Where do the fiscal Conservatives line up on this one?

[Joes Place]

I realize, she's a "Dem", and running for the Dem nomination.
But she's acting like an anti-corruption/fiscal conservative here. Bigly.

I'm not a fan of some of her positions (e.g. wealth tax, etc), but I do think someone like this might actually root out some of the swamp in Washington. It's what she's stood for, for years.

 

[gonegolfing]

That's awesome. She got embarrassed, and one would hope at this point that no one would take her serious after that interaction.

 

[slobberknockers]

She is a witch and an old hag, all that was was trying to grandstand and she got put back in her place.

 

[hawkiniowacity]

Wait, someone can watch that and think Warren 'got out in her place'? First, what's her place exactly? Second, she has very valid points, things that shouldnt be allowed.

 

[franklinman]

She is a witch and an old hag, all that was was trying to grandstand and she got put back in her place.

Its OK to be a crooked con, right ?

 

[Old_wrestling_fan]

I see several things there...not all of them line up real cleanly.

Warren - clearly to me, she is grandstanding and trying to trap the guy with her questions. She isn't really interested in what his responses are, she just wants to "gotcha" him in front of the committee. For what reason? If he had answered every question the way she wanted him to she still would not be voting for his confirmation, IMO. It would seem that she would like to position herself as the "outsider" in her quest for POTUS.

The one question/challenge that she posed to him that bothered me the most is the 4 year voluntary hiatus from working in defense after leaving government...it sounds noble on the surface...but realistically, where is a guy who has spent his career working in the defense industry and steps out to "go to Washington" going to get a job, post-Washington? McDonald's? LOL. What means would someone have to support their family if taking a gubmint job then meant you would be all but unemployed for the 4 years following that ride?

That being said, I would likely find myself in agreement with her that there is too much coziness between DC and such a gigantic part of our government expenditures, the defense industry. Now then...how to go about making sure the fox isn't guarding the henhouse? Made for sound bite questions in a Senate hearing probably isn't it. But at this point in our country's governance, what route is viable??

Nominee - he clearly was fully prepared for her, whether that is a good thing or a sign of the problem is a matter for debate IMO. Where, if not the defense industry, would we like to source our highest level government overseers?

I think you just about have to have people from the industry to have any idea what they are in charge of...but how do you keep them honest then? There are committees and protocols in place to do so, and he appears to have submitted to them, so then what?

 

[Formerly Rockymtnole]

I agree with her that former govt employees should be prohibited from lobbying those agencies for a period of time.

I don’t see the reverse being an issue. Why would an individual going from private sector to public sector be incentivized to favor a former private sector employer? Either way, conflicts rules would already cover that.

Regarding his $1m payout from Raytheon - she called it deferred comp, which means there’s no earn outs or other tie to Raytheon getting future DoD contracts. She lost me on this one and I think this was a bit of grandstanding and innuendo on her part.

 

[Joes Place]

I see several things there...not all of them line up real cleanly.

Warren - clearly to me, she is grandstanding and trying to trap the guy with her questions.

No. She's not. She's asking him if he'll recuse himself from decisions regarding a major military contractor with whom he has a financial relationship, among many other industry ties.

It is a rather simple question, with a simple answer.

In fact, when asked if he would "renew" his ethical obligation, like another appointee had, his answer was "I did last year". Which isn't acceptable. And she wasn't buyin' it.

 

[Joes Place]

I agree with her that former govt employees should be prohibited from lobbying those agencies for a period of time.

I don’t see the reverse being an issue. Why would an individual going from private sector to public sector be incentivized to favor a former private sector employer?

One, that he has a "several million" payout coming to him. (Did u miss that part?)
Indeed.

 

[Joes Place]

I think you just about have to have people from the industry to have any idea what they are in charge of...but how do you keep them honest then?

You ask them to RECUSE themselves when decisions come up that are directly related to companies they hold vested interests in. It's a rather simple idea.

 

[Joes Place]

Regarding his $1m payout from Raytheon - she called it deferred comp

Deferred comp is often tied to performance or stock or options. It can be a conflict of interest, no matter how to want to slice it.

 

[Formerly Rockymtnole]

Deferred comp is often tied to performance or stock or options. It can be a conflict of interest, no matter how to want to slice it.

