Pasadena Star News
Comment by Jim Campbell
The positions that Dianne Feinstein has taken shown below are indicative that she has been “Too Long” and “Too Wrong for California’s voters. It seems odd, and the reader will note, that her policies drive jobs from CA, drive business’ out of CA and frequently out the United States. Diane Feinstein just doesn’t get it.
It’s time to send the 78 year-old senator home where she belongs. Let’s be clear, Feinstein has rarely seen or heard of a tax she was not in favor of. She doesn’t even need to read the legislation. Tax and Spend say it again more government control over my people. Sorry Dianne we don’t work for you, you were supposed to work for us, you did a miserable job and that is why CA voters will fire you in November.
Dianne Feinstein immediately following the admission that Durkee had embezzled millions from her campaign war chest.
I don’t see how politicians do it. There’s character assassination waiting for them at every turn, with adversaries itching for public expression even to vent questionable complaints.When Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-California, was apparently financially victimized by her former re-election campaign treasurer, Kinde Durkee, some Republican detractors pounced, saying Feinstein should be removed from office for not being “with it” enough to realize Durkee couldn’t be trusted.
But blaming the victim is not new. And neither is unwarranted political harassment that borders on abuse. Durkee, who heads Durkee and Associates in Burbank, an accounting firm, was arrested last September on suspicion of mail fraud, and pleaded guilty on March 30. Federal prosecutors said the case, which dates back more than a decade, is about defrauding almost 50 clients to the tune of at least $7 million and is believed to be the biggest embezzlement case involving political campaign funds in the country’s history.
Campaign treasurer Kinde Durkee admits $7-million theft
Last Tuesday, California regulators ordered Durkee and Associates to stop work – it was discovered that, contrary to its claims of financial compliance, the firm wasn’t licensed and had no certified accountants on staff.
Durkee, who controlled hundreds of bank accounts, reportedly acknowledged misusing clients’ money for years and filing bogus records. She is said to have shifted money around in order to pay personal expenses, such as her mother’s care at an assisted living facility. To allay suspicions, after looting funds from campaign committees, she sometimes channeled them into her company account and then into other campaigns. (See More)
Feinstein lost about $4.5million from her re-election account, and her request to the Federal Election Committee (FEC) to be allowed to replace the pilfered money with new donations from the original donors looked like it would be denied. The original contributions plus the new monies would have exceeded current federal limits, and the FEC would not consider the new monies only.
Feinstein made her first public remarks on the subject after Durkee pleaded guilty and, to her credit, replaced the pilfered campaign funds with a $5 million personal loan.
But before Feinstein went public, Elizabeth Emken, a Republican mother of three who lobbies for an autism advocacy group, told reporters that career politicians such as Feinstein have contributed to the national debt and should be retired. Of course, people who agree with Emken were quick to have their say too, on the Web.
It’s easy, however, to counter their reasoning. Just a brief survey of Feinstein’s recent voting record on some key issues speaks for the senator’s awareness.
March 8, 2012: Feinstein voted nay on approving the Keystone Pipeline Project amendment – the amendment was rejected by the Senate;
Feb. 2, 2012: she voted yea on prohibiting insider trading by government officials – the bill was passed by the Senate;
Jan. 26, 2012: she voted nay on disapproval of the president’s authority to raise the debt limit – the motion was rejected by the Senate;
Dec. 14, 2011: she voted yea on a proposed balanced budget amendment to the U.S. Constitution (the Udall bill) – the bill was rejected by the Senate;
Dec. 1, 2011: she voted yea on extending the payroll tax cut and establishing a tax on income over $1 million – the motion was rejected by the Senate;
Dec. 1, 2011: she voted yea on a proposed amendment prohibiting detention of U.S. citizens without trial – the amendment was rejected by the Senate;
Nov. 29, 2011: voted yea on an amendment to repeal authorization for the use of military force against Iraq – the amendment was rejected by the Senate.
How could anyone who knows her record even slightly accuse Feinstein of being asleep at the switch simply because, like so many others who are also sophisticated and knowledgeable, she was fooled by an adroit con artist. Those voters who dislike her liberal record needn’t vote for her, but trying to oust her from the political scene for little or no reason is not the right way.
For sure the senator will get my vote.
As for Durkee, she faces up to 14 years in prison. Will she try to con the con artists there, I wonder?