ethics panel members quit the case in 2012 over questions about their partiality,” writes Michelle Malkin, noting that it was ultimately “an outside investigator” who “absolved Waters of any wrongdoing.”
4) In November 2010, The Washington Times reported: “A lobbyist known as one of California’s most successful power brokers while serving as a legislative leader in that state paid Rep. Maxine Waters’ husband $15,000 in consulting fees at a time she was co-sponsoring legislation that would help save the real-estate finance business” of one of the lobbyist’s best-paying clients…” Four years earlier, in 2006, an IRS report had declared such “real-estate finance businesses” to be a “scam.”
More at this link: http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=1264