The Wine Cave Issue that appears overlooked.

[Tiggeroshii]

Warren was referencing a 1 week old report from the associated press about the origins of the wine cave fundraiser that Buttigieg used. The problem was not the chandeliers or even the 900 dollars per bottle. The real problem is that the owner has been a prominent Democratic donor as a result of being bailed out from the Savings and Loans crisis that he was embroiled in in the 1980s and his fortune -and freedom, is likely a direct result of his large donations, particularly the large contributions given to the Speaker of the House at the time. This is important because this is a perfect example of the type of corruption that Warren has vowed to take on if she were elected President.

Craig and Kathryn Hall are prolific donors who split their time between Dallas and their California wineries. But they have also drawn notoriety over their past giving, as well as Craig Hall’s role in a 1980s savings and loan crisis.

Massive contributions to Democrats in the 1990s helped secure an Austrian ambassadorship for Kathryn Hall during Bill Clinton’s second term. Risky investments by Craig Hall, the chairman and founder of the Hall Group, during the savings and loan meltdown in the 1980s culminated in an over $300 million federal bailout and the resignation of House Speaker Jim Wright of Texas, a Democrat he turned to for help.


Federal regulators had been zeroing in on a series of Hall’s unpaid loans. To push back, the developer and bank operator turned to Wright, who was then ascending in the House leadership, to get them to back off, the AP reported at the time.

Wright held up legislation that would have given the struggling industry a $15 billion lifeline and told federal officials they had a “choice.” A few days later, the regulator overseeing some of Hall’s loans was replaced and the legislation moved forward.

Taxpayers eventually covered the cost of Hall’s default while the developer’s outreach to Wright played a central role in a congressional ethics investigation that toppled him from the speaker’s office in 1989.

https://apnews.com/08a7d86a43a2a1a007ea21cb54994dda

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

1. Were all of the donations legal and accounted for?

Should people be prohibited from political fundraising thirty five years after being involved in a financial controversy?

[Tiggeroshii]

2. To who?

To Buttigieg? Or to Wright? Yes to the former, no to the latter.

[Demsrule86]

3. 30 years ago? That is reaching... we need donors period and I will say it again. This sort

thing is bad ...stop stop. It is divisive. And Sander isn't going to win the nomination in IMHO...so we need to be careful not to give the GOP ammo.

[progressoid]

13. You know how you don't give the GOP ammo?

Stop playing footsie with people with skeletons in their closet. It's going to come out.

Actually, these skeletons aren't even in the closet. They are out in the open for all to see.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

27. Damn straight!!

Bernie/Elizabeth or Elizabeth/Bernie 2020!!
Either way, they're stronger together & can't be bought!!
Time for all to join the progressive revolution!! l

[Demsrule86]

28. Nah.Trump would win..

Can`t do it.

[Demsrule86]

29. You know how we win elections and put out our owm message....raise

money to do so...nothing wrong with big donors and Warren for sure took money and I am sick of hearing two millionaires attacking other rich Democratic people who want to help rid us of Trump...especially going back to 1980 for God`s sake.

[myohmy2]

14. I hate to disagree...

...it isn't divisive, it's selective...

...we have sort these things out...

...the sooner, the better...

[stopdiggin]

4. and, as usual there is more to the story

from the same link:

In 1993, the year Craig and Kathryn Hall were married, he agreed to pay a $100 million settlement and moved on.

The couple has since given a minimum of $2 million to Democratic Party committees and have donated substantial amounts to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, according to an analysis of data from the Federal Election Commission. That total, though, is likelier higher because not all their older contributions show up in current FEC records.

In 1996, they were among a group of high-profile donors who attended a coffee at the White House with Clinton and donated at least $234,000 to Democrats while he sought reelection. Kathryn Hall was part of a group of contributors who were later rewarded with ambassadorships.

So .. Pelosi can work with these folks, Clinton worked with these folks, the Democratic party has worked with these folks over the years ...
But Pete Buttigieg? Bad, bad, BAD!

[Amimnoch]

5. Shame on you for stomping on that BS narrative!!

So rude!!

[Tiggeroshii]

6. No. It isnt about Pete Buttigieg or any candidate.

It is about how our system allows these things to take place and unless we choose to change it, largely by refusing some of these large donations, but also just taking bold initiative, we will continue to get the worst of it: IE Donald Trump, who is only a symptom of a corrupt campaign infrastructure that has only gotten worse with rulings like citizens united. Ultimately Warren's message is: We need to take money our of politics.

[stopdiggin]

8. thanks. but it looks to me like these people are attempting to help

And I don't have any problem taking (and putting to good use?) their money. I know others disagree with that point of view, but that's where I stand.

