Rahm Emanuel's profitable stint at mortgage giant Short Freddie Mac stay $320,000 +

[loganinkosovo]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/obama/chi-rahm-emanuel-profit-26-mar26,0,5682373.story




Rahm Emanuel's profitable stint at mortgage giant

Short Freddie Mac stay made him at least $320,000



Before its portfolio of bad loans helped trigger the current housing crisis, mortgage giant Freddie Mac (http://www.chicagotribune.com/topic/economy-business-finance/freddie-mac-ORCRP006178.topic) was the focus of a major accounting scandal that led to a management shake-up, huge fines and scalding condemnation of passive directors by a top federal regulator.

One of those allegedly asleep-at-the-switch board members was Chicago's Rahm Emanuel (http://www.chicagotribune.com/topic/politics/government/rahm-emanuel--PEPLT000007532.topic)—now chief of staff to President (http://www.chicagotribune.com/topic/politics/government/barack-obama-PEPLT007408.topic)Barack Obama (http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/obama/)—who made at least $320,000 for a 14-month stint at Freddie Mac that required little effort.

As gatekeeper to Obama, Emanuel now plays a critical role in addressing the nation's mortgage woes and fulfilling the administration's pledge to impose responsibility on the financial world.

Emanuel's Freddie Mac involvement has been a prominent point on his political résumé, and his healthy payday from the firm has been no secret either. What is less known, however, is how little he apparently did for his money and how he benefited from the kind of cozy ties between Washington and Wall Street that have fueled the nation's current economic mess.

Though just 49, Emanuel is a veteran Democratic strategist and fundraiser who served three terms in the U.S. (http://www.chicagotribune.com/topic/politics/government/national-government/united-states-ORGOV0000001.topic) House after helping elect Mayor Richard Daley (http://www.chicagotribune.com/topic/politics/government/richard-m.-daley-PEPLT007475.topic) and former President Bill Clinton (http://www.chicagotribune.com/topic/politics/government/presidents-of-the-united-states/bill-clinton-PEPLT007410.topic). The Freddie Mac money was a small piece of the $16 million he made in a three-year interlude as an investment banker a decade ago.

In business as in politics, Emanuel has cultivated an aggressive, take-charge reputation that made him rich and propelled his rise to the front of the national stage. But buried deep in corporate and government documents on the Freddie Mac scandal is a little-known and very different story involving Emanuel.

He was named to the Freddie Mac board in February 2000 by Clinton, whom Emanuel had served as White House (http://www.chicagotribune.com/topic/politics/government/executive-branch/the-white-house-PLCUL000110.topic) political director and vocal defender during the Whitewater and Monica Lewinsky scandals.

The board met no more than six times a year. Unlike most fellow directors, Emanuel was not assigned to any of the board's working committees, according to company proxy statements. Immediately upon joining the board, Emanuel and other new directors qualified for $380,000 in stock and options plus a $20,000 annual fee, records indicate.

On Emanuel's watch, the board was told by executives of a plan to use accounting tricks to mislead shareholders about outsize profits the government-chartered firm was then reaping from risky investments. The goal was to push earnings onto the books in future years, ensuring that Freddie Mac would appear profitable on paper for years to come and helping maximize annual bonuses for company brass.

The accounting scandal wasn't the only one that brewed during Emanuel's tenure.

During his brief time on the board, the company hatched a plan to enhance its political muscle. That scheme, also reviewed by the board, led to a record $3.8 million fine from the Federal Election Commission for illegally using corporate resources to host fundraisers for politicians. Emanuel was the beneficiary of one of those parties after he left the board and ran in 2002 for a seat in Congress from the North Side of Chicago.

The board was throttled for its acquiescence to the accounting manipulation in a 2003 report by Armando Falcon Jr., head of a federal oversight agency for Freddie Mac. The scandal forced Freddie Mac to restate $5 billion in earnings and pay $585 million in fines and legal settlements. It also foreshadowed even harder times at the firm.

Many of those same risky investment practices tied to the accounting scandal eventually brought the firm to the brink of insolvency and led to its seizure last year by the Bush administration, which pledged to inject up to $100 billion in new capital to keep the firm afloat. The Obama administration has doubled that commitment.

Freddie Mac reported recently that it lost $50 billion in 2008. It so far has tapped $14 billion of the government's guarantee and said it soon will need an additional $30 billion to keep operating.

