60 Minutes Cherry Picks Book To Make Congressional Insider Trading Mostly a GOP Scandal
When CBS's Steve Kroft recently asked House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) some penetrating questions about stock purchases she and her husband made, the internet was abuzz with rumors about an upcoming 60 Minutes installment about the wealthy couple that have been known to use her political interest for their mutual benefit.
Unfortunately, this Sunday's 60 Minutes piece about Congressional insider trading cherry picked from author Peter Schweizer's soon to be released book "Throw Them All Out" to make it look like this is largely a Republican scandal (video follows with commentary):
After speaking with the Hoover Institution's Schweizer about his research, Kroft cited acts of legal but potentially corrupt financial dealings by Rep. Spencer Bachus (R-Ala.), House Speaker John Boehner (R-Oh.), former House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.), former Sen. Judd Gregg (R-N.H.), and Pelosi.
As such, four of the five lawmakers named were Republicans certainly giving viewers the impression this is largely a GOP scandal.
Yet a source that has seen an advanced copy of Schweizer's book says that 60 to 70 percent of the offenders named are Democrats.
According to Newsweek's Peter J. Boyer, one of them is Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.):
While examining trades made around the time of the 2003 Medicare overhaul, Schweizer experienced what he calls his “Holy crap!” moment. The legislation, which created a new prescription-drug entitlement, promised to be a huge boon to the pharmaceutical industry—and to savvy investors in