Bill Richardson Withdraws Commerce Bid
The New Mexico governor will not go up for Commerce secretary. It has to do with a a grand jury probe into a pay-to-play allegation concerning a California contractor who gave money to Richardson’s political endeavors. CDR Financial Products gave $110,000 to three committees formed by Richardson and won a bid to help finance a $1.6 billion New Mexico transportation program.
“Let me say unequivocally that I and my Administration have acted properly in all matters and that this investigation will bear out that fact,” he said Sunday in a report by NBC News’ Andrea Mitchell. “But I have concluded that the ongoing investigation also would have forced an untenable delay in the confirmation process.”
Truly a shame. Richardson is a fine public servant. He’ll continue to serve as governor of New Mexico.
I’m indifferent toward him, though I find it unfortunate, having first heard of this recently on Greta’s blog, that so many of her commenters are quick to assume Richardson’s not only guilty, but has done much worse, as many of them believe. From what I’ve seen, her commenters don’t mirror her supposedly centrist to center left beliefs.
January 4th, 2009 at 1:48 pm
We’ll see what happens. karma is a b$$$$
January 4th, 2009 at 1:50 pm
WOW.
Thought he would have made a better secy of state than Hillary too. This still leaves a lot of bench strength for whoever is going to have to fall on their Obama sword later.
January 4th, 2009 at 2:02 pm
Karma for what? Also, I don’t believe in Karma. I’m not sure I believe in justice, for that matter.
January 4th, 2009 at 2:21 pm
[...] The Alan Colmes Liberaland blog calls it a shame and Richardson a fine public servant. He’ll continue to serve as governor of New Mexico. Um Alan, not if the allegations against Richardson are found to be true. He might find himself in the same fate as Illinois governor Rod Blagojevich. Share This [...]
January 4th, 2009 at 2:57 pm
WFG
Karma for the criticism that democrats through around of not vetting palin enough.
In the past few weeks we have blago, and now richardson. I found this on MSNBC. Maybe the clinton’s are next? who knows
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28485901/
January 4th, 2009 at 3:19 pm
now why were 2 of my posts both with links taken down?
January 4th, 2009 at 3:27 pm
Limbaugh and Hannity, Hannity especially, are going to cite this as “proof” of Obama’s corrupt connections. Hannity has been whining and flinging accusations non-stop since Nov. 5th.
January 4th, 2009 at 3:34 pm
That’s because the republicans are grasping at straws, CherylCarroll. They have nothing on Obama and are trying to pin anything and everything on him while at the same time are trying to make Bush and Cheney look halfway decent (if that’s possible).
January 4th, 2009 at 3:59 pm
You don’t have to try and pin associations on anyone. You are either associated with people, or you aren’t. Whether those associations led to illegal activity is something else entirely.
January 4th, 2009 at 4:01 pm
Like I said, Hannity will TRY to pin associations to Obama. He tried that with Rev. Wright and that went over like a lead balloon.
January 4th, 2009 at 4:11 pm
FREE Movies, TV Shows, Music, Games, Virtual Worlds, and College Educations @ InternetSurfShack.com
January 4th, 2009 at 4:14 pm
It doesn’t matter which commentator tries to pin association on anyone. The authorities will investigate and do what is necessary.
January 4th, 2009 at 4:15 pm
I have an update, CherylCarroll. Since Al Franken won the senate seat in Minnesota, Hannity will put on his tinfoil hat and try to claim Franken stole the election.
Blissful:
I can assure you the republicans will investigate Obama. After all, they scraped the barrel with Clinton and came up with his sexual indiscretion. What’s even more laughable is that Newt Gingrich was leading the charge to impeach Clinton, calling his behavior immoral, while he himself was screwing around on his wife.
January 4th, 2009 at 4:48 pm
It wasn’t just sexual indiscretion that got him impeached. It was lying under oath, right?
What is laughable is liberals torch conservatives for being tainted, all the while you have a government with it’s fair share of dems whose noses are as dirty as the chicago soil.
yet once again, you try to blame conservatives for your own party’s indiscretion instead of laying the blame where it belongs. Squarely on the shoulders of those who partake in it.
January 4th, 2009 at 5:02 pm
from whitewater to jones, to lewinsky, janet reno approved the investigation.
Lying under oath and obstruction of justice were the charges. when you coerce a witness to lie for you under oath, and lie yourself that is against the law,
doesn’t matter what you are lying about. I don’t care if you stole a stick of gum from the 5 and dime.
January 4th, 2009 at 5:04 pm
I never cared for Richardson, because I thought him to be lacking in something that is difficult for me to define. I winced when obama nominated him. Given his statements during the debates, it was obvious to me that his understanding of economics was at best slight.
Glad to see him through himself overboard, as opposed to dragging the Obama team through the mud. Apparently, even Obama’s team says he wasn’t forthcoming enough about the facts when they initially interviewed him.
As far as right-wingnut’s like Hannity are concerned, it once again reminds me we spend far too little on mental health care in this country….perhaps a nice padded cell for Hannity, Rush, O’reilly, etc., would be in order. And for Rush and Hannity, a sedative would be in order…make it a BIG one.
January 4th, 2009 at 5:27 pm
matthews and olberman aren’t out there now are they
January 4th, 2009 at 6:01 pm
On the topic of corruption, this is just a sad reality and I don’t think republicans are necessarily worse than democrats or vice versa. There are flaws on both sides.
I have to admit though I find it entertaining watching O’Reilly and Hannity. Not because they have valid viewpoints but because they are both masters of taking comments/actions out of context and then giving whatever victim they have, no time to mount any reasonable defence/explanation. They are not very informative but are at least fun to watch in a surreal way.
January 4th, 2009 at 7:47 pm
Another SCOUNDREL !!!!!
January 4th, 2009 at 8:54 pm
Gee. I wonder how many unnecessary wars Clinton started which costs hundreds of thousands of lives and 3 trillion dollars.
Yeah, lying under oath is sooooooo much worse.
January 4th, 2009 at 9:17 pm
aspirin plant. blackhawk down.
OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE
January 4th, 2009 at 9:42 pm
[...] The Field on the Narcosphere, Swampland, Outside The Beltway, Think Progress, Hotline On Call, Alan Colmes’ Liberaland, Scared Monkeys, Riehl World View, NewsBusters.org, TPM Election Central, Booman Tribune, The [...]
January 4th, 2009 at 9:47 pm
Sorry Bilssful Conservative ~
I’ll take a President that lies to me about a “BJ” compared to the horror of the last eight years any day.
January 4th, 2009 at 9:59 pm
Here, here. Danielle said it well.
Richardson is a real man with actual ethical understanding. Unlike Rove, Bush, Cheney he understands that he serves at the BEHEST of the people. When his ingrity is called into question he removes himslf from a position where he might cause unfounded questions to be raised. A true civil-servant in an age of liars and greedy snobs. This is what Blagojevich should have done if he was really a good man and honest with the public. In fact Bush should have resigned after the intel issue came to light over the Iraq war lead-up. Like Jay said on the air on the 1st, it was all about tyhe inspectors. But no, instead we get hateful conservatives supporting lies told to us and know-nothing radio heads smashing Richardson / Obama / any Democrat everytime they do their job.
January 4th, 2009 at 10:49 pm
Richardson was picked because Obama was pressured by Latino groups to pick a Hispanic for a high cabinet post. Now, since Richardson is giving this position up, who will Obama pick now? Will he pick another Latino/a?
Who in the world could it be if he does? It’s important to pick the best qualified person for the Commerce job. Richardson, as governor of NM, wasn’t all that bad. He lowered the state income tax considerably, but I didn’t think he was the right choice in the first place.
January 4th, 2009 at 11:06 pm
No, Richardson was a great pick.
I think Obama will pick who he thinks is best fit. It’s already apparent that he is not someone who “goes along to get along” with picking one time rival Hillary Clinton and having Rick Warren at his inauguration. I don’t Obama cares about impressing anybody; I think he is a man with integrity who is interested in doing what’s best for this country.
