Cheney drops an F-bomb

[Faos]

If the fallout is bad will this give Bush a reason to choose another running mate?

Cheney curses senator over Halliburton criticism

http://cnn.allpolitics.printthis.clickability.com/pt/cpt?action=cpt&title=CNN.com+-+Cheney+curses+senator+over+Halliburton+criticism+-+Jun+24%2C+2004&expire=-1&urlID=10825391&fb=Y&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cnn.com%2F2004%2FALLPOLITICS%2F06%2F24%2Fcheney.leahy%2F&partnerID=2001

Thursday, June 24, 2004 Posted: 7:19 PM EDT (2319 GMT)


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Typically a break from partisan warfare, this year's Senate class photo turned smiles into snarls as Vice President Dick Cheney reportedly used profanity toward one senior Democrat, sources said.

Sen. Patrick Leahy of Vermont, who was on the receiving end of Cheney's ire, confirmed that the Vice President used profanity during Tuesday's class photo.

A spokesman for Cheney confirmed there was a "frank exchange of views."

Using profanity on the Senate floor while the Senate is session is against the rules. But the Senate was technically not in session at the time and the normal rules did not apply, a Senate official said.

The story, which was recounted by several sources, goes like this:

Cheney, who as president of the Senate was present for the picture day, turned to Leahy and scolded the senator over his recent criticism of the vice president for Halliburton's alleged war profiteering.

Cheney is the former CEO of Halliburton, and Democrats have suggested that while serving in the Bush administration he helped win lucrative contracts for his former firm, including a no-bid contract to rebuild Iraq.

Cheney's office has said repeatedly that the vice president has no role in government contracting and has severed all financial ties with the Texas-based oil services conglomerate.

Cheney was chief executive officer of Halliburton from 1995 to 2000. He resigned when he became George Bush's running mate.

Responding to Cheney's comment, Leahy reminded him of an earlier statement the vice president had made about him. Cheney then replied with profanity.

Leahy would not comment on the specifics of the story Thursday, but did confirm that Cheney used profanity.

"I think he was just having a bad day," said Leahy, "and I was kind of shocked to hear that kind of language on the floor."

Kevin Kellems, a spokesman for the vice president, said, "That doesn't sound like the kind of language that the vice president would use, but I can confirm that there was a frank exchange of views."

[Harrisment]

Classic...

[bamaslammer]

About time they ditched this nice "new" tone. Good for Cheney, because Leahy is a bastard anyhow.

[gifford1967]

I don't know much about Leahy, but he must be doing something right. Now just imagine if Gore had told someone to F- off. I can just hear the clucking from the Right. "He must be crazy." "Gore's gone off the deep end." "He even raised his voice."

[RocketMan Tex]

Bwah!

Leahy brought up Halliburton in the Senate. That's why Humpty Dumpty got pissed. How dare he bring up Cheney's war profiteering exploits in the Senate!

Without a doubt, this is the most arrogant and secretive Administration in US history. These assclowns are such crooks they make Richard Nixon look honest.

[Sir Jackie Chiles]

Do Republicans even like Cheney? Just curious.

From abroad, he looks like a total jerk, but I am too far away to make a judgment.

[Dennis2112]

Originally posted by RocketMan Tex
How dare he bring up Cheney's war profiteering exploits in the Senate!

Without a doubt, this is the most arrogant and secretive Administration in US history. These assclowns are such crooks they make Richard Nixon look honest.


Well if Cheney has:

1. no longer any financial connection to Halliburton
2. no responsibilty or say-so in who gets the contracts
3. sold every once of stock he had in the company

Where does the war profiteering come in?

[mc mark]

Originally posted by Sir Jackie Chiles

From abroad, he looks like a total jerk, but I am too far away to make a judgment.

Distance brings clarity! You are 100% correct sir!

[mc mark]

Originally posted by Dennis2112
Well if Cheney has:

1. no longer any financial connection to Halliburton
2. no responsibilty or say-so in who gets the contracts
3. sold every once of stock he had in the company

Where does the war profiteering come in?

I think you need to do a little more research Dennis.

[Dennis2112]

Originally posted by mc mark
I think you need to do a little more research Dennis.


How do you figure?

All the things I said are true.

[Faos]

Cheney uses `F word' in Senate

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/politics/2646176

Reuters News Service
WASHINGTON -- Vice President Dick Cheney blurted out the "F word" at Democratic Sen. Patrick Leahy of Vermont during a heated exchange on the Senate floor, congressional aides said Thursday.

The incident occurred Tuesday in a terse discussion between the two that touched on politics, religion and money, with Cheney finally telling Leahy to "f--- off" or "go f--- yourself," the aides said.

"I think he was just having a bad day," Leahy was quoted as saying on CNN, which first reported the incident. "I was kind of shocked to hear that kind of language on the floor."

"That doesn't sound like language the vice president would use, but there was a frank exchange of views," said Cheney spokesman Kevin Kellems.

According to congressional aides, Leahy said hello to Cheney on the floor of the chamber. Cheney, who is president of the Senate, then ripped into Leahy for the Democratic senator's criticism this week of alleged war profiteering in Iraq by Halliburton, the Houston-based oil services company that Cheney once ran.

During their exchange, Leahy said Republicans had accused Democrats of being anti-Catholic because they are opposed to some of President Bush's anti-abortion judges, the aides said.

That's when Cheney unloaded with the "F-bomb," aides said.

[MadMax]

I am certainly not a fan of Cheney.

But it strikes me that this is one of those events that if you identify with party X you defend like crazy when it's your guy...but attack like crazy when the other side does it.

if it had been Leahy dropping the "F" bomb, someone from the right would be here this morning talking about how classless it was...and someone from the left would be attacking it.

[gifford1967]

Originally posted by Dennis2112
How do you figure?

All the things I said are true.



Cheney office denies role in Halliburton deal
E-mail cited by Time implies veep helped ex-employer get Iraq contract
From Suzanne Malveaux
CNN Washington Bureau
Tuesday, June 1, 2004 Posted: 7:45 AM EDT (1145 GMT)


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Vice President Dick Cheney's office denied Sunday that he was involved in a coordinated effort to secure a multibillion dollar Iraq oil deal for Halliburton, his former employer.

A reference to such an arrangement was made in an internal Pentagon e-mail from an Army Corps of Engineers official to another Pentagon employee, Time magazine reports in its June 7 edition, which is due on newsstands Monday.

The existence of the e-mail was confirmed to CNN by a senior administration official familiar with it.

The e-mail -- dated March 5, 2003 -- says Douglas Feith, undersecretary of defense for policy, approved the arrangement to award the contract to the oil-services company, the administration official said.

According to an e-mail excerpt in Time, the contract was "contingent on informing WH [White House] tomorrow. We anticipate no issues since action has been coordinated w[ith] VP's office."

The Corps of Engineers gave Halliburton the contract three days later without seeking other bids, Time reports.

Time says it found the e-mail "among documents provided by Judicial Watch, a conservative watchdog group."

