consultants are sandburs

Sunday, May 11, 2014

Strib has a long exodus item about Michele Bachmann's exodus, longer than the coverage given Oberstar's. A where is she going next dimension to it ... a what mischief is she up to now dimension, some might think.

photo credit

This link. From mid-item:

Investigations continue

Bachmann is leaving office under something of a cloud. She and former campaign staffers are still under investigation by a number of entities, including the House Ethics Committee, over alleged campaign-finance violations in her presidential campaign.

The Office of Congressional Ethics last year found “substantial reason to believe” that Bachmann failed to adequately oversee her political committees, that she used her leadership PAC money to subsidize her presidential campaign and used her book tour to promote her presidential campaign — all illegal under House rules or federal campaign laws.

Once she exits Congress, the House Ethics Committee will have no jurisdiction over Bachmann. Many on Capitol Hill suspect that the investigation — at least into Bachmann’s personal handling of her campaign finances — will then cease.

Bachmann insists that even if it continued, no wrongdoing would be found.

[...] The announcement last spring that Bachmann would not seek a fifth term in Congress came about the same time her lawyers were fine-tuning a settlement agreement over a lawsuit alleging that senior members of her presidential campaign stole an e-mail list of home-school families from the computer of an Iowa campaign staffer.

She says her decision to retire from office had nothing to do with controversies surrounding her presidential campaign.

Relevant and civil reader comments to this post are welcome.

Another quote from the Strib "Bachmann's track record/next move" softball article:

Former Sixth District GOP Chair Jen Niska, who calls Bachmann a friend, defended her tenure. Niska said that Bachmann “led our district really well. ... She was a good voice for us.” Above all, Niska said, “any time she was with constituents, she listened.”

The fact is judges get paid good money too to listen to stupid stuff. The folks Bachmann worked regularly - for contributions and foot soldiering during elections - DID talk to her, as kindred souls, reinforcing one another's biases full bore.

But - a voice for who? Which "us" did Ms. Niska mean? Us is an inclusive term, and intentional cutting edge divisiveness is noninclusive.

Us, me and my tape worm, live in the district and she was an antithetical voice in every dumb utterance the woman made, and she spoke regularly, to a fault.

She was a voice,
that I willingly concede to Ms. Niska.

No comments: