home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!rutgers!spcvxb!hsh!paul
- From: paul@hsh.com
- Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
- Subject: House Bank WAS a Scandal
- Message-ID: <1992Dec21.152429.395@hsh.com>
- Date: 21 Dec 92 19:24:29 GMT
- Organization: HSH Associates
- Lines: 31
-
- Quoting unabashedly from the 12/21 Wall Street Journal editorial:
-
- "It turns out the House Bank was a real scandal after all.
-
- "In his just-released report on the affair [and will y'all tell us if it gets
- on ANY news shows? And for how many seconds?], Special Counsel Malcolm
- Wilkey found that, contray to the claims of House leaders, the money Members
- 'borrowed' from the House Bank with hot checks did belong to the taxpayers.
- The Justice Department has now begun a criminal probe into the creative
- checking accounts of several House Members.
-
- "...In his report, Judge Wilkey listed the following assertions or
- 'misconceptions' about the Bank, and said all of them were false:
-
- "* 'It was a Members' cooperative, underwritten by Members' own deposits.'
- * 'No checks were ever really bounced.'
- * 'No Member was notified of his overdrafts and therefore was innocent of any
- intentional abuse.'
- * 'There was no kiting of checks.'
- * 'There has been no violation of law because not a penny was lost.'"
-
- There's more, but you'll have to read it yourself. It goes on to tell how
- "Speaker Folwy continues to deny any public funds were involved..."
-
- So -- how many seconds of coverage will be devoted to this by the networks?
- And will the Clinton Administration continue this investigation, or will it
- be history as of January 21?
-
- ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------
-
- Paul Havemann (paul@hsh.com)
-