My Big Question:

Why did McCain risk violating the public finance laws for a couple million dollars?

To McCain's wife Cindy, a few million is a measly amount. As best I can gather, McCain's wife is worth at least 100 million dollars, probably a lot more.

I'd hard to figure her exact worth as she and John separate their finances. Election law only requires spouses to list assets worth more than one million dollars as "greater than 1 million".

She was the sole heir to her parent's fortune and is now the controlling shareholder of the 3rd largest Anheuser-Busch distributor in the US,
(privately held Hensley & Company). The company did more than 160 million dollars worth of business in 2002 and has been doing over 100 million per year since the '80s. Being in business since the 1950's, they probably have significant real-estate holdings.

What's the company worth? My wild-ass guess is one quarter to one half billion dollars.

So if his wife is worth hundred(s)of million(s), why the heck was McCain playing risky financial games for measly 4 mil?

Cindy has funded some of his earlier political runs. Though I suppose McCain was looking like a longshot when he took those loans. Had Cindy lost faith in John's presidential aspirations? Were they having a tough time personally?

It would be interesting to hear the Senator's response to these questions.

http://www.azcentral.com/news/election/special3/articles/0123biz-hensley.html?&wired

http://www.referenceforbusiness.com/history2/87/Hensley-Company.html

We can't compare this to Mitt. Mitt spent over 40 million of his own money. In McCain's case, we're talking about loans as little as ONE million dollars.

Wouldn't it have been far, far easier for McCain to have borrowed the money from Cindy instead of the banks? All of his public financing trouble is because of a letter he was forced to give the banks explaining how public financing would be used to repay the loan. That one piece of paperwork could lock him into public funds.

Had he instead borrowed the money from his wife, he could have given her the exact same assurance, except as an unwritten, personal assurance of repayment by matching funds. There wouldn't be any pesky paperwork proving that he was planning to use federal matching funds as collateral.

Getting larger life insurance policies to use as collateral?
Unprecedented, untested, and possibly unlawful hedges against federal matching funds?
All for a total of about 4 million dollars?

It just doesn't wash. These aren't things rich candidate do.

Why go through all of that if his wife is worth Hundred(s) of Million(s)?

I have said it before and I will say it again.
McCain is senile. No one apparently wants to face that fact but his lies will get stranger and stranger and his temper will get out of hand. He has no business even running for President and others around him should know that. But, as long as he is useful to the Washington Lobby this will continue.

"Wouldn't it have been far, far easier for McCain to have borrowed the money from Cindy instead of the banks? All of his public financing trouble is because of a letter he was forced to give the banks explaining how public financing would be used to repay the loan. That one piece of paperwork could lock him into public funds.

Had he instead borrowed the money from his wife, he could have given her the exact same assurance, except as an unwritten, personal assurance of repayment by matching funds. There wouldn't be any pesky paperwork proving that he was planning to use federal matching funds as collateral.
//Why go through all of that if his wife is worth Hundred(s) of Million(s)?"

Posted by M Stevens

More importantly, he could excercise some alternative payment options if he owed the money to Cindy...! [Viagra permitting!]

Is he boned? I'd like to think this means he's boned. And my hopes are way up from the last time TPM et al addressed this issue, when it looked like the FEC's non-quorum would prevent them from overriding his declaration, rather than preventing him from requesting a change. (Thanks, Commissioner Mason!)

But I'm sure that if McCain has learned anything in the last eight years, it's how thin a legal pretense one needs to be able to say after the fact, "Well, as far as I knew the thing that I did which is now completely un-doable was legal, so there's no point in holding me accountable now."

Gaming this out, what happens if McCain wins the general election? Nothing. What happens if he loses? Nothing--it would stink to high heaven if President Obama/Clinton's DOJ went after a vanquished political opponent. And what's the worst that can happen to McCain in the meantime? Something tells me that the same lack of quorum preventing the FEC from ruling prevents them from being terribly proactive in using any other power to sanction him during the election. I doubt they'd even legally be able to publicly comment.

Any thoughts from knowledgeable sorts?

