Skip to comments.John McCain's Role In The $160.1 Billion Lincoln Savings & Loan Collapse 
Posted on 01/28/2010 11:19:29 AM PST by ConservativeMind
This morning in Green Bay, Wisconsin, John McCain, a former major figure in the 1989 Lincoln Savings & Loan Scandal and the $160.1 billion dollar collapse, with his running mate, Sarah Palin, under her own ethics investigation in her state of Alaska by the legislature over "Troopergate", gave an absurd and disingenuous speech calling for firings of some public officials and indictments for some other corrupt persons in business.
Yet it is exactly these same sort of a personalities that McCain would either fire or indict that he was himself back in 1989 during the savings and loan collapse scandal that cost the American taxpayer $124.6 billion.
While the Senate Ethics Committee may have found McCain "not guilty" of any criminal conduct and only guilty of "bad judgment", McCain was the most personally involved of any of the "Keating Five" U.S. senators with Charles H. Keating, Jr., by far. Keating was eventually convicted of racketeering and other serious crimes and sent to federal prison for his trail of financial corruption in the scandal that bankrupted Lincoln Savings & Loan.
Interestingly, prior to his conviction as one of the worst white collar criminals in American history, Keating was best known as an anti-pornography crusader, most likely to mislead many that he was some sort of moral figure by fighting against dirty books, while being the most dirty businessman ever himself. But Keating's phony moral crusading was just part of his phony ruse to conceal all of his theft and corrupt financial dealings with crooked senators like McCain and the other "Keating Five" members.
Keating, and other close business associates hoped to use corrupt senators like John McCain to influence banking regulators, and had given McCain no less than $112,000 in political contributions over the five year period leading up to 1987. McCain's own wife, Cindy McCain and her father, Jim Hensley, were also involved in a shopping center business arrangement with Keating in 1986, in which they invested $359,100 in the business deal.
In addition, the McCains had made no less than nine vacation trips at Keating's expense, often on Keating's own jet to a resort he built in the Bahamas. All of this acceptance of vacations, jet plane trips and McCain family business dealings with Keating led up to McCain and four other corrupt senators meeting federal banking regulators to hold off any federal regulators from a probe into Keating's conduct as head of Lincoln Savings & Loan using this company as his own personal piggy bank to fund his billionaire lifestyle. Only after Keating fell into legal problems did Senator John McCain make any attempt to repay Keating for all the vacations trips he and his family accepted from Keating, obviously intended to keep banking regulators from acting against Keating.
"Not indicted" or "not guilty" of any crime isn't really a very high standard to prove that McCain is an honest man. If anything, McCain's dealings with convicted savings and loan racketeer Keatings prove entirely the opposite.
Electing someone with a corrupt history of accepting Bahamas vacations on some criminals own jet plane in a resort paid for with money stolen from a business that McCain sought to protect from government regulators is like electing a fox to watch over the hen house.
John McCain is a perfect symbol of old time Washington corruption. And all of his phony rhetoric about being some sort of a government "reformer" is just pure political B.S. that McCain adopted after he nearly lost his seat in the senate because of his corrupt business dealings with racketeer Charles Keating. For a fact, McCain is part of the Washington problem, not part of the solution. Anyone who thinks the opposite is true is just not dealing with reality.
Didn’t one of the Bush Boy have something to do w/ this as well?
If I were you, I would have noted that this article is from 2008. My first clue was the mention of Governor Palin and Troopergate investigation.
Sep 19, 08 01:49 PM
I did note the date. What’s it to you?
You can tell the others posting old news on JD Hayworth that their information is just as old.
Didnt one of the Bush Boy have something to do w/ this as well?
Neil Bush was involved in the Silverado Savings & Loan fiasco...I believe. It was not the Lincoln/Keating Five.
Glad this article on John Sidney McCain was reposted. Not only McCain is treasonous...he is a lot more corrupt than many make him out to be.
I realize the date was in the small print near the article, which can be and is often overlooked. What I meants was you might have considered posting that this was an old article yourself. What’s it to me? Not much. I just thought I’d point it out in case you hadn’t noticed it was an oldie.
I don’t care what the article is about nor whom it is about, nor who posts it. I just think it would be a common courtesy to point it out.
Caribou, I PUT THE DATE WITH THE YEAR IN THE DATE FIELD!
Shut up, already.
This article is a partisan hit job designed to influence people who don’t know the facts. McCain’s part in the scandal was a walk on walk off. He was naive and when he realized he had been maneuvered into looking like he was trying to exert influence he immediately withdrew. No stain on him and no stain on Sarah Palin following multiple non-substantive complaints by the same person who was on an all out smear campaign. I believe that the personal, and Alaskan government expenses and the disruption to the business of being Governor that these attacks caused was the reason Palin stepped down, in the people’s interest.
