AP Exclusive: Reid Got $1M in Land Sale

Calabrio

Dedicated LVC Member
Joined
Oct 14, 2005
Messages
8,793
Reaction score
3
Location
Sarasota
AP Exclusive: Reid Got $1M in Land Sale
Oct 11 2:13 PM US/Eastern

By JOHN SOLOMON and KATHLEEN HENNESSEY
Associated Press Writers
WASHINGTON


Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid collected a $1.1 million windfall on a Las Vegas land sale even though he hadn't personally owned the property for three years, property deeds show.

In the process, Reid did not disclose to Congress an earlier sale in which he transferred his land to a company created by a friend and took a financial stake in that company, according to records and interviews.

The Nevada Democrat's deal was engineered by Jay Brown, a longtime friend and former casino lawyer whose name surfaced in a major political bribery trial this summer and in other prior organized crime investigations. He's never been charged with wrongdoing _ except for a 1981 federal securities complaint that was settled out of court.

Land deeds obtained by The Associated Press during a review of Reid's business dealings show:

_The deal began in 1998 when Reid bought undeveloped residential property on Las Vegas' booming outskirts for about $400,000. Reid bought one lot outright, and a second parcel jointly with Brown. One of the sellers was a developer who was benefiting from a government land swap that Reid supported. The seller never talked to Reid.

_In 2001, Reid sold the land for the same price to a limited liability corporation created by Brown. The senator didn't disclose the sale on his annual public ethics report or tell Congress he had any stake in Brown's company. He continued to report to Congress that he personally owned the land.

_After getting local officials to rezone the property for a shopping center, Brown's company sold the land in 2004 to other developers and Reid took $1.1 million of the proceeds, nearly tripling the senator's investment. Reid reported it to Congress as a personal land sale.

The complex dealings allowed Reid to transfer ownership, legal liability and some tax consequences to Brown's company without public knowledge, but still collect a seven-figure payoff nearly three years later.

Reid hung up the phone when questioned about the deal during an AP interview last week.

The senator's aides said no money changed hands in 2001 and that Reid instead got an ownership stake in Brown's company equal to the value of his land. Reid continued to pay taxes on the land and didn't disclose the deal because he considered it a "technical transfer," they said.

They also said they have no documents proving Reid's stake in the company because it was an informal understanding between friends.

The 1998 purchase "was a normal business transaction at market prices," Reid spokesman Jim Manley said. "There were several legal steps associated with the investment during those years that did not alter Senator Reid's actual ownership interest in the land."

Senate ethics rules require lawmakers to disclose on their annual ethics report all transactions involving investment properties _ regardless of profit or loss _ and to report any ownership stake in companies.

Kent Cooper, who oversaw government disclosure reports for federal candidates for two decades in the Federal Election Commission, said Reid's failure to report the 2001 sale and his ties to Brown's company violated Senate rules.

"This is very, very clear," Cooper said. "Whether you make a profit or a loss you've got to put that transaction down so the public, voters, can see exactly what kind of money is moving to or from a member of Congress."

"It is especially disconcerting when you have a member of the leadership, of either party, not putting in the effort to make sure this is a complete and accurate report," said Cooper. "That says something to other members. It says something to the Ethics Committee."

Other parts of the deal _ such as the informal handling of property taxes _ raise questions about possible gifts or income reportable to Congress and the IRS, ethics experts said.

Stanley Brand, former Democratic chief counsel of the House, said Reid should have disclosed the 2001 sale and that his omission fits a larger culture in Congress where lawmakers aren't following or enforcing their own rules.

"It's like everything else we've seen in last two years. If it is not enforced, people think it's not enforced and they get lax and sloppy," Brand said.

SALE HIDDEN FROM CONGRESS

Reid and his wife, Landra, personally signed the deeds selling their full interest in the property to Brown's company, Patrick Lane LLC, for the same $400,000 they paid in 1998, records show.

Despite the sale, Reid continued to report on his public ethics reports that he personally owned the land until it was sold again in His disclosure forms to Congress do not mention an interest in Patrick Lane or the company's role in the 2004 sale.

AP first learned of the transaction from a former Reid aide who expressed concern the deal hadn't been properly reported.

Reid isn't listed anywhere on Patrick Lane's corporate filings with Nevada, even though the land he sold accounted for three-quarters of the company's assets. Brown is listed as the company's manager. Reid's office said Nevada law didn't require Reid to be mentioned in the filings.

"We have been friends for over 35 years. We didn't need a written agreement between us," Brown said.

