They Would Bribe Him to Give Them Illicit Gains?

What if a Citigroup executive were told he would bonus $940,000 if he could secure a position with the government, the idea being he would then be in position to influence the government to benefit Citigroup? For, according to Utah Senator Orrin Hatch, it happened.

The Citigroup executive? Jack Lew, President Obama's nomination as secretary of the Treasury.

The payout? Don't know that Lew obtained a government job, but he apparently did win the $940,000 bonus, anyway, being paid the day before the government awarded Citigroup $7 billion.

Graft and corruption? I read how the definition of "graft" is the practice (especially bribery) of obtaining of illicit gains in business or politics. Guess you could argue anything Lew would do for Citigroup wouldn't be "illicit," but I surely say it was. Sure seems to me to be graft. Sure seems like bribery, to be offered almost a million dollars if you will find a way to get on board with the government so you can use your influence on behalf of the company.

You might argue that Citigroup needed the money, that it all ended up saving the company and helping save our economy. I don't know, though. It does seem Citigroup was asking Lew not to use more than logic to convince the government. Citigroup was asking him to get on the inside, where he could use more than logic, where he could use a-good-old-boy, you-are-one-of-us,-bonded-in-a-brotherhood emotion, I'm asking, should we be giving out $7 billion because someone cuddles up to us?

Hatch recalled President Obama's warning from a few years back, that it was time to stop the revolving door carrying special interest influence in and out of government.

Well, I don't know if Hatch's charges are accurate, but he does reference an employment agreement between Citigroup and Lew, seeming to have gotten the information directly from reading the agreement.

I sit here, thinking how this story broke about a week ago. No scandal has followed. Oh, the Wall Street Parade article does refer to Hatch's revelation as a "bombshell." But, we certainly haven't seen much of it in the media.

So, do we simply dismiss it as scandal 90023? Or is it not even a scandal at all? Is this simply the way politics are conducted, and no one even bats an eye, hardly reports it, and doesn't give a care?

Bat a eye, then, and agree with me that we should not stand to allow such things.

http://wallstreetonparade.com/2013/02/senator-orrin-hatch-drops-a-bombshell-at-jack-lew%E2%80%99s-confirmation-hearing/