Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Bachmann: Obama Exceeding Constitutional Authority in Ordering BP to Surrender Funds--'Extortion'
CNSNews ^ | June 16, 2010 | Chistopher Neefus

Posted on 06/16/2010 10:54:35 AM PDT by jazusamo

Washington (CNSNews.com) – Rep. Michelle Bachmann (R-Minn.) said Tuesday that President Barack Obama is exceeding his legitimate constitutional authority in telling BP it must set up an independent fund, not controlled by the company, for compensating victims of the Gulf oil spill. She described the administration's policy as an action "that's all about extortion."
 
"Private companies need to be held accountable but not necessarily to the executive branch," said Bachmann. "It seems to me there’s a misreading of the Constitution and a misunderstanding of jurisdictional limits from this White House on what the extent of executive power is. They don’t seem to understand that and it—now it seems that it’s all about extortion--and that what they want to do is create a pot of money for themselves that they can control and that’s not what the Executive is supposed to do. There is a real misreading of jurisdictional limits, and they continue to stretch those limits beyond all bounds."

VIDEO

Bachmann, who was speaking to a gathering of bloggers held at the conservative Heritage Foundation in Washington, D.C., criticized the administration’s response to the massive oil spill in the Gulf.

The conservative from Minnesota said she was particularly bothered by the call President Obama made Monday--later reiterated in his Oval Office address Tuesday night--for BP to set aside money for reimbursements to victims of the Gulf oil spill that would be administered independently, taking control of the money away from the company. 

“The president just called for creating a fund that would be administered by outsiders which would be more of a redistribution-of-wealth fund, and now it appears we’re going to be looking at yet one more gateway for more government control, more money to government,” she said. “If there’s a disaster, why is it that government is the one who always seems to benefit after a disaster?”
 
The proposed fund that the administration wants BP to create would go to reimburse individuals and businesses along the Gulf Coast that make claims as a result of the oil spill. But the money, which belongs to BP stockholders, would be taken out BP's control and the administration has not clearly stated what due process of law would be observed in distributing the money.

The Fifth Amendment to the Constitution was ratified specifically to prevent the government from taking or redistributing private property without due process of law. The amendment says: "No person shall be … deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."

Bachmann said the press has not reported enough on the federal goverment's expanded control of the economy over the past two years, which she described as a “stunner story.”

“The jurisdictional issue has been, I think, one of the most underreported issues that has gone on in the last 18 months, because this is a shocking story, what’s happened in the last 18 months,” she said.

Bachmann acknowledged the problem began under President George W. Bush with the creation of the Troubled Assets Relief Program (TARP). 

“Now just because we don’t own an industry doesn’t mean that we don’t effectively control it, because we are in a lot of ways,” she said.
 
Bachmann said Obama’s “non-stop” castigation of BP, the administration’s consideration of the escrow fund, and Democrats’ use of the crisis to push cap-and-trade legislation are all distractions from the task at hand.
 
“When are we ever going to talk about actually capping this hole?” she asked quizzically.
 
“For over 50 days, that should be the only story that we write about and that we talk about: What is the next engineering genius that we could bring on board to actually cap the hole? That’s it. You know, we can talk about restitution, we can talk about all the rest, but right now, it is capping the hole.”
 
“What strikes me is that it seems that every response that’s come out of the White House--and it’s in excess of 50 days--has been about the White House. It’s been about them. It doesn’t seem like it’s really been about stopping the hole and dealing with the devastation that’s going on down there in the Gulf.”
 
-------------------------------
The following is a transcript of Rep. Bachmann’s exchange with CNSNews.com:
 
CNSNews.com: You mentioned the president castigating BP over possibly creating a fund. We saw sort of the same thing with Secretary Sebelius and Wellpoint insurer. They hiked their rates and she demanded an explanation. What’s your reaction to this pattern of holding private companies accountable to the executive branch?
 
Rep. Michelle Bachmanm (R-Minn.): Well, private companies need to be held accountable but not necessarily to the executive branch. It seems to me there’s a misreading of the constitution and a misunderstanding of jurisdictional limits from this White House on what the extent of executive power is. They don’t seem to understand that and it—now it seems that it’s all about extortion and that – that what they want to do is create a pot of money for themselves that they can control and that’s not what the Executive is supposed to do.

There’s a real misreading of jurisdictional limits and they continue to stretch those limits beyond all bounds. And, really, I also fault the Democrat leadership in the Congress for not doing more to hold the White House accountable to the extent of those jurisdictional limits, because that really is then for the Congress to get upset about that and say, ‘Wait a minute, you know we’re the ones that have oversight and we have the power of the purse, not you.’ 

It’s a good question though. The jurisdictional issue has been, I think, one of the most underreported issues that has gone on in the last 18 months, because this is a shocking story what’s happened in the last 18 months, because an economist from Arizona State University has calculated that in 18 months time, beginning unfortunately under a Republican president with the generation of the TARP fund, the federal government effectively--we have gone from 100 percent ownership of the private economy in private hands to 51 percent ownership of the private economy directly owned or controlled by the federal government. That is the stunner story that has been very underreported. Now just because we don’t own an industry doesn’t mean that we don’t effectively control it, because we are in a lot of ways -- and just with what you’re seeing happening with financial services and now cap-and-trade, that could boost that closer up into the 70 percentile. I don’t see any effort from this administration to unwind and back off of the government control or ownership of any of these private industries.
 
And there’s just a story that came out on AIG on how much this--the federal government takeover efforts and ownership of AIG has done to hurt the economy because it sent signals to the business community of the federal government’s willingness to cross jurisdictional lines and to--to trample in areas that are not reserved to the executive.



TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: bachmann; bp; chicagoway; deepwaterhorizon; dueprocess; extortion; leadership; michellebachmann; obama; obamaregime; obamunism; oilspill; oxtortion; thugbama
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-93 next last
You go, Michelle!
1 posted on 06/16/2010 10:54:36 AM PDT by jazusamo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

Yes, I agree.

However, historically no Congress has acted to correct such misuse bu the President on issuance of executive Orders.

Then again, I do not believe other presidents use of EO’s have been this egregious and blatantly unconstitutional.


2 posted on 06/16/2010 10:56:36 AM PDT by K-oneTexas (I'm not a judge and there ain't enough of me to be a jury. (Zell Miller, A National Party No More))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

And why didn’t BP have a lawyer with its execs today to say “this isn’t constitutional” to Obummer?


3 posted on 06/16/2010 10:57:42 AM PDT by Clara Lou
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

As a BP stockholder, I am outraged that my company is not managing our own funds.

The Board will hear of this.


4 posted on 06/16/2010 10:59:54 AM PDT by edcoil (Kingdoms have never survived. Don't let any new ones be formed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

However warranted, or justified, this is a very bad precedent!


5 posted on 06/16/2010 10:59:54 AM PDT by The Sons of Liberty (The 0bama regime represents an "Clear and Present Danger" to the US - Mene, Mene, Tekel, Upharsin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

He overstepped it two-three years ago. Besides, the Constitution is only for the little people. Hussein doesn’t need no stinkin’ Constitution.


6 posted on 06/16/2010 11:00:14 AM PDT by bgill (how could a young man born here in Kenya, who is not even a native American, become the POTUS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clara Lou

I believe Jamie Gorelock was retained by BP and thought she would be there.

Being BP seems to be going to establish $20 billion escrow account they must be doing it for the PR.


7 posted on 06/16/2010 11:00:46 AM PDT by jazusamo (But there really is no free lunch, except in the world of political rhetoric,.: Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

It’s all good. Algore has more room in the lock box now.


8 posted on 06/16/2010 11:02:17 AM PDT by WOBBLY BOB (drain the swamp! ( then napalm it and pave it over ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

Obama trampling all over the US Constitution with his cohorts in congress is probably THE most underreported story since he was sworn in as POTUS!

This administration is a runaway juggernaut, unconstrained by the rule of law.

And no one wants to admit that this emperor has no clothes...


9 posted on 06/16/2010 11:02:44 AM PDT by Tigerized (pursuingliberty.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Sons of Liberty
However warranted, or justified, this is a very bad precedent!

Amen to that. There's laws on the books to cover this and the Executive branch stepping in sets a very bad precedent.

10 posted on 06/16/2010 11:03:31 AM PDT by jazusamo (But there really is no free lunch, except in the world of political rhetoric,.: Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

1st word that came to mind here too.. Extortion


11 posted on 06/16/2010 11:04:28 AM PDT by NormsRevenge (Semper Fi ... Godspeed .. Monthly Donor Onboard)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

Jesse Jackson has never been this successful with a shake down.


