Feinstein's Husband Gets Rail Contract (contractors, price, authority)

[Sierravillian]

Originally Posted by jkbatca

Yeah you can sit there and smugly say "well where's the evidence?" because guess who's supposed to be going out and finding if there is any? You (LOL)? Me (don't have the time as I have a full time job nor am I a lawyer)? No, it is California's Attorney General, who is (wait for it) a big time DEMOCRAT PARTY supporter [1]. And the press? Don't make me ROTFL... So, yeah, just keep posting "where is the evidence" because you KNOW it's never going to come.

<sarcasm> Yep sureeee is nice that California is solidly Democrat party run with no Pubs in sight. Sure makes Feinstein's husband's job a LOT easier, doesn't it? </sarcasm>

[1] thanks to the brain stem California voters

This was not a very well thought out post. Last time I checked Feinstein was a federal employee.

[Kafkaesque]

Originally Posted by Sierravillian

This was not a very well thought out post. Last time I checked Feinstein was a federal employee.

I don't have any idea why he thought asking for evidence would entail any more than linking a news story from a reputable news source. With a headline like DOJ investigating Feinstein's husband, or something similar.

I don't expect him to get out his Junior Sherlock Holmes set and go to work.

[Killer_Demo]

Feinstein is a vile woman, everything out of her mouth makes me sick. Not to mention her skin looks like sun-dried leather

[nullgeo]

Originally Posted by Killer_Demo

Feinstein is a vile woman, everything out of her mouth makes me sick. Not to mention her skin looks like sun-dried leather

Well there's a major disqualifier right there ... and pretty much the proof Kafkaesque has been asking for that she's a thief stealing taxpayer money to give to her husband.

[Sierravillian]

Originally Posted by Killer_Demo

Feinstein is a vile woman, everything out of her mouth makes me sick. Not to mention her skin looks like sun-dried leather

Interesting, do you also consider the complexions of men, or is it just overt sexism?

Can you give one factual policy reason why you don't care for Feinstein?

[Killer_Demo]

Originally Posted by Sierravillian

Interesting, do you also consider the complexions of men, or is it just overt sexism?

Can you give one factual policy reason why you don't care for Feinstein?

sounds like an obummer supporter... I dont talk to *******s and democraps

[Ruth4Truth]

Originally Posted by Killer_Demo

sounds like an obummer supporter... I dont talk to *******s and democraps

You're posting on the wrong forum then, lol!

If sun-dried leather-like skin were a criterion for eliminating people from office, you'd have to send about 25% of Congress home. Reagan would have been retired not long after he got into office. Oh well.

[jkbatca]

Originally Posted by Kafkaesque

Uhh, that's Federal. The Attorney General, DoJ, the Inspectors Generals of the relevant agencies should be interested in any actual fraudulent activities, at the least.

I take that as admission that you have no evidence, only supposition at this point.

I did not know that insisting someone is innocent until proven guilty was being "smug". I thought it was the foundation of the system of justice, and very American. Learn something new every day.

A) I never said I had any proof, just saying that it is not good for anyone who has connections to government policy making should not be bidding for government contracts that can be influenced directly or indirectly with those people. I just cant see why this is so hard to comprehend. It just does not look good for obvious reasons. Well maybe not obvious to some posters here.

B) Uhh this is a STATE contract, not a FEDERAL one.

C) And oh by the way, correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the federal executive branch controlled by a DEMOCRAT anyway?

[jkbatca]

Originally Posted by Sierravillian

This was not a very well thought out post. Last time I checked Feinstein was a federal employee.

So you are saying when she goes to a state democrat party convention or meeting, that her opinion has absolutely no weight whatsoever? Like I said I don't have any proof on anything, I'm pointing out that this whole deal is extremely bad form and does not look good.

[jkbatca]

Originally Posted by Kafkaesque

I did not know that insisting someone is innocent until proven guilty was being "smug". I thought it was the foundation of the system of justice, and very American. Learn something new every day.

Then you have misread my post. The reason I said you were "smug" was not whether or not there would be any proof that any misconduct was done or not. The reason I said you were smug was nobody who is responsible for investigating matters such as this will never look into it and let these obvious conflict of interest matters be investigated. THAT is why I said you were smug. Clearer?