Steve Peacock's U.S. Trade & Aid Monitor

Sen. Menendez Responds (Sort Of) to HSBC Dirty Dollars Inquiry (Commentary)

Media scrutiny of the HSBC money-laundering scandal has died down, but I am not letting  Sen. Robert Menendez (D) -- who represents me here in New Jersey -- nor any other congressional recipients of the disgraced bank's political action committee's generosity off the hook.

Despite calling -- as a journalist -- the leadership of the House Financial Services and the Senate Banking committees, until today only one member responded.  And the spokesman for that one leader (one of the few who has not gotten or taken a penny from the HSBC PAC in fifteen years)  -- declined comment.The rest have remained steadfastly silent.

Today, however, Sen. Menendez had this to say in response to my questions, "In light of HSBC's dealing with Mexican drug lords and suspected Iranian terrorist supporters, what do you plan to do with the bank PAC donations you have received over the years?  Will you reject future offers?"

Dear  Mr. Peacock :

Thank you for contacting me regarding an issue with my re-election campaign.  

As you may know, I am currently up for re-election to the United States Senate, with the election taking place on November 6, 2012.  While I would like to respond to your inquiry, I am legally prohibited from discussing any activity related to a political organization, such as my re-election campaign, with official Senate resources.  As such, I would encourage you to contact my campaign with your inquiry.

Again, thank you for sharing your thoughts with me.  Please do not he sitate to contact me  if I may be of further assistance.  I invite you to visit my website http://menendez.senate.gov to learn  more about how I am standing up for New Jersey families in the United States Senate.

Sincerely,

Robert Menendez, United States Senator

He says he cannot comment, yet tells me to contact his campaign for a comment? How frustrating. I will not accuse Menendez, however, of using the upcoming re-election campaign as an excuse to continue his silence, as indeed I am aware there are such restrictions as he claimed. Still, if the Menendez campaign remains mute on the matter through November, the senator risks jeopardizing what's left of his integrity and reputation.

In the meantime, dear citizens, please sign the petition urging the HSBC PAC congressional recipients to diverst themselves of those tainted campaign contributions. Please take action now.

-- Steve Peacock

RELATED COVERAGE:

Scandal-Plagued HSBC Shopped Congress for Favors

Key Committee is Lawmaker’s Cash Cow (The Revered Review, Aug. 4, 2012)

Federal Lawmakers Silent on Tainted HSBC Funds (The Revered Review, July 27, 2012)

Scandal-Plagued HSBC Shopped Congress for Favors

The fallout from the HSBC money laundering scandal continues to reverberate around the globe, but U.S. Congress members apparently are in no hurry to return millions of dollars they have received from the scandal-plagued bank's political action committee.

U.S. Trade & Aid Monitor conducted an analysis of Federal Election Commission records specific to the company PAC's generosity toward Congress. The investigation centered upon two congressional panels with primary oversight of the industry: The Senate Committee on Banking, Housing & Urban Affairs, and the House Committee on Financial Services.

Since 1997, the earliest available FEC electronic records, HSBC bestowed its greatest beneficence upon the House panel’s leadership.

The bank’s direct contributions to individual leaders amounted to hundreds of thousands; however, HSBC’s financial support of the American Bankers Association PAC, or BANKPAC – plus many dozens of other financial, insurance, and law firm PACs for which HSBC provides funding – in turn donated millions of dollars to a handful of key members.

The Monitor offered two basic questions for committee leadership to answer:

1. In light of the U.S. Senate’s allegations that HSBC laundered billions, for example, from murderous Mexican drug cartels and rogue nations such as Iran, do you intend to return any of the funds received from HSBC?
2. Will you accept or reject future offers from the HSBC North America PAC?

In the few instances where leaders obtained zero or minimal HSBC funds, WND inquired whether the member had rejected or simply never had been offered donations.

The spokesperson of only one congressional leader – who declined to be identified – returned an e-mail to the Monitor. In that instance, the congressman, who received a small amount from HSBC several years ago, said he would rather not comment on the situation.

As of this deadline, the Monitor’s questions otherwise continue to be met with a wall of silence.

HSBC’s biggest financial beneficiary on the committees is Chairman Spencer Bachus, R-Ala., who since 1997 raked in $45,500 directly from the HSBC PAC. It most recently cut a $1,000 check for the Bachus for Congress Committee in November.

HSBC in May likewise donated $2,500 to the Financial Services Roundtable, a PAC that has given Bachus $33,499 from 1997 onward, including a $5,000 check in February.

Subcommittee Vice Chairman Jeb Hensarling, R-Texas, has reaped $34,500 from HSBC since 2002, last receiving $1,000 in September 2011. BANKPAC, however, donated $52,000 to his campaign in that same period.

Ranking Minority Member Barney Frank, D-Mass., directly received $21,000 since 2002 from HSBC, which in turn gave $42,500 to BANKPAC – which in turn donated a total of $48,250 back to Frank.