The senior official told CNN the e-mail was a typical "heads-up" memo from one government agency to another that "a decision has been made, we're about to announce this contract, and as a courtesy we are alerting the White House of a public announcement. This is a standard practice."

The "coordinated action" referred to, the senior administration official said, was "that of publicly announcing the contract decision that has already been made."

The heads-up would have been given because of Cheney's previous involvement in the company as chief executive officer, and the anticipated controversy over the noncompetitive bid, the official said.

"The vice president and his office have played no role whatsoever in government contracting since he left private business to campaign for vice president" in 1999, Cheney spokesman Kevin Kellems said Sunday.

Time reports the e-mail also says Feith got the "authority to execute RIO," or Restore Iraqi Oil, from his supervisor, Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz.

The contract was one of several Halliburton and its subsidiaries were awarded by the government over the past year.

Cheney was chairman and chief executive officer of the Texas-based Halliburton Co., one of the world's largest service providers to the oil and gas industry, from 1995 to 2000, when he resigned to run for vice president.


1. no longer any financial connection to Halliburton
2. no responsibilty or say-so in who gets the contracts
3. sold every once of stock he had in the company

Cheney still receives about $150,000 a year in deferred payments for work he performed as chairman. He also holds more than 433,000 stock options, according to a report last fall by the Congressional Research Office requested by Sen. Frank Lautenberg, a New Jersey Democrat. (Full story)

Cheney has insisted in the past that the deferred compensation was set up two years before he became a vice presidential candidate in 2000 and that he assigned all his stock options to a charitable trust just before being sworn in.






Find this article at:
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/05/30/cheney.halliburton



1. and 3. are inaccurate on their face. You might believe 2. if you still believe in the Easter Bunny.

[mc mark]

Originally posted by Dennis2112
How do you figure?

All the things I said are true.

http://www.truthout.com/docs_03/092703B.shtml

A Congressional Research Service report released yesterday concluded that federal ethics laws treat Vice President Cheney's annual deferred compensation checks and unexercised stock options as continuing financial interests in the Halliburton Co.

The report, from the law division of the congressional research arm of the Library of Congress, said deferred salary or compensation received from a private corporation -- as well as unexercised stock options -- may represent a continuing financial interest as defined by federal ethics laws.

Cheney received deferred compensation of $147,579 in 2001 and $162,392 in 2002, with payments scheduled to continue for three more years.


http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0923-09.htm

But lost in the winks and nudges of his appearance on "Meet the Press" was an outright lie regarding his ties to Halliburton, the oil service company he headed in the 1990s: "Since I left Halliburton to become George Bush's vice president, I've severed all my ties with the company, gotten rid of all of my financial interest. I have no financial interest in Halliburton of any kind and haven't had, now, for over three years."

Really?

Sen. Frank Lautenberg, the New Jersey Democrat, wasn't so sure. He looked into Cheney's financial disclosure forms filed with the Office of Government Ethics. This is what he found: In 2001, Halliburton paid Cheney a salary of $205,298. In 2002, the company paid him $162,392. He is to receive similar payments this year and for the next two years. Those are "deferred salary" payments -- not retirement benefits or payments from escrow accounts, but, as Lautenberg points out, "an ongoing corporate obligation that is paid from company funds." If Halliburton were to go under, the payments would stop.

That, of course, is not about to happen. The stock market has tanked in the last three years. The economy continues to lurk between recession and Herbert Hoover's shadow. But Halliburton's stock value in less than a year (going back to last October) has grown 75 percent. Hint: Halliburton is the Pentagon's top contractor in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. And Cheney, a proponent, if not a fan, of both wars, holds 433,333 Halliburton stock options. I have no financial interest in Halliburton of any kind. If Cheney's deferred salary and stock options don't constitute a financial interest of any kind, then the vice president's conception of reality is as questionable as his ethics. The fact that he has pledged not to profit from stock sales by giving profits to a charity doesn't diminish the extent of his ties.

Cheney is the Bush administration's hawk in chief. His company's profitable subsidiary (to say former company would stretch the truth) is Kellogg Brown & Root, which houses and feeds American soldiers deployed around the world, and provides an array of other services, from maintaining supply lines to running POW camps. The Pentagon and reconstruction contracts KRB has snagged are mind-boggling: Iraq oil field repairs: $7 billion. Other services in Iraq: $613 million. Afghanistan: $62.2 million. In the Balkans: $1.6 billion. Hungary: $287.7 million. Those contracts explain Halliburton's much healthier stock price of late.
So for taxpayers at the moment, the most relevant connection isn't Saddam Hussein's ties to al-Qaida. It is Dick Cheney's, and government's, ties to Halliburton.

[mc mark]

1. Cheney still has stock options in Halliburton. In September 2003, Cheney told a national TV audience that "since I left [as CEO of] Halliburton to become George Bush's vice president, I've severed all my ties with the company, gotten rid of all my financial interest." Cheney, however, still owns 433,000 of stock options in Halliburton. The Congressional Research Service found that this constitutes "a continuing financial interest in the company." (CNN)

2. Cheney still receives a salary from Halliburton. Along with stock options, Cheney still receives a six-figure "deferred" salary from Halliburton each year. (CBS)

3. Cheney's office has "coordinated" the awarding of government contracts to Halliburton. Since taking office, Halliburton has been awarded billions in federal contracts. Cheney has adamantly denied any involvement in the awarding of federal contracts, insisting "as Vice President, I have absolutely no influence of, involvement of, knowledge of in any way, shape or form of contracts led by the [Army] Corps of Engineers or anybody else in the Federal Government." But an internal Pentagon e-mail obtained by Time Magazine revealed that a $7 billion contract was "coordinated w [the] VP's [Vice President's] office." (Time)

http://winningargument.blogspot.com/2004/06/cheney-still-has-financial-ties-to.html

[Trader_Jorge]

Originally posted by gifford1967
Cheney still receives about $150,000 a year in deferred payments for work he performed as chairman. He also holds more than 433,000 stock options, according to a report last fall by the Congressional Research Office requested by Sen. Frank Lautenberg, a New Jersey Democrat. (Full story)
[/B]

1. The deferred compensation that Cheney receives is money that he earned years ago when he was the CEO. Halliburton's success or failures have nothing to do with the level of this allocation. It is already set. It doesn't matter how many contracts Halliburton gets -- this amount of money isn't going to change. Even in a bankruptcy situation (extremely unlikely), this money would be virtually untouchable. Most people who are unfamiliar with finance can't understand that deferred comp is not a financial tie to a company. Gifford, you can't understand it. All it is is electing to take your salary/bonus/etc in the future as opposed to the present. That's all it is. No financial tie.
DEBUNKED

2. The Vice President's office has no say so whatsoever in awarding contracts. Halliburton got the contract because it is world reknowned as the best in its field. Gifford, I seriously doubt you work in the energy space. If you did, you would know this. They are the premier reconstruction, oilfield infrastructure, and infrastructure company on this planet. They earned the job, they didn't get it as some type of political gift. That's just absurd. Again, the liberals are speaking out of school and from an informational disadvantage.

3. Any financial gain to be had from Cheney's stock options in Halliburton are PLEDGED TO CHARITY. He receives nothing. This was a big deal a while back when he did this. This removed any and all financial ties to Halliburton. All of them.

Anybody with even an elementary exposure to finance can easily understand the points I make above. If you look at the criticisms coming from the liberals, you will notice that the only ones making these outrageous Cheney/Halliburton claims are the most extreme liberals. It's always the long-haired sandal-wearing hippie with the Grateful Dead shirt on with his poster high above his head. Most liberals can't understand what I posted above -- or simply refuse to. It's one of their favorite applause lines. Too bad it's a lie.

CASE CLOSED

[mc mark]

Originally posted by Trader_Jorge
CASE CLOSED



http://www.chezmaya.com/humour2/poof.jpg

[Trader_Jorge]

^
^
^
^
Looks like somebody can't muster a response. Son, you just got humiliated and exposed for propagating lies on this BBS. This is your chance to defend yourself, and the best you can do is post a picture. Can you defend yourself mcmark? I debunked every one of your allegations. Let's see how deep your financial knowledge runs. The board eagerly awaits your response.

[FranchiseBlade]

Originally posted by Trader_Jorge

2. The Vice President's office has no say so whatsoever in awarding contracts. Halliburton got the contract because it is world reknowned as the best in its field. Gifford, I seriously doubt you work in the energy space. If you did, you would know this. They are the premier reconstruction, oilfield infrastructure, and infrastructure company on this planet. They earned the job, they didn't get it as some type of political gift. That's just absurd. Again, the liberals are speaking out of school and from an informational disadvantage.

3. Any financial gain to be had from Cheney's stock options in Halliburton are PLEDGED TO CHARITY. He receives nothing. This was a big deal a while back when he did this. This removed any and all financial ties to Halliburton. All of them.

Anybody with even an elementary exposure to finance can easily understand the points I make above. If you look at the criticisms coming from the liberals, you will notice that the only ones making these outrageous Cheney/Halliburton claims are the most extreme liberals. It's always the long-haired sandal-wearing hippie with the Grateful Dead shirt on with his poster high above his head. Most liberals can't understand what I posted above -- or simply refuse to. It's one of their favorite applause lines. Too bad it's a lie.


2. The e-mail already provided is evidence that belies your litte statement.

3. Pledged to charity still helps Cheney with taxes, and who's to say that he won't change his pledge.

Why should we believe Cheney when he's a proven liar.

[Faos]

Did I just witness ANOTHER TJ bone saw?

Wow!

[mc mark]

When you defend yourself in this thread...

http://bbs.clutchcity.net/showthread.php?s=&threadid=78982


I might honor you with a response.

[wouldabeen23]

Originally posted by MadMax
I am certainly not a fan of Cheney.

But it strikes me that this is one of those events that if you identify with party X you defend like crazy when it's your guy...but attack like crazy when the other side does it.

if it had been Leahy dropping the "F" bomb, someone from the right would be here this morning talking about how classless it was...and someone from the left would be attacking it.

I will admitt to that, I would have defended Leahy and say how much of a Bastard Cheney is....

[Mulder]

Cheney is a classless jerk. I would expect nothing less from a person who thinks that anyone caught asking questions about the administration is considered a traitor to America.
If Howard Dean can be called nuts for his little "yah" then cursing on the Senate floor shows what a megalomaniac screwball Cheney is.

[Trader_Jorge]

Originally posted by FranchiseBlade
2. The e-mail already provided is evidence that belies your litte statement.

3. Pledged to charity still helps Cheney with taxes, and who's to say that he won't change his pledge.


2. This email says nothing of the Vice President's involvement in the selection process. Nothing. It simply says 'action' has been coordinated with the VP's office. Is this the best the liberals can do? One email from un-named officials? One email in 4 years? That's it? Very weak. Later in that article, the involvement is denied by Cheney's spokesman. Sorry libs, but this ain't holding water.

3. You've got to be kidding me. Do you honestly think Cheney is risking his political life to give Halliburton a sweetheart deal so that he can save money on his taxes? AMT probably makes your point ridiculous anyhow. (google AMT to find out what it means).

[gifford1967]

Originally posted by Trader_Jorge
1. The deferred compensation that Cheney receives is money that he earned years ago when he was the CEO. Halliburton's success or failures have nothing to do with the level of this allocation. It is already set. It doesn't matter how many contracts Halliburton gets -- this amount of money isn't going to change. Even in a bankruptcy situation (extremely unlikely), this money would be virtually untouchable. Most people who are unfamiliar with finance can't understand that deferred comp is not a financial tie to a company. Gifford, you can't understand it. All it is is electing to take your salary/bonus/etc in the future as opposed to the present. That's all it is. No financial tie.
DEBUNKED

2. The Vice President's office has no say so whatsoever in awarding contracts. Halliburton got the contract because it is world reknowned as the best in its field. Gifford, I seriously doubt you work in the energy space. If you did, you would know this. They are the premier reconstruction, oilfield infrastructure, and infrastructure company on this planet. They earned the job, they didn't get it as some type of political gift. That's just absurd. Again, the liberals are speaking out of school and from an informational disadvantage.

3. Any financial gain to be had from Cheney's stock options in Halliburton are PLEDGED TO CHARITY. He receives nothing. This was a big deal a while back when he did this. This removed any and all financial ties to Halliburton. All of them.

Anybody with even an elementary exposure to finance can easily understand the points I make above. If you look at the criticisms coming from the liberals, you will notice that the only ones making these outrageous Cheney/Halliburton claims are the most extreme liberals. It's always the long-haired sandal-wearing hippie with the Grateful Dead shirt on with his poster high above his head. Most liberals can't understand what I posted above -- or simply refuse to. It's one of their favorite applause lines. Too bad it's a lie.

CASE CLOSED

Only in your alternate universe is $100,000/year in deferred compensation not a financial tie.

Dennis claimed he sold all of his Halliburton stock. Was this accurate?

[Rocketman95]

It's sad that the Vice President can't respect the Senate floor. At least when Bush called someone a "major league asshole" it was on a campaign stage.

[Trader_Jorge]

Originally posted by gifford1967
Only in your alternate universe is $100,000/year in deferred compensation not a financial tie.

Dennis claimed he sold all of his Halliburton stock. Was this accurate?

1. You obviously do not even understand deferred comp. It is not a financial tie. A financial tie implies that Cheney's compensation depends on Halliburton's future success. This comp does not depend on that. Nice try.

2. Not only do you not understand deferred comp, but you don't understand the difference between a share of stock and an option to purchase a share of stock. When you learn the difference, then you will be qualified to share an opinion. Until then, please study up.

I'm noticing that the lib's posts are getting shorter and shorter. Scared? Or just exposed for your shallow knowledge base? Are all of the liberals' criticisms this shallow and uneducated? One can only wonder....

[bigtexxx]

gifford has just been humiliated. Hilarious.