12 posted on 06/16/2010 11:05:07 AM PDT by ryan71 (Let's Roll!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

More money for the Democrat warchest.


13 posted on 06/16/2010 11:06:04 AM PDT by ryan71 (Let's Roll!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tigerized

Obama is violating the Constitution by occupying the office of the President. After that, everything else is icing. I guess they figure that if he got that far, illegally then what the hell, go for broke. Their actions speak that very loudly.


14 posted on 06/16/2010 11:07:14 AM PDT by Texas resident (Outlaw fisherman)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Clara Lou

Gorelick isn’t a lawyer? How could she be a possible candidate for Attorney General if she isn’t a lawyer? Even if she is a loser.


15 posted on 06/16/2010 11:07:23 AM PDT by taxesareforever (Release Staff Sgt. Frank Wuterich and let him and his family get on with their lives.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo
...they must be doing it for the PR...
That thought occurred to me, but I really want to see someone stand up to the Chicago hooligan on the basis of the Constitution.
16 posted on 06/16/2010 11:07:26 AM PDT by Clara Lou
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

Now THERE is a remarkable politician, and thinker. Not to mention GUTS.

Where are the Republicans in the House & Senate?

COWARDS to the core!!

They should be screaming bloody murder over Obama!! He is going to STEAL a good chunk of this “shakedown” money.


17 posted on 06/16/2010 11:08:26 AM PDT by stephenjohnbanker (Support our troops....and vote out the RINOS!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

This president’s default reaction is to threaten, look for lawsuits to file, and demand payoffs.

He does not have the first idea what it means to organize and delegate to solve a problem.

This is what happens when you hire someone to run your country that could not run a convenience store. You would not hire him to do anything practical, because you know he has no practical ability at all. He has never done anything that didn’t involve threatening, intimidating, running his jaw, extorting payoffs, and suing people. Why would he be any different as a president?

And the answer is, he isn’t. A real president would have called BP’s president and said, what do you need? And helped to organize whatever they needed, helped to knock down any regulatory barriers to getting what they needed. He would have called the governors and asked what do you need? And again, moved heaven and earth to see that they got it.

In many cases being a leader is about making sure the people handling a problem get what they need. It isn’t about your histrionics in front of the camera. If the president was doing his job well there would be no need for him to get in front of a camera at all. He doesn’t know that, because he has never been a leader.


18 posted on 06/16/2010 11:08:37 AM PDT by marron
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo
Well, Fur Shur Michelle is onto something regarding the Fifth Amendment, but that comes into play in this case when the US Government, as a bad landlord to BP and the drilling of oil wells, has let the leak get out of hand and cause all manner of property losses to American citizens working or investing around the Gulf, or fishing in the seas.

BP has a lease for the well site ~ and that lease is full of all sorts of things. I doubt they'll will ever be able to claim a Fifth Amendment "taking" because, alas, it's not their land, not their well ~ and they do owe a functional equivalent of a "deposit" for the use.

The evil doer in this case is Obama for not getting the hole plugged sooner, as well as just letting the oil flow all over the place because he didn't want to give an emergency exception to the Jones Act. BP must pay whatever penalties have been established, either through law, or through the terms of the lease. The poor people of the Gulf are deserving of compensation for their losses, and I don't care if it's BP or the US government that pays!

We need to remove ALL of Obama's supporters from the government this November.

19 posted on 06/16/2010 11:09:13 AM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ryan71
More money for the Democrat warchest.

Yep, Obama and his thugs will control the money no matter that he says they'll be an independent administrator.

20 posted on 06/16/2010 11:09:38 AM PDT by jazusamo (But there really is no free lunch, except in the world of political rhetoric,.: Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

21 posted on 06/16/2010 11:09:39 AM PDT by Pollster1 (Natural born citizen of the USA, with the birth certificate to prove it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clara Lou
They probably listened politely, thanked the Kenyan born King, and then left.

Anything they say will be used against them.

22 posted on 06/16/2010 11:10:00 AM PDT by PA-RIVER
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Clara Lou

Contrary to Obama’s wording in last night’s speech, he didn’t “order them” to create the escrow fund. He just pressured them into it, and they agreed (acquiesced).