The following is a run-down solely of direct HSBC PAC donations to the respective House Committee on Financial Services subcommittee leaders:

Insurance, Housing and Community Opportunity Subcommittee

• Chairman Judy Biggert, R-Ill.: $39,499 since 1998
• Vice Chairman Robert Hurt, R-Va.: Single $1,000 payment on May 18, 2011
• Ranking Minority Member Luis V. Gutierrez, D-Ill.: $3,500 since 1998

Financial Institutions and Consumer Credit Subcommittee

• Chairman Shelley Moore Capito, R-W.Va.: $10,000 from 2000-2004
• Vice Chairman James B. Renacci, R-Ohio: $0
• Ranking Minority Member Carolyn B. Maloney, D-N.Y.: $12,000 since 1997

Domestic Monetary Policy and Technology Subcommittee

• Chairman Ron Paul, R-Texas: Single $500 payment in 1998
• Vice Chairman Walter B. Jones, R-N.C.: $11,400 since 1999
• Ranking Minority Member Wm. Lacy Clay, D-Mo.: $10,500 since 1999

Capital Markets and Government Sponsored Enterprises Subcommittee

• Chairman Scott Garrett, R-N.J.: $24,500 since 2002
• Vice Chairman David Schweikert, R-Ariz.: $0
• Ranking Minority Member Maxine Waters, D-Calif.: $0

U.S. Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs leaders received significantly less than their House counterparts from HSBC. Chairman Tim Johnson, D-S.D., got $20,000 from the PAC since 1997.

While HSBC only gave $13,029 to Ranking Minority Member Richard Shelby since 1998, Shelby – who also serves as a senior member of the Senate Appropriations Committee – separately received millions during that period from a multitude of PACs in every imaginable industry sector.

The following is a run-down solely of direct HSBC PAC donations to the respective Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs subcommittee leaders:

Economic Policy Subcommittee

• Chairman Jon Tester, D-Mont.: $1,000 in 2009
• Ranking Minority Member David Vitter, R-La.: $3,000 since 2009

Housing, Transportation, and Community Development Subcommittee

• Chairman Robert Menendez, D-N.J.: $9,000 since 2006
• Ranking Minority Member Jim DeMint, R-S.C.: $1,000 in 2008

Financial Institutions and Consumer Protection Subcommittee

• Chairman Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio: $0
• Ranking Minority Member Bob Corker, R-Tenn.: $4,000 in 2008

Security and International Trade and Finance Subcommittee

• Chairman Mark R. Warner, D-Va.: $8,500 since 1999
• Ranking Minority Member Mike Johanns, R-Neb.: $0

Securities, Insurance, and Investment Subcommittee

• Chairman Jack Reed, D-R.I.: $3,000 since 2010
• Mike Crapo, R-Idaho: $16,000 since 2003

A spokesperson for the Center for Responsive Politics expressed concern about such linkages between industries such as the banking sector and members of Congress with jurisdiction over them.

Viveca Novak, CRP editorial and communications director, cautioned, however, against making a direct connection between contributions received and the perception of congressional favors granted.

“It creates at least the appearance of a conflict of interest when lawmakers running for re-election rely on contributions from the very companies they are supposed to be overseeing,” she said.

“Is this why Congress has such difficulty passing legislation that addresses some of the questionable practices of banks and others? There’s not a straight line between cause and effect, but there are grounds for raising questions about a link.”

Alluding to the Monitor’s questioning of House and Senate committee members about what their plans are for the campaign contributions, Novak said CRP is not taking a position “on what should be done with the donations already given.”

A similar version of this article first was published via WND.com on July 29.

RELATED COVERAGE:

Federal Lawmakers Silent on Tainted HSBC Funds (The Revered Review, July 27, 2012)

Key Committee is Lawmaker’s Cash Cow (The Revered Review, Aug. 4, 2012)

WND: Cash Flows for 'Madrassa' Lawmaker

Rep. Andre Carson (D-Ind.)

Check out my latest article for WND, "Cash flows for 'madrassa' lawmaker -- Contributors include Obama appointee as U.S. Marshal." For all it's worth, I spent two days researching and writing this piece, which reveals a surprising connection between a shady congressman and a high -ranking law enforcement official appointed by President Obama. Specific to U.S. Trade & Aid Monitor, the piece is quite relevant since the elected official in question,  Rep. Andre Carson, serves on powerful congressional panels having great influence upon -- and which are greatly influenced by -- cash-rich international corporations and unions seeking political favors.

U. S. Marshal Kerry Forestal

Armor & Irony: Destroy the Village & Sell Huts to Homeless Villagers

Isn't it ironic that U.S. industry produces items such as mini armored troop carriers while simultaneously manufacturing bombs known as sensor fuzed weapons, which are made to destroy such human-delivery watercraft?

