The campaign is really getting nastier every day

[Mass]

Yesterday, the moonies had an article about an unnamed source, supposedly from the Hillary's campaign, was calling the media and saying Obama was somehow connected to islamic fundemmentalists (two smear jobs in one article, one about Hillary, one about Obama, how nice).

This morning, there is an article about Obama and how he supposedly is lying in his autobiography.

And of course, the article accusing the Edwards of some pb in selling their house (I could not figure out what was wrong, but we learned that the house was sold for $5 M ... So much for a regular couple).

Of course, the media are continuing their daily smearing of Kerry, but we are used to it now. (Oh, should we believe these stories just as they believed the BS stories about Kerry?).

[karynnj]

1. This nastiness is starting unbelievably early

I seriously doubt Hillary had anything to do with the Obama story because it was posted here at least a week ago as a RW emil chain letter. (Is that a new technique - using the email that to all your friends)

The Edwards thing is harder to figure out. I had seen something on it last week - it sounded iffy but unless there is more proof of a quid por quo, it might not hurt unless it is used by one of his opponents to help her defeat him. (this was also only one of their homes.)

The only thing I can think of is that someone would like the serious candidates winnowed down to one before the first vote is cast. This is NOT democratic and may backfire. The decision is really a year off - the pressure to choose or declare now is amazing.

[wisteria]

2. The e-mailing of lies and distortions began in 2004, it is a RW tactic.

The e-mail travels to homes and offices. And, yes gullible people believe what they read in them. The RW is really good at the tug at your heart stories about our soldiers, and the fake outrage over one distortion or another.
Do you remember the anti- Edwards e-mail from 04? The one where a "neighbor" dislike Edwards because he was really a jerk, and gave the middle finger to everyone who got in his way when he would go jogging in the neighborhood?

[beachmom]

3. The chain e-mails are merely a continuation of the GOP's direct

mail strategy that goes back to the '70s. The e-mails just work faster and are "viral" in nature. I think they started earlier than '04 -- they probably started as soon as a lot of people had e-mail.

Yes, the campaign is nasty, but I have to admit, I think it's naive to think the mud comes only from the Right. Our side has unscrupulous individuals in it, too, sad to say. I'm not sure on the Hillary/Obama story. Since it's from a Moonie paper, one has to take a few grains of salt with it, however.

[karynnj]

5. My doubts were not based on her scruples

but that she would likely not leave fingerprints - having a "Hillary" person give something to the Moonies is simply too dumb. If someone identified themself as a "Hillary" person", I would suspect that they are really RW or Edwards. (hitting 2 people at once)

I would guess that someone who wants to hurt Obama put this out. It is likely an attempt to add doubt (is he really Christian? Does he still have Moslem connections?)

Like you wrote on the SBVT thing maybe generating doubt that a candidate, who in an early part of his life was Moslem and who has an unfortunate last name could be accepted by the masses. (I would expect some saying, I wouldn't consider it, but some people are dumb.) Could this be a proxy for racism?

[karynnj]

4. I never heard that

what's funny is it is more likely something Bush would have done.

[TayTay]

6. What is raising eyebrows about this deal and why

The paperwork for the sale was handled in such a way that it kept the Klaassens' names off the public deed documents, which show that the buyer was P Street LLC. That limited-liability corporation was created Dec. 22, public records show. Palmieri said the Klaassens used it to purchase the house. Such corporations are frequently created by large real estate buyers to protect themselves from lawsuits by shielding buyers' other personal assets.

Ellen S. Miller, head of the nonpartisan Sunlight Foundation, which studies public officials' real estate deals, said presidential candidates should go the extra mile by determining who they are doing business with, especially when "a substantial amount of cash is changing hands on the eve of his campaign."

The house sale comes at a time when the Securities and Exchange Commission has opened an inquiry into allegations that the Klaassens, founders of Sunrise Senior Living, and other company insiders cashed $32 million in stock options before Sunrise announced in May an accounting problem that caused its stock to dip.