[mc mark]

Originally posted by Trader_Jorge
2. Not only do you not understand deferred comp, but you don't understand the difference between a share of stock and an option to purchase a share of stock.


So Jorge enlighten me here with your vast knowledge.

Cheney has no opportunity in the future to profit off of 433,000 of stock options?

[Mulder]

Choo-choo wrote:
1. You obviously do not even understand deferred comp. It is not a financial tie.

The Congressional Research Service disagrees with you and Cheney on this one.

A report by the Congressional Research Service undermines Vice President Dick Cheney's denial of a continuing relationship with Halliburton Co., the energy company he once led, Sen. Frank Lautenberg said Thursday.

The report says a public official's unexercised stock options and deferred salary fall within the definition of "retained ties" to his former company.

Cheney said Sunday on NBC that since becoming vice president, "I've severed all my ties with the company, gotten rid of all my financial interest. I have no financial interest in Halliburton of any kind and haven't had, now, for over three years."

Democrats pointed out that Cheney receives deferred compensation from Halliburton under an arrangement he made in 1998, and also retains stock options. He has pledged to give after-tax proceeds of the stock options to charity.

Cheney's aides defended the assertion on NBC, saying the financial arrangements do not constitute a tie to the company's business performance. They pointed out that Cheney took out a $15,000 insurance policy so he would collect the deferred payments over five years whether or not Halliburton remains in business.

Lautenberg, D-N.J., asked the Congressional Research Service to weigh in.
Without naming Cheney or Halliburton, the service reported that unexercised stock options and deferred salary "are among those benefits described by the Office of Government Ethics as 'retained ties' or 'linkages' to one's former employer."

Lautenberg said the report makes clear that Cheney does still have financial ties to Halliburton. "I ask the vice president to stop dodging the issue with legalese," Lautenberg said.

Cathie Martin, Cheney's spokeswoman, said the question is whether Cheney has any possible conflict of interest with Halliburton, "and the answer to that is, no."

Cheney was chief executive officer of Halliburton from 1995 through August 2000. The company's KBR subsidiary is the main government contractor working to restore Iraq's oil industry in an open-ended contract that was awarded without competitive bidding.

According to Cheney's 2001 financial disclosure report, the vice president's Halliburton benefits include three batches of stock options comprising 433,333 shares. He also has a 401(k) retirement account valued at between $1,001 and $15,000 dollars.

His deferred compensation account was valued at between $500,000 and $1 million, and generated income of $50,000 to $100,000.

In 2002, Cheney's total assets were valued at between $19.1 million and $86.4 million.

Earlier this month, a federal judge dismissed a lawsuit that accused Halliburton and Cheney of misleading investors by changing the way the company counted revenue from construction projects.

The lawsuit was filed last year by Judicial Watch, a conservative public interest group, on behalf of three small investors, who said the company tried to polish financial results by booking revenue on cost overruns before it was certain of getting paid.

Halliburton has contracts worth more than $1.7 billion for its work in Iraq, and it could make hundreds of millions more from a no-bid contract it was awarded by the Army Corps of Engineers, The Washington Post has reported.

According to The Post, while Cheney was defense secretary the Pentagon chose Halliburton subsidiary Brown & Root to study the cost effectiveness of outsourcing some military operations to private contractors. Based on the results of the study, the Pentagon hired Brown & Root to implement an outsourcing plan. Cheney became Halliburton CEO in 1995.

link (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/09/26/politics/main575356.shtml)

[gifford1967]

Originally posted by Trader_Jorge
1. You obviously do not even understand deferred comp. It is not a financial tie. A financial tie implies that Cheney's compensation depends on Halliburton's future success. This comp does not depend on that. Nice try.

2. Not only do you not understand deferred comp, but you don't understand the difference between a share of stock and an option to purchase a share of stock. When you learn the difference, then you will be qualified to share an opinion. Until then, please study up.

I'm noticing that the lib's posts are getting shorter and shorter. Scared? Or just exposed for your shallow knowledge base? Are all of the liberals' criticisms this shallow and uneducated? One can only wonder....


1. So what you're saying is if Bin Laden was receiving $100,000/year in deferred compensation from Saddam for 9/11, this would not constitute a "financial tie"?


2. I was conflating stocks and stock options. That was my mistake.

See it feels good when you are intellectually honest. Trader, admitting when you're wrong doesn't make you less of a man..

[Trader_Jorge]

No, it is not a financial tie. Mulder, your link proves nothing but that you have been reduced to a semantics game. Words and lables aside, I can confidently and accurately state that Vice President Dick Cheney has NO FINANCIAL INCENTIVE FOR HALLIBURTON TO SUCCEED OR FAIL. This is the bottom line. His integrity is in no way compromised by his deferred comp payments or his stock options.

The financial community would have a hearty laugh at watching the liberals try to defend themselves on this point. Talk about arguing from a position of weakness...

[Mulder]

Originally posted by Trader_Jorge
No, it is not a financial tie. Mulder, your link proves nothing but that you have been reduced to a semantics game. Words and lables aside, I can confidently and accurately state that Vice President Dick Cheney has NO FINANCIAL INCENTIVE FOR HALLIBURTON TO SUCCEED OR FAIL. This is the bottom line. His integrity is in no way compromised by his deferred comp payments or his stock options.

The financial community would have a hearty laugh at watching the liberals try to defend themselves on this point. Talk about arguing from a position of weakness...

Cheney is playing semantics, not me, not the Congressional Research Service. Forgive me if I trust the findings of a congressional research organization rather than a shill, choo-choo. That's just me, I'm funny about stuff like that.

Since you are cool about folks giving out $ and expecting nothing in return, can I have $100,000? I promise I won't do a thing for you afterwards.

[Trader_Jorge]

Originally posted by Mulder
Cheney is playing semantics, not me, not the Congressional Research Service. Forgive me if I trust the findings of a congressional research organization rather than a shill, choo-choo. That's just me, I'm funny about stuff like that.

Fine, then playing by the rules of your semantics game, they called it a "retained tie" or a "linkage". Not a financial tie. You lose on both counts. Sorry.

[Mulder]

Originally posted by Trader_Jorge
Fine, then playing by the rules of your semantics game, they called it a "retained tie" or a "linkage". Not a financial tie. You lose on both counts. Sorry.

So money does not equal finances? And you say you work with money, right? :confused:

[Mulder]

By the way, can you send my "linkage" to my paypal account?

[Trader_Jorge]

Originally posted by Mulder
Since you are cool about folks giving out $ and expecting nothing in return, can I have $100,000? I promise I won't do a thing for you afterwards.

You see this is the problem, "nothing in return" is false. It is the fatal flaw in your argument. Cheney earned that money when he was the CEO at Halliburton. He gave his service in return. That money was earned years ago. He simply didn't collect it then. He deferred it. Now do you understand deferred comp?

Don't you think the liberals should try to understand deferred compensation and stock options before they weigh in with their criticisms? To me it destroys their credibility. Well, I guess you can't destroy something that never existed.

[bnb]

I've sat on, and worked with, many non profit boards.

Almost all of them had policies that prohibited involvement when you had a conflict of interest, or a perceived conflict of interest.

i don't understand how anyone could suggest there isn't a huge perceived conflict of interest between Dick and Halliburton. Especially since the report Mulder referenced did conclude financial ties still exist (not withstanding Traders points).

It seems so obvious that he should have absolutely NO involvement in contracts that may benefit Halliburton. Sometimes the perception of justice is just as important as justice itself. (i think that's a bastardized quote from someone smarter than i am -- and it seems to fit here).

[bobrek]

Look at deferred compensation this way:

Assume the Astros sign a free agent to a 2 year 10 million dollar contract. They pay 6 million the first 2 years and the remaining 4 million is deferred to the 3rd year. After two years, the free agent signs a new contract with the Rangers. On top of the Rangers offer, he still gets the 4 million the Astros owe him. The 4 million will be his regardless of the Astros season, attendance, profits or losses. He'll get it whether or not he hits a game winning HR against the Astros or commits an error that enables the Astros to win a game.

[Mulder]

Originally posted by Trader_Jorge
You see this is the problem, "nothing in return" is false. It is the fatal flaw in your argument. Cheney earned that money when he was the CEO at Halliburton. He gave his service in return. That money was earned years ago. He simply didn't collect it then. He deferred it. Now do you understand deferred comp?

Don't you think the liberals should try to understand deferred compensation and stock options before they weigh in with their criticisms? To me it destroys their credibility. Well, I guess you can't destroy something that never existed.

Standard response to a legitimate inquiry; we are just to dumb to understand the intricacies of advanced finance. Please choo_choo, enlighten us with your fiduciary wisdom.

[Trader_Jorge]

I love winning arguments where it is me against a whole band of liberals.

mcmark, gifford, FranchiseBlade, Mulder

vs

The_Conquistador

If you think the odds are stacked, then you're right. To be fair to the liberals, maybe I should only engage them in debate when it is 10-on-1 against me.

[Mulder]

Originally posted by bobrek
Look at deferred compensation this way:

Assume the Astros sign a free agent to a 2 year 10 million dollar contract. They pay 6 million the first 2 years and the remaining 4 million is deferred to the 3rd year. After two years, the free agent signs a new contract with the Rangers. On top of the Rangers offer, he still gets the 4 million the Astros owe him. The 4 million will be his regardless of the Astros season, attendance, profits or losses. He'll get it whether or not he hits a game winning HR against the Astros or commits an error that enables the Astros to win a game.

But let's say that every time this guy plays the Astros he goes hitless. EVERY SINGLE GAME. Would you get suspicious at all?

[Mulder]

Originally posted by Trader_Jorge
I love winning arguments where it is me against a whole band of liberals.

mcmark, gifford, FranchiseBlade, Mulder

vs

The_Conquistador

If you think the odds are stacked, then you're right. To be fair to the liberals, maybe I should only engage them in debate when it is 10-on-1 against me.

What's the weather like on your planet?

Been to Vegas lately? I bet you CLEANED UP! :rolleyes:

[gifford1967]

Trader this is a serious question. Has Cheney pledged to donate any profits from his Halliburton stock options for all time? Or is this pledge time specific?

[mc mark]

Originally posted by Mulder
What's the weather like on your planet?



Sad really...

There’s some really good drugs out there to treat delusional schizophrenia.

[bobrek]

Originally posted by Mulder
But let's say that every time this guy plays the Astros he goes hitless. EVERY SINGLE GAME. Would you get suspicious at all?

No, simply because his performance (as well as the Astros performance) has no impact on his receiving the deferred money. Now if your example was "what if he makes an inordinate amount of fielding errors that appear deliberate", I'd have some thoughts about that, but it would not make sense as it relates to his deferred compensation. It would lead me to believe he is either mentally unstable or has a different deal (one that's not on the books).

[bnb]

Originally posted by gifford1967
Trader this is a serious question. Has Cheney pledged to donate any profits from his Halliburton stock options for all time? Or is this pledge time specific?

That is a good question.

Why didn't he transfer the beneficial ownership of the options rather than pledging the profit?

Makes me think that he can 'unpledge' them should he be looking for other work in November.

[bobrek]

Originally posted by bnb
That is a good question.

Why didn't he transfer the beneficial ownership of the options rather than pledging the profit?

Makes me think that he can 'unpledge' them should he be looking for other work in November.

I suspect that you can't transfer stock options (at least I know I can't transfer mine). They belong to me and me alone.

[bnb]

Originally posted by bobrek
I suspect that you can't transfer stock options (at least I know I can't transfer mine). They belong to me and me alone.

I expect you're right. That's why i said beneficial ownership rather than the options themselves. There must be some sort of trust that them fancy lawyers could draw up though.

It just seems sort of 'soft.'

And i get back to the perceived conflict thing. I just don't accept that the former CEO is ever truly independent.

[Deckard]

Originally posted by bobrek
I suspect that you can't transfer stock options (at least I know I can't transfer mine). They belong to me and me alone.
So, is it in your interest to have that stock go up before you exercise those options, whenever you choose to? One would think so.

Personally, I don't care if Cheney used the "F" word in the Senate chambers. I would wager that it was used quite frequently by LBJ, just as one example, and by others in it's long history. He may not have done it during a speech or a debate, but I don't think Cheney did, either.

Having said that, I think Cheney is a lying weasel who is the worst VP we've had since Agnew. I wouldn't trust him to do my laundry, much less run the country if Goofus were to drop dead.

[B-Bob]

Originally posted by Trader_Jorge
I'm noticing that the lib's posts are getting shorter and shorter. Scared?
The argument has been proved in this thread (and others) with substantial documentation. Why should we all keep reposting the facts for you over and over when you simply lie and spin and yell your little lunatic cries of desperation in all caps? It's very boring.

So, let's have some fun. Compare and contrast Cheney's ties to Halliburton to...

Al Qaeda's ties to Saddam Hussein. Did Saddam used to run Al Qaeda? Did he receive "deferred payments" for past work on Al Qaeda's behalf? Does he own major stock positions in Al Qaeda? No, no, and no, but you want us to believe they collaborate, right? Yet, Cheney has no connection to the company. Interesting position.

Until your next lunatic war cry, enjoy the comparison.

By the way, I don't care about the expletive at all. It's kind of funny. Kind of sad, too, that smackdown is now the rule of the day for our government (on both sides mind you).

[basso]

Originally posted by Mulder
Lautenberg said the report makes clear that Cheney does still have financial ties to Halliburton. "I ask the vice president to stop dodging the issue with legalese," Lautenberg said.

oh the irony, frank lautenberg, installed as the democratic candidate for senate only because the democratically controlled NJ supremes chose to ignore their own statutes, questioning cheney's ethics...

really, who really gives a flying F!!ck if the F!!cking VP told somebody to F!!ck off? we're involved in a war and this is what the press, senate, and the bbs choose to debate? f!!cking pathetic...

[nyrocket]

Originally posted by Mulder
But let's say that every time this guy plays the Astros he goes hitless. EVERY SINGLE GAME. Would you get suspicious at all?

Are you talking about Richard Hidalgo?

[B-Bob]

whoa. I think everyone here has said they don't give a flying Humpty Dumpty about the f-word. right?

But those of us who care about our nation aren't going to sit back and let someone repeat the spin that Cheney has no ties to the company he used to run. That dog won't hunt, and it's become a subject in this thread because that's what Richard flipped out over.

[Deckard]

Originally posted by basso
oh the irony, frank lautenberg, installed as the democratic candidate for senate only because the democratically controlled NJ supremes chose to ignore their own statutes, questioning cheney's ethics...

really, who really gives a flying F!!ck if the F!!cking VP told somebody to F!!ck off? we're involved in a war and this is what the press, senate, and the bbs choose to debate? f!!cking pathetic...
Yes, it's about as trivial as Kerry happening to be at an anti-war rally in the same crowd as Jane Fonda.
Glad we agree.

[Trader_Jorge]

Originally posted by B-Bob
But those of us who care about our nation aren't going to sit back and let someone repeat the spin that Cheney has no ties to the company he used to run.

You know, whenever I need financial advice, I march right into my physics professor's office. Ha!

What part of the no-financial ties do you not understand?

1) That the upside from the stock options are pledged to charity?

2) That the deferred compensation has already been earned?

3) That the deferred compensation has nothing to do with Halliburton's performance?

:confused:

[gifford1967]

Originally posted by Trader_Jorge
You know, whenever I need financial advice, I march right into my physics professor's office. Ha!

What part of the no-financial ties do you not understand?

1) That the upside from the stock options are pledged to charity?

:confused:

Trader will you explain the process by which the stock options will be exercised and the profits given to charity?

[rimbaud]

Originally posted by gifford1967
Trader will you explain the process by which the stock options will be exercised and the profits given to charity?

I found this:

Cheney sold most of his Halliburton shares when he left the company, but retained 433,333 stock options worth about $8 million. Cheney arranged for the profits to be donated to charity, placed the options in a charitable trust, and relinquished control over them.

[B-Bob]

Originally posted by Trader_Jorge

:confused:
You refused to compare and contrast this situation to another "collaboration" allegation. We are eagerly awaiting your insight. You accused "liberals" of posting short posts, and now you avoid the question before you.

As for Physics, I could argue from the point of view of General Relativity that an apple does not fall to Earth at all -- it follows its natural space-time path, and is only truly accelerated once the ground interrupts its natural Minkowsky stationary point.

But everyone with common sense would hopefully say "whatever, B-Bob, the apple falls." As a physicist, I would not wave my semantic wand of high theory at a very practical, life-on-Earth conclusion. Your trappings of financial legalese strike me as having substantially less practical merit than the work of Albert Einstein. I will admit a bias toward and a deep respect for the work of Einstein when compared to the lifetime profiteering of Cheney though. I cannot say I'm objective on that front.

But let us use common sense, shall we? For all real purposes, the apple falls to earth. For all real purposes, to appear objective, Cheney should forfeit these foul-looking payments that put the median American income to shame and sell his Halliburton stock before the federal government awards enormous contracts to the company. That's obvious, and the PR damage alone is staggering. Does he love his country more or less than he loves his accumulated wealth?

Again, this is kind of boring.

[bnb]

Originally posted by rimbaud
I found this:

Cheney sold most of his Halliburton shares when he left the company, but retained 433,333 stock options worth about $8 million. Cheney arranged for the profits to be donated to charity, placed the options in a charitable trust, and relinquished control over them.

cool. works for me.

i wonder what the congressional research service's concern was?

[B-Bob]

Originally posted by rimbaud
Cheney sold most of his Halliburton shares when he left the company, but retained 433,333 stock options worth about $8 million. Cheney arranged for the profits to be donated to charity, placed the options in a charitable trust, and relinquished control over them.
That squares with what I know, rimbaud. But that trust is not permanent, is it? He will still own the principal worth of those shares once he leaves office -- is that not true?

If he indeed has given up control of that stock permanently, then I need to update my opinion. But reliquishing control for four years hardly strikes me as a noble path when he's supposed to be working full-time for us anyway.

[Trader_Jorge]

Originally posted by B-Bob
But let us use common sense, shall we? For all real purposes, the apple falls to earth. For all real purposes, to appear objective, Cheney should forfeit these foul-looking payments that put the median American income to shame and sell his Halliburton stock before the federal government awards enormous contracts to the company.

Oh good grief. Foul looking payments? It's money that was earned long ago and was deferred out into the future. It's called deferred compensation, not "foul-looking payments". It's quite common, and frankly I'm surprised that even the layman like yourself isn't familiar with it. And for the last time, there is a huge difference between owning shares and owning the option to purchase shares. This is not the first time I've said this in this thread. Please review the entire thread.

The bottom line is this: The liberals are hell bent on establishing a financial tie from Halliburton's success to Cheney's pocket book. There is no such tie. Halliburton could become the richest company in the world, and Cheney's financial picture would not change one by one red cent. He has absolutely no incentive to make 'sweetheart deals' with them. It is pure lunacy to think that he would jeopardize his political career to enrich his former employer. That's proposterous. There are even some liberals who think that the entire War on Terror was an attempt to enrich Houston-based oil companies. That is just downright absurd. There is absolutely, positively no conflict of interest.

[bobrek]

Currently 400,000 shares of Cheney's Halliburton stock are underwater. Halliburton is trading around $30.75.

100,000 @ $54.50
300,000 @ $39.50
33,333 @ $28.125

http://money.cnn.com/2003/09/25/news/companies/cheney/?cnn=yes

[mc mark]

I also found this.

From an August 2000 article

Some of the 400,000 options will not vest for Cheney until December of this year, before he takes office if elected vice president. Other options will not vest until December 2001 or December 2002, meaning that Cheney would retain a substantial personal interest in Halliburton well into his term of office.

According to a Halliburton officer, the options cannot be transferred or donated to charity except after Cheney's death, by his heirs.

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2000/aug2000/chen-a18.shtml

[B-Bob]

Originally posted by mc mark

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2000/aug2000/chen-a18.shtml
Trader_Jorge,

Of course I agree it seems preposterous for Cheney to risk his political standing with such connections. He's a smart guy, but he's also a smart guy who feels very entitled to certain things, and he has a certain arrogance. As for "foul-looking," I'm talking about to the average American. It just has a very bad appearance. Just like duck hunting with a supreme court justice in the months before his case was headed to the supreme court. Not smart PR -- flippant arrogance.

And I don't see how your financial analysis squares with the results of the congressional investigation, as referenced by mc mark. I can only square them as follows (in my feeble financial way).

Cheney will not sell those shares in his lifetime, let's assume. So you can freely say he will not *collect* one red cent in his lifetime. That's fair. But his heirs clearly inherit the stock -- is that not correct? Does Cheney care about his offspring (even the gay one)? I believe he does. Would he like Halliburton to do well so that his heirs will be better off? I would certainly hope he cares about his family, so it's obvious.

Cheney will not take out the halliburton-related options and go spend it on a yacht. But these options are a non-trivial part of his largess, and they can significantly benefit his family. Why not just separate himself as much as possible? It would be trivial for him to reestablish a host of industry connections and salaries once he leaves office. Some steps are worth taking for the sake of appearances when one steps into public life.

[Trader_Jorge]

B-Bob:

HE HAS NO SHARES. HE HAS OPTIONS TO PURCHASE SHARES AT SET PRICES. ANY UPSIDE HE RECEIVES ON THE EXERCISE OF THOSE OPTIONS IS PLEDGED TO CHARITY.

[mc mark]

433,000

That's a nice little chunk of OPTIONS TO PURCHASE AT SET PRICES!

[bobrek]

Originally posted by mc mark
433,000

That's a nice little chunk of OPTIONS TO PURCHASE AT SET PRICES!

The stock has to double in order to make 100,000 of the shares worth anything. It has to go up 25% in order to make 300,000 of the shares worth anything. The set prices currently aren't very good.

[B-Bob]

Oh, okay. It all makes sense in all caps now. Maybe you should send an all-caps message to that congressional investigation committee. Here's an honest question left over from my last post:

IS THE "UPSIDE" PLEDGED TO CHARITY AD INFINITUM, OR RATHER DOES THE FAMILY OF RICHARD CHENEY STAND TO REAP FINANCIAL BENEFIT AFTER RICHARD'S DEATH?

Either way, he still should have made the smart PR move, avoided a situation that requires lectures in stock finance to argue that he's not financially connected.

[Trader_Jorge]

B-Bob:

No hard feelings. I accept your apology.

To answer your question, where do you find the information that leads you to believe there is some reversionary interest in which the proceeds from the sale of options come back to Cheney or his family? I have never seen such an instrument relating to a stock option. What makes you think something like this exists? My guess is nothing. You are just trying the best you can to salvage the financial tie theory.

[thadeus]

Batting the cloud of obscuring numbers aside (besides - does anyone think Cheney's going to say, "Oops, you caught me. Ha ha, okay I AM making money from Halliburton.")- It doesn't take much more than common sense to sense something shady in Halliburton getting a no-bid contract in Iraq while the sitting vice-president is also their former CEO.

It's not that complicated. Everything else is spin.

[RIET]

Originally posted by Trader_Jorge
1. The deferred compensation that Cheney receives is money that he earned years ago when he was the CEO. Halliburton's success or failures have nothing to do with the level of this allocation. It is already set. It doesn't matter how many contracts Halliburton gets -- this amount of money isn't going to change. Even in a bankruptcy situation (extremely unlikely), this money would be virtually untouchable. Most people who are unfamiliar with finance can't understand that deferred comp is not a financial tie to a company. Gifford, you can't understand it. All it is is electing to take your salary/bonus/etc in the future as opposed to the present. That's all it is. No financial tie.
DEBUNKED


Please tell me how creditors cannot reach his deferred compensation plan.

Assuming this is a NQDC, not subject to ERISA rules, an employer's creditors can attach the funds in the event of the company's bankruptcy.

[Deckard]

Wow. Maureen Dowd with a blistering view of Cheney and the "F" word, along with a lot more...



June 27, 2004
OP-ED COLUMNIST

Are They Losing It?

By MAUREEN DOWD

WASHINGTON

One thing you've got to say for Dick Cheney: No one will ever again dismiss the vice presidency as a pitcher of warm spit. Mr. Major League Potty Mouth has shown that, with obsequiousness to the president and obtuseness to the facts, a vice president can run the world. Right into the ground.

This week, it's not just Democrats who are questioning whether Vice is losing it. Now, even some in the White House are saying it's bizarre that he chose a class photo-op on the Senate floor to suggest that Senator Patrick Leahy do something that you won't even find described in Bill Clinton's "My Life."

While Democratic lawmakers delayed final passage of a defense spending bill so they could mingle with Michael Moore, the once sweat-free Bushies were acting jangly.

First Vice chewed out The Times for accurately reporting that the 9/11 commission said there was no collaborative relationship between Saddam and Al Qaeda. Then Paul Wolfowitz called the reporters risking their lives in Iraq craven rumormongers. Then came Mr. Cheney's F-word. (Not Fox, the other one.)

Finally, President Bush got agitated when an Irish TV interviewer said most of the Irish found the world more dangerous now than before the Iraq invasion. "First of all, most of Europe supported the decision in Iraq," Mr. Bush declared. (It's all in how you define "Europe.")

Even as Tom Daschle proposed bipartisan family retreats to heal the harsh mood, even as the Senate passed the "Defense of Decency Act," Mr. Cheney profanely laced into Mr. Leahy for criticizing Halliburton's getting no-bid contracts.

"I felt better afterwards," he told Neil Cavuto during a no-bid interview with Fox News. Hey, if it feels good, Dick, do it.

He said he had no regrets about his "little floor debate in the United States Senate." He didn't want to go along with Mr. Leahy's attitude that "everything's peaches and cream" when the Democrat had just been jawing about Halliburton war profiteering. Peaches and cream have never been on the Bush-Cheney menu, only brimstone and gall.

By playing on the insecurities of an inexperienced leader, Mr. Cheney has managed to change W. from a sunny, open, bipartisan, uniter-not-a-divider, non-nation-builder into a crabby, secretive, partisan, divider-not-a-uniter, inept imperialist. Vice is bounding around the country, talking to his usual circumscribed audiences of conservatives, right-wing think tanks and Fox News anchors. No need to burrow in the bunker when you've turned America into one.

As they used to say about the Soviet Union, the defensive Bush imperialists have to keep expanding because they're encircled. Mr. Cheney's gloomy, scary, contentious world view has fueled a more gloomy, scary, contentious world.

After disastrously dividing the world into the strong (Bush hawks) and the weak (everyone else), Vice turned his coarseness into another macho, tough-guy moment against a Democrat considered a pill by many Republicans. "I think a lot of my colleagues felt that what I had said badly needed to be said, that it was long overdue," he preened.

The conservatives defending Mr. Cheney are largely the same crowd that went off the deep end because of a glimpse of breast on the Super Bowl, demanding everything from fines to new regulations to protect red states from blue language.

Mr. Cheney's foul outburst was not as bad as his foul reasoning. On Fox, he again belabored his obsession with "links" between Iraq and Al Qaeda. Exhibiting WASP chutzpah, this time he used The Times to bolster his faux case.

But the Thom Shanker story he cited said only that in the mid-1990's, Iraq agreed to rebroadcast anti-Saudi propaganda and that a request from Osama "to begin joint operations against foreign forces in Saudi Arabia went unanswered."

Rebroadcast anti-Saudi propaganda? As a threat to U.S. security, that's right up there with Iraqi "weapons of mass destruction-related program activities."

Mr. Cheney assured Fox's anxious viewers that he would stay on the ticket and in the White House until January '09. (No four letter words, dear Democrats.) Vice said of W., "he knows I'm there to serve him."

Mr. Bush must have missed that classic "Twilight Zone" episode where the aliens arrive with a book entitled, "To Serve Man." It turns out to be a cookbook.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/06/27/opinion/27DOWD.html

[B-Bob]

Originally posted by thadeus
It's not that complicated. Everything else is spin.
Thank you. If you have to do backflips to find a way to clean Cheney's hands, the situation is fishy.

No apology was granted, _Jorge. Sorry to hear about the further deterioration of your reading comprehension. From your post, I take it you've never heard of inhertitance. This really changes my view of you and what you're about, which is good.

Dowd rocks, by the way. Her image of Richard transforming W is pretty spot on. Cheney's proud refusal to apologize for his infantile outburst is telling, to say the least.

[mc mark]

http://us.news1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/uc/20040628/ltt040629.gif

[RocketMan Tex]

mcmark...that cartoon was on the op-ed page of the Houston Chronicle this morning. Hilarious!

[GreenVegan76]

These guys are human (though Cheney is probably half-machine by now) and they're going to have outbursts. I'm disappointed that the second most powerful man in the world resorted to name-calling and mean-spirited attacks, but it's not like I held Cheney in high regards anyway.

Leahy's response was pretty classy, though.

[Fegwu]

Originally posted by mc mark
http://us.news1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/uc/20040628/ltt040629.gif


Classic!!!


.....but sad :(

[RIET]

Originally posted by Trader_Jorge
1. You obviously do not even understand deferred comp. It is not a financial tie. A financial tie implies that Cheney's compensation depends on Halliburton's future success. This comp does not depend on that. Nice try.


I find it funny that T_J has no clue about deferred compensation and is calling people out on something he himself does not understand.

T_J, once again, see my post above on this page. Tell us how a deferred compensation plan is not affected by a company's bankruptcy.

Have you ever heard of ERISA, discrimination rules, Non-qualified accounts for executives?

[Trader_Jorge]

Originally posted by RIET
I find it funny that T_J has no clue about deferred compensation and is calling people out on something he himself does not understand.

T_J, once again, see my post above on this page. Tell us how a deferred compensation plan is not affected by a company's bankruptcy.

Have you ever heard of ERISA, discrimination rules, Non-qualified accounts for executives?
Ho ho ho! Lookie here!

You haven't been through too many bankruptcies have you? Your inexperience shows. If you did have the experience I have, then you would know that it's not what happens *after* the bankruptcy filing that matters, but before. You see, your focus is entirely wrong. Now Riet, I have a little assignment for you, since you are such an eager little beaver today. I request that you study up on how executives can protect themselves from becoming an unsecured creditor in the case of a bankruptcy. When completed, please report back to the board. You could use a lesson in humility, son. I'll be nice though and just ask you to do a little homework. I'll give you a hint on where to start: I'm right (as usual).

[SamFisher]

Originally posted by RIET
I find it funny that T_J has no clue about deferred compensation and is calling people out on something he himself does not understand.

T_J, once again, see my post above on this page. Tell us how a deferred compensation plan is not affected by a company's bankruptcy.

Have you ever heard of ERISA, discrimination rules, Non-qualified accounts for executives?

TJ, what do you have to say about this point?

Did you just get

ERISOWNED?

:eek:

[RIET]

Originally posted by Trader_Jorge
Ho ho ho! Lookie here!

You haven't been through too many bankruptcies have you? Your inexperience shows. If you did have the experience I have, then you would know that it's not what happens *after* the bankruptcy filing that matters, but before. You see, your focus is entirely wrong. Now Riet, I have a little assignment for you, since you are such an eager little beaver today. I request that you study up on how executives can protect themselves from becoming an unsecured creditor in the case of a bankruptcy. When completed, please report back to the board. You could use a lesson in humility, son. I'll be nice though and just ask you to do a little homework. I'll give you a hint on where to start: I'm right (as usual). [/i]

You are full of crap and you know it.

This is a 100% false statement :

Originally posted by Trader_Jorge Even in a bankruptcy situation (extremely unlikely), this money would be virtually untouchable. Most people who are unfamiliar with finance can't understand that deferred comp is not a financial tie to a company. [/i] [/B]

The fact Cheney had purchase an insurance policy just in case the company went bankrupt should give you a clue that general creditors do in fact have access to deferred compensation plans.

[bnb]

The argument here, is that because of the insurance policy (paid for by Sir Dick himself) he no longer had a financial tie to the company as he was not dependent upon its solvency for payment.

It, of course, ignores the inherent huge conflict of having been the CEO just moments ago. And the appearance of conflict, which undermines confidence.

It also ignores the conclusions of the congressional committee.

[RIET]

Originally posted by bnb
The argument here, is that because of the insurance policy (paid for by Sir Dick himself) he no longer had a financial tie to the company as he was not dependent upon its solvency for payment.

It, of course, ignores the inherent huge conflict of having been the CEO just moments ago. And the appearance of conflict, which undermines confidence.

It also ignores the conclusions of the congressional committee.

Cheney obviously bought a policy to protect himself because he(unlike T_J) actually understands the risk of deferred compensation.

For T_J, to make a blanket statement that is completely false is laughable:

You obviously do not even understand deferred comp. It is not a financial tie

His tone is completely condescending and wrong.

[bnb]

Originally posted by RIET


His tone is completely condescending and wrong.

You don't come around these parts much, do you?

:D

(it's too bad really...).

;)

[Trader_Jorge]

Poor little RIET. He thought he had this great plan concocted to finally trap The_Conquistador! Sadly he fell flat on his little face. You learned your lesson, friend!

It's a shame that the only argument the liberals have been reduced to in this thread is a hypothetical Halliburton-bankruptcy case. How ridiculously unlikely. This is yet another sign that they have been annhiliated in this thread. There is no financial tie, no matter how horribly the liberals attempt to grope and google to understand finance. Sorry libs. You're out of your league on this one. The fact remains that Dick Cheney does not benefit from the level of success of Halliburton. There remains no conflict of interest. There is no financial tie.


CASE CLOSED

[MacBeth]

I don't know about others, but for me, even if I'm not paying attention to the debate, one of the surest signs I have of T_J having lost again is the declaration of victory. If he posts a pic, it's conclusive.

[RIET]

Originally posted by Trader_Jorge
Poor little RIET. He thought he had this great plan concocted to finally trap The_Conquistador! Sadly he fell flat on his little face. You learned your lesson, friend!


You crack me up buddy. Friendly little wager:

$100 to the tip jar.

NQ Deferred Comp assets are available to creditors in bankruptcy.

Take the bet.

Deferred comp is a great executive benefit but with a major weakness - which allows it to fly under the ERISA discrimination rules. Can you guess what that is?

[Mulder]

CHALLENGE!!!!

choo_choo go poof!