January 4th, 2009 at 11:22 pm
The wacky right on another message board I visit has Richardson accused, indicted, tried, and convicted already.
No proof needed. He’s a Democrat so he’s guilty.
January 4th, 2009 at 11:47 pm
[...] “MODERATE” AND LEFT SIDE OF THE AISLE: Alan Colmes of LiberalLand says this is “Truly a shame“; Alex Knapp of Outside The Beltway says “Lopez” is “doing the right [...]
January 5th, 2009 at 12:51 am
danielle
so sad that so many women who identify themselves as feminists have so little to say about a man with so many allegations by women who say he sexually harrassed them.
only makes me think that anyone with a “D” by their name gets a free pass regardless of what they do with some people.
January 5th, 2009 at 8:02 am
“so sad that so many women who identify themselves as feminists have so little to say about a man with so many allegations by women who say he sexually harrassed them.”
……………………………….
Many women, especially single, working moms feel they did better under Clinton’s policies.
Problem is, allegations don’t equal evidence or proof,
particularly if the allegations were just politically motivated, as in Richard Mellon Scaife’s anti Clinton crusade.
Some referred to the “Scam Scaife Project”…. tell the American Spectator something bad about Clinton, Scaife will give you a few thousand dollars.
January 5th, 2009 at 8:21 am
old,
how many women were there over the years?
January 5th, 2009 at 8:26 am
Atleast Richardson had the guts to step down instead of creating a scandal. Bush would haved pushed someone trough under the same plight.
January 5th, 2009 at 8:58 am
old,
how many women were there over the years?
Posted by bilssfulconservative
…………………………………..
How many have you proven have actually been harrassed?
A affair between consenting adults is not harassment.
January 5th, 2009 at 9:09 am
Gocards,
bush had one that stepped down as well. Linda (can’t remember her last name or the sitatuion)
Clinton had some that stepped down, bush had some that stepped down.
Now obama is dealing with reality.
January 5th, 2009 at 9:23 am
Bush fought tooth and nail to keep his staff and that is reality. Obama will deal with it as well. Our gov,t has flaws from both sides.
January 5th, 2009 at 9:34 am
Bill Richardson, an honorable democrat. Different than the ones under the cloud of suspicion but still continue. At least he is honest and doesn’t want to bring that cloud into the Obama administration. I’ve got to give him credit for that.
January 5th, 2009 at 7:21 pm
I give Governor Richardson Credit for Stepping down and Not bringing the problems to Obamas new administration. However, If there is any truth to the allegations they should be investigated. Regardless of of Political Party, Our elected Officials should not be above the law. They have been elected and are paid to do there jobs, ethically and in the best interest of the voters. I also laugh at the term Public Servants. They are paid to do jobs that bring them great honor. Not much servituded.
January 6th, 2009 at 12:41 am
TDRO said in regards to Republicans: “They have nothing on Obama and are trying to pin anything and everything on him while at the same time…”
I’d say Obama continues to prove himself of – at LEAST – excruciatingly poor judgment in choosing his friends and companions. From Ayers, to Wright, to whats-his-name the Arab terrorist financier, to Blago, and now to Richardson – and he hasn’t even made it to the oval office yet!!
January 6th, 2009 at 1:35 am
I was surprised a few days back when someone stated that the newest scandals involving democrats (blago, richardson, etc) were all ploys by repubs tring to smear obama.
when i asked IF, just IF he was connected in any way to any wrongdoing if they would feel differently about him (obama) their asnwer was an emphatic “no”
shocking
January 6th, 2009 at 9:19 am
That’s because, Blissful, he’s way better than what we have now.
With the current recession, skyrocketing unemployment and a severe housing crisis, the last thing the public is concerned about is who Obama has associated with in the past.
I don’t care if he’s a martian. If he can fix this catastrophic mess we’re in, I’m all for him.
January 6th, 2009 at 1:46 pm