SEC insider-trading notifications show that the Klaassens withdrew $20 million from their company in the year before they bought the house. Some of that money was taken out the week before the company announced an accounting review in May.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/18/AR2007011802077.html

Why was this covered up? One of John Edwards' biggest backers is the SEIU Union. They have had problems with the Sunrise Senior Living, Inc ((NYSE: SRZ) company and are in litigation with them. Here is the SEC notification that Sunrise is required to post about their problems and how it affects earnings:

Update on Timing of Restatement

As previously announced, the board of directors has appointed a special independent committee to review recent insider sales of Sunrise stock and the Company’s historical practices related to stock option grants. The special committee has retained independent outside legal counsel to assist in its review.

The Board’s decision to appoint the special committee followed receipt of a letter from a union shareholder, Service Employees International Union (SEIU), that was simultaneously sent to news outlets, which resulted in media coverage and a subsequent request by the SEC for information about matters raised in the media reports. The Company believes SEIU’s actions are designed to put pressure on management as the union attempts to organize certain of our team members.

“Sunrise is committed to sound corporate governance, integrity and transparency,” said Thomas Newell, president of Sunrise. “We have taken appropriate action, such as the appointment of the special committee, to ensure that our shareholders, team members and residents are completely comfortable with our actions. While we are disappointed with the union’s tactics, they will not distract us from our focus on building our business and providing the highest quality of service to our customers and residents.”

At this time Sunrise is unable to provide an expected date for the filing of its restated 2005 Form 10-K, its 2006 Form 10-Qs and its 2006 Form 10-K. Sunrise believes it is close to submitting its recast 2005 financial information to the SEC for its review. This recast financial information will provide the SEC a summary of the items to be restated and their resulting impact.

As previously reported, Sunrise has received comments from the SEC with respect to certain filings, including its Form 10-K, as originally filed for the year ended December 31, 2005. Sunrise has responded to the comments but is unable to predict the timing or outcome of the SEC accounting staff’s review of its response or of its to-be-submitted preliminary recast 2005 financial information. Once this review is completed Sunrise will prepare full financial statements, including footnotes and disclosures, for completion of Sunrise’s restated 2005 Form 10-K. The filing of this 10-K will also require completion or substantial completion by the special independent committee of its review. Sunrise cannot currently predict the timing of these steps.

Sunrise expects to file the 2006 Form 10-Qs and Form 10-K as soon as possible following the filing of the restated 2005 Form 10-K. Sunrise also is continuing to cooperate fully with the SEC’s information requests and review of matters raised in the media reports prompted by the letter from SEIU.

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1011064/000095013307000142/w29060exv99w1.htm

Why is the SEIU mad at Sunrise:

Shareholders Call for Investigation of Insider Stock Sales, Questionable Accounting at Sunrise Senior Living
Business Wire (11-26-2006)

Outside Investigation of Nation's Premier Assisted Living Company Business Editors/Healthcare Writers WASHINGTON, D.C.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Nov. 26, 2006--The SEIU Master Trust, a shareholder of Sunrise Senior Living, Inc., is calling on the company to conduct an independent investigation into concerns about insider stock sales, questionable accounting practices, and improbably-timed stock option grants. Sunrise Senior Living (NYSE: SRZ) is the nation's second-largest operator of assisted living facilities and has a market capitalization of $1.6 billion.

A review of the company's finances by the SEIU Capital Stewardship Program has now found that:

-- Sunrise directors and executives sold $32 million worth of shares in the months leading up to the announcement of an accounting review, after which the share price fell 34%, causing shareholders to lose $660 million.

-- Many of the company's executive stock option grants were fortuitously timed, with strike prices at or near periodic or yearly stock price lows that preceded rapid and/or long-term stock price increases, raising the possibility of manipulation.

-- All the members of the audit and compensation committees have had personal and business ties to the company that may impair the independence of judgment needed to protect shareholder value.

More at: http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/shareholders-call-investigation-insider-stock/story.aspx?guid=%7BC835AACA-833B-4993-9A91-5EE5CDE8C7DA%7D

So, what's the upshot of this? Maybe nothing. Sunrise is engaging in the same type of thing that a lot of companies are: executives are getting enormous payoffs while the stockholders are getting screwed. (See the recent troubles with the payoof for the CEO of Home Depot.)

However, why was this so hush-hush? Edwards or his people were trying NOT to let this get in the news. He should have disclosed right away. (It's always the attempt to hide something that kills people.)

What does Labor mean to Edwards?

Labor's Man In '08?

By Robert D. Novak
Thursday, December 21, 2006; Page A29

While Sens. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama soak up media attention, John Edwards has pushed for organized labor's support. No decisions have been made, but the former senator from North Carolina and 2004 vice presidential nominee is the front-runner for winning over the big, dynamic unions that left the AFL-CIO almost 18 months ago.

Edwards is a leading prospect for backing from Andrew Stern's Service Employees International Union (SEIU) and James P. Hoffa's International Brotherhood of Teamsters, the unions that led the breakaway, forming the Change to Win coalition. Stern and Hoffa are wary of early decisions, and there are things about the Edwards operation that their unions do not like. But their interest in him reflects largely unspoken discontent in Democratic ranks over a choice limited to Clinton and Obama.

Withdrawal from presidential consideration of former Virginia governor Mark Warner and Sen. Evan Bayh of Indiana prompted the analysis that Clinton and Obama consume all the political oxygen, leaving nothing for another candidate. But many labor leaders question Clinton's electability and worry about Obama's inexperience. While Warner and Bayh would have been positioned to front-runner Clinton's right, Edwards is on her left. That is no liability in seeking support from Change to Win unions.

While some of these unions fret about Edwards's closest political associates, he personally is a big hit with labor leaders who left the AFL-CIO unhappy about a lack of fervor in recruiting new members. With the same eloquence and careful preparation that made him a multimillionaire trial lawyer, Edwards boosts trade restrictions and other elements of organized labor's agenda.

More at: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/20/AR2006122001328.html

[karynnj]

7. Just read the article on the Edwards' house

It's hard to believe there's anything there, unless it comes out that Edwards asked the buyers to set up the blind to hide their name. The one I had read about that could be innocent or a problem was at the end of the article.


"Edwards has run into controversy once before on a house sale. In 2002, he reached a deal to sell a Washington house to a U.S. lobbyist for Saudi Arabia and then refused to give back the lobbyist's $100,000 earnest money when the deal collapsed. At the time of the sale, the Saudis were trying to improve their image in Congress after the Sept. 11 attacks, and Edwards was serving on the Senate intelligence committee.

Edwards said he did not know the buyer was a Saudi lobbyist until after the deal had fallen through."

This is likely nothing - unless it can be shown that Edwards met or spoke with Saudi Arabian lobbyist before they entered the deal and there is any reason to assume the deal was a sham. I seriously doubt if Edwards, embarking on a Presidential run with assets in the 20 million range (per stories then) would sell out to an Arab country.

The WP is playing political games putting this on the front page - with two stories that suggest a pattern and connections to shady people- though both are more likely nothing except what is likely selling multi-million dollar houses in DC

[TayTay]

8. This is POLITICAL

It involves the SEIU, a major backer of John Edwards. They are suing Sunrise Senior Living because they believe the Master Trust for SEIU, which was a stockholder in the company, was defrauded out of money that should have been put into the Retirement Fund of the Union Pension.

It is not a wrong-doing, there is no evidence of that. However, it is a potentially awkward situation for Edwards to be in. He is doing business, then hiding the name of the person he is doing business.

Think politically. It doesn't look savory. He should have simply disclosed it.

[wisteria]

9. You are right, get it out there before someone else does so that it doesn't' t look like your

hiding something.

[TayTay]

10. Is it clear why this is a slight eyebrow raiser?

The Klaassen's bought that house for $5.2 million. The SEIU is arguing that the managers of Sunrise Senior Living played with the books and ended up taking money that should have gone to the stockholders, including the pension fund for SEIU.

What funds did the Klaassen's use to buy that house? This might be very irritating to the SEIU who are pursuing SEC violations against that company. (SEIU claims their pension fund is out $660 million from Sunrise.)