Like its larger government-chartered cousin Fannie Mae (http://www.chicagotribune.com/topic/economy-business-finance/fannie-mae-ORCRP005575.topic), Freddie Mac was created by Congress to promote home ownership, though both are private corporations with shares traded on the New York Stock Exchange (http://www.chicagotribune.com/topic/economy-business-finance/new-york-stock-exchange-ORCRP001376.topic). The two firms hold stakes in half the nation's residential mortgages.

Because of Freddie Mac's federal charter, the board in Emanuel's day was a hybrid of directors elected by shareholders and those appointed by the president.

In his final year in office, Clinton tapped three close pals: Emanuel, Washington lobbyist and golfing partner James Free, and Harold Ickes, a former White House aide instrumental in securing the election (http://www.chicagotribune.com/topic/politics/elections/u.s.-elections/2008-u.s.-presidential-election-EVHST0000104.topic) of Hillary Clinton (http://www.chicagotribune.com/topic/politics/government/hillary-clinton-PEPLT007433.topic) to the U.S. Senate. Free's appointment was good for four months, and Ickes' only three months.

Falcon, director of the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight, found that presidential appointees played no "meaningful role" in overseeing the company and recommended that their positions be eliminated.

John Coffee, a law professor and expert on corporate governance at Columbia University (http://www.chicagotribune.com/topic/education/colleges-universities/columbia-university-OREDU000097.topic), said the financial crisis at Freddie Mac was years in the making and fueled by chronically weak oversight by the firm's directors. The presence of presidential appointees on the board didn't help, he added.

"You know there was a patronage system and these people were only going to serve a short time," Coffee said. "That's why [they] get the stock upfront."

Financial disclosure statements that are required of U.S. House members show Emanuel made at least $320,000 from his time at Freddie Mac. Two years after leaving the firm, Emanuel reported an additional sale of Freddie Mac stock worth between $100,001 and $250,000. The document did not detail whether he profited from the sale.

Sarah Feinberg, a spokeswoman for Emanuel, said there was no conflict between his stint at Freddie Mac and Obama's vow to restore confidence in financial institutions and the executives who run them. At the same time, Feinberg said Emanuel now agrees that presidential appointees to the Freddie Mac board "are unnecessary and don't have long enough terms to make a difference."

Former President George W. Bush (http://www.chicagotribune.com/topic/politics/government/presidents-of-the-united-states/george-bush-PEPLT000857.topic) voluntarily stopped making such appointments following Falcon's assessment of their uselessness.

In an interview, Falcon said the Freddie Mac board did most of its work in committees. Yet proxy statements that detailed committee assignments showed none for Emanuel, Free or Ickes during the time they served in 2000 or 2001. Most other directors carried two committee assignments each.


http://www.chicagotribune.com/media/photo/2009-03/45803447.jpg



"Crooked" is just too weak a word for this.

[Panchito12]

Would anyone care to ask what military force Rahm Emmanuel went to assist during the Gulf War (instead of coming over and serving with me, his fellow U.S. citizen)? Anyone? Anyone?

[LineDoggie]

It would take Delta to get him to give the loot back


Do as I say,...................

[Kaplanr]

Would anyone care to ask what military force Rahm Emmanuel went to assist during the Gulf War (instead of coming over and serving with me, his fellow U.S. citizen)? Anyone? Anyone?

And the relationship of your ****wad question question to this story?

[Flagg]

And the relationship of your ****wad question question to this story?

Potential conflict of interest in financial crisis.........potential conflict of interest in a foreign policy crisis

[Nano]

Not very surprising given the long list of people from both parties who got monies from Fannie and Freddie. Maybe Rahm Emanuel's pay should be 90% tax along with everyone else's who received campaign contributions from now defunct financial institutions who got bailed out. This should be both a lifetime tax and an estate tax after their death. It is only equitable that they've leveraged our futures and several generations down the road to get elected and re-elected their future and family's should be as well.

[Hot Lips]

Here me pretending to looked shocked :| at executive levels scheming to pad their own pockets. I'm jaded enough to think you'd be hard pressed to put many under a microscope and not conclude with "WTF?".

[Flagg]

Here me pretending to looked shocked :| at executive levels scheming to pad their own pockets. I'm jaded enough to think you'd be hard pressed to put many under a microscope and not conclude with "WTF?".

I would agree to a certain extent.

My guess is that 99.9% of people are imperfect enough that SOMETHING they have done could be used as leverage against them.......or puffed up and packaged into something bigger.

