Yeah, it takes far more creative accounting to enrich one's self with campaign contributions than it does as a 'consultant'.
You call that a defense?
I swear, it's like being attacked by zombies. Their brains are shut down but they still like to bite.
It always feels like you’re being attacked by zombies when you haven’t made your case. I have serious misgivings about all of the candidates.
You seem to have a problem with Newt working as a consultant for Freddie Mac. You said “I don’t believe for one minute that Freddie and all of the other outfits that paid Newt hansomely only paid him for advice. They paid him for influence, something a former speaker has in spades.” Did he? I thought he was damaged goods, resigned in disgrace, and only still in the discussion because he can speak articulately on the issues (even if he’s on the wrong side sometimes.)
As I heard it, Newt said he worked as a consultant and was frustrated because much of the advice he gave was ignored. Someone at the top of FM said that’s not exactly true. I happen to believe Newt until shown otherwise. I can see them hiring a token Repub to ensure bipartisan blame for a fall while ignoring his advice. I can see Newt’s ego saying “I can help fix this” and “my advice is worth what they are paying.” (If they used it, it might have been.)
Why should I believe them over Newt? Don’t confuse a poorly articulated point on your part with stupidity on the part of your audience.