The informalities didn't stop there.

PROPERTY TAXES LOOSELY HANDLED

Brown sometimes paid a share of the local property taxes on the lot Reid owned outright between 1998 and 2001, while Reid sometimes paid more than his share of taxes on the second parcel they co-owned.

And the two men continued to pay the property taxes from their personal checking accounts even after the land was sold to Patrick Lane in 2001, records show.

Brown said Reid first approached him in 1997 about land purchases and the two men considered the two lots a single investment.

"During the years of ownership, there may have been occasions that he advanced the property taxes, or that I advanced the property taxes," Brown said. "The bottom line is that between ourselves we always settled up and each of us paid our respective percentages."

Ultimately, Reid paid about 74 percent of the property taxes, slightly less than his actual 75.1 ownership stake, according to canceled checks kept at the local assessor's office. One year, the property tax payments were delinquent and resulted in a small penalty, the records show.

Ethics experts said such informality raises questions about whether any of Brown's tax payments amounted to a benefit for Reid. "It might be a gift," Cooper said.

Brand said the IRS might view the handling of the land taxes as undisclosed income to Reid but it was unlikely to prompt an investigation. "If someone is paying a liability you owe, there may be some income imputed. But at that level, it's pretty small dollars," he said.

FEDERAL LAND SWAPS

Nevada land deeds show Reid and his wife first bought the property in January 1998 in a proposed subdivision created partly with federal lands transferred by the Interior Department to private developers.

Reid's two lots were never owned by the government, but the piece of land joining Reid's property to the street corner _ a key to the shopping center deal _ came from the government in 1994.

One of the sellers was Fred Lessman, a vice president of land acquisition at Perma-Bilt Homes.

Around the time of the 1998 sale, Lessman and his company were completing a complicated federal land transfer that also involved an Arizona-based developer named Del Webb Corp.

In the deal, Del Webb and Perma-Bilt purchased environmentally sensitive lands in the Lake Tahoe area, transferred them to the government and then got in exchange several pieces of valuable Las Vegas land.

Lessman was personally involved, writing a March 1997 letter to Interior lobbying for the deal. "This exchange has been through many trials and tribulations ... we do not need to create any more stumbling blocks," Lessman wrote.

For years, Reid also had been encouraging Interior to make land swaps on behalf of Del Webb, where one of his former aides worked.

In 1994, Reid wrote a letter with other Nevada lawmakers on behalf of Del Webb, and then met personally with a top federal land official in Nevada. That official claimed in media reports he felt pressured by the senator. Reid denied any pressure.

The next year, Reid collected $18,000 in political donations from Del Webb's political action committee and employees. Del Webb's efforts to get federal land dragged on.

In December 1996, Reid wrote a second letter on behalf of Del Webb, urging Interior to answer the company's concerns. The deal came together in summer and fall 1997, with Perma-Bilt joining in.

In January 1998 _ just days before he bought his land _ Reid applauded the Lake Tahoe land transfers, saying they would create the "gateway to paradise."

None of Reid's letters mentioned Perma-Bilt. Reid's office said the senator never met Lessman nor discussed the Lake Tahoe land transfer or his personal land purchase. A real estate attorney handled the 1998 sale at arms-length, aides said.

"This land investment was completely unrelated to federal land swaps that took place in the mid-1990's," Manley said.

Lessman said he never talked to Reid or asked for his help before the 1998 land sale, and only met the senator years later at a public event. "Any suggestion that the land sale between Senator Reid and myself is somehow tied in with the Perma-Bilt exchange is completely absurd," Lessman said.

THE REZONING

Clark County intended for the property Reid owned to be used solely for new housing, records show. Just days before Reid sold the parcels to Brown's company, Brown sought permission in May 2001 to rezone the properties so a shopping center could be built.

Career zoning officials objected, saying the request was "inconsistent" with Clark County's master development plan. The town board in Spring Valley, where Reid's property was located, also voted 4-1 to reject the rezoning.

Brown persisted. The Clark County zoning board followed by the Clark County Commission voted to overrule the recommendation and approve commercial zoning. Such votes were common at the time.

Before the approval in September 2001, Brown's consultant told commissioners that Reid was involved. "Mr. Brown's partner is Harry Reid, so I think we have people in this community who you can trust to go forward and put a quality project before you," the consultant testified.

With the rezoning granted, Patrick Lane pursued the shopping center deal. On Jan. 20, 2004, the company sold the property to developers for $1.6 million. Today, a multimillion dollar retail complex sits on the land.

On Jan. 21, 2004, Reid received more than $1.1 million of the sale proceeds. Reid disclosed the money the following year on his Senate ethics report as a personal sale of land, not mentioning Patrick Lane.

A BUSINESS PARTNER'S PAST

Brown has been a behind-the-scenes power broker in Nevada for years, donating to Democrats, Republicans and charities. He represented a major casino in legal cases and dabbled in Nevada's booming real estate market.

Brown befriended Reid four decades ago, even before Reid served as chairman of the Nevada gaming commission and decided cases involving Brown's clients.

Brown's name has surfaced in federal investigations involving organized crime, casinos and political bribery since the 1980s.

This past summer, federal prosecutors introduced testimony at the bribery trial of former Clark County Commission chairman Dario Herrara that Brown had taken money from a Las Vegas strip club owner to influence the commission. Herrara was convicted of taking kickbacks. Brown was never called as a witness.

Brown declined to discuss past cases where his name surfaced, including Herrara. "The federal government investigated this whole matter thoroughly, and there was never any implication of impropriety on my part," he said.

http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/10/11/D8KMJ8I00.html
 
Thank you sir. The 'Culture of Corruption' continues in the Democratic Party.

Wonder how much play this gets on the news. Should I hold my breath?
 
Statement of Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid

Honest Leadership and Open Government Act

March 6, 2006

In recent months, the public has been shocked and outraged over stories detailing abusive and criminal practices by lobbyists, Senior Administration officials, Members of Congress, and congressional staff. A number of the participants in these schemes that breached the public trust have pled guilty – Republican lobbyist Jack Abramoff, former staffer for the recent House Republican Majority Leader Michael Scanlon, and Republican Member of Congress Duke Cunningham and one of his co-conspirators, Mitchell Wade. Others are under indictment, including Bush political appointee David Safavian.

The guilty pleas, indictments, and documents released to date suggest wrongdoing or improper behavior, as well, by many others, including a former Deputy Secretary of the Interior, other former aides to the recent House Republican Majority Leader, former aides to Republican Senators, Grover Norquist, a close ally of the Bush White House, Ralph Reed, and the heads of two other groups closely associated with the Republican party.

The American people understand these are not one or two isolated incidents. They understand this is a clear pattern of wrongdoing, wrongdoing that can only be explained by an alarming sense of impunity.

The public understands these individuals felt that they were above the law. They felt that they could ignore the rules. They felt that the government was not there to serve the people’s interest, but to serve their own special interests or the interests of their cronies. What the public has seen is a [Republican] culture of corruption that has distorted government priorities and grown into the greatest pubic corruption scandal since Watergate.

As we begin this debate, it is important to realize that this corruption and wrongdoing often violated existing laws and congressional ethics rules. It is already illegal to offer or accept a bribe. It is already illegal to defraud your clients. It is already illegal to lie and commit perjury. The rules already prohibit Members from taking trips that have no real business purpose and are just excuses to golf. So much of what went on was already criminal or clearly unethical. The problem in many cases was not in the rules, it was in the culture of corruption that allowed everyone to feel that they could ignore the rules.

But, in other cases, it was also clear that the Rules had some shortcomings. In these areas, we need to expand disclosure and to tighten up rules that had been abused. We also need to find some way to restore public faith in the integrity of the government. And the best way for us to do that is to show the public that we take this issue seriously and that we will act aggressively and swiftly to change the culture in this town.

That is why I am so proud of what my Democratic colleagues and I have been able to do this year. As soon as we came back from the winter recess, we acted decisively. We unveiled sweeping reform principles and backed them up with legislation. It is one thing to address this issue through hastily called press conferences that offered no details. It is another to put reform to paper and introduce a reform bill that has the support of virtually the entire Democratic caucus. And that is what we did.

The Honest Leadership Act took the bull by the horns and fundamentally changed the debate on ethics and lobbying reform. Democrats stood united and said, “We are not going to let this process drag on and hope that people get distracted; we are going to seize the initiative and begin to change the culture of corruption.” The Democrats established the baseline for reform by getting caucus-wide support for a tough and comprehensive reform bill. Democrats raised the stakes on this issue and forced the Senate to deal with this in a meaningful way. I would like to commend Senators Feingold, Obama, Lieberman, Dodd and Levin for their initial work in this area and their efforts to advance these reform proposals in the Senate.

So, I am glad we are here today. I think it is fair to say we would not be here, and certainly not with as strong a bill, if not for the efforts of my Caucus in the Honest Leadership Act. In fact, much of what Democrats supported in S. 2180 has been included in the bill we are taking up today.