I believe THIS is what prevents a number of otherwise outstanding candidates from throwing their hat in the political ring....the fear of being discovered as human, but publically turned into a monster.

In my opinion, the problem lies with special interests doing their homework to co-opt people willingly or unwillingly into compromising themselves....or providing them with protection against compromise.

If many in office or power today have their quite serious conflicts of interest successfully hidden, ignored, or intentionally lost in "noise", surely efforts to prevent outsiders from gaining office would be equally effective in keeping them out.

[Panchito12]

And the relationship of your ****wad question question to this story?

It goes towards his character.

[Dilla2k]

Would anyone care to ask what military force Rahm Emmanuel went to assist during the Gulf War (instead of coming over and serving with me, his fellow U.S. citizen)? Anyone? Anyone?

Israel. Your damned if you do, your damned if you dont. As for this scandal is the tv news media covering it? Ya know, the media people actually acknowledge. **** like this needs to get out. He wont be fired even though he deserves it for shady **** like that. Hes just another cog in this broken machine. Ask some of my friends and they'll tell you why im not shocked at all that he did this.

[Dilla2k]

I would agree to a certain extent.

My guess is that 99.9% of people are imperfect enough that SOMETHING they have done could be used as leverage against them.......or puffed up and packaged into something bigger.

I believe THIS is what prevents a number of otherwise outstanding candidates from throwing their hat in the political ring....the fear of being discovered as human, but publically turned into a monster.

In my opinion, the problem lies with special interests doing their homework to co-opt people willingly or unwillingly into compromising themselves....or providing them with protection against compromise.

If many in office or power today have their quite serious conflicts of interest successfully hidden, ignored, or intentionally lost in "noise", surely efforts to prevent outsiders from gaining office would be equally effective in keeping them out.That could be true. Im sure hes somewhat responsible but some of that story feels a bit implied. Like their holding my hand to a conclusion. I fear the day Obamas big oust comes. He has to have real skeletons and im not talking that Bill Ayers bull****.

[Flagg]

That could be true. Im sure hes somewhat responsible but some of that story feels a bit implied. Like their holding my hand to a conclusion. I fear the day Obamas big oust comes. He has to have real skeletons and im not talking that Bill Ayers bull****.

Everyone I trust has skeletons in their closet........but they're usually not relevant to what matters in our relationships.

Relevancy is what counts.

There aren't too many Jimmy Stewarts around....and I bet even ole 'awe shucks Jimmy Stewart possessed human flaws.

[Walter Sobchak]

Potential conflict of interest in financial crisis.........potential conflict of interest in a foreign policy crisis

Conflict of interest in the US CON-gress???? I'm shocked!!!

Oh, you mean like... Conrad and Dodd's 3% home loans from Countrywide Mortgage, over whom they had regulatory oversight?

Or Bwaney Fwank shacked up with a Fannie Mae executive... as he was regulating that agency?

Or the millions that flowed from Wall Street firms into the mostly Democratic campaign coffers... and now we keep bailing them out to the tune of billions and billions?

Or, the politically well-connected AIG negotiating their "bonus" program into the bail-out when Geithner was still at NY Fed last fall and hidden by Dodd in one of the "hurry up and pass it" bills?

Oh, THAT conflict of interest!

It's funny that is Congress had to obey the same laws that they pass, many of them would be in orange jumpsuits right now. Of BOTH parties.

[Kaplanr]

Potential conflict of interest in financial crisis.........potential conflict of interest in a foreign policy crisis

As for his financial crisis conflict of interest, seems to be the natural manner of things in Washington, Republican or Democrat, Jew or Gentile.

Regarding his time in Israel "Emanuel did not serve in the Israeli army, but was a civilian volunteer assisting the Israel Defense Forces for a short time during the 1991 Gulf War, repairing truck brakes in one of Israel's northern bases with Sar-El."

Not sure that provides gist for a potential crisis in foreign policy.

[LineDoggie]

Hmmm

Why does it always come down to a Jewish Politician in the USA to be accused of Divided Loyalties?

We never accuse Irish Americans, African Americans, Protestant Americans, etc.

What causes the fact that someones a Jew to suddenly be considered untrustworthy by some here?


Do y'all wear pillowcases with eye holes when you accuse him of that?

I cant stand this Csucker, but not for his religion, but his politics.

[LineDoggie]

It goes towards his character.

