That’s attorney Ed Brunini, explaining why his client, Haley Barbour, governor and owner of the only known blind trust among Mississippi officeholders, wants to keep the trust’s assets a secret.
“A couple of things would ring a bell with people”
August 2nd, 2008 @ 5:31 am - by lotus · 14 Comments
Tags: Haley Barbour
Filed Under: Herald & Examiner
Ring a bell? Pardon me if I cover my mouth to hide the giggle. Lawyers do have a talent for understating the obvious (I’d apologize to the lawyers in here, but I don’t think they’re going to disagree with me).
I’m sorry, but I just can’t resist quoting the obvious verse (especially fitting after the release of one stone killer and the clemency refusal for one less guilty, all within such a short time):
For Whom the Bell Tolls
by John Donne
No man is an island,
Entire of itself.
Each is a piece of the continent,
A part of the main.
If a clod be washed away by the sea,
Europe is the less.
As well as if a promontory were.
As well as if a manner of thine own
Or of thine friend’s were.
Each man’s death diminishes me,
For I am involved in mankind.
Therefore, send not to know
For whom the bell tolls,
It tolls for thee.
Well Donne, MSPolitical.
And is anyone really surprised? Even the people who voted for Barbour should be insulted by this because he just told them that they are just as stupid as he considers those that didn’t vote for him.
folks must not understand why it’s called a “blind” trust. They should find something else to fuss at Barbour about. This is a non-issue.
Hahahaha, Lotus, are you trying to pun-nish me?
Oldfaithful, I gotta ask . . . is that you, Haley?
MSPolitical, I gotta ask……is that you, Hood or have just never read a book on trusts?
Well, heck, you made me grin, Oldfaithful.
Nope, haven’t read even one book on trusts and don’t plan to do so, but I would imagine Hood has read one or two. Speaking of trusts, I have about as much trust in Jim Hood as I do in Haley Barbour. Main differences between the two of them is one of them is slightly better looking but the other one has more money.
I *have* read the letter Haley’s old company sent out (about the fabulous investment possibilities in post-invasion Iraq) when the invasion of Iraq was still “just” talk from the present federal administration. For some reason it inspired a sense of distrust in this suspicious old redneck and rang a bell or two back then. I’d sorta like to see if he still owns a big piece of that firm, and how much tobacco company stock he has. Just for starters. Then I might be interested in knowing if any of the companies he has stock in or owns outright have big post-Katrina contracts.
Further, if it’s such a non-issue, I have to ask you why the legislature just passed a law on this non-issue, and why the Guv thought this non-issue was an issue for the people following behind him (or else, why would he have signed it)?
As far as finding something else to fuss at Barbour about, see my first post.
MSPolitical, I was in Pascagoula the day the lady was killed. Tragic at every level. I cannot begin to understand the reasons Haley has shown Graham leniency.
If Haley’s assets which are in a blind trust are revealed to the public, then Haley will be like the rest of the public and learn just where the trustee has been investing those assets. Hence, the blind trust means even Haley does not know.
Oldfaithful, are you really that naive? I have trouble swallowing that. I’m an old cynic, I suppose. Just in case you’re not just trying to snow folks, let me roll a thing or two by you:
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=washingtonstory&sid=a3O8w8_QJ6KU
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2007/08/impeach-haley-b.html
http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=30035cf7-ba1a-456d-8c1a-9941111d50ca
I dunno why, since I haven’t read all that much that you’ve written yet, but I have this strange feeling that you just aren’t this stupid.
MSPolitical, you refer to yourself as a cynic and posit that I may be stupid. OK, I give up. Haley has done everything wrong, from setting up the blind trust, to managing it secretly, failing to disclose his continued operation of his “former” firm, and hypnotizing Hood into believing everything is OK. Whew. I feel better now. The truth is out.
Oldfaithful, I was actually positing that you are not stupid, but far be it from me to contradict you.
Why shouldn’t the trust instrument be revealed to the public without revealing its corpus and income? It may be “blind” to the Governor, but reveal to someone very close to him, in daily contact with him, without penalty for disclosure, everything the Governor wants to know about how his investments are performing. If this is the case, it should be called a “blind faith trust” to accurately describe the naive asleep-at-the-switch response of the press and the populace to a shrewd sleight of hand.
I knew that, MSPolitical. In any event, it’s impossible to resolve this on a blog. I concede the argument. We’ll resume the next time a wealthy person wins the governor’s race and if a blind trust is established.
Exactly Thirdsouth, thank you.
And OF, I knew you knew. I just reflected your snarkiness back to you. There will be no future argument, because of the legislation that Barbour just signed into law (you know, the one he wants to be exempted from).
I don’t know why you insist on being disingenuous, but it certainly kills any discussion. Ohhhhh…..I suppose I just answered my own question.