- Slow the revolving door between government jobs and lucrative private sector employment.

- Revoke Floor Privileges for former Member lobbyists.

- Eliminate gifts paid for by lobbyists, not just disclose them.

- More disclosure and scrutiny of privately-funded travel.

- Stop dead of night legislating by making conference reports available on the internet.

- More frequent and more detailed lobbyist disclosure available on the internet and increased civil penalties for violations.

- Required ethics training for congressional staff.

- New disclosure for stealth lobbying campaigns by business coalitions and Astroturf lobbying campaigns.

Now, not all of what the Democratic Caucus sought is in the bill, and in some cases the provisions that were included are weaker than what Democrats sought. Democrats will offer amendments to strengthen the bill in these areas. But, I am very pleased that so much of what we worked for as a Caucus has now gained broad bipartisan support.

During this debate, I hope we remain honest with the American people about an important point. When we approve this bill, we will not have “put the Abramoff scandal behind us.” Indeed, it is likely that future indictments and additional revelations will end any confusion on this point. The only way we put the Abramoff and other scandals behind us and restore the public faith in government is by each and every one of us conducting ourselves and operating this institution with the highest level of integrity.

Let’s remember, the costs of corruption are high. And it is the America people who pay them. The culture of corruption in Washington erodes the ability of our government to meet the needs of our people.

Look at this Administration’s response to hurricane Katrina and the growing national unease about our security both here and abroad. Just imagine – if Duke Cunningham and his co-conspirators had not succeeded in spending tens of millions of taxpayer dollars to give their cronies bogus contracts, that money could have been used to pay for body armor, for port security, or some other critical need.

The culture of corruption distorts our priorities and frustrates efforts to address the real needs of Americans -- who are trying to cope with high natural gas prices to heat their homes, high fuel prices for their cars, concerns about their own retirement security and a growing sense that they are having to work harder and harder to maintain even their current standard of living.

We were sent here to serve the people in our states and the country. We have been given an awesome responsibility and a real privilege. I hope we can begin clean up this mess in Washington so that we can get on with the nation’s business.

America deserves a government as good as its people.

Together, America can do better.

http://democrats.senate.gov/newsroom/record.cfm?id=252209&

DEMOCRATS = HYPOCRITES
 
fossten said:
Listen: Do you hear all the liberal responses?

*crickets*

I can hear them muttering under their breath...

So that's how Reid got his nickname 'Dirty Harry'. :rolleyes:
 
Nice bed-fellow Harry...

From the A.P.

" The Nevada Democrat's deal was engineered by Jay Brown, a longtime friend and former casino lawyer whose name surfaced in a major political bribery trial this summer and in other prior organized crime investigations..."
 
If he's done something illegal, then hang him out to to dry. Hell, get rid of all of the bastards and start over. Term limits would be a good compromise short of re-enacting that scene from "Mars Attacks".
 
I would be surprised if Reid has to resign. Democrats never get the penalties that Republicans get, nor do they get the press surrounding their actions like R's do.
 
AP: Allen didn't disclose stock options
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061008...Jl7IbKs0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA3OTB1amhuBHNlYwNtdHM-
By SHARON THEIMER and BOB LEWIS, Associated Press Writers Sun Oct 8, 7:01 PM ET

RICHMOND, Va. - For the past five years, Sen. George Allen (news, bio, voting record), has failed to tell Congress about stock options he got for his work as a director of a high-tech company. The Virginia Republican also asked the Army to help another business that gave him similar options.
ADVERTISEMENT

Congressional rules require senators to disclose to the Senate all deferred compensation, such as stock options. The rules also urge senators to avoid taking any official action that could benefit them financially or appear to do so.

Those requirements exist so the public can police lawmakers for possible conflicts of interest, especially involving companies with government business that lawmakers can influence.

Allen's stock options date to the period from January 1998 to January 2001 when Allen was between political jobs and had plunged into the corporate world.

An Associated Press review of Allen's financial dealings from that era found that the senator:

_Did not have to look far to find corporate suitors, joining three Virginia high-tech companies he assisted as governor. Allen served on boards of directors for Xybernaut and Commonwealth Biotechnologies and advised a third company called Com-Net Ericsson, all government contractors.

_Twice failed to promptly alert the
Securities and Exchange Commission of insider stock transactions as a Xybernaut and Commonwealth director. The SEC requires timely notification and can fine those who file late.