His character is the IDF allows Civilian Volunteers to help in wartime IIRC.

Can You as a US Civilian, Volunteer for Iraq as a Civilian to repair Vehicles without being hired by a KBR type organization?

I dont think so.....

[Flagg]

As for his financial crisis conflict of interest, seems to be the natural manner of things in Washington, Republican or Democrat, Jew or Gentile.

yep.....republicrats and special interest corruption are sadly intertwined and swept over by cooperative media.

Regarding his time in Israel "Emanuel did not serve in the Israeli army, but was a civilian volunteer assisting the Israel Defense Forces for a short time during the 1991 Gulf War, repairing truck brakes in one of Israel's northern bases with Sar-El."

Not sure that provides gist for a potential crisis in foreign policy.

I speaks to his priorities(foreign power), balance(or lack thereof), and personal preferences(foreign power) in a region of perpetual conflict now employed in a role of massive influence in the US government.

Where do his interests lie.....in time of conflict.....he went to the aid of a foreign power.

I have duel citizenship...and serve(I believe you do as well?). I can relate personally keeping a foot in both camps isn't always possible...choices need to be made.

[Flagg]

Hmmm

Why does it always come down to a Jewish Politician in the USA to be accused of Divided Loyalties?

We never accuse Irish Americans, African Americans, Protestant Americans, etc.

What causes the fact that someones a Jew to suddenly be considered untrustworthy by some here?


Do y'all wear pillowcases with eye holes when you accuse him of that?

I cant stand this Csucker, but not for his religion, but his politics.

I sincerely hope this isn't directed at me..........if it is, you're getting smoked.

Clarify yourself......who are you directing this "anti-semitism hand grenade" towards?

I sincerely hope your next post has far more thought put into it than this piece of garbage.

[LineDoggie]

I sincerely hope this isn't directed at me..........if it is, you're getting smoked.

Clarify yourself......who are you directing this "anti-semitism hand grenade" towards?

I sincerely hope your next post has far more thought put into it than this piece of garbage.
No it isnt directed towards you, it was directed towards the poster who posted this:

Would anyone care to ask what military force Rahm Emmanuel went to assist during the Gulf War (instead of coming over and serving with me, his fellow U.S. citizen)? Anyone? Anyone?

The Insinuation is that as a Jew, instead of Helping the USA fight the first Gulf War, that his loyalties lie with Israel.

I have heard this numerous times before about Various Jewish Politicians here in the USA. I find it disgusting and to the lowest level of bigotry. I never see this done for those who are from any other religion or country. I've never heard someone say a Russian-American is more loyal to Russia than to America. Never heard it about Protestants, Or Greeks, Turks, Buddhists, the gamut.

[Nano]

Actions speak louder than words and his speak volumes. His loyalties certainly are not to this country. Everyone is scrutinized for their actions and thus loyalties lie therein. A former FBI agent now sitting in Colorado super Max is a testament to that. He may have said his loyalties were to this country, but his actions handing over list of names of sources then KGB said otherwise. Given the situation the country is because of said financial/political corruption which he gained from $320k one can at least note that his loyalties are not to this country, but his bank account.

[sinophile]

Actions speak louder than words and his speak volumes. His loyalties certainly are not to this country.

I really feel safer knowing you're keeping watch on all this, and admire your scientific approach to determining loyalty.

Since you are an expert of national loyalties, and you're so certain about Emmanuel, how concerned are you about Steven Chu's ties to China? Should there be concern over Leon Panetta's ties to Italy?

Also, not to derail the thread, but just how do you reconcile your take on Emmanuel with the fact the Obama administration appears to be putting pressure on Israel adopt the two state solution? What is Emmanuel's grand plan? Should I start learning to speak Hebrew now, or can it wait a few years?

[soaked in sarcasm]

[Flagg]

No it isnt directed towards you, it was directed towards the poster who posted this:

Would anyone care to ask what military force Rahm Emmanuel went to assist during the Gulf War (instead of coming over and serving with me, his fellow U.S. citizen)? Anyone? Anyone?

The Insinuation is that as a Jew, instead of Helping the USA fight the first Gulf War, that his loyalties lie with Israel.

Well weren't his loyalties to Israel in this example?

IIRC the US surged a sh!tload of pers out of the US during Gulf War 1.0, surely there was heaps of work that could be done in the Good Ole USA...instead he volunteered his time in direct support of a foreign power. Until a new Constitutional Ammendment is passed making Israel the 51st State, Israel remains a foreign power who's interests are aligned with the US at this time.


I have heard this numerous times before about Various Jewish Politicians here in the USA. I find it disgusting and to the lowest level of bigotry. I never see this done for those who are from any other religion or country. I've never heard someone say a Russian-American is more loyal to Russia than to America. Never heard it about Protestants, Or Greeks, Turks, Buddhists, the gamut.

How many Russian Americans with significant political influence went back to Russia to change tank treads during the Chechen Conflicts?

None that I'm aware of........

If an ethnic Chinese American in a highly influential position of power spent time in China loading donkeys when China fought Vietnam in the 70's-80's border conflict...damn straight you'd be hearing about it...you'd probably be first in the queue.

What if a high level American of Pakistani or Indian heritage spent time digging latrines in support of either nation during their perpetual Kashmir conflict? Same...they'd be getting roasted in regards to US foreign policy in the region.

Criticizing someone who is Jewish, someone who is Israeli, Israel, Israel's past or current political/social/economic/military policies doesn't automatically require an automated "Anti-semetic Jew Hater!" response.

Your anti-semetic "hand grenade" is absolute rubbish.

Maybe debate the issue, rather than a "get out of jail free card".

Your failed accusation of anti-semitism simply weakens it's impact when and where it's TRULY appropriate.

[sinophile]

Flagg, when I see your avatar I know there will be an intelligent and well reasoned argument to follow.

On this one I think you're wrong. Certainly NOT anti-semetic; and if anyone makes that claim based on this thread I'd back you up.

First, you ought to consider the possibility that Emmanuel's primary motive is to see the Obama administration succeed. With three family members in the US, his entire life under a microscope and a decade invested in getting O elected... I seriously doubt Israel's interests are on his mind. At Dayton he supposedly helped Clinton rake Barak over the coals.

Next, the guy is a product of the Chicago political machine. Graduates of that school don't walk around contemplating sampson options, dramatic tests of loyalty and the like... they're tough dry pragmatists who consolidate and use power with an economic agenda in-mind.

To the extent he's thinking about Israel, its to determine how to steer clear of it to avoid charges like the one you've made, so it doesn't screw up what's got to be the power-trip high of the guy's life.

I don't agree with his politics, and I think he may be the Democrat's Lee Atwater, but I think you're assessment is dead wrong and superficial.

[Flagg]

Flagg, when I see your avatar I know there will be an intelligent and well reasoned argument to follow.

Cheers...and right back at ya.

On this one I think you're wrong.

First let me explain below

Certainly NOT anti-semetic; and if anyone makes that claim based on this thread I'd back you up.

Cheers for that........and it's the anti-semitism bit that got me all hot and bothered

First, you ought to consider the possibility that Emmanuel's primary motive is to see the Obama administration succeed. With three family members in the US, his entire life under a microscope and a decade invested in getting O elected... I seriously doubt Israel's interests are on his mind. At Dayton he supposedly helped Clinton rake Barak over the coals.

Next, the guy is a product of the Chicago political machine. Graduates of that school don't walk around contemplating sampson options, dramatic tests of loyalty and the like... they're tough dry pragmatists who consolidate and use power with an economic agenda in-mind.

To the extent he's thinking about Israel, its to determine how to steer clear of it to avoid charges like the one you've made, so it doesn't screw up what's got to be the power-trip high of the guy's life.

I don't agree with his politics, and I think he may be the Democrat's Lee Atwater, but I think you're assessment is dead wrong and superficial.

My "assessment", from the posts I made in this thread, included the following carefully chosen words:

potential (conflict of interest)

relevancy (is the potential conflict of interest relevant to the discussion)

An argument could be made that his potential conflicts of interest could affect his decision making. Past performance is indicative of future performance. It could also turn out to be, as you suggested, a situation where a person overcompensates in the opposite direction BECAUSE OF past performance, or it could be a whole lot of nothing, or something else???

I guess we will have to wait and see.

I don't have any skin in this game.......specifically regarding Emanuel......I'm more concerned with his potential conflict of interest with the finance sector than with Israel at the moment(same goes for pretty much everyone elected or appointed to high office).

My anger resides ENTIRELY with the all too frequent overuse of the anti-semetic netron bomb.

In my opinion, it has been incorrectly overused on this forum.....this thread is just one example of that trump card being pulled....it is a lazy, ineffective, and inevitably counterproductive debating weapon.