Why was he formally reprimanded by the Senate Ethics Committee, then?
You make it sound like he had no involvement. If so, a bi-partisan ethics panel shouldn’t have struck out at him.
Looking at the info in the article, it interests me what you chose to address here.
McCain treachery duly documented, or a publication date that was clearly noted in the posting...
Part of the problem is that senators life to live a millionaire’s life style on a smaller income. Doesn’t help that there are always man real millionaires in the Senate. His wife, of course, was from a wealthy family. Keating, of course, was a kind of “Madoff’type, and fooled a lot of people including Mother Theresa.
“Caribou, I PUT THE DATE WITH THE YEAR IN THE DATE FIELD!
Shut up, already.”
I already acknowledged that. I only further explained myself because you didn’t understand why I said what I said.
Thanks . That was a close one . I was almost going to vote for Neil Bush for United States Senator from Arizona .
Forgive me for not understanding, but if you saw the proper year applied to the article in my posting, why would you say, “If I were you, I would have noted that this article is from 2008.”?
The article’s date is right there next to the website name and the author in my thread posting. Since the thread was posted with the proper date, how else should I have posted the date???
Good grief. You’d certainly think after the intense scrutiny of McCain during the presidential campaign, anyone on a forum such as this would know McCain’s history by now. And again, I made a simple suggestion. I expect liberals to fly out of their skin at the drop of a hat, they’re just so damned defensive. I’m rather disheartened to see this sort of reaction from a fellow conservative.
In my best Glenn Beck voice, I assure you that I will NEVER, EVER, EVER MENTION THAT AN ARTICLE IS AN OLD ONE AGAIN. ME BAD.
Because I have had this happen to me before. Where I’ve read an article not realizing it was old, until informed by someone else, because I had not noticed the date near the title. However, I have read old articles, where the person who posted it, also made a comment....ya know, in the “comment” area of the very 1st post on the thread....or they put a metion of the date in bold letters, in parenthesis, next to the headline....where they informed the readers that they had posted an old article.
I am so sorry my comment has upset you so much. I never intended for your thread to become a discussion on dates. For heaven’s sake, get a grip.
And his being a RINGER for Zero is proof positive.
What a load of horse crap!
The article is factual as it relates to McCain.
McCain participation with Keating took place over seven years, some walk-on.
He accepted $13,000 in perks from Keating and did not report it as required by Congress. That alone should have gotten him booted.
The icing on the cake was McCain joining with four other sitting U.S. Senators to confront a banking regulator. He did it not just once, but twice.
McCain stated in his oun book, “I knew it was wrong, but Keating wouldn’t take no for an answer.”
It is reported that McCain didn’t advocate for Keating in those meetings, as if that would absolve him. When five sitting U.S. Senators demand a meeting, intimidation is the a major factor.
This banking regulator told the Senators he had referrals ready to go. Those referrals were not filed for more than a year after that meeting, and during that year many more people were cheated out of their life savings by Keating.
The meeting with the Senators had a real tangible impact, and McCain was an integral party to it.
Just great. A “your guy is a bigger crook than my guy” pissing contest, LOL!
You would think, but then you still get folks defending McCain here, or trying to take the focus off point, sorta like you have here. That's why some of us continue to try to out him during his attempt to return to the U.S. Senate.
<>John McCains Whimsical World of Conservatism
Food for thought for the George Soros, Teressa Heinz Kerry, Tides Foundation et al wing of the Republican Party.
Mc Cain receives $112,000 from Keating and his minions.
And again, I made a simple suggestion. I expect liberals to fly out of their skin at the drop of a hat, theyre just so damned defensive. Im rather disheartened to see this sort of reaction from a fellow conservative.
I don't know about you, but I don't come here to criticize how other well meaning Conservatives post articles on the forum. This person posted the accurate publication date, and this particular article is timeless as it relates to McCain.
In my best Glenn Beck voice, I assure you that I will NEVER, EVER, EVER MENTION THAT AN ARTICLE IS AN OLD ONE AGAIN. ME BAD.
You can use Reagan's voice for all the credibility it will give you on this matter.
ah com’on’ do we have to do this again. Next thing you’ll get people to start wanting to see Obama’s birth certificate.
In no way was I attempting to take focus off of McCain. If you knew me, you’d know how absurd that assumption is.
Here’s an old Alaskan chill pill for ya. It’s good medicine.