_Kept stock options provided to him for serving as a director of Xybernaut and Commonwealth, but steered other compensation from his board service to his law firm.

Allen, a potential 2008 presidential candidate, rose to prominence as a conservative from Virginia, serving in the U.S. House and as governor. From 1998 through 2000, he worked as a private lawyer and businessman before joining the Senate in 2001.

He now faces a tough re-election campaign against Democrat Jim Webb.

In interviews, Allen and his staff sought to play down his corporate dealings, saying they were a good learning experience but did not lead to extraordinary riches — except for a quarter-million-dollar windfall from Com-Net Ericsson stock.

Allen's office said he sold his Xybernaut stock at a loss and has not cashed in his Commonwealth options because they cost more than the stock is now worth. The senator also said he saw no conflict going to work for companies shortly after assisting them as governor.

"I actually got no money out of Xybernaut. I got paid in stock options which were worthless. Commonwealth Biotech asked me to be on their board. Glad to do it. I learned a lot on their board and enjoyed working with 'em, and they seem to be doing all right, I guess," Allen said.

___

THE DISCLOSURE ISSUE

Allen's office said he did not report his Commonwealth options on his past five Senate disclosure reports because their purchase price was higher than the current market value. Allen viewed them as worthless and believed in "good faith" he did not have to report them, aides said.

Allen disclosed the options once — on an amendment to his 2000 ethics report filed three months after the normal filing period ended. He excluded the options from subsequent reports.

When AP showed Allen's lawyer the Senate ethics manual requirement that such options must be reported each year regardless of value, the lawyer said he was unfamiliar with that provision. Allen has now asked the Senate ethics committee for an opinion on whether he should have disclosed them.

"While we continue to believe that we have disclosed more than is required, we will abide by the formal ruling of the committee," Allen spokesman John Reid said.

The disclosure requirements exist so the public can watch for potential conflicts of interest, and Allen had an obligation to report his Commonwealth stock options to Congress, two ethics experts said.

"As an ethical matter, it's irrelevant whether the exercise price of those stock options is above or below the current market price of the stock," said Kathleen Clark, a Washington University of St. Louis law professor, former prosecutor and former Democratic congressional aide.

"If he owns stock options, he does have such a financial stake, whether the exercise price is above or below current market value."

Lawyer Marc Elias, who represents Democrats in ethics cases, said the conflict issue is even clearer because Commonwealth gets federal contracts.

"Unlike some other controversies that have come up from time to time, this is a situation where the underlying asset is in a company that has business before Congress," Elias said.

Commonwealth granted Allen options on 15,000 shares of company stock at $7.50 a share in May 1999, company chief executive Robert Harris said.

The company's stock has a history of wild fluctuations, typically rising after new government contracts. It hit $9 to $10 a share the month after Allen left the board. It has been closer to $2 recently.

Commonwealth usually gives departing directors just 90 days to exercise stock options, but Allen's were extended until as late as May 2009 because he was entering public service, Harris said.

When Allen left for the Senate, Commonwealth made clear it hoped he would help the company in his new job. "We, of course, wish him much success in Washington and look forward to his pro-business agenda reaping benefits for CBI, the commonwealth and the nation," company chairman Richard Freer said.

___

HELP FOR XYBERNAUT

Both Commonwealth and Xybernaut have suffered through difficult times and federal contracts have been an important financial lifeline in recent years.

Allen's office acknowledges he has met socially over the years with company executives and his office has granted "routine courtesy meetings" from company lobbyists "to hear their opinion on legislation and issues before the federal government."

Reid said he is aware of only one time that Allen's office helped any of his former companies. That came in December 2001 when Allen asked the Army to resolve a lingering issue with Xybernaut. The company asked Allen to intervene, and he urged the Army to give Xybernaut an answer, Reid said.

At the time, Allen still owned options to buy 110,000 shares of Xybernaut stock, which could be affected by any new federal contracts.

The Army answered but did not give Xybernaut what it wanted, and Allen did nothing more, Reid said. The office declined to release the correspondence, saying constituent letters are confidential.

Allen himself said he could not recall helping, and only met former company associates socially. "Whether I see a former — whatever the question is — personally at some social event or political event over the years, so what?" Allen asked.

Xybernaut declined comment.

___

ALLEN ASSISTED COMPANIES AS GOVERNOR

As Virginia's governor, Allen took representatives of Xybernaut and Ericsson on trade missions. He helped steer $4 million in tax-exempt bonds to Commonwealth for new headquarters and announced an $800,000 state grant to help Lynchburg, Va., prepare a site for an Ericsson expansion.