I REALLY don't like it.......it devalues and destroys the legitimacy of effective response against anti-semitism.

I think of this as one of those "awkward farts in the room" that are largely ignored as too embarrassing, uncomfortable, or awkward to deal with on most occasions.

[sinophile]

Look at the positive side... people are saying they really value equality when they scream discrimination. They're saying they want to fit in, integrate and have a fair shot. This is one big reason why the US is so superior at integrating immigrants successfully into its society. Nothing undermines US adversaries more than the opportunities immigrants have to achieve in America. Obama's election may not work out well for Americans, but its a much bigger kick in the nuts for closed and discriminatory societies. That Emmanuel could ascend to the White House is the reason I'm not worried about loyalty. Flagg, opportunity is America's secret weapon.

[Flagg]

Look at the positive side...people are saying they really value equality when they scream discrimination.

Are they?

Or is the "shoot from the hip" accusation of VERY questionable discrimination an often abused and too quickly assumed to be true method of bullying and impairing free speech and spirited debate........diluting real efforts to impair discrimination and rascism?

They're saying they want to fit in, integrate and have a fair shot.

As a first generation immigrant myself, and the spawn of second generation immigrants in my country of birth, I can think of better ways to integrate and have a fair shot than to immediately drop to the rascist/discrimination "get out of jail free card".

This is one big reason why the US is so superior at integrating immigrants successfully into its society.

I agree to a point...it may be arguing semantics, but there are other countries that possess incredibly resilient and flexible societies offering opportunities that are simply overshadowed by the size and scale of the US...but that's a topic for a different thread.

Nothing undermines US adversaries more than the opportunities immigrants have to achieve in America.

I would agree and I would suggest you have a look at data regarding legal and illegal immigrants in the US....there are some troubling trends, but again a topic for another thread.

Obama's election may not work out well for Americans, but its a much bigger kick in the nuts for closed and discriminatory societies.

What I am taking from your post is that you are saying it will suck for America, but suck worse for the rest of the world.

That Emmanuel could ascend to the White House is the reason I'm not worried about loyalty.

That SO many elected and appointed high government officials could be SO closely aligned with special interests and SO quick to maintain the special interest status quo leaves me QUESTIONING EVERYONE'S LOYALTY.

It is an all encompassing problem.

Emmanuel is simply the subject of THIS discussion on it.

You are one of the sharper knives in the drawer on this topic in this forum.......you seriously can't tell me with a straight face we have seen ANY substative change in course/heading in regards to the FIRE economy under President Obama compared to President Bush......same special interests, different puppets on their strings.

GM's CEO gets the sack.......VERY small potatoes in terms of bailout money spent so far.

Funny how the new Administration's "change and hope" refers to only things outside the very well insulated and politically protected FIRE economy.



Flagg, opportunity is America's secret weapon.

It's a valuable weapon, but one shared with Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Singapore, parts of Europe, and elsewhere........The US gets the spotlight and much of the creme of every crop, but it IS being taken for granted.......yet something else for another topic.

Back to Emmanuel...just because a forum member calls into question his loyalty due to his activities during Desert Shield/Desert Storm doesn't make him right.

Most importantly, it doesn't necessarily or automatically make him an anti-semite either.

[sinophile]

you seriously can't tell me with a straight face we have seen ANY substative change in course/heading in regards to the FIRE economy under President Obama compared to President Bush......same special interests, different puppets on their strings.


You mention a bunch of different issues, but I tie them together by saying I believe the media and Congress has lost their way and missed a chance to help the American people do a better job holding leadership accountable.

If you're up for it I have a book for you that would put some of this in a calming historical perspective. American Aurora (http://www.amazon.com/American-Aurora-Democratic-Republican-Suppressed-Beginnings/dp/0312194374). Or skip the book and know that competing interests have often brought the US to the edge, and it always comes out better for it.

A good Amazon review of the book (http://www.amazon.com/American-Aurora-Democratic-Republican-Suppressed-Beginnings/dp/0312194374) as a summary:





Can historical source material make for an exciting and engaging read? This book answers that question in the extreme affirmative. It contains documents mainly from the 18th century, but it reads like a political thriller. It also provides valuable peeks into the formation of the United States as we know it today. Magma hot controversy surrounded that formation. The press on all sides fervently spewed accusations that seem nearly heretical even today. Did John Adams want to be king? Was George Washington a bumbling and incompetent general? Did the French win the revolution for us, thanks to the diplomatic powers of Benjamin Franklin? Was Thomas Jefferson an atheistical French sympathizer? In light of these claims, Who is really the "father of our country?" Many unconventional opinions see light in this book. Some cherished political figures get shredded to bits, sometimes by their own words and sometimes by the words of others. In the end, no one is safe from abuse. Not even Benjamin Franklin and George Washington. Shocking claims await on almost every page.

