Friday, March 20, 2009

Nearing the end for Dodd? An update...

As an update to my last post, it has now been learned that Senator Dodd is doing more back peddling. He now admits that he is the one that put the language into the Stimulus bill to allow AIG executives to take bonuses, but claims that it was Treasury officials who desired this, and that he was just accommodating them, allegedly because the word "veto" was being thrown around if he didn't put it in.

Um...sorry but Senator Dodd is challenging the intelligence of Americans with this claim. Administration officials, cabinet members, appointees, whatever you want to call them CANNOT TELL CONGRESS WHAT TO DO. Not only is it illegal (as it violates the concept of separation of powers) but it just doesn't happen for common sense reasons as well. If anything, government agencies are at the whim and mercy of CONGRESS...they are the ones that threaten to not pass legislation if something isn't done, and they certainly don't communicate threats like these to agency heads...this back and forth only occurs between Congress and the White House.

Let's not forget that prior to this reversal his story was:
"When the language went to the conference and came back, there was different language," he said then. "I can tell you this much, when my language left the Senate, it did not include it. When it came back, it did."

To me that's a pretty stark change of face, since he was so specific. So basically, nothing that ever comes out of Senator Dodd's mouth at this point can be believed because:

A) He's your prototypical, career politician who lies like a rug.
B) It is clear that with all this controversy swirling around him he's in "CYA" mode.

If that doesn't qualify for a Senate investigation I don't know what does.

In attempt to try to make the public feel better about this snafu, Dodd offered that he was confident that the bill was written in a way that should make it easy for Treasury to recoup the bonuses, but Treasury Secretary Geithner said the opposite, stating that he thought it would be legally difficult to do so.

No comments: