Democrats in New Mexico are probably the second most corrupt group of Dems in the country. They aren’t up to Illinois standards. NM Dems are getting “caught” at an alarming rate.
Take Big Bill – please.
““While the U.S. Attorney’s Office has not notified Governor Richardson about the completion of its investigation, it appears that no action will be taken as a result of the year-long inquiry,” Deputy Chief of Staff Gilbert Gallegos said.
“Governor Richardson has known all along that neither he nor any staff members committed any transgressions during their successful fundraising back in 2004. The U.S. Attorney’s thorough and lengthy investigation has apparently determined the same thing – that no indiscretions occurred.
Although patience was difficult while Governor Richardson and his administration were being falsely accused and were the subject of rumors and speculation through the news media, Governor Richardson chose to remain silent and let the justice system run its course. Governor Richardson is gratified that this year-long investigation has ended with the vindication of his administration.”
“…But, as Sanderoff said, there are some pending situations that could keep Richardson in New Mexico, at least for now. Federal prosecutors have subpoenaed two state agencies in an ongoing investigation into investment practices in New Mexico. Of interest, according to a federal subpoena released in June, is Texas-based Aldus Equity, New Mexico’s former investment adviser. Meyer, its founder, has been indicted in an ongoing New York investigation into pay-to-play allegations.
Among the allegations in the New York inquiry is that Meyer helped the son of the New York state comptroller, Alan Hevesi, win a lucrative contract in New Mexico for a firm he was representing in return for Aldus’ increased business in New York, according to the criminal complaint. At the time, the comptroller’s son, Dan Hevesi, was acting as a third-party marketer.
Third-party marketers, once obscure figures in the investment world who act as matchmakers between private equity and hedge funds and states looking for a good return on their money, have grabbed headlines in New Mexico in recent months. That’s due to the millions of dollars paid out to them, including $22 million to Marc Correra.
Correra is the son of a friend and prominent fundraiser for Richardson.
Richardson has one other direct tie to the investment scandal: Steven Rattner, the former head of Obama’s auto-bailout program, gave $5,000 to Richardson’s 2002 gubernatorial campaign and $15,000 to Richardson’s 2006 re-election bid.
Richardson heads the State Investment Council (SIC) which, in 2005, voted to invest $20 million with Quadrangle Group LLC. At the time of the 2002 and 2006 campaign contributions, Rattner was a managing principle in the company, which he left in February of this year to take the auto-bailout job.
Rattner recently left the auto-bailout job and is reportedly negotiating a settlement with the New York attorney general in order to avoid criminal charges in that state.
Richardson and his administration have taken strong action in response to the investment scandal, banning the use of third-party marketers by investment companies seeking to do business in New Mexico and compiling and publicly releasing information about third-party marketers who have been employed by those companies….”
Is it over?
Is Big Bill Innocent?
Is Big Bill simply being a Democrat?
Why drop the DOJ probe on Big Bill?
FROM THE NM GOP:
Questions Concerning Decision to Halt Possible Indictments
ALBUQUERQUE—In response to news reports that high-level Washington DC officials in the U.S. Department of Justice have decided not to allow indictments related to pay-to-play allegations involving Governor Bill Richardson and members of his administration, Chairman Harvey Yates Jr. released the following statement:
“In light of the serious and endemic public corruption plague in this state, New Mexicans deserve straight answers from the Obama Administration.
“Specifically, who is responsible for the decision not to proceed with these indictments? Was this decision made contrary to the advice of experienced, non-political, career prosecutors and the FBI? If so, what was the justification for ignoring the advice of experienced, non-political prosecutors and FBI investigators? Did Obama’s political appointees dispute the results of the FBI investigation? Lastly, what is the basis for overturning these decisions in a case of public corruption involving high-level Democrat politicians?”
During his Senate confirmation hearing, Eric Holder, Obama’s pick for the attorney general post, testified that “The attempt to politicize the department will not be tolerated should I become attorney general of the United States.” Continued Holder, “… I will work to restore the credibility of a department badly shaken by allegations of improper political interference ….”
“In light of his former statements and on behalf of New Mexicans statewide, we ask that Attorney General Holder provide transparent and honest answers concerning this matter,” concluded Yates.
Today’s Associated Press coverage of the story quotes an individual familiar with the case saying that the probe “was killed in Washington….
…Background press quotes concerning the CDR-Richardson probe:
“On Dec. 15, Bloomberg News reported that the grand jury in Albuquerque was meeting to review how the company, Beverly Hills, California-based CDR Financial Products Inc., received almost $1.5 million in fees from the New Mexico Finance Authority. CDR contributed $100,000 to Richardson-affiliated groups.” (Martin Bran and William Selway, “Richardson Adviser Helped JPMorgan Win Bond Deals,” Bloomberg, 1/6/09)
“Richardson appoints five directors to the New Mexico Finance Authority’s 12-member board, including the chairman. Five other directors are members of his cabinet.” (Martin Bruan and William Selway, “Grand Jury Probes Richardson Donor’s New Mexico Financing Fee,” Bloomberg, 12/15/08)
“At the same time his company was seeking work from the New Mexico Finance Authority, CDR owner Rubin was making political contributions to Richardson political committees. The timing of a $75,000 contribution from Rubin to Si Se Puede is of particular interest to investigators. Si Se Puede was the political committee formed to pay the expenses of Richardson and his staff at the 2004 Democratic National Convention in Boston.” (Mike Gallagher, “Pay To Play Inquiry Derails Cabinet Post,” The Albuquerque Journal, 1/5/09)
“The New Mexico probe comes two years after the FBI searched CDR’s offices as part of a nationwide investigation into whether banks and advisers conspired to overcharge local governments on financing deals.” (Martin Bruan and William Selway, “Grand Jury Probes Richardson Donor’s New Mexico Financing Fee,” Bloomberg, 12/15/08)
“Earlier this year, local governments in California, the city of Chicago and others filed antitrust lawsuits naming 37 banks and financial companies, including CDR, over allegations of bid rigging and fee fixing in local government bonds. CDR also was sanctioned in 2007 by the Securities and Exchange Commission for work on government bonds in Florida in 1999 and 2000.” (Mike Gallagher and Colleen Heild, “GRIP Contract Probed,” The Albuquerque Journal, 8/29/08)”