Then he went to work for those companies.

Allen joined Commonwealth's board of directors about two months after leaving the governor's office in January 1998. Xybernaut named him a director that August, and he became a Com-Net Ericsson adviser in February 2000.

"He was an ex-governor and pre-senator," Commonwealth's Harris said. "He represented a skill set that was of value to the company in terms of his corporate legal experience and he was, and is, a high-profile person prominent in Virginia and elsewhere."

The three companies have had starkly different fates in recent years.

Com-Net Ericsson became part of Tyco after Allen left the board, and got a new management team.

Commonwealth reported its first full year of profitability in 2005.

Xybernaut, which makes a computer people can wear on their heads, sought bankruptcy protection last year and is being sued by shareholders. The SEC also is investigating the company.

Allen's office said he had no knowledge of any wrongdoing at Xybernaut. The senator sold his Xybernaut stock at a modest loss in 2005.

____

BELATED FILINGS TO REGULATORS

At least twice during his corporate service, companies told the SEC that Allen had failed to promptly file required reports on insider stock transactions.

In March 1999, Commonwealth reported to the SEC that Allen failed to "timely file" a report showing an initial statement of beneficial ownership in the company and a single acquisition of stock. The transactions were subsequently reported, it said.

In April 2000, Xybernaut told the SEC that Allen and all but one of his fellow directors failed to file statements of beneficial ownership in a timely way.

The SEC makes it the responsibility of directors, not their companies, to file insider stock notifications. Those who file them late can face civil penalties.

Allen's office said he considered it the companies' responsibility to file the reports and the SEC never contacted him or took action against him.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Allen's Undisclosed Stock Options Were Worth Up to $1.1 Million
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=aMTFur4YOYEs&refer=news
By Michael Forsythe and Miles Weiss

Oct. 10 (Bloomberg) -- Stock options that Senator George Allen described as worthless were worth as much as $1.1 million at one point, according to a review of Senate disclosure forms and U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission filings.

The records appear to contradict remarks he made to the Associated Press. ``I got paid in stock options which were worthless,'' AP quoted him as saying.

Allen served as a board member of Chantilly, Virginia-based Xybernaut Corp. from 1998 until December 2000 and was awarded options on 110,000 shares during that period. His Senate financial disclosure form for 1999, required for candidates as well as officeholders, doesn't report that he owned the options.

The stock options issue didn't arise during a televised debate last night between Allen, a 54-year-old Republican, and Democratic nominee Jim Webb, 60. Nevertheless, Mark Rozell, a professor of public policy at George Mason University in Arlington, Virginia, said the issue poses a problem for Allen, who polls show is in a close race with Webb.

``In an election season in which congressional ethics and morality are at the top of public discussion, Allen may now be seen by much of the public as part of a larger problem afflicting his party,'' Rozell said.

Allen left Xybernaut at the end of 2000 after he was elected to the Senate. The company makes portable computers that can be strapped to the body for military or civilian uses.

SEC records showed that Allen owned 60,000 options at the end of 1999, worth $38,200. For 2000 and 2001, he filed amendments to his annual disclosures stating that he owned Xybernaut options.

60,000 Options

In March 2000, Allen held 60,000 options when Xybernaut shares closed at an all-time high of $23.75. That would have made the options worth $1.1 million, less commissions and fees, had Allen exercised them.

At that time, Allen could have paid $5.47 and $1.56 respectively for two groups of options, sold them and pocketed the difference. He was awarded another 50,000 options in October 2000.

Greg Walden, an attorney at Patton Boggs LLP in Washington who represents Allen, said the options with Xybernaut expired 90 days after Allen left the board in December 2000.

Walden said Allen never exercised the options. They became worthless as the share price fell. The company went bankrupt in 2005.

A filing by Allen, which Xybernaut forwarded to the SEC in February 2001, shows that he had the right to exercise all the options at the end of 2000. The options were to begin to expire in 2008. Allen also reported owning the options on his 2002 and 2003 Senate financial disclosures, long after Walden said they had expired.

Chief Executive

Xybernaut Chief Executive Perry Nolen referred reporters to Allen's Senate office. ``I've helped them by providing information to them. So it should be accurate,'' Nolen said.

The company, which now has a market capitalization of less than $1 million, raised $173 million from investors since first going public 10 years ago. It never had a profitable quarter.

By the end of 2000, Xybernaut's share price had plummeted to $1.69, and Allen's options were worth just $1,300.

In 2001, Allen's first year in the U.S. Senate, the company's share price recovered to $5.46 on May 25, which would have valued 110,000 options at $71,500 before commissions and other brokerage fees. Some of the options exceeded their strike price as recently as July 2004.

Allen wrote a letter to the U.S. Army on Xybernaut's behalf in December 2001, AP reported, citing John Reid, Allen's spokesman, who told AP he wouldn't disclose the contents of the letter. In September 2003 the U.S. Defense Department announced $2.13 million in contracts to buy the company's wearable computers.

Accounting Rule Change

In the Senate, Allen opposed an accounting rule change that requires companies to list options as an expense on their financial reports. Allen co-sponsored a measure to block the rule change and in a hearing that year linked the awarding of stock options to increasing the security of U.S. troops in Iraq.

He said stock options make investments in technology companies more attractive, leading to innovations that helped make ``it safer for our men and women in uniform.''

Allen's double-digit lead in the race was eroded following a comment he made about one of Webb's Indian-American campaign workers and media reports alleging he made racial slurs against blacks while a student at the University of Virginia in the 1970s. He has denied making racial slurs.
 
Nice try shrubbies, nothing illegal here.........

Reid to amend his $1.1M land deal ethics report

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15291225/

Senate Democratic leader says everything 'transparent', 'fully disclosed'

Updated: 26 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid announced Monday he is amending his ethics reports to Congress to more fully account for a land deal that allowed him to collect $1.1 million for property he hadn't personally owned for three years.

Reid acted several days after The Associated Press reported the senator didn't disclose to Congress that he first sold the land to a friend's company back in 2001 and took an ownership stake in the company. He didn't collect the seven-figure payout until the company sold the land again in 2004 to others.

"I directed my staff to file amended financial disclosure forms noting that in 2001, I transferred title to the land to a Limited Liability Corporation," Reid said in a statement issued by his office.

Reid said he believed the 2001 sale did not alter his ownership of the land but that he agreed to file the amended reports because "I believe in ensuring all facts come to light."

Reid blamed the AP story as a "latest attempt" by Republicans to affect the election. AP reported last week that it learned of the land deal from a former Reid adviser who had concerns about the way the deal was reported to Congress.

Reid also announced he failed to disclose two other land transactions on his prior ethics reports and would account for those on his amended reports.

Land deal background
From the start Reid has denied any wrongdoing in collecting the $1.1 million windfall, but had said he was willing to change his report on the transaction if the Senate Ethics Committee orders him to.

Reid hung up on an A-P reporter asking about the deal. He told a Las Vegas news conference today that everything he did was "transparent," that he "paid all the taxes" and that everything was "fully disclosed."

Aides to the senator say no money changed hands in 2001 when Reid got an ownership stake in a friend's company equal to the value of the land.

<snip>
 
Amending the report is like closing the barn door after the horse has escaped. Too late, Dingy Harry, you violated ethics rules.

Nice try, lib wacko.
 
fossten said:
Amending the report is like closing the barn door after the horse has escaped. Too late, Dingy Harry, you violated ethics rules.

More like correcting an error on a piece of paper to ensure the record is accurate. Yep, he may have violated some "rule", but he didn't do anything remotely illegal or endangering to fellow humans like the repugs who've been dropping like flies lately.

fossten said:
Nice try, lib wacko.

Man, that must really roast your nuggets to be *owned* by a "troll". How many keyboards do you break each week from all the pounding you put on them? You must go through alot of shoes too from all the stomping you do.
 
JohnnyBz00LS said:
More like correcting an error on a piece of paper to ensure the record is accurate. Yep, he may have violated some "rule", but he didn't do anything remotely illegal or endangering to fellow humans like the repugs who've been dropping like flies lately.

"Reid also announced he failed to disclose two other land transactions on his prior ethics reports and would account for those on his amended reports."


I guess we'll have to wait for the other 2 shoes to drop after he amends the other 2 land deals he also 'forgot' to mention on previous filings.

Dingy Harry. Name fits that guy perfectly.
 
Reid to Reimburse Campaign for Donations
Oct 16 2006

By JOHN SOLOMON
Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON


Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid has been using campaign donations instead of his personal money to pay Christmas bonuses for the support staff at the Ritz-Carlton where he lives in an upscale condominium. Federal election law bars candidates from converting political donations for personal use.

Questioned about the campaign expenditures by The Associated Press, Reid's office said Monday he was personally reimbursing his campaign for $3,300 in donations he had directed to the staff holiday fund at his residence.

Reid also announced he was amending his ethics reports to Congress to more fully account for a Las Vegas land deal, highlighted in an AP story last week, that allowed him to collect $1.1 million in 2004 for property he hadn't personally owned in three years.

In that matter, the senator hadn't disclosed to Congress that he first sold land to a friend's limited liability company back in 2001 and took an ownership stake in the company. He collected the seven-figure payout when the company sold the land again in 2004 to others.

Reid portrayed the 2004 sale as a personal sale of land, making no mention of the company's ownership or its role in the sale.

Reid said his amended ethics reports would list the 2001 sale and the company, called Patrick Lane LLC. He said the amended reports would also divulge two other smaller land deals he had failed to report to Congress.

"I directed my staff to file amended financial disclosure forms noting that in 2001, I transferred title to the land to a Limited Liability Corporation," Reid said in a statement issued by his office.

He said he believed the 2001 sale did not alter his ownership of the land but that he agreed to file the amended reports because "I believe in ensuring all facts come to light."

Reid labeled the AP story as the "latest attempt" by Republicans to affect the election. AP reported last week that it learned of the land deal from a former Reid adviser who had concerns about the way the deal was reported to Congress.

On the Ritz-Carlton holiday donations, Reid gave $600 in 2002, then $1,200 in 2004 and $1,500 in 2005 from his re-election campaign to an entity listed as the REC Employee Holiday Fund. His campaign listed the expenses as campaign "salary" for two of the years and as a "contribution" one year.

Reid's office said the listing as salary was a "clerical error."

Residents and workers at the Ritz said the fund's full name is the Residents Executive Committee Holiday Fund and that it collects money each year from the condominium residents to help provide Christmas gifts, bonuses and a party for the support staff.

Federal election law permits campaigns to provide "gifts of nominal value" but prohibits candidates from using political donations for personal expenses, such as mortgage, rent or utilities for "any part of any personal residence."

The law specifically defines prohibited personal use expenses as any "obligation or expense of any person that would exist irrespective of the candidate's campaign or duties as a federal officeholder."

Land deeds show Reid and his wife, Landra, purchased a condominium for their Washington residence at the hotel for $750,000 in March 2001. The holiday fund has existed for years the at the condo, workers said.

Reid said Monday he believed the expenses were permissible but he nonetheless was reimbursing the campaign.

"These donations were made to thank the men and women who work in the building for the extra work they do as a result of my political activities, and for helping the security officers assigned to me because of my Senate position," Reid said.

Larry Noble, the Federal Election Commission's former chief enforcement lawyer, said Reid's explanation is aimed at a "gray area" in the law by suggesting the donations were tied to his official Senate and political work.

"What makes this harder for the senator is that this is his personal residence and this looks like an event that everybody else at the residence is taking out of their personal money as they're living there," Noble said.

On the land dealings, Reid announced Monday he had failed to disclose two other transactions on his prior ethics reports and would account for those on his amended reports along with the 2001 sale.

The first, he said, involved the sale in 2004 of about one-third acre of land in 2004 he owned in his hometown of Searchlight, Nev. And, he said he had not reported his ownership since 1985 of a quarter acre of land his brother gave him in 1985.

Reid said the failure to disclose those transactions previously was due to "clerical errors" and they amounted to "two minor matters that were inadvertently left off my original disclosure forms."

He had asked the Senate Ethics Committee last Wednesday for an opinion on the 2001 land sale but decided to amend his forms prior to the committee acting.

Reid's announcement came after numerous newspapers nationwide published editorials criticizing both his initial failure to disclose the full details of his Las Vegas land deal and his response to AP's story.

The $1.1 million land deal was engineered by Jay Brown, a longtime friend and former casino lawyer whose name surfaced in a major political bribery trial this summer and in other prior organized crime investigations. Brown has never been charged with wrongdoing, except for a 1981 federal securities complaint that was settled out of court.

Ethics experts told AP that Reid's inaccurate accounting of the deal to Congress appeared to violate Senate ethics rules and raised other issues concerning taxes and potential gifts.
 
Apparently republicans don't have a monopoly over the "culture of corruption" after all. Worse...it looks like corruption for democrats begins with the Town Crier himself—Harry Reid! Why am I not surprised?
 
And if the media covered this, it would be over for the Dims, but alas, they won't. The sheeple will continue to be brainwashed by the liberal media and won't know what hit them when they take the only people willing to protect out of power.
 

Members online

No members online now.
Back
Top