I just can't stand the thought of electing another president that thinks he's above the law. What is absolutely astounding is how this administration has corrupted and done an end run around the justice system. FISA, torture, the firing of the U.S. attorneys, rendition, voter fraud, military tribunals without access to actual evidence, the selling of the Iraq war. That guy who just got off for phone-jamming.

These have all been proven to be crimes, we all know it, yet these people are untouchable.

McCain included.

Eventually, someone high up is going to have a crisis of conscience and blow the lid off everything.

Does anyone -- e.g., Obama or a single FEC commissioner -- have standing to seek an injunction preventing McCain from breaching the limits?

Anyone know?

Gaming this out, what happens if McCain wins the general election? Nothing. What happens if he loses? Nothing--it would stink to high heaven if President Obama/Clinton's DOJ went after a vanquished political opponent.

That's the thing. That's why this should be a big deal, but won't be. McCain is going to spend every dollar he can get from any source he can find and he isn't going to care what's legal and what's not. He's busy defending the American Way - he doesn't have time to respect the law.

Does anyone seriously think for a second that Republican senators, the one group most vocally opposed en masse to McCain-Feingold, are going to bail out the co-sponsor who tried to embarrass them into supporting it in the first place? Those guys would love nothing less than to see McCain hoisted on his own petard. If they think they're going to get blown out in November by the Democrats, McCain is the perfect guy they want holding the bag.

All these rules and alleged ethics violations and missing commissioners and FEC letters might just get too confusing. Let's just say "Bush's third term" when asked for an explanation of what all this is about. After, multiple scandals at once, too many to follow easily, is more Bushie than a stolen election.

But McCain has refused to support efforts to fix the system, so in a way, he has himself to blame for the fact that the system is so unworkable that he's possibly bent the rules to get out of it.

Since one of the other posts on this site invoked Hamlet, I'll stick with that theme:

"For 'tis the sport to have the enginer Hoist with his owne petar."

From here, it looks like McCain has huge wiggle room. Everything hinges on viewing the letter as collateral. It can also be viewed as a last-ditch cosigner. If an applicant has a rich dad who says he will bail junior out, the bank will give him money. In McCain's case, the bank made a business decision to lend money on the premise that if everything went bad, at least he could pay them back from the public fund. It is not collateral, it is a safety net. Until he takes money from the fund itself, he should have full rights to opt in or out, same as any other candidate. This issue will not hurt McCain. The real question regards how he will achieve the opt-out. Looks like revenge time. If the commission cannot muster a quorum, he must stay in. The only ones who can change that are republicans who could cease opposition to separate votes for new members. Whether they do so will depend on how they feel about McCain. Payback time? Possibly.

From here, it looks like McCain has huge wiggle room.

Wrong. ... By flouting the public finance laws, McCain has given Obama all the justification he'll needs to back out of that "almost a pledge" to take public financing in the general election.

I think you've got it right, M Stevens. Take a look at FEC Chairman David Mason's letter again, primus.

Filter out all the required politesse these letters require and see what Mason's telling McCain. It isn't pretty and it isn't polite. It's calling McCain on his duplicity.

Obama needn't feel bound by any gentleman's agreement. McCain is no gentleman.

Ok let me get this straight since its hard to keep up with McCain the last few days, so there are atm 7 issues going on at least around the lobbyist issue and finance issue.
Not in any real order.

1. Did he cheat on his wife with the lobbyist.
2. Was he corrupt because of the lobbyist.
3. Is he corrupt now because of all the lobbyist who work as his advisor's.
4. Is he in trouble for making contradictions in his story about the lobbyist.
5. What is going to happen if he spends more then 55 million in the primary with out opting out, which it seems he cant do atm.
6. Can he even opt out of the system because of that loan.
7. What kind of flack is he going to get because of that loan he made.

So I guess that McCain argument to push Obama into public financing for the GE is generally toast after this scandal right?

If McCain isn't allowed to opt-out of public financing until the committee votes I'll bet the Republicans will suddenly decide to do whatever it takes to get two more people on the committee even if it means watching Hans go down the drain.