Maybe it is, maybe it isn’t. She wasn’t clear. “Can be a conflict of interest” isn’t necessarily a conflict of interest.

 

[Formerly Rockymtnole]

One, that he has a "several million" payout coming to him. (Did u miss that part?)
Indeed.

Nope, didn’t miss it

 

[Joes Place]

Maybe it is, maybe it isn’t.

He can eliminate it by signing documentation that he will recuse himself from decisions regarding Raytheon contracts. That doesn't mean eliminating himself from discussion or debate on military contracts or hardware - simply final decisions on them.

That should be a 'given' if you are entering public service.

 

[Formerly Rockymtnole]

He can eliminate it by signing documentation that he will recuse himself from decisions regarding Raytheon contracts. That doesn't mean eliminating himself from discussion or debate on military contracts or hardware - simply final decisions on them.

That should be a 'given' if you are entering public service.

Please explain his conflict. What is his continuing incentive to benefit Raytheon? He wants to throw a bone to his former employer?

 

[Joes Place]

Please explain his conflict. What is his continuing incentive to benefit Raytheon? He wants to throw a bone to his executive buddies former employer?

 

[Formerly Rockymtnole]

Ah, you have to do better than that.

 

[Joes Place]

Ah, you have to do better than that.

She asked him about "extending his waiver".
Instead of answering, he brought up his PAST waiver, as though that held some kind of legal sway over his actions moving forward.

It's almost like that was his "talking point" for the snowball question coming from Republicans, who would nod and agree it was fine. It's not fine.

 

[Fijimn]

Please explain his conflict. What is his continuing incentive to benefit Raytheon? He wants to throw a bone to his former employer?

The potential that there is a wink agreement and payola once he leaves public office and returns to Raytheon. Or that he will assign contracts to Raytheon to keep them highly profitable to his benefit. Like the guys in the Bush administration that protected Goldman (their former employer) and let Bear Sterns fail

 

[Joes Place]

The potential that there is a wink agreement and payola once he leaves public office and returns to Raytheon. Or that he will assign contracts to Raytheon to keep them highly profitable to his benefit. Like the guys in the Bush administration that protected Goldman (their former executive buddies their former employer) and let Bear Sterns fail

Fixed

 

[Formerly Rockymtnole]

She asked him about "extending his waiver".
Instead of answering, he brought up his PAST waiver, as though that held some kind of legal sway over his actions moving forward.

It's almost like that was his "talking point" for the snowball question coming from Republicans, who would nod and agree it was fine. It's not fine.

His deferred comp deal is just like most others - he has money put into an account that is invested in various standard investment choices and he begins taking a payout for 10 years beginning 5 years after his separation from employment (2022). I can't see anything he would do as Secretary that would increase that payout. Warren made it sound like he had some secret, sinister deal with Raytheon that would pay him at least $1million for favorable treatment in purchasing decisions.

There is enough actual corruption in Washington that we don't need to have grandstanding politicians making shit up.

 

[Formerly Rockymtnole]

The potential that there is a wink agreement and payola once he leaves public office and returns to Raytheon. Or that he will assign contracts to Raytheon to keep them highly profitable to his benefit. Like the guys in the Bush administration that protected Goldman (their former employer) and let Bear Sterns fail

A. I don;t see how keeping them profitable is to his benefit. Doesn't appear to be any such tie.

B. So the standard going forward is all former employers are off limits? He hasn't worked there in 2 years.

 

[Joes Place]

His deferred comp deal is just like most others - he has money put into an account that is invested in various standard investment choices

You don't know that, or if it's in Raytheon stocks.

Recusing yourself, because of personal biases, or potential financial biases, is the correct thing to do. And he would not go on record stating that is what he'd do. Others have done that.

If you want the corruption out of government, put up the hard/fast/legal roadblocks, and if he doesn't like that deal, he can go back to the private sector.

 

[Fijimn]

A. I don;t see how keeping them profitable is to his benefit. Doesn't appear to be any such tie.

B. So the standard going forward is all former employers are off limits? He hasn't worked there in 2 years.

Yes - a Chinese wall should be created between his office and any deals with Raytheon.

 

[Formerly Rockymtnole]

You don't know that, or if it's in Raytheon stocks.

We actually do know that because it's in his ethics disclosures. All index funds.