This ah, is bad politics which may be why the sale was done the way it was. The money the SEIU says is theirs might have gone to buy that house. Hence the 'perception' problem here.

[wisteria]

11. I would bet the SEIU are right to suspect it was there money that was used. n/t

[TayTay]

13. That said

Edwards did nothing wrong.

It is a political. It is about disclosing it upfront. That is the only thing that might raise slight eyebrows. (This is how impressions of people are formed, the gradual accumulations of 'iffy' things that, over time, make people uncomfortable. Edwards should have disclosed this, then there would be no problem.)

[wisteria]

17. Agreed, he did nothing wrong, but by not disclosing this, he looks like he is hiding something.

Oh, and I bet this is only the beginning of a look back at Edwards. He got away without much investigation in 04. Some of the media is not going to play nice with Edwards. It isn't fair, but mostly all of what Senator Kerry endured in 04 wasn't at all fair either and some people like Edwards don't consider this before suggesting that they could of won against President Bush if they were the nominee in 04.
In other words, I find it hard to manage any sympathy for Edwards, must the same as Clinton.

[beachmom]

14. Carpetbagger is underwhelmed:

http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/9667.html#more-9667

For the life of me, I have no idea why this is literally front-page news to the Washington Post. Is there some hint of a quid pro quo? Not even a little. Did Edwards change his position on something as a result of the sale of his house? Nope. Was there anything unusual about the actual transaction? Not a thing.

There aren’t even any quotes from Edwards critics, suggesting something untoward about any of this.

Has the WaPo fired all of its editors? Wouldn’t someone on staff read the article first and ask, “Where’s the news in all of this?” And isn’t there anyone who thought this might not be a story appropriate for the front page of one of the nation’s premier news outlets?

It’s going to be a long presidential campaign, isn’t it.

[karynnj]

18. Thanks to your excellent earlier post - I understand now

You're right it looks like he tried to hide it.

[beachmom]

19. Actually, this story is still developing. Remember Greg on TPM?

He's really a good investigative blogger. He made some calls:

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/horsesmouth/2007/01/post_7.php

The story points to two unions who are fighting with the couple over money their pension funds lost investing in the couple's company: the Service Employees International Union, and the United Food and Commercial Workers Union.

So do these unions have a problem with Edwards' sale? An official at the first union -- SEIU -- is quoted by Solomon way at the end of the story saying he didn't find fault with Edwards' action. According to the story, this union official said "he was unaware of the Edwards home deal and would reserve judgment on it." No official from the second union, the UFCW, is quoted.

Well, I've just gotten in touch with an official from that second union, and guess what: The official told me that UFCW doesn't see anything whatsoever wrong with what Edwards did. What's more, the official said that Solomon didn't even contact the union at all for comment on the story.




You can read the whole thing. Seems like the WP was going for sensational as opposed to thorough. You guys know how I feel about Edwards. But I'm being perfectly honest here that I just don't see him doing anything wrong here, either in real terms or even in political terms. He sold his house; he had bad luck with who he sold it to. Not his fault.

[karynnj]

20. Not involving Edwards - who simply sold a home

but can you shelter a home in DC from law suit damages?

[Mass]

12. Interestingly, this story is reminiscent from a story that ran in 03

about the Edwards selling a house in VA for a house in DC. The story was also about the buyer (an emir prince). It seems that he is fairly unlucky with who his buyers are.

[TayTay]

15. Not really.

That first one was a non-story. He kept the deposit of $100,000 because the good faith period had ended. It was Edwards clear legal right to do so. (Hey, my brother did this on a sale of property when the sale fell through. It's perfectly legal.

[Mass]

16. This was not my point. The point that, in 2002, people were

glossing about the identity of the buyer, and here, it is also about the identity of the buyer. Subtitle of these articles: Edwards is hypocrite, he preaches something and does something else.

This said, of course, we know what these articles are worth. But it comes with the territory. If you run for president you can expect them and these stories are small compared to what will come (for anybody who is seriously in the race).

[beachmom]

21. Edwards continuing to piss me off. He's still going after Congress,

this time after Biden specifically:

http://www.tpmcafe.com/blog/electioncentral/2007/jan/19/quote_of_the_day_ii_edwards_compares_biden_levin_resolution_to_childs_tantrum#comment-197066

"Why don't we go stand in the corner and stomp our feet like an 8-year-old?"

— John Edwards, quoted by The Orlando Sentinel deriding the Biden-Levin non-binding resolution against escalation in Iraq by comparing it to a child's tantrum as he called for tougher Congressional action on Iraq



Yeah, except for the fact that we MAY (if McConnell doesn't filibuster) be able to show the GOP divided. As it is, it's a bi-partisan resolution, so it's already accomplished something politically.


Edited to add: yes, I agree with Kennedy. It's just I have no problem with the Biden/Levin amendment in conjuction with going stronger after that.

[wisteria]

22. Actually, that is not a very Presidential comment by Edwards.

It isn't clever or funny either. He is definitely going for the anti-anti position, but IMO, he doesn't come off as believable.

[karynnj]

29. Also what does it do to his original base

who liked him because he was :

sunny
nice and polite
moderate
pro-war

Now he's the activist, angry, grass roots guy.

[Inuca]

30. But he still has great hair! n/t

[karynnj]

35. Isn't it getting thinner?

Actually I don't have any reason reason to think it though it might scare the Edwards people if someone posted it. :)

NOT SERIOUS

[karynnj]

28. I don't like Biden and Kerry is with the good bill

but did Edwards take even one real controversial stand in the 6 years he was at least nominally in Congress.

To quote a song (that I hated at the time - put it fits him, if not the original target)

"Ah, how do you sleep?
Ah, how do you sleep at night?

A pretty face may last a year or two
But pretty soon theyll see what you can do"

John Lennon - who would never have hung out with John Edwards

[beachmom]

32. But if you recall, when Kerry mapped out what was going to happen

in Congress, he mentioned the non-binding resolution, and not in a negative way. My understanding was that he supports it as a step 1 but thinks there needs to be a step 2 (Kennedy) and then "go from there". So I have no problem with the Biden resolution as long as the next step is taken.

[karynnj]

34. Exactly - that was on the Ed Schultz tape

I assume all the Kennedy resolution people will all vote for the Biden bill.

[Mass]

36. Kerry stated in an interview yesterday why they would vote on the

Biden proposition first: -they want to get the GOP on record and hope they can get a substantial bi-partisan majority as a signal to Bush that the GOP is against that as well.

Edwards is in a comfortable position being out of the Senate. He can ignore the realities of a legislation. The Kennedy resolution has NO chance to pass in the US Senate. Many democrats will not vote on it . So, it would be purely political for Kerry to push for a vote of their resolution first, as it would not pass and therefore, the Senate would give an implicit OK to Bush.

As insignificant and useless as it is, the Biden resolution will put on the record the fact that the Senate opposes this policy.

Of course, it is important to do more, but this is a first step that will draw a line.

[beachmom]

23. You're right, Mass -- ugly, ugly. Maybe we should just title a post

called "Ugly campaign" every day, and we can keep adding to it throughout the day. This is really awful, the stuff about Obama -- Fox News has it on the air now:

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/1/19/153531/326

This morning, Fox News featured a segment highlighting a right-wing report that Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) attended an Islamic “madrassa” school as a 6-year-old child.

Fox & Friends host Steve Doocy pointed out that madrassas are “financed by Saudis” and “teach this Wahhabism which pretty much hates us,” then declared, “The big question is: was that on the curriculum back then?” Later, a caller to the show questioned whether Obama’s schooling means that “maybe he doesn’t consider terrorists the enemy.” Fox anchor Brian Kilmeade responded, “Well, we’ll see about that.”

The Fox hosts failed to correct the false claim that Obama is Muslim. One caller, referring to Obama, said, “I think a Muslim would be fine in the presidency, better than Hillary. At least you know what the Muslims are up to.” Anchor Gretchen Carlson responded, “We want to be clear, too, that this isn’t all Muslims, of course, we would only be concerned about the kind that want to blow us up.” Obama is Christian, a member of Chicago’s Trinity United Church of Christ since 1988.



By the way, Mark Barrett of The Premise called this over a month ago. He SAID this would happen, and it has. For some reason, it still doesn't make it any less stunning to see them stoop to this level.

[wisteria]

24. Sad, but there is no level too low it appears anymore, short of

kidnapping and murder.

[Inuca]

26. ANd are you really so sure about THAT? n/t

[beachmom]

27. If any Republican takes this and runs with it, I think fellow senators

should take to the floor, call them on it, and demand an apology to Sen. Obama. They're basically calling him a terrorist who wants to blow us up. So, actually he IS being accused of wanting to murder. This is disgusting, and it needs to be counteracted outside of the 2008 race. Everyone should come together to defend Obama as a public servant, community activist, and overall very good American citizen. Maybe I'm too naive here in terms of presidential politics go, but this is so bad, I just feel like Democrats should unite on this.

[karynnj]

33. I agree

[Inuca]

25. OMG!

I am afraid that Obama will get quite a pounding along along such lines, ridiculous as it may sound to a sane person. That middle name of his.... that of course nobody even knew about until he became a presidential contender. It's painful, not only because I like him, but primarily because it's so disgusting to see the depths of stupid manipulation that some people can sink to and how so many people can swallow it whole. Depressing really...

[karynnj]

31. This is swift boating - and the underground sneaky period

was at least 2 weeks. Now, it's obviously inched it way up to the sleaziest part of the cable. I honestly think that some high ranking Democrats need to condemn this - preferably ones not running.

We've all posted that Kerry needed backup - Obama may need it here too. The other thing I remember is the polling Kerry did showed there was less problem than there was. (likely for the reason you posted - and the lack of overall Democratic support hurt that.)

[Mass]

37. More "Ugly campaign"

I have no clue if Clemons supports somebody or not, but this is probably as ugly as it gets and Richardson only announced this morning.

http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/001884.php

I will frame this as a "question" for Bill Richardson.

Have you behaved inappropriately or not in public settings with female members of your government administration, jokingly or not? Have you gestured to female public servants and political appointees -- who work as colleagues with you -- and made lewd gestures, specifically pointing to them and then pointing at your crotch with a room full of media and other politicos there in the room?

I ask this not to demean or undermine Richardson.
...

And of course, the goal of the post is not to demean or undermine him. :sarcasm:

This said, I have no clue whether this is true or not, but why the rush to attack somebody who polls about 1%. Is it possible that his resume frightens some people, given that he is running on experience at the executive level (both as governor and member of a cabinet).

[kerrygoddess]

38. Oh my.

That's quite a read. Not sure what to think but have to agree with the last comment:

I understand that the Washington Note is your blog. But, you have an insider's credibility that typically draws readership. I guess I simply find this post as cheaper than I would expect from you.

Have your sources go on the record and maybe I'll change my mind.

Posted by: TuiMel at January 21, 2007 07:51 PM

[whometense]

39. Did you see the previous post?

http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/001883.php

Hillary Clinton Needs to Avoid the Al Gore/John Kerry Democratic Party Politburo Problem

...It is a testament to Hillary Clinton that she has some extraordinary staff -- like Rubiner, but also including others like Andrew Shapiro managing foreign policy and national security issues and Tamara Luzzatto as her chief of staff. Luzzatto was chief of staff for Senator Jay Rockefeller before joining Clinton.

But Clinton also has other arenas of advisors -- a rumored five "super advisors" on the deep inside -- who are the only ones who know the finite, gritty details of Hillary's plans, strategy, and views. But then there is another ring of advisors, many of whom look like the somewhat drab advisors who have animated other Democratic campaigns. Perhaps Hillary Clinton and her inner circle have those "Democratic politburo" members in place to keep them from working elsewhere -- and perhaps their bad advice will be gently overlooked while Clinton follows either better counsel or her own instincts.

But there will be tension around Clinton -- and this kind of unresolved tension between excellent policy thinking, excellent political counsel and those who think that they have been around the block so many times they don't need to learn anything more -- is something that strangled Al Gore's first phase presidential candidacy.

And guess what? The same tensions brought down John Kerry...