John McCain was named decades ago in 1989 as one of the Keating Five. The Keating case involved US senators who were accused of abusing their authority by interfering with government regulators investigating Charles Keating, chairman of Lincoln Savings and Loan. Yes, part of the Savings and Loan scandal.
Sounds pretty awful doesn't it? And John McCain was the only Republican in the scandal, along with 4 Democrats, including John Glenn.
So today, Barack Obama is revisiting the Keating Five scandal in attacks against the character of John McCain. But what if McCain was completely innocent then, but included for simply partisan reasons in the Democratic Congress' investigation. What if a high-profile Democrat investigator of the Keating 5 nearly 20 years ago believed McCain was railroaded and innocent? Would that make a difference to Obama supporters? Would it make them consider the character of their candidate; using a lie to attack his opponent?
In 1991, the Senate Ethics Committee determined that Democrats Alan Cranston, Dennis DeConcini, and Donald Riegle had substantially and improperly interfered with regulators in their investigation of Lincoln Savings, with Cranston receiving a formal reprimand. But - pay attention! - Senators John Glenn and John McCain were cleared of having acted improperly but were "criticized" by the Democrat Senate committee for having exercised "poor judgment".
Ok, so McCain was found not guilty by committee controlled by Democrats. That should be a pretty convincing factoid, and even the "poor judgment" finding could easily be explained by partisan politics, but don't take my word for that.
Super-attorney Robert Bennett was Bill Clinton's attorney during many of Bill Clinton's legal problems in the 90s. He was certainly not thought of an ally to Republicans then, and more evidence of that was in 1989 when the Democrats appointed him as special outside counsel to the committee conducting the Keating Five investigation. So what did Robert Bennett conclude about McCain?
On FoxNews some month ago, as well as at the time of the investigation, Robert Bennett stated that no evidence was ever uncovered implicating McCain in any wrongdoing. Bennett actually lumped tons of praise on McCain in that FoxNews interview. Bennett stated that despite his recommendation for McCain and John Glenn to be excused from further investigation after he had performed his investigation, because McCain was the only Republican alleged to have been involved in the wrongdoing, the Democrat-controlled committee refused to excuse McCain. In fact, Bennett even said that he believed that McCain had been included from the start simply to include a Republican and support the Democrats' claim that the scandal was bipartisan.
According to Bennett, referring to a New York Times hit piece that was reported just before his Fox interview:
"You know, I'm in a pretty unique position to talk about John McCain. First, I should tell your listeners, you know, I'm a registered Democrat, so I'm not on his side of a lot of issues. But I investigated John McCain for a year and a half, at least, when I was special counsel to the Senate Ethics Committee in the Keating Five, which, by the way, this New York Times article goes back to and discusses, goes back years and years.
And if there is one thing I am absolutely confident of, it is John McCain is an honest and honest man. I recommended to the Senate Ethics Committee that he be cut out of the case, that there was no evidence against him, and I think for the New York Times to dig this up just shows that Senator McCain's public statement about this is correct. It's a smear job. I'm sorry.
If your listeners want to know about the Keating Five case, I have a whole chapter on it. And what happened was that I had recommended that John McCain be cut out of it and not go forward. And, you know, I call it the way I see it. As I said, I'm a Democrat. And I recommended they go forward against Senators DeConcini, Senator Cranston and Senator Riegle.
But if you cut out John McCain, you would have had 28 days of public hearings with just Democrats in the dock. So, it's probably the first time in the history of the Senate that they rejected the advice of their counsel to exonerate a senator.
McCain's "crime" was attending two meetings with the 4 other senators with government regulators investigating Keating in the room. He was guilty of participating in meetings where he would say that, "the appearance of it was wrong. It's a wrong appearance when a group of senators appear in a meeting with a group of regulators, because it conveys the impression of undue and improper influence. And it was the wrong thing to do." So McCain admitted the poor judgment, but just poor judgment attending two meetings.
Unfortunately for John Glenn, a Democrat, he was also forced to have his name and reputation smeared, because if Democrats couldn't remove McCain from the scandal, they would have appeared to be partisan hypocrites if they had excused John Glenn, another true American hero.
So Barack Obama, the new "change and hope" candidate worshiped by many, is resurrecting a lie to attack and smear John McCain today. He's attacking an innocent man to offset the charges and growing evidence of his involvement with William Ayers, Jeremiah Wright, and darker figures who are appearing as one news network, FoxNews, continues the near-impossible task of vetting the Democratic presidential nominee.
What does that say about the character of Obama that he would attack his opponent using a charge that Democrats found McCain innocent of nearly 20 years ago?Posted by mjc3389 at October 06, 2008 11:32 AM | Email This