Halliburton: Enron II New White House Scandal Shocker

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Unk's Troll-free Private Saloon : One Thread

CHENEYGATE
New White House Scandal Shocker

ANNALS OF ENRON
VEEP'S FIRM COLLAPSING OVER ASBESTOS LAWSUITS
Big-Time Payoffs to G.O.P. Pols
Panic On Pennsylvania Avenue
Halliburton: Enron II

(Washington, D.C., Jan. 21, 2002: Special to MWO)

The lid has just about blown off this already tense capital city with breaking news of the possible impending collapse of Vice-President Cheney's old firm, Halliburton Company of Dallas, Texas.

With its stock value in free fall for months, Halliburton is reported on the edge of doom, thanks to a mountain of asbestos lawsuits linked to its 1998 acquisition, under then-CEO Cheney, of Dresser Industries. The company has paid out more than $150 million in recent damages for asbestos cases -- and has about 260,000 related lawsuits still pending. More than $19 billion in Halliburton shareholder value has vanished since the summer of 2001 -- an undisclosed amount of it in employee 401(k) plans and other pension funds.

To try and stem off the disaster, Halliburton has given huge gobs of money to former and present Congressional Republicans in order to gain favorable deregulation rulings and other breaks. Among the more prominent names caught up in the Halliburton political operation, apart from Cheney, are former Missouri Senator and current Attorney General John Ashcroft and House Majority Leader, Dick Armey of Texas.

Both stock-watchers and political heavyweights are nervously awaiting Halliburton's release of its latest earnings report, now scheduled for Wednesday. Bad news could lead to allegations of fraud and mismanagement like the ones that have befallen Enron..

Confidence in Halliburton and its imminent statement is all the shakier given that the firm's accountant is none other than Arthur Andersen LLB -- the same outfit mixed up in destroying documents and defrauding shareholders in the Enron affair.

Non-partisan watchdog groups warn than Halliburton shows all the signs of becoming another Enron.

"Halliburton is just as vulnerable to collapse but doesn't get much scrutiny," said Craig McDonald, director of Texans for Public Justice. "We definitely should be alarmed."

So, apparently, should the White House and the Republican Party -- big time.

According to public records, Halliburton and Cheney funneled nearly $500,000 to congressional candidates from 1997 to 2000, including more than $150, 000 to members of Congress sponsoring legislation that would limit the ability of workers to sue companies for asbestos exposure. The vast majority of the money has gone to Republicans -- just as, not surprisingly, did the great bulk of the company's contributions in the last presidential campaign.

Of special interest are Halliburton's payouts in connection with the highly controversial Fairness in Asbestos Compensation Act, a piece of legislation so outrageous that it has not yet passed the Congress. Halliburton gave big money to 49 of the 77 lawmakers who in 2000 co-sponsored the act in the House of Representatives and 14 of 29 co-sponsors of similar legislation in the Senate.

Halliburton's spending on the bill was intensely partisan, including 46 House Republicans and only three House Democrats, along with 14 Senate Republicans and no Senate Democrats.

Of the more than $150,000 Halliburton doled out over the asbestos bill, all but $3500 went to Republicans -- a pro-Republican division of 98% to 2%.

Among the top beneficiaries were Tom De Lay (R-TX, $5500), Dick Armey (R-TX, $6000), and J.C. Watts (R-OK, $7000).

Cheney, as an individual, donated $12,500 to members who sponsored or co-sponsored the asbestos bill.

A Halliburton spokeswoman, Zelma Branch, told reporters that the contributions were "purely coincidental."

Further complicating matters, while Halliburton, under Cheney, pressed for radical deregulation, it also fed richly at the federal trough, benefiting from at least $3.8 billion in federal contracts and taxpayer-insured loans between 1995 and 2000.

If he were to become vice president, one Halliburton official who admires Cheney but asked to remain anonymous said in 2000, "the company’s government contracts would obviously go through the roof." But the company's demise now could well bring close scrutiny to its government contracts, both before and after Cheney and George W. Bush "won" the disputed 2000 election.

