A note on the Amazon ads: I've chosen to display current events titles in the Amazon box. Unfortunately, Amazon appears to promote a disproportionate number of angry-left books. I have no power over it at this time. Rest assured, I'm still a conservative.
|
Sunday, January 13, 2002
The guys running Enron are a bunch of white-collar crooks. They apparently used accounting principles heretofore limited to the U.S. government. Enron created a series of complex partnerships in order to keep billions of dollars in debt off their books.With these debts hidden, Enron was able to continue borrowing cash to run its trading business. According to Friday's Union-Tribune, company officials admitted that they had overstated their profits by $580 million since 1997.
Democrats are already readying their scandal machine -- despite the lack of any evidence of wrongdoing by the Bush administration -- the Democrats repeatedly refer to Enron Chairman Ken Lay's close relationship with Bush. Well, Lay had a close relationship with Bill Clinton too. The head of the nation's 7th-largest company is going to have access to powerful people, including whoever is in the oval office.
In the weeks and months before Enron declared bankruptcy, Lay contacted Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill and Commerce Secretary Don Evans. Both of them refused to intervene on behalf of the company with bond analyst Moody's.
Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., who would have been screaming bloody murder if it appeared as though Enron's campaign contributions had resulted in preferential treatment for the failing company, decided to scream bloody murder instead, because the company did not receive preferential treatment.
"The White House had knowledge that Enron was likely to collapse, but did nothing to try to protect innocent employees and shareholders who ultimately lost their life savings," Waxman said. " I am deeply troubled that the White House stood by and let this happen to thousands of families."
What was the White House supposed to do? What would Waxman have had them do?
On NBC's "Meet the Press" on Sunday Commerce Secretary Evans answered some of Waxman's spurious charges:
MR. RUSSERT: This is what Waxman’s concern is, however, in August, he says, that Ken Lay, he believes, sent this e-mail to all Enron employees: “I want to assure you that I have never felt better about the prospects for the company. ...Our performance has never been stronger; our business model has never been more robust; our growth has never been more certain. ...We have the finest organization in American business today.”
And during that time, 29 executives of Enron were taking out about a billion dollars over the last year, selling their stock. But the average guy was locked down and being told this in e-mails. So if the Bush administration is told in September, October, “We got some real problems. We need some help with the credit agency,” should the administration been more assertive in saying, “What about the little guy?”
SEC’Y EVANS: Well, you know, again, I mean, in terms of what we knew in September and October—I mean, I didn’t hear from Ken on this particular subject until October the 29, so at the very end of October. At that time, everything he told me was already in the public domain. The public knew about it. The shareholders knew about it. Wall Street knew about it. Yet, on Wall Street, 11, 12 research analysts still had a strong buy on Enron.
But let me go a little bit further, Tim. If I had of stepped in—and, again, I mean, I think it would have been an egregious abuse of the office of the secretary of commerce, the United States of America, for me to step in. I’m not confused about whose office that is. That office belongs to the people of America. It’s not my office. And I’m going to do everything I can to protect the integrity and the trust of that office. And my judgment was to protect the integrity of that office, not to step in. But if I had of stepped in, if I had of stepped in and made a call to Moody’s and in some way influenced some examiner’s opinion and he had decided at that point not to take the credit down, he had said, “Let’s leave it right where it is,” what do I say to the lady who bought the stock that day, that put her life savings into the stock that day, when it was $10 a share—I had played a role in stabilizing the stock for a week or two.
And guess what? Thirty days later they were bankrupt. What do I say to her?
Russert didn't answer Evans question, because it's not his place to. Someone needs to get Waxman on TV and ask him those questions.
6:18 PM
|
|