Come to think of it, they probably limit sales of this disparate combination of protective and destructive goods to just the good guys. So, there you have it: a natural and understandable balance to an otherwise contradictory production schema. Similarly, I have found such a logical balance in the attempted bribery of Congress, whose members -- such as my dear congressman Rep. Don Sherwood (R-Pa.), indicted ex-House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Texas), and incarcerated felons such as ex-Rep. Randy “Duke” Cunningham (R-Cal.) -- have stood side-by-side to collect millions of dollars from the political action committees of global military-hardware behemoths such as Textron.

No, I’m not picking on Republicans, it’s just that uttering the phrase The Sherwood-DeLay-Cunningham Trio has an undeniably nice ring to it. Yes, indeed, the Democrats -- particularly the privileged few among the Armed Services or Appropriations Committee leadership -- also get their wheels greased by the Textron PAC and hundreds of other interest groups.

It's just plain ol' good business-sense to replenish the gold-laced feed bags attached to most elected federal officials' chins, both Democrat and Republican. It's irrelevant that such "investments" don't guarantee billions in reciprocal favors (i.e.: government contracts), because often there is a sufficient return on investment, and when there isn't, hey, it's always worth a shot.

In all fairness, Democrats such a John Murtha (Pa.) likewise have been targets of generosity from the Textron PAC, which gave the Murtha campaign a total of $50,000 between 1997 and 2005. On the other hand, that source of Textron cash for some reason came to a halt for Murtha in May 2005, when the donations ceased.

There‘s probably no connection between Textron‘s abrupt termination of support for Murtha and his well-publicized statement calling to end the occupation of Iraq -- where Textron is making a killing (literally and figuratively) through the continuous supply and re-supply of bombs and other war-making materials that are rained daily upon that nation.

“The war in Iraq is not going as advertised. It is a flawed policy wrapped in illusion,”Murtha said last year.

Rumor has it that Textron CEO Lewis B. Campbell said in response, "You’ve been a bad boy, Mr. Murtha, and we’re going to spank you on your proverbial pee-pee as punishment.”

Likewise, I’d have to rule out the possibility that The Sherwood-DeLay-Cunningham Trio’s unwavering support for the war (and its critical suppliers) had been related to Textron’s seemingly endless infusion of cash to the Trio (sans Cunningham, obviously, who will sit in a federal penitentiary for the next eight years for receiving bribes from military contractor lobbyists). While DeLay got less than half ($24,000) of what Murtha received in approximately the same time period, his obedience keeps the cash flowing, most recently in the form of a $2,500 check right before Christmas.

Sherwood, who sits a bit lower on the congressional pecking order as vice-chairman of the Appropriations Foreign Operations Subcommittee, received $10,000 from Textron PAC in that time frame, the last of which was a mere $1,000 back in September 2005. Sherwood isn’t complaining, though, as every penny gained takes him closer to satisfying his sealed settlement with former mistress Cynthia Ore, whom Sherwood has admitted (even to his wife) he capitalized upon her in his Capitol Hill apartment for five years, while denying he smacked her around with heavy envelopes reportedly stuffed with PAC cash and checks.

Textron, it should be noted, cranks out a diverse line of products, ranging from amphibious assault craft to sensor fuzed weapons. Textron, come to think of it, makes just about anything and everything, both in the realm of lifesaving and life taking. They are a true engine of economic growth, and are committed to integrity and the American way, as seemingly incompatible as those concepts may be.

Textron and its complex web of subsidiaries and affiliates provide, in its own words, "innovative technology solutions to meet the needs of the global aerospace and defense industries... The Textron name is well known in the areas of advanced weapons, surveillance systems, aircraft control components, specialty marine craft and armored vehicles... a $10 billion multi-industry company with 44,000 employees in 40 countries."

Ahhh... with such fine offerings, no wonder the company can confidently proclaim in its Code of Ethics: "At Textron, we are committed to the principles of INTEGRITY, RESPECT, TRUST, and PURSUIT OF EXCELLENCE in all relationships with CUSTOMERS, EMPLOYEES, SHAREHOLDERS, the COMMUNITY and the ENVIRONMENT." The company even publishes the Code in Chinese, Czech, English, Flemish, French, German, Italian, Japanese, Portuguese, Spanish and Swedish!

Do you realize what that means? It means they must be serious about being ethical (even if it is within their own narrowly construed vision of ethics), or else they wouldn't have gone though all this trouble to the entire world about it, right? I said right?

Oh, never mind. What it come down to is this: Textron is a winner, and CEO Lewis B. Campbell has lots of reasons to be proud. I mean, even if on the surface it appears that the company PAC wasted $7,000 in trying to help John Ashcroft get elected to the Senate in 2000, don’t forget that Congress passed the USA Patriot Act thanks to Ashcroft’s later efforts as Attorney General. And Textron’s surveillance technology unit can’t complain about that.