Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tejek who wrote (506565)	8/20/2009 12:57:29 PM
From: jlallen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1577060

'No evidence that Axelrod directly profited . . .' [Victor Davis Hanson] What is wrong with the following AP storyline? There is no evidence that Axelrod directly profited from the group's ads. Axelrod took steps to separate himself from AKPD when he joined Obama's White House. AKPD owes him $2 million from his stock sale and will make preset payments over four years, starting with $350,000 on Dec. 31, according to Axelrod's personal financial disclosure report. But obviously if AKPD cannot find contracts to secure revenue, then of course it cannot pay David Axelrod. And the fact they are paying him over four years might suggest that they do not have large reserves of cash on hand. In other words, it is very much in David Axelrod's personal interest to help out AKPD secure as many lucrative contracts as possible if he is going to be continued to be paid over the next four years. Given the hysteria over the Halliburton bidding (but Cheney was receiving no money from Halliburton at the time, and had no offspring working for them), one would have expected liberal ethicists to have pounced all over this clear conflict of interest. The Corner on National Review Online (20 August 2009) corner.nationalreview.com