Unfortunately, you’ve got the description right. :-)
A couple forgotten quotes by SEn. John McCain:
Give everyone in the world an opportunity to come to America
Those who live closest are the ones who can get here. Everyone in the world should have the opportunity through an orderly process to come to this country.
Source: AZ Senate Debate, in Tucson Citizen Oct 16, 2004
Change rule barring immigrants from running for president?
Q: Should we change our Constitution to allow men like Mel Martinez, born in Cuba, and Arnold Schwarzenegger, born in Austria, to stand here some night as candidates for president?
McCAIN: He and I have many similar attributes, so I have to seriously consider it.
Source: 2007 GOP primary debate, at Reagan library, hosted by MSNBC May 3, 2007
If you had a chill pill, why didn’t you take ‘the good medicine’ instead of criticizing someone who did nothing wrong?
As for taking the focus off McCain, intended or not, that’s what you did. And your dismissive attitude aside, you haven’t escaped being called on what you did, or the validity for it.
Lets see, McCain walks on and walks right off from a
situation that occured over 20 years ago when he got a clue.
JD Hayworth puts both feet into it with Ambramoff and Indian lobbying as late as a few years ago and just paying back the money which delayed his entering the Senate race.
Nice try by the article, but wishing won’t make it so.
My, my, what have we here.
McCains Law Preserved Loophole for Tribal Contributions
by Amanda B. Carpenter Human Events
Sen. John McCain (R.-Ariz.), chairman of the Indian Affairs Committee, says the campaign finance reform law he sponsored in 2002 intentionally left open a loophole that allows Indian tribes to make campaign contributions to an unlimited number of candidates for federal office.
Before McCains law passed, most Americans were allowed to give an aggregate of only $25,000 to party committees and candidates for federal office in any two-year election cycle. Indian tribes were not subject to that cap. McCains law lifted the aggregate-contribution cap to $95,000 for ordinary American contributors, but declined to impose any cap at all on Indian tribes.
When I asked McCain last week why this was the case, he said, Because tribes are sovereign entities. They are treated on a government-to-government relationship, and were looking at that whole issue.
I asked, But it was an intentional thing? McCain replied, Oh yeah. Because they are sovereign nations unquote. We sign treaties with them.
When I pointed out that the U.S. does not allow contributions from foreign governments, McCain said, No, we dont. But theyre American citizens. So, its a unique kind of a status.
Its also quite interesting to note the BIG contributors to McCAin..the same ones Obama gets! Merrill Lynch $
JPMorgan Chase & Co
And the top 5 industries...2nd is LAWYERS, last is conservatives
LOL, you've got to be kidding! I've lived in Arizona all my life, I was here when it all took place, I work in construction and was VERY familiar with Charlie Keating and his lack of ethics. McCain spent a lot of time with Charlie, vacations, jaunts, etc. and old Charlies donated lots of money to McCain's campaigns. Don't kid your self about how "naive" he was. He knew what he was doing and it wasn't nice.
Still doesn’t make what JD did correct.
It is all moot anyways as JD doesn’t have a chance.
Are you done yet? If anyone has taken the focus off this thread it is you who is insisting on beating a dead horse. I made a suggestion, and not even in a rude tone. When someone says, “If I were you, I would have.....” and you take that as an insult or criticism, that indicates an extremely thin skin.
Now would you please, stop trying to make a mountain out of a molehill? Good day to you.
J.D. took and reported the funds. Explain to me what he did that was illegal or against House rules.
Failing that, I don’t see how your comment is connected to reality. “Still doesnt make what JD did correct.”
McCain took over $13,000 under the table and failed to report it in violation of House rules.
CaribouCrossing has little respect for those playing the victim card over something so incredibly insignificant and petty. You do realize that the U.S. is in danger from a far-left radical, don’t you? And your big concern right now is that someone made a suggestion about dates on an article.
I’m sorry, I’m sorry, I’m sorry. What more do you want? My moose meat?! ;)
Yeah, that makes sense. I can be a pain too. Looks like we’ll share that trait, but let’s not have a contest. heh heh
Never met anyone who didn’t like moose steaks. They’re better than beef and caribou highly recommend them.
I’m sure caribou do... LOL. I’ve never had steaks made from either.
Generally you and I will have very few major pain contests. Take care...
I prefer to get along with folks. Now and then I get my hackles raised, but it’s not good for the blood pressure and I’ve got enough white hairs for someone to mistake me for an arctic hare in winter.
Best to you and yours, DoughtyOne.
I just checked out your page. Excellent!
Thank you CaribouCrossing. I truly value people I can disagree with and still remain friends.
Best to you and yours also.
Thank you. I appreciate it