Madison Cawthorne (woo-doggy)

TreeFrogTrader said:
So, the dems nailed Cawthorn for promoting crypto and fined him 15K.

What will the fine be for dems who accepted mega-bucks from FTX/Bankman in return for their looking the other way. Maxine Waters being Exhibit A but not limited to Maxine by any means.

NEVERMIND.
More...

You do realize that as a Congressional representative it violates ethics to hype individual investments to others involving stocks, bonds. crypto, etc. -- especially in a scenario where you personally profit from the sales.

Campaign contributions from a firm that went bankrupt is a totally different matter and generally don't violate ethics rules unless the contributions exceeded limits or if there was some direct quid pro quo promised for the campaign contribution.
 
gwb-trading said:
Campaign contributions from a firm that went bankrupt is a totally different matter and generally don't violate ethics rules unless the contributions exceeded limits or if there was some direct quid pro quo promised for the campaign contribution.
More...

So you don't see any conflicts of interest when the Chair of the House Finance Committee which has oversight of any and all financial issues comments on an interacts with Sam Bankman who gave over a billion to dem and republican campaigns for protection? Yeh. go get Madison Cawthorne and let the people who lost billions from their lack of oversight fend for themselves.

You are either a fool or naive.

Maxine loves you.
FhyxcblVQAAuF28-736x551.jpeg

 
TreeFrogTrader said:
So you don't see any conflicts of interest when the Chair of the House Finance Committee which has oversight of any and all financial issues comments on an interacts with Sam Bankman who gave over a billion to dem and republican campaigns for protection? Yeh. go get Madison Cawthorne and let the people who lost billions from their lack of oversight fend for themselves.

You are either a fool or naive.

Maxine loves you.
FhyxcblVQAAuF28-736x551.jpeg

More...

So tell us which section of the Congressional Ethics rules this violates?

Thanks to Citizens United this level of campaign/PAC donations is perfectly legal. Take it up with the legal system if you don’t like the influence of big money in politics.
 
gwb-trading said:
So tell us which section of the Congressional Ethics rules this violates?
More...

Let's start with Rule number 1:

1. A Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee of the House shall behave at all times in a manner that shall reflect creditably on the House.

Looking the other way on FTX and failing to provide adequate oversight on such matters is/was a total abdication of their congressional responsibilities- particularly the House Finance Committee-.

But, hey, you bagged Madison Cawthorne and that is all that matters to you.
 
TreeFrogTrader said:
Let's start with Rule number 1:

1. A Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee of the House shall behave at all times in a manner that shall reflect creditably on the House.

Looking the other way on FTX and failing to provide adequate oversight on such matters is/was a total abdication of their congressional responsibilities- particularly the House Finance Committee-.

But, hey, you bagged Madison Cawthorne and that is all that matters to you.
More...

The Executive Branch has divisions like the SEC, FTC, etc. providing direct oversight, detecting fraud, and issuing penalties for misconduct. The legislature is responsible for creating laws and smart wealthy business owners and CEOs lobby the legislature and meet with legislators- it is part of their expected role.

The influence of big money in politics is definitely a concern — but does not violate Congressional ethic rules.

If it bugs you so much then you should recommend some realistic measures to reform the campaign donation system.
 
gwb-trading said:
If it bugs you so much then you should recommend some realistic measures to reform the campaign donation system.
More...

One of the factors that leads to reform is usually the exposing of misconduct or conflicts of interest by sitting house or senate members. My comments have been in the direction of examining and calling for further examination of the conflict of interest between key democrats and republicans who have oversight over the FTX scenario while also benefitting from his billion dollars of party and candidate contributions. I have not bought into the premise of your comments which seems to be that because they bagged Cawthorn via house ethic violation. Members can be doing all sorts of unsavory acts or outright felonies that are not necessarily under the purview of the house ethics committee, although are proper subjects of inquiry by the public, the media, and various interests groups that either want to expose their conduct or to expose it and also have it as a basis for further rule making or legislation (as in the case of insider trading by members).

This seems to bother you. I am just establishing that you have a boner for nailing Cawthorn but are pretty much okay with any scenario where there is no political benefit for you. This is how you roll with other scenarios too. Step one is that you identify your villain. Usually DeSantis, Gaetz, or Trump and have a whole portfolio links that go with it but you go out around any shady scenarios that do not include one of your designated villains. Meanwhile your Biden ilk are running a complete crime syndicate and selling out this country to China and anyone else who has the cash. Just in case you don't have a clue there are many laws on the books there. And the Biden Syndicate has violated all of them so don't tell me to go off and argue for laws if I am not satisfied.

Alright I am done. We are entering boring territory.
 
gwb-trading said:
So tell us which section of the Congressional Ethics rules this violates?

Thanks to Citizens United this level of campaign/PAC donations is perfectly legal. Take it up with the legal system if you don’t like the influence of big money in politics.
More...

weren't these cucks out here defending mypillowfuck, homedepot fuck, tesla fuck, and every other fuck that tried to traffic w/influence in previous WH because it "owned the libs"?
 
Let's see the latest with Madison...

Cawthorn faces $193K lawsuit over unpaid legal bills
An Indiana law firm says it hasn't been paid for its legal services in helping the outgoing congressman remain on the North Carolina primary ballot.
https://www.wral.com/cawthorn-faces-193k-lawsuit-over-unpaid-legal-bills/20630441/

Scandal-plagued Republican Rep. Madison Cawthorn failed to report another trade of 'Let's Go Brandon' coin — a violation of the federal STOCK Act
https://www.businessinsider.com/mad...crypto-stock-act-lets-go-brandon-coin-2022-12
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top