[johnforbes]

Thoughts?

[johnforbes]

alifornia Gov. Gavin Newsom lobbied the White House and the Department of the Treasury about the pending bailout of Silicon Valley Bank, even as three of his private wineries had apparently been among the bank's clients, according to a Tuesday report by Ken Klippenstein of the Intercept.

According to Klippenstein's reporting, Newsom's personal relationship with SVB went beyond the wineries. One anonymous former employee who handled Newsom's finances told Klippenstein that Newsom "maintained personal accounts at SVB for years."

It is unclear whether those personal accounts were still active at the time of the bank's collapse last week. If they were, Newsom could have stood to benefit directly from the Biden administration's rescue package, which will reimburse SVB account holders even if their balances surpass the $250,000 limit insured by Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.

On Saturday, Newsom's office issued a statement that Newsom had "been in touch with the highest levels of leadership at the White House and Treasury."

[Clownkicker]

"It is unclear whether those personal accounts were still active at the time of the bank's collapse last week. If they were, Newsom could have stood to benefit directly from the Biden administration's rescue package, which will reimburse SVB account holders even if their balances surpass the $250,000 limit insured by Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.

johnny, you mysteriously failed to post any evidence whatsoever that Newsom actually had current accounts at SVB or that any of these alleged accounts had over $250,000 in them. Nor did you produce any evidence that Newsom would have personally profited from his lobbying. For some reason all you have given us is unsupported partisan speculation and innuendo.

When you actually have some evidence of wrongdoing, be sure to post it so that we can all be outraged about it.

Until then, we've told you many times that no one is interested in your wild partisan speculations.

[johnforbes]

No, even pro-Democrat Yahoo News was running articles critical of Newsom for being a bailout lobbyist while not disclosing that he, his wife, her charity, and 3 winery operations had accounts at Silicon Valley Bank.

As for Mr Forbes reviewing the actual records, he -- like Clowntroller -- has not.

Those records are in the hands of the bailout team which will not help failing Midwest banks, but will indeed help leftist multi-millionaires * in Silicon Valley who start iffy climate tech startups.

_______________
* Nota Bene: Mr F is not criticizing multi-millionaires for the obvious reason (ahem) . What he is pointing out is the hypocrisy of folks like that who then pander to the Left on climate. For example, Kerry and Obama preach rising seas but then both buy waterfront mansions.

[Clownkicker]

"What he is pointing out is the hypocrisy of folks like that who then pander to the Left on climate. For example, Kerry and Obama preach rising seas but then both buy waterfront mansions."-Cluelessjohnflubs

johnny, buying waterfront homes is not hypocrisy when you will be long dead before the water rises enough to threaten the house. The house is already there, dimwit. Somebody has to live in it. No one ever proposed tearing down old houses that MAY be threatened by climate change.

Now if they BUILT a new house on low-bank waterfront, that would be hypocrisy. Of course neither Kerry nor Obama did that.

Even if they built a new house on a mid-bank property, that would be fine since rising seas will not threaten those houses for at least a hundred years. And it is not hypocrisy since they would not be saying one thing for some people and doing another themselves. (The way you do here on a daily basis for purely partisan reasons.)

You really need to learn the meaning of the word, "hypocrisy" before you parade your poor education this way. Your high school English teacher would be appalled.

[johnforbes]

Come on, Clown.

All I expect is a little intellectual honesty from Obama and Kerry.

If they really believed that the seas were rising, they would NOT buy waterfront mansions.

Even they don't believe their baloney.

[Clownkicker]

johnny, I would buy a waterfront home today as long as it is above the projected sea level expected in my lifetime.

Meanwhile, I absolutely DO believe that climate change will cause sea levels to rise in the near future.

That does not make me a hypocrite, dummy. It makes me someone smart enough to understand the implications of climate change and use that understanding to live comfortably at the beach if I so choose.

Again, you really need to ask a high school English teacher the meaning of the word "hypocrite."

"You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."

[johnforbes]

I would buy one too, but where I live most of the time it can be windy and cold, so I opted for lakefront.

But then I'm not a climate hypocrite, as Kerry and Obama are.

I don't fly an executive jet to Davos, then take a helicopter, and then a large limo to attend a climate conference where I lecture lesser mortals on small carbon footprints.