Of course, I’m guessing Obama and BP can both agree the U.S. Congress is capable of inflicting worse outcomes upon BP if they do nothing to quell the cost-of-cleanup concerns.


23 posted on 06/16/2010 11:10:30 AM PDT by ivyleaguebrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Clara Lou
but I really want to see someone stand up to the Chicago hooligan on the basis of the Constitution.

I hear you and BP should have been the ones to do it now.

24 posted on 06/16/2010 11:11:27 AM PDT by jazusamo (But there really is no free lunch, except in the world of political rhetoric,.: Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: stephenjohnbanker

Absolutely! Michelle Bachmann is not afraid to stand up to anyone, we definitely need more like her.


25 posted on 06/16/2010 11:13:11 AM PDT by jazusamo (But there really is no free lunch, except in the world of political rhetoric,.: Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: marron

Very well said. Obama has no clue about that nor will he ever.


26 posted on 06/16/2010 11:15:14 AM PDT by jazusamo (But there really is no free lunch, except in the world of political rhetoric,.: Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

” Yep, Obama and his thugs will control the money no matter that he says they’ll be an independent administrator. “

LMFAO!!!!


27 posted on 06/16/2010 11:16:00 AM PDT by stephenjohnbanker (Support our troops....and vote out the RINOS!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

I can see a point to going this route, but I wonder what BP got in return. Perhaps a promise not to be debarred from contracts? A promise of no criminal prosecution or multi-thousand dollar per barrel fee? A cap on damages?

As to the point I see, the damages are clearly going to be over $20 billion, so this is a contribution towards it that can be delivered speedily (if inefficiently and to political favorites). I say “political favorites” because Obama has appointed the escrow fund’s head. Wouldn’t it have made more sense to go right to a court, with an agreement in hand, and requested a special master agreed to by both parties? That wouldn’t have taken much more time, either.


28 posted on 06/16/2010 11:16:57 AM PDT by Pearls Before Swine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

Yes. Plug the hole in the Gulf; pull the plug on the Democrats in November.


29 posted on 06/16/2010 11:17:34 AM PDT by jonrick46 (We're being water boarded with the sewage of Fabian Socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

BP should have Bachmann as a lawyer, not Jamie Gorelick


30 posted on 06/16/2010 11:18:29 AM PDT by silverleaf (Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ryan71

That would be why Jackson said what he said, lo these many moons ago. You remember...?

Also why Dear Reader was musically compared to a mythical dinosaur with a boy for a friend.


31 posted on 06/16/2010 11:18:55 AM PDT by BelegStrongbow (Ey, Paolo! uh-Clem just broke the Presideng...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

Obama would like to nationalize oil companies, but feels the country isn’t ready for that yet, so he does the next best thing - he seizes their assets and threatens to put them in jail.


32 posted on 06/16/2010 11:18:59 AM PDT by Leftism is Mentally Deranged
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah
We need to remove ALL of Obama's supporters from the government this November.

That can't be said enough and should be reiterated often, like hourly.

33 posted on 06/16/2010 11:19:15 AM PDT by jazusamo (But there really is no free lunch, except in the world of political rhetoric,.: Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo; SwinneySwitch; SuzyQue; RebelTex; mdittmar; Clemenza; rmlew

I agree with Michelle Bachman. I got to see her speak last Friday at the 2010 TX GOP Convention. She’s awesome.


34 posted on 06/16/2010 11:21:37 AM PDT by Paleo Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clara Lou

“And why didn’t BP have a lawyer with its execs today to say “this isn’t constitutional” to Obummer?”

OMG- they had JAMIE GORELICK there as their “counsel”.
If she plays BP the way she played FNMA, her main concern was how much of a cut she got for brokering the deal...who needs a steenkin’ Constitution?

No company could be so inept as to hire a dirty politician/bureaucrat like Gorelick to deal with a punk like obama- unbless they are ALLLLL in the tank


35 posted on 06/16/2010 11:21:49 AM PDT by silverleaf (Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

This smacks of a dictatorship, where 0bamao decrees and everyone must obey.


36 posted on 06/16/2010 11:21:59 AM PDT by The Sons of Liberty (The 0bama regime represents an "Clear and Present Danger" to the US - Mene, Mene, Tekel, Upharsin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

When this type of thing is done in NY or NJ its refered to as protection money and falls under the RICCO statutes.