There were some scattered press reports about Halliburton during the 2000 campaign, no more. Even though charged by consumers and workers' groups with being an integral part of an asbestos industry which knowingly poisoned its own workers for years, Halliburton escaped media scrutiny. Reporters were too busy tracking down every last detail of Al Gore's "exaggerations" and the phony Buddhist Temple non-scandal to pay much mind to Dick Cheney and Halliburton -- to say nothing of Halliburton's hundreds of thousands of victims, Americans who are today riddled with cancer and other diseases which could have been prevented, except for Halliburton's immoral worship of the bottom line.

Now, just maybe, the press will start paying attention.

. Developing furiously.... Sources: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2002/01/20/BU125026.DTL http://www.opensecrets.org/pressreleases/cheney/halliburton.htm http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/hall04.shtml http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/hallchart04.shtml http://www.public-i.org/story_02_011402.htm http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=hal&d=c&t=1y http://www.public-i.org/story_01_080200.htm U.S. embassies assisted Cheney firm. (Associated Press, Oct. 26, 2000) Cheney's standard of living soars in private sector. (Los Angeles Times, Oct. 19, 2000)



-- Cherri (jessam5@home.com), January 24, 2002

Answers

Excellent post, Cherri. Things are getting very very interesting.

-- Peter Errington (petere7@starpower.net), January 24, 2002.

Dickhead Cheney is as crooked as they come. No wonder that sleazy bastard is always hiding unnderground like the filthy mole that he is.

-- (Dickhead @ majorleague. scumbag ("big time")), January 24, 2002.

I'm convinced that then CEO Cheney directed Halliburton to purchase Dresser Industries for the sole purpose of fighting subsequent asbestos legislation that it otherwise never would have been involved with. Yeah, that sounds smart.

-- Carlos (riffraff@cybertime.net), January 25, 2002.

Dammit Carlos! Stop muddying the waters with logic already.

-- So (cr@t.es), January 25, 2002.

The main point of Cherri's article has to do with bribery through campaign finance. (Not that I agree with the article about the Bhuddist Temple "non-scandal.")

-- Peter Errington (petere7@starpower.net), January 25, 2002.


Cheney actually hated Halliburton Socs and this was his way of stickin 'em. Smooth old dude. Gotta admire the style.

-- Carlos (riffraff@cybertime.net), January 25, 2002.

I'm convinced that then CEO Cheney directed Halliburton to purchase Dresser Industries for the sole purpose of fighting subsequent asbestos legislation that it otherwise never would have been involved with. Yeah, that sounds smart.
-- Carlos (riffraff@cybertime.net), January 25, 2002.

I believe I have found the answer to your question Carlos.

``It's not going away, it is serious, but at least the problem appears to be contained.''

Did you even read what was written above????

What is to stop Cheney from getting what he was lobbied for when he worked there? It would be interesting to find out who has been buying stock in certain companies and sells it when "rumors" such as this drives the stock up.

I also wonder how many industries that Enron bought up secretly which will profit greatly if caps are inforced, or other regulations and rules are softened by the Bush administration.

There are so many industries which stand to profit greatly by all of the policy changes, lowering of standards, and removal of regulations that have been quietly (in the most part) taking place since the first days of this administration. I realize you probably have not gone out of your way to look at all of the changes have been made, especially those that are not publiclly announced, but there have been an unbelievable amount. Most of them done so quickly that there appears to have been little thought to the long term consequences. Industry does a horrible job of policing itself, there has been an attitude of profit over anything else, even safety in the past 20 years or so. This attitude did not come from the baby boomers, it is their children and their children's children who grew up with the instant gradification attitude, a belief that somehow they deserve to get rich at any cost and little effort, and with little or no concern for other people. Another attitude they seem to have is that the rules and laws do not apply to them, that it is OK to go through a red light, cheat on taxes, park in handicap parking etc. Commercialization has told them that they are "special" somehow more deserving, better and superior to the majority of other human beings. They always make excuses and try to justify wrongdoing. This attitude has moved into business. Kenny Lay is a perfect example of this mentality. He freely shared his view that regulations should not exist, that business should pay no taxes. His attitude is apalling, he bragged about his influence with the administration, would blatently threaten to use his influence to get what he wanted. He bragged about the influence he had on GW Bush. He was a frequent overnight guest in the first Bush while house, and provided jets and money to this Bush during his stint as Governer and right up until GW Bush was sworn in as president.