[Tiggeroshii]

15. From the looks of it, from your citation, he still owes 200 million dollars to the taxpayers

I'd prefer he pay that back (or paid it in the first place) instead of give more to democrats.

[The Mouth]

20. No bailouts, no bankruptcy

for people who gamble with other people's money.

Fuck these billionaires, no matter *HOW* much they contribute to ANYBODY.

[Tiggeroshii]

21. Agreed

[Demsrule86]

30. Purity causes us to lose and that sucks. We need money to win elections.

[aidbo]

7. I would contend that it was bad the whole time.

[stopdiggin]

9. then you have a more developed concept of "bad" than I

Looks to me like these people are try to help, and I don't have any problem taking (and putting to good use?) their money. I think where money is coming from deserves scrutiny (know who the players are, etc.) -- but I can't buy into the argument that all contributions that flow from wealth are tainted or disqualifying. I just can't get that "pure" on the subject .. and I think it is a vast mistake to put our candidates (or our party) in that kind of straitjacket. I know others disagree with that point of view, but that's where I stand.

[aidbo]

16. It is absolutely about them having an influence on the politicians they are donating to.

Any other belief is naive.

[betsuni]

26. Why assume the influence is nefarious. His main concern might be climate change's affect on the wine

industry and California wild fires. These are Democrats. They wouldn't contribute if they didn't want Citizen's United repealed, higher taxes on the corporations and the wealthy, regulation, universal health care, environmentalism, etc. Seriously, would they contribute to Democrats and bug them to change their positions on these things, which they're not going to do, or just give to Republicans who will always give tax cuts to the 1%.

Al Franken: "The proliferation of money in politics is a huge problem ... it has some pretty terrible consequences. But does this mean that elected officials are all bought and paid for? The truth, I've discovered, is a little more complicated. Campaign contributions don't buy votes. What they buy is access. ... They may have contributed to you not in order to buy your support going forward, but because you've been supporting their good cause all along. And more often than not, you're not meeting with them because of a check they wrote, but rather because you're on the same team. You're strategizing together about how to move the ball forward, and trading useful information about how to achieve a shared goal."

[Demsrule86]

31. Me too.

[Paka]

18. Thank you!

That is the problem. It's been normal for way too long. It's the system that's corrupt and the only way we will get the government we want and need requires that we fix the system.

[progressoid]

11. So he got a $300 million federal bailout and later had to pay $100 million settlement.

Is there something like that for us peons at the bottom?

[dalton99a]

24. +1.

[booley]

17. I think you made a point you didnt' mean to make

Pelosi can work with these folks, Clinton worked with these folks, the Democratic party has worked with these folks over the years ...
But Pete Buttigieg? Bad, bad, BAD!

Or maybe, ....maybe, this might indicate a systemic problem that isn't just about Pete Buttigieg.
It might even perhaps in some way be important to criticisms some candidates have laid out and why people support said, candidates. Issues that perhaps go beyond just this one election.

Possibly..... You laid out the problem beautifully and didn't' even realize you did it. Probably would even disagree with it if you had known.


Just something to think about.

(And if I am wrong and you are being satirical, oh my Gods that was brilliant. If you were doing satire)

[stopdiggin]

22. Nope. I just don't recognize a "systemic problem" where you do

I stand behind my post (#9) .. and understand that others have a different point of view.

Right now I see the biggest "problem" confronting the party (and us by extension) is defeating Donald Trump. We can come back to this argument after accomplishing that.

[stopdiggin]

25. any charges leveled for the "theft" (stealing)

of this 200 mill .. or do those "charges" derive almost exclusively from your indignation?

[Demsrule86]

32. That is really silly...1980...ok stone age.

[MichMan]

33. Wonder what perks they think they deserve this cycle?

"In 1996, they were among a group of high-profile donors who attended a coffee at the White House with Clinton and donated at least $234,000 to Democrats while he sought reelection. Kathryn Hall was part of a group of contributors who were later rewarded with ambassadorships."

[redqueen]

10. So let me get this straight.

He donates to Dems, gets them to help him foist $300M of bad debt onto taxpayers.

He then pays a $100M fine (to who?) and gives more money to Dems.


What am I missing?

When does he pay back rhe other $200M? (lol jk as if)

[redqueen]

12. More about Craig Hall

In 1978, Hall put up $111,000 to start Independence Health Plan, the second for-profit HMO in the country.

“Can you imagine $111,000 being all the capital that you needed to start a health maintenance organization?” he says. “It actually worked. Made a lot of money. Went public. That was fun because my $111,000 turned into $35 million.”

[comradebillyboy]

19. Campaigns are expensive. Fundraisers are necessary. I'm OK

with the whole wine cellar experience. I don't think the big donors will show up at IHOP.