37 posted on 06/16/2010 11:22:28 AM PDT by MCCC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

the “independent administrator” is obama’s named “pay czar”

go figure
BP CEO better learn to live on $250K a year

(and dont hold you breath waiting for the politicians like obama who got money from BP to turn it over to the victim fund....oh no, that’s all for the shareholders to cough up....rofl)


38 posted on 06/16/2010 11:24:47 AM PDT by silverleaf (Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Pearls Before Swine

I believe you’re right that it should have been handled in the courts, there’s already laws on the books.


39 posted on 06/16/2010 11:24:56 AM PDT by jazusamo (But there really is no free lunch, except in the world of political rhetoric,.: Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: edcoil
ask your board why they hired a criminally culpable ex-clinton consiglieri and incompetent bureaucrat like “911 Fanny Mae Jamie” and how much they are paying her and what she is doing for you?

Ask them why you shareholders are taking it on the chin and all the politicians BP paid off, like lord obama, get to keep their cash

40 posted on 06/16/2010 11:28:07 AM PDT by silverleaf (Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo
There's an oil site lease involved in this. It's between the United States and BP. It's "administered" by the Executive (branch of government).

Administrative Due Process has not yet been completed, and you gotta' have somebody sign off "Final Agency Decision" before you can go to court.

41 posted on 06/16/2010 11:29:16 AM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

It’s the Chicago Way - first step in a major shakedown...


42 posted on 06/16/2010 11:29:46 AM PDT by GOPJ (http://hisz.rsoe.hu/alertmap/index2.php?area=dam&lang=eng)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo; All
Isn't this an issue for the COURTS?

Since when does HUSSEIN get to choose how much is paid? If the federal law limiting liability to $75M is unconstitutional, then LET THE COURTS, NOT HUSSEIN and his CAMPAIGN DONOR BRITISH PETROLEUM decide!

43 posted on 06/16/2010 11:31:10 AM PDT by Recovering_Democrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

wonder what he said to BP in today’s SHORT meeting to make them roll over and give up the $$$.

Sadly, the victims will never see a dime of it.


44 posted on 06/16/2010 11:32:19 AM PDT by a real Sheila (WHY is BP allowed to use "sinking agents" on the oil spill?!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

I’d rather BP handed out the money for claims. The money could still be placed in an escrow account, but one in which “the regime” could not impose layers of red tape for accessing it nor favor cronies in its distribution.


45 posted on 06/16/2010 11:34:02 AM PDT by luvbach1 (Stop Barry now. He can't help himself.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

There is no way that Kenneth Feinberg, Obama’s Pay Czar, is an independent third party to monitor the $20 billion escrow account. He answers to no one but Obama.

Call your Congress man or woman....don’t let this stand.


46 posted on 06/16/2010 11:37:20 AM PDT by BlessingsofLiberty (Obama: "President Tarball" (chris37))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clara Lou
And why didn’t BP have a lawyer with its execs today to say “this isn’t constitutional” to Obummer?

They did...guess who? Jamie Gorelick!

47 posted on 06/16/2010 11:37:58 AM PDT by 6ppc (It's torch and pitchfork time)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: silverleaf

” No company could be so inept as to hire a dirty politician/bureaucrat like Gorelick to deal with a punk like obama- unbless they are ALLLLL in the tank “

I wonder.


48 posted on 06/16/2010 11:40:04 AM PDT by stephenjohnbanker (Support our troops....and vote out the RINOS!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo
Is extortion unconstitutional?

49 posted on 06/16/2010 11:40:12 AM PDT by Genoa (Luke 12:2)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: a real Sheila; GOPJ; silverleaf; MCCC; The Sons of Liberty; NormsRevenge
Sadly, the victims will never see a dime of it.

May I make a prediction here?

If another president and vice president of recent memory are any guide, I think a couple of years down the road we'll be hearing that yet another former president, who has never had a real job in his life outside of government, somehow magically has $250 million in his checking account. Or maybe billions in paper assets.

Sure, they obtained all that after they left office, sure they did. Except, nobody pays off an ex-president.

50 posted on 06/16/2010 11:40:38 AM PDT by marron
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-93 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson