VP Biden collects rent from Secret Service

www.usoge.gov...

www.usoge.gov...

reply to post by macman


Here's the law:

Executive branch employees must not use their public office for their own or another's private gain. Employees are not to use their position, title or any authority associated with their office to coerce or induce a benefit for themselves or others.
Employees also are not to use or allow the improper use of nonpublic information to further a private interest, either their own or another's.
Employees may use Government property only for authorized purposes. Government property includes office supplies, telephones, computers, copiers and any other property purchased with Government funds.
Employees may not misuse official time. This includes the employee's own time as well as the time of a subordinate.

He's not using his public office for gains, he's using his PRIVATE PROPERTY. If the property wasn't his, they would rent it from someone else. And lastly, it's clear he didn't MAKE them rent it, they WANTED to rent it.

So thanks for proving my point

Gotta love this you.

HEY, CHARLIE RANGEL, where are you???
www.usoge.gov...

Originally posted by MrXYZ
reply to post by macman

 

Here's the law:

Executive branch employees must not use their public office for their own or another's private gain. Employees are not to use their position, title or any authority associated with their office to coerce or induce a benefit for themselves or others.
Employees also are not to use or allow the improper use of nonpublic information to further a private interest, either their own or another's.
Employees may use Government property only for authorized purposes. Government property includes office supplies, telephones, computers, copiers and any other property purchased with Government funds.
Employees may not misuse official time. This includes the employee's own time as well as the time of a subordinate.

He's not using his public office for gains, he's using his PRIVATE PROPERTY. If the property wasn't his, they would rent it from someone else. And lastly, it's clear he didn't MAKE them rent it, they WANTED to rent it.

So thanks for proving my point

Actually, by being the Vice President, he is able to steer the Secret Service into this, as a personal financial gain.


But, keep making excuses for him.

This is fun.

If Biden had been renting the cottage out prior to running on Obamas ticket and upon becoming VP had to evict tenants to make room for SS then why the hell shouldn't he be compensated for his financial loss? if it was a vacant rental property that he's able to rent out to his protection detail andnisnt overcharging them, again what's the conflict? Its really laughable to see the comments about special treatment for the ultra rich when Biden really isn't that well off. You're talking about a guy who commuted from Delaware to DC on a train. Look up his financial disclosure documents he has to file.

Originally posted by peter vlar
If Biden had been renting the cottage out prior to running on Obamas ticket and upon becoming VP had to evict tenants to make room for SS then why the hell shouldn't he be compensated for his financial loss? if it was a vacant rental property that he's able to rent out to his protection detail andnisnt overcharging them, again what's the conflict? Its really laughable to see the comments about special treatment for the ultra rich when Biden really isn't that well off. You're talking about a guy who commuted from Delaware to DC on a train. Look up his financial disclosure documents he has to file.

Another Liberal defender.

So, his submitted documents show him as not Ultra Rich. Ok, how about just rich then.

But I forgot, Liberals get to define that, as per case and person.

Always different.



If Bush were to do this, it would be equivalent to putting babies in a microwave.

Originally posted by macman
Gotta love this you.

HEY, CHARLIE RANGEL, where are you???
www.usoge.gov...

And just like all the other laws you posted, none suggest him renting out his cottage is illegal

Hell, this one only talks about public disclosure of finances...which he fully complied with by stating his rental income for this cottage.

Soooooooo...where's the law that makes this illegal?

Originally posted by MrXYZ

Originally posted by macman
Gotta love this you.

HEY, CHARLIE RANGEL, where are you???
www.usoge.gov...

And just like all the other laws you posted, none suggest him renting out his cottage is illegal

Hell, this one only talks about public disclosure of finances...which he fully complied with by stating his rental income for this cottage.

Soooooooo...where's the law that makes this illegal?

That was directed towards other great bastions of Liberal stooges. Charlie Rangel.

reply to post by macman

Love seeing the wagons circle round the Liberal Politicians.

Congratulations on being partisan, can you list the cost the SS spent protecting Bush. Which if I remember correctly, meant buying out an adjoining property.

If Biden actually saved the government money, what then? Still conflict of interest.

Unless more information comes out it's just speculation...

Originally posted by macman

Originally posted by peter vlar
If Biden had been renting the cottage out prior to running on Obamas ticket and upon becoming VP had to evict tenants to make room for SS then why the hell shouldn't he be compensated for his financial loss? if it was a vacant rental property that he's able to rent out to his protection detail andnisnt overcharging them, again what's the conflict? Its really laughable to see the comments about special treatment for the ultra rich when Biden really isn't that well off. You're talking about a guy who commuted from Delaware to DC on a train. Look up his financial disclosure documents he has to file.

Another Liberal defender.

So, his submitted documents show him as not Ultra Rich. Ok, how about just rich then.

But I forgot, Liberals get to define that, as per case and person.

Always different.



If Bush were to do this, it would be equivalent to putting babies in a microwave.

It must be nice to live in your black and white world. I rather enjoyed the liberal defender comment. It betrays the true depths of your seemingly boundless ignorance. I prefer to think of it as defense of reason and comon sense. It has nothing to do with either liberal or conservative sensibilities. Bush isn't really a fair example either as the SS has it's own quarters and offices in the white house where Bush lived. You should try to find some parallel with Cheney for a realistic comparison. While $267,500 is a decent net worth compared tokay Americans I would hardly call the rich or elite in any way. Get your facts
Together and attempt to make a tangible argument next time.

reply to post by macman


same place maxine waters is

Originally posted by macman
www.usoge.gov...



Looking for more right now.

I am sure I will get the retort of "It's different".
The famous words of every Liberal.

If that's the best you can do try again -- or read it slowly -- it dosent even come close He has property - he is required to have security - the security needs a bunk house -- it is very convenient for them to use the bunkhouse - to do so will deprive the owner of its use -- the fair thing is to compensate the owner what is so hard about that concept as a matter of fact it is probably even common

For instance when Palin charged the state of Alaska while she stayed in her own home

www.washingtonpost.com...



hotair.com... (dubious source)

quote ->When I worked at the White House – the Secret Service rented a very large home adjacent to President George H.W. Bush’s holiday home in Kennibunkport, MN.

There had been a family living it. Secret Service said “name your price”. I don’t remember how much it was – but it was outrageous. The deal also requred that the owners give Secret Service permission to “modify” the house to suit their needs – however, the agreement also included a statement that Secret Service would REVERSE the modifications free of charge and the owners had the option to KEEP any modification the Secret Service performed on the structural aspects of the house.

This is the way the White House works sportsfans – no regard for money – and that was a REPUBLICAN administration. Yet – heh … we can’t seem to cut any waste out of this budget. It's "a rental cottage adjacent to the waterfront home he owns in a Wilmington, Del., suburb.
...
Officials say the arrangement came about when a previous tenant moved out of the cottage and the Secret Service moved in.
...
Asked if the Secret Service typically pays rent to the people it protects, he said, "It's a rental property so we pay rent there." With a net worth between $59,000 and $366,000, and almost no outside income or investment income, he was consistently ranked as one of the least wealthy members of the Senate. Buildings on the land built by the Englebrechts were refurbished for new uses, such as Secret Service quarters and guest houses.

reply to post by spyder550


You're not supposed to present facts, just make random claims and stick with them

Originally posted by boncho
reply to post by macman

Love seeing the wagons circle round the Liberal Politicians.

 

Congratulations on being partisan, can you list the cost the SS spent protecting Bush. Which if I remember correctly, meant buying out an adjoining property.

If Biden actually saved the government money, what then? Still conflict of interest.

Unless more information comes out it's just speculation...

If Bush did it, then he was wrong.
Biden is doing it, and he is wrong.

OH no, I am called Biased. OH no.....Let me cry in the corner.

Originally posted by peter vlar

Originally posted by macman

Originally posted by peter vlar
If Biden had been renting the cottage out prior to running on Obamas ticket and upon becoming VP had to evict tenants to make room for SS then why the hell shouldn't he be compensated for his financial loss? if it was a vacant rental property that he's able to rent out to his protection detail andnisnt overcharging them, again what's the conflict? Its really laughable to see the comments about special treatment for the ultra rich when Biden really isn't that well off. You're talking about a guy who commuted from Delaware to DC on a train. Look up his financial disclosure documents he has to file.

Another Liberal defender.

So, his submitted documents show him as not Ultra Rich. Ok, how about just rich then.

But I forgot, Liberals get to define that, as per case and person.

Always different.



If Bush were to do this, it would be equivalent to putting babies in a microwave.

It must be nice to live in your black and white world. I rather enjoyed the liberal defender comment. It betrays the true depths of your seemingly boundless ignorance. I prefer to think of it as defense of reason and comon sense. It has nothing to do with either liberal or conservative sensibilities. Bush isn't really a fair example either as the SS has it's own quarters and offices in the white house where Bush lived. You should try to find some parallel with Cheney for a realistic comparison. While $267,500 is a decent net worth compared tokay Americans I would hardly call the rich or elite in any way. Get your facts
Together and attempt to make a tangible argument next time.

OOOHHH no, cut to the quick.


Ok, if Cheney did it, it would be compared to throwing 5 babies in a microwave owned by Haliburton, covered in Oil.
That better???

Originally posted by spyder550

Originally posted by macman
www.usoge.gov...



Looking for more right now.

I am sure I will get the retort of "It's different".
The famous words of every Liberal.

If that's the best you can do try again -- or read it slowly -- it dosent even come close He has property - he is required to have security - the security needs a bunk house -- it is very convenient for them to use the bunkhouse - to do so will deprive the owner of its use -- the fair thing is to compensate the owner what is so hard about that concept as a matter of fact it is probably even common

For instance when Palin charged the state of Alaska while she stayed in her own home

www.washingtonpost.com...



hotair.com... (dubious source)

quote ->When I worked at the White House – the Secret Service rented a very large home adjacent to President George H.W. Bush’s holiday home in Kennibunkport, MN.

There had been a family living it. Secret Service said “name your price”. I don’t remember how much it was – but it was outrageous. The deal also requred that the owners give Secret Service permission to “modify” the house to suit their needs – however, the agreement also included a statement that Secret Service would REVERSE the modifications free of charge and the owners had the option to KEEP any modification the Secret Service performed on the structural aspects of the house.

This is the way the White House works sportsfans – no regard for money – and that was a REPUBLICAN administration. Yet – heh … we can’t seem to cut any waste out of this budget. It's "a rental cottage adjacent to the waterfront home he owns in a Wilmington, Del., suburb.
...
Officials say the arrangement came about when a previous tenant moved out of the cottage and the Secret Service moved in.
...
Asked if the Secret Service typically pays rent to the people it protects, he said, "It's a rental property so we pay rent there." With a net worth between $59,000 and $366,000, and almost no outside income or investment income, he was consistently ranked as one of the least wealthy members of the Senate. Buildings on the land built by the Englebrechts were refurbished for new uses, such as Secret Service quarters and guest houses.

reply to post by macman


Funny how you conveniently forget to mention that Bush Jr took more vacations than any other president in history...and yes, that includes Obama, even fi you compare the first 2 years of presidency.

Originally posted by MrXYZ
reply to post by macman

 

Funny how you conveniently forget to mention that Bush Jr took more vacations than any other president in history...and yes, that includes Obama, even fi you compare the first 2 years of presidency.

Then he was wrong as well.

You operate under the incorrect assumption that I like, voted for or supported either.

They are all thieves, crooks and lairs.

reply to post by MrXYZ


And call everyone who disagrees "Liberals," but get upset when you are called a right-winger.

Fact of the matter is, this is not illegal. A little odd (if I had SS protecting me 24/7, I would happily let them stay in my guest house for free), but not illegal.