Former Senator Dodd ————–Wall of Shame
. 
.
.
.
.
.
....
.
Does Senator Chris Dodd Deserve A Piggy Nose?
.
.
Senator Dodds Official Website: http://dodd.senate.gov/index.php?q
Dodd served as general chairman of the Democratic National Committee from 1995 to 1997. He serves as Chairman of the Senate Banking Committee.[3]In 2006, Dodd decided to run for the Democratic nominationfor President of the United States, but eventually withdrew after running behind several other competitors. In January 2010, Dodd announced that he would not run for re-election in the 2010 midterm elections.
John Wright stated: Shame on you Senator Dodd! In fact, maybe Wall of Shame on you Senator!
Let me get this right, they have all these strict guidelines to stop people from qualifying for HAMP, but have nothing in place to stop the piggy banks from giving themselves a bonus with taxpayer money? In fact, it sounds like they actually put language in it to make sure they did get a bonus! You know why? Baically because it was all planned, according to one article that stated: Treasury Makes Shocking Admission: Program for Struggling Homeowners Just a Ploy to Enrich Big Banks”
Well it is readily apparent who Senator Dodd works for! He works for the THE BANKS! Therefore, it is time to find out who helped fund Senator Dodd’s campaign. It is time to follow the money!
Controversial Dodd-Frank FOIA Provision Repealed, Revised-click here
Article below comes from CROOKSANDLIAR’S
March 19, 2009 09:34 AM
Treasury Officials Blame Dodd for What They Did – and Lapdog Media Helps
Glenn Greenwald sums it up nicely:
There is a major push underway — engineered by Obama’s Treasury officials, enabled by a mindless media, and amplified by the right-wing press — to blame Chris Dodd for the AIG bonus payments. That would be perfectly fine if it were true. But it’s completely false, and the scheme to heap the blame on him for the AIG bonus payments is based on demonstrable falsehoods.
Jane Hamsher (who’s really been on fire lately) breaks it all down, step by step. A well-placed leak to the New York Times (who’s always oh-so-grateful for any story they don’t have to actually investigate) was all it took to finger Dodd as the bad guy.
But, as Glenn says, it’s just not true.
It was Dodd who did everything possible — including writing and advocating for an amendment — which would have applied the limitations on executive compensation to all bailout-receiving firms, including AIG, and applied it to all future bonus payments without regard to when those payments were promised. But it was Tim Geithner and Larry Summerswho openly criticized Dodd’s proposal at the time and insisted that those limitations should apply only to future compensation contracts, not ones that already existed. The exemption for already existing compensation agreements — the exact provision that is now protecting the AIG bonus payments — was inserted at the White House’s insistence and over Dodd’s objections. But now that a political scandal has erupted over these payments, the White House is trying to deflect blame from itself and heap it all on Chris Dodd by claiming that it was Dodd who was responsible for that exemption.
From a Feb. 14th article in the Wall St. Journal:
The most stringent pay restriction bars any company receiving funds from paying top earners bonuses equal to more than one-third of their total annual compensation. That could severely crimp pay packages at big banks, where top officials commonly get relatively modest salaries but often huge bonuses.
As word spread Friday about the new and retroactive limit — inserted by Democratic Sen. Christopher Dodd of Connecticut — so did consternation on Wall Street and in the Obama administration, which opposed it.
__________________________________________________________________________
Wall of shame is dramatic license only. There is no other purpose.
For the record, I use a lot of dramatic license in my blog. Therefore, all persons talked about in my blog are to be considered innocent until proven guilty by a court of law. This is a peaceful demonstration where dramatic license is used in an abstract way. Please be advised that nothing in this protest is to be construed or defined as suggesting that there will be a consequence or penalty given if such protest does not produce a result. There will be absolutely no consequence issued whatsoever. Please contact me right away with any concerns that there is anything on my blog to suggest otherwise.
Video Broadcast
0 Comments
You can be the first one to leave a comment.