***PING***
The company has paid out more than $150 million in recent damages for asbestos cases -- and has about 260,000 related lawsuits still pending. More than $19 billion in Halliburton shareholder value has vanished since the summer of 2001
It does not say that these problems existed when Cheney worked for them, it says recent And Cheney was in office during the summer of 2001
***PING***
To try and stem off the disaster, Halliburton has given huge gobs of money to former and present Congressional Republicans in order to gain favorable deregulation rulings and other breaks.
***PING***
According to public records, Halliburton and Cheney funneled nearly $500,000 to congressional candidates from 1997 to 2000, including more than $150, 000 to members of Congress sponsoring legislation that would limit the ability of workers to sue companies for asbestos exposure.
***PING***
Of special interest are Halliburton's payouts in connection with the highly controversial Fairness in Asbestos Compensation Act, a piece of legislation so outrageous that it has not yet passed the Congress.
***PING***
Cheney, as an individual, donated $12,500 to members who sponsored or co-sponsored the asbestos bill.
***PING***
Even though charged by consumers and workers' groups with being an integral part of an asbestos industry which knowingly poisoned its own workers for years, Halliburton escaped media scrutiny.
***PING***
Halliburton's hundreds of thousands of victims, Americans who are today riddled with cancer and other diseases which could have been prevented

that's hundreds of thousands of victims,100's of of times more people than died on 911. Unless you doubt the validity of the number of people effected, there have been special reports and invesigative reports about the situation. It isn't some vague rumor started by "right wing bias in the media", it is a well documented fact. Just do a search.

Now for todays news;

Yahoo -Stocks rise in companies with asbestos exposure liabilities due to rumors of limits on compensation.

By David Howard Sinkman

NEW YORK, Jan 25
(Reuters)
- Shares of major U.S. companies with asbestos liabilities climbed Friday on growing hopes that the U.S. government may intervene in an attempt to limit the extent of any future exposure to asbestos settlements, money managers said on Friday.

Among those companies with liabilities that are gaining in afternoon trade on the New York Stock Exchange are Halliburton Co.(NYSE:HAL
-
news), Georgia-Pacific Corp.(NYSE:GP
-
news), both up more than 8 percent, and USG Corp.(NYSE:USG
-
news), which shot up more than 21 percent.

``There are rumors that the president is going to discuss asbestos and talk about liability limitations,'' said Seth Tobias, a money manager for Circle T Partners, referring to President George W. Bush's State of the Union address on Tuesday. Tobias said that nearly 40 percent of the Dow Jones Industrial Average has asbestos exposure.

White House officials declined to comment specifically on talks of asbestos, saying that the president's comments on Tuesday are expected to focus broadly on the war on terrorism, homeland security and ways to lift the economy out of recession.

Shares in building materials company USG jumped $1.49 to $8.54, forest products company Georgia-Pacific rose $2.13 to $23.88, oil driller and services company Halliburton rose more than a $1 to $14.42, packaging company Crown Cork & Seal Co. Inc. (NYSE:CCK
-
news) gained more than 6 percent to $4.70, and Dow Chemical Co.(NYSE:DOW
-
news), the No. 2 U.S chemical company rose about 4 percent higher to $29.09.

``The thing driving some gains today is the rumor that Bush is going to cap asbestos litigation,'' said portfolio manager Uri Landesman. ``It's kind of been rocking the market.''

An explosion of asbestos-related legal claims is battering many of the most recognized manufacturing names in the United States, and threatens to push some into bankruptcy, said money managers.

Industry experts said today's rebound is also a reaction to being heavily oversold on indiscriminate asbestos fears.

``Now that investors have had a chance to look at this in the sober light of day and listened to the year-end conference call ... the asbestos problem appears to be contained,'' said Tom Escott an analyst at SunTrust Robinson Humphrey.

``It's not going away, it is serious, but at least the problem appears to be contained.''

Money managers and industry experts place the blame for these fears related to asbestos claims squarely on class-action lawyers, who have clouded the outlook of these companies.

``These stocks, like Minnesota Mining & Manufacturing Co. (NYSE:MMM
-
news), Halliburton and Georgia-Pacific, were oversold last week on lawyer-induced fears of asbestos issues. Now the stocks are coming back to reality,'' said Paul Foster, an investment strategist at Beyondthebull.com.

-- Cherri (jessam5@home.com), January 26, 2002.




-- Cherri (jessam5@home.com), January 26, 2002.

Read it all Cherri. Don't think your efforts are entirely wasted on me. Like the ACLU, when you actually hit one out of twenty I'm damned glad you're out there.

Trying to pick on threads that have too much shotgun in them. In truth, you don't like Cheney not just because he's a republican but that he happens also to be vice president. If the guy was lucky enough to be spending his retirement quietly in Idaho it wouldn't matter a wit. Would his crimes then be less?

The argument is pure politics Cherri and doesn't draw me often cause it's a hopeless banter game played only by true believers. Did I ever tell you the 3 great things that Clinton accomplished that Bush Sr never could have? NAFTA, Welfare Reform & Don't Ask Don't Tell. Grateful to him for bludgeoning his constiuency for the better good.

-- Carlos (riffraff@cybertime.net), January 26, 2002.


Carlo's. I don't judge people because of their political views. My Father was a stonch Republican until he died. I loved my Father more than anyone else except my Children.

I do not automaticlly dislike Cheney because he is vice president. I do not like the things he has done in the past, is doing now, and what I fear he will do in the future.

He was in charge of picking the Vice President to run with GWBush, he picked himself.

Seeing the corruption and the way they have manipulated the public with lies and twisted facts is what made me stand back and decide I did not wish to back them anymore. It was not easy to have to realize that the party I had backed since I started voting was corrupted and using every method they could to go against what the public as a whole wanted done in this country.

There has been so much conflict of interest in this administration. Clinton got mass media coverage of conservatives screaming "conflict of interest" over Coffee Clatches in the White House that were fully recorded on videotape. They even had lip readers try to see if something corrupt was going on. Now we get GWBush filling his administration with Enron employees who will be decision makers about the very policies they had been lobbying the government for while working for Enron. Like...Hello...no one mentioning during the confirmation hearings about conflict of interest, and the few who dared to on a few candidates got told that it was revenge for what was done to Clinton. And amazingly whenever one of these contiversial hearings got media attention, BILL CLINTON was accused of trashing the white house or ripping off Air Force 1. Getting the picture yet? They blatently tried to shift attention away from any wrongdoing on their part by going after Clinton (or Al Gore) with some false scandal once again. The Republicans even brag that they have dug up dirt on the Democrats that they would use if any of them opposed them on the tax reform bill. Pure Blackmail, since it didn't matter if the "dirt" was real or not, the country had been mindwashed to believe anything they were fed without even the least amount of proof or facts. That is why you can name a LOT of crimes Clinton is supposidly guilty of, but are not aware that they have all been proven false (except for the Monica situation). That is also why we experienced 911, when Clinton tried to bring down OBL he was accused of "wagging the dog", That is why Clinton's efforts to have airports more secure from terrorists were opposed by the republicans, that is why he designated OBL and the Taliban as terrorists, which Bush threw out in his early days in office and made demands that the Taliban let them build a pipeline through the country or we would reign bombs down apon them. Who was going to profit from those pipelines? Enron, Halliburton? Both? How many in the administration did not sell their shares in Enron and other companies until they were found out and forced to? Why did they get away with making excuses? Why did Cheney hold republican fundraisers in his residence right after the election when those same republican's raised hell over coffee in the whitehouse? It is almost as if they didn't expect anyone to notice, which would no one would have except that the information was passed around the internet until it could not be ignored by the media. The same media witch they claim is left wing, but is legally owned by rightwing extremist entities. Why did Ari Fletcher openly threaten the media about what they reported? Could it be that he actually believed that he could get away with it like he had in Texas, where anyone who opposed Bush would be destroyed? Does Bush actually believe that there should be limits on "free speech, unless he honestly feels that way. Pretty blatant and obvious ploy to have him carry that book that is supposed to "expose" the media leading to the left, it is no more than an attempt to try to sway the public into believing that the facts that are now coming out are nothing more than an extreme left wing conspiracy... Kind of like the pot cally the kettle black. He is now using that as an excuse for not talking to the media. Geeze, they are really getting pathetic in their attempt to manipulate public perception.