 

[Formerly Rockymtnole]

Yes - a Chinese wall should be created between his office and any deals with Raytheon.

For how long?

 

[Monzon]

She needs to learn not to interrupt. To be fair, so do many other people who feel their opinion is more important than the person speaking, or think questions are simply yes/no.

Should the guy recuse himself if anything Raytheon-related comes up for the duration of his tenure? Sure, and she didn't bring any evidence he has been in any violation. If his 1 million deferred payment is factual, then I'm sure it's public record what it entails and what it's tied to - stock, cash, profitability beyond X, etc.

I feel Warren's smart enough to dig into it and know those details. And she'd have brought them up during the questioning if there was anything there, besides a potential waiver.

 

[Formerly Rockymtnole]

If his 1 million deferred payment is factual, then I'm sure it's public record what it entails and what it's tied to - stock, cash, profitability beyond X, etc.

I feel Warren's smart enough to dig into it and know those details. And she'd have brought them up during the questioning if there was anything there, besides a potential waiver.

I found the deferred comp info in 10 minutes. She didn't bring it up because it doesn't help her argument.

 

[Joes Place]

She needs to learn not to interrupt. To be fair, so do many other people who feel their opinion is more important than the person speaking, or think questions are simply yes/no.

Should the guy recuse himself if anything Raytheon-related comes up for the duration of his tenure? Sure, and she didn't bring any evidence he has been in any violation.

Not being in violation isn't the same thing as signing paperwork that you won't ask for a waiver to violate the rules down the road. That was his answer.

 

[HawkeyeShawn]

I don’t know how anyone could sit there and take that from her. She’s grandstanding and is a complete B to him. Let him answer the question. Her questions are so freaking long, but he’s only allowed a yes or no answer? Then she continually interrupts his answer. Our govt is a GD joke. What a waste.

 

[Joes Place]

I don’t know how anyone could sit there and take that from her. She’s grandstanding and is a complete B to him. Let him answer the question.

He's not answering the questions. He's offering sidebars unrelated to the questions.

 

[Formerly Rockymtnole]

He's not answering the questions. He's offering sidebars unrelated to the questions.

Nobody should ever feel obligated to give a yes or no answer.

 

[SotaHawk87]

This is so ****ing easy.

1. Yes he should recuse himself from all matters with his former employer.
2. He should get his $1 million now before being sworn in so that future decisions aren’t impacted based off that dollar amount.
3. It should be 2 years not 4.. Taking 4 years away from your line of work is a big ask. OR make it 4 if it’s with the same company and 2 if it’s with someone else.

 

[SotaHawk87]

Nobody should ever feel obligated to give a yes or no answer.

Exactly. This is why and how people grandstand. You form BS questions to try and prove a point rather than ask a genuine question for a genuine answer. She framed it to make him look bad without him having the opportunity to explain why her question was stupid.

 

[Joes Place]

Nobody should ever feel obligated to give a yes or no answer.

Nobody should be talking about what they did "last year", when the issue is how they are going to act AFTER they are given a federal appointment.

 

[Formerly Rockymtnole]

Nobody should be talking about what they did "last year", when the issue is how they are going to act AFTER they are given a federal appointment.

Nobody should be telling a witness how to answer, period. She wasn’t interested in a Q&A, she just wanted to take her shots for the cameras.

 

[HawkeyeShawn]

He's not answering the questions. He's offering sidebars unrelated to the questions.

Maybe he would if she would just let him. It’s obvious she doesn’t like what he’s saying. Let him talk.

 

[Joes Place]

Nobody should be telling a witness how to answer, period

When he's being asked if he'll extend a waiver, and the answer is "well, here's what I did last year" and "I'm a patriot sworn to defend the Constitution", it's not really addressing the question, is it?

 

[Gonolz]

I used to work for an accounting firm doing tax work. I was prohibited from even investing $1 in any audit client of the firm. The theory, I guess, was that somehow I could affect an honest audit to benefit my investment. I thought the policy was overreaching. I don't find it overreaching that a government official should recuse himself from signing off on billion dollar contracts going to his former company who is still paying him or be prohibited from later taking employment with any company for which he has final word in awarding large contracts.

 

[CarolinaHawkeye]

trumpbaggers sure love their corruption.