The drama begins in the city of Philadelphia in 1798. At this time it served as the capital for the very young United States (the government moved to Washington in 1800). John Adams holds the presidency. George Washington still has a year to live. Benjamin Franklin has been dead for eight years. His grandson, Benjamin Franklin Bache runs a newspaper called the Aurora General Advertiser (or just "The Aurora"). For reporting on certain congressmen's less than professional behavior (spitting, insults, etc), congress bars the paper from the floor of both houses. The Aurora gets shoved into the balconies of congress, far above the whispers of congressman that Bache so often reported on without approval from the House Speaker. Congress marks the Aurora as a troublemaker. This begins the first section of the book, where the Aurora accuses president Adams of wanting to be king of the United States. More than mere conjecture or metaphor spurned this accusation. Adams presented his idea of "titles" to Congress on May 9, 1789. He suggested a verbose title for the president: "His Highness, the President of the United States of America and Protector of the Rights of the Same." Along with this, he proposed that the president and all senators should hold their offices for life. These ideas deeply disturbed Bache, and the exposure of Adams' goals became a predominant goal of his paper. In addition, Bache accused the Adams administration of purposefully alienating France. The Aurora and other news sources of 1789 reported on the terrifying prospect of a French invasion of the United States. It never happened, and Bache yelled foul from his printing press. The more he yelled the more the Adams administration responded. The Sedition Act, supposedly created to silence the Aurora, came before Congress and passed in 1789. On top of that the the Alien Bill also passed, which enabled the president to deport any illegal alien without trial. Bache argued the unconstitutionality of both Acts. The inevitable arrest came soon after. Bache posted bail for trial for indictment under the Sedition Act. The yellow fever epidemic of the same year altered the proceedings. Other arrests and trials of newspaper editors continued. Many were convicted, spent time in prison, and paid heavy fines.

Part Two of the book goes back in time to before the American Revolution. This section will raise the most eyebrows. It begins with an accusation that George Washington started the French Indian War of 1756. The section goes on to argue that Washington bungled the Revolutionary war so badly that Benjamin Franklin had to go to France and beg for help. Surprising letters from Washington's Generals and other government officials dot the entire section. Other revelations include Alexander Hamilton's avowal that monarchy best suits the new constitution's checks and balances, Adams' ideas behind a two house legislature, Benjamin Franklin's support of a unicameral legislature, and the alleged flouting of the French Treaty of 1778 under the Washington administration. Washington in particular fares badly in this section.

The Third and final section returns to 1798. William Duane now heads up the Aurora (you can guess what happened). He continues the fight against the Adams administration's policies, particularly in the critical election year of 1800. The government arrests Duane under the Sedition Act, and even the United States Senate arrests Duane for "breach of privilege". Duane spends much of this section in hiding. This section also sheds some light on the origins of the Second Amendment concerning the subject of standing armies. Much, much more gets coverage in this section. Far too much to summarize here, but the election of 1800 (Adams vs. Jefferson) receives more than ample coverage.

Throughout, the reader gets more perspectives than just the Aurora's. The Federalists (Adams' party) also get plenty of space. Numerous passages from the Gazette of the United States and Porcupine's Gazette (both Federalist papers of Philadelphia) provide vitriolic responses to Bache's and Duane's Democratic-Republican claims. Candor was not something practiced by the press of the time. Articles sometimes resulted in personal assaults on editors with opposing papers cheering on the abusers. Rough times indeed.

Though the book provides many perspectives, the book mainly argues that Bache and Duane's Aurora saved the United States from monarchy (even Thomas Jefferson made this claim in 1823), and that freedom of the press provided the means. The book takes a decidedly anti-Federalist stance.

Engaging and powerful, this book will provide at least another perspective on the founding of the United States and its major personalities. It accomplishes this mostly through excerpts from newspapers, The Annals of Congress, and personal letters of the time (the book contains over 2000 direct citations). At times it feels close to time travel. A long and arduous but ultimately extremely rewarding read.