Geeze, did the administrations threats to the Taliban piss them off and set the gears in motion for their campaign against America? There is a timeline here that should really be looked into. Or doesn't anyone care? How much will American's suffer due to the orragance and flippant attitude of this administration that the bottom line is number one and human lives don't matter.

It's sickening to me that Enron gave so much money to the campaign and turned around and got so many Enron employees seats in the administration. Not to mention them being the biggest contributors to congress.

Now it is coming out that Halliburton has done the same or worse as Enron has done when it comes to contributions and getting what they want. Where are the headlines screaming about these things? Why is the white house going so far out of their way to make excuses and tell lies (which come out anyway) if they have done nothing and have nothing to hide? Why are they so hell bent on twisting things around to be revenge from the left? Why is the white house still dictating what is publicized about these things? If it were not for the internet, this information would be almost completly stiffled. You may not have noticed but all of the "investigations" are centered around the paper shredding at Andersons and little is being directed at the Enron corporate organization. Off shore banking to avoid taxes? Would not have been an issue if the tax was not only repealed but taxes reimberced for the past 15 years. Seems Enron assumed that would indeed happen, that the legeslation would be passed and the taxes they have not paid in 4 of the past 5 years would not matter. How is it that they knew what would be done unless they had first hand knowledge of it? Now think back to the fight in the House over the stimulation package. Look at who recieved the most contributions from Enron, and who fought hardest for the package to pass. The timeline is amazing, Enron didn't get the money and tax breaks the assumed they would get and they headed downhill. 911 cost them, bigtime. Seems the many people newly unemployed, and the cost of "the war", the bailout of the airline industry (who dumped employees anyway) caused the public to fight against the idea of throwing even more money to big corporations money to "stimulate" the economy. They had just seen that it didn't work. It wasn't intended to stimulate anything except to "bail out" Enron and their scams.

Next we get Halliburton. The players are all involved with each other, the congress swayed(??)and/or blackmailed (by the scandals that might be released) or by their pet projects failing (like they tried to do to Jeffords) if they did not comply with the administration's demands which do not benifit Americans as a whole, but benifit special interests who funded their elections and/or whom they worked for before getting their posts in the Bush administration.

Shall we do as the Bush administration is demanding and stop looking into possible conflicts of interest and possible corruption, or should we do the right thing and investigate and find the facts-whatever they prove to be. If they have nothing to hide, why is there such an effort to twist and hide the facts?

Halliburton gave big money to 49 of the 77 lawmakers who in 2000 co-sponsored the act in the House of Representatives and 14 of 29 co-sponsors of similar legislation in the Senate.

Halliburton's spending on the bill was intensely partisan, including 46 House Republicans and only three House Democrats, along with 14 Senate Republicans and no Senate Democrats.

Of the more than $150,000 Halliburton doled out over the asbestos bill, all but $3500 went to Republicans -- a pro-Republican division of 98% to 2%.

Among the top beneficiaries were Tom De Lay (R-TX, $5500), Dick Armey (R-TX, $6000), and J.C. Watts (R-OK, $7000). And you may notice these are some of the biggest screamers about Clinton's "so called" corruption (which were proven

to have no basis in fact).

Cheney, as an individual, donated $12,500 to members who sponsored or co-sponsored the asbestos bill.

A Halliburton spokeswoman, Zelma Branch, told reporters that the contributions were "purely coincidental." There are too many coincidences involved in the Bush administration and certain big businesses.

Be foreworned, this is just the tip of the iceburg.

-- Cherri (jessam5@home.com), January 27, 2002.



Cherri:

I agree with quite a bit of what you say about the Bush Administration, though certainly not all of it. But you make claims about the cleanliness of the Clinton Administration which I find nonsensical.

"crimes Clinton supposedly is guilty of....all been proven false (except for the Monica situation)"

"screamers about Clinton's 'so called' corruption (which were proven to have no basis in fact.)"

Italics mine, both quotations.

Filegate. The incredible espionage career of John Hwang. Blatant campaign finance violations. The Mark Rich pardon. And I could go on.

I'll tell you what was proven about these cases: The ability of the Clinton spin machine to come out with the worst lying shit imaginable and have huge sections of the gullible public believe it.

-- Peter Errington (petere7@starpower.net), January 27, 2002.


Good points Peter. Also, do you find it a bit odd that a man (Joseph Lieberman) who spent much time last year trying to steal the election for Al Gore rush right into this whole Enron thing to "investigate". Never mind the fact that this man has received a QUARTER MILLION DOLLARS in campaign contributions from Enron.

-- lamey (lbug@294days.com), January 27, 2002.

Since you find Senator Lieberman's position odd because he received a "QUARTER MILLION DOLLARS" from Enron, just to be consistant, aren't you required to find President Bush's position more than twice as odd, in view of the fact that he received more than twice as much?

-- Little Nipper (canis@minor.net), January 28, 2002.

Cherri, if I read you right and you are right we are doomed as a republic. The labyrinth you weave is so complete and pervasive that I can't imagine democratic leadership not being part of the conspiracy as well. As for Clinton, well, he did get reelected didn't he and did enjoy a favorable public confidence in his second term as well. Would bet you worry more about his 'scandals' than most of us. It was good press. Bush & Cheney aren't.

-- Carlos (riffraff@cybertime.net), January 29, 2002.

"Would bet you worry more about his (Clinton) 'scandals' than most of us."

Nope, you Repugs still don't get it. That's just it, everyone except the rightwingers didn't care at all about Clinton and Monica.

"It was good press."

Nope, wrong again. It was very BAD press. It was tabloid garbage dug up by scum like Matt Drudge and the only reason it persisted so long is because it was funded by Repugs who were desperate to destroy Clinton.

"Bush & Cheney aren't."

Three strikes, you're out. This scandal is BIG. Thousands of people were robbed of their life savings. The people want to get to the bottom of it and make damn sure it doesn't happen again. This one is going to go down in the history books as the scandal that finally triggered major campaign finance reform. In addition, it will be the last time that the people will stand by and let sleazy businessmen be "elected" into so much power.

-- (back@to.dugout), January 29, 2002.



"Good points Peter. Also, do you find it a bit odd that a man (Joseph Lieberman) who spent much time last year trying to steal the election for Al Gore rush right into this whole Enron thing to "investigate". Never mind the fact that this man has received a QUARTER MILLION DOLLARS in campaign contributions from Enron.

-- lamey (lbug@294days.com), January 27, 2002."

Hey Lamey, where did you come up with that amount? Any links to prove it?

Last I heard, Lieberman had received $2,000 from Enron in 1994, that was it. That is also a HELL of a lot different than the kind of deal Enron has going with The Bush and Dick Show.

-- (repugs@are.liars), January 29, 2002.


Silliness. Monica was the best thing that could have happened to the Clinton presidencey. You should be grateful for the a smokescreen and foil that couldn't have been invented or bought. The woman deserves a library of her own.

-- Carlos (riffraff@cybertime.net), January 31, 2002.

And Enron is the best thing that could have happened to the Bush pretzeldensey. The true nature of these puppet politician criminals is being exposed, and hopefully they will soon be put "out of commission" (pun intended). The best thing the repug bottom feeders could dig up was some trivial penis chronicles, whereas this scandal is huge, and means a lot to a lot of decent hard-working Americans.

-- (dubya@goin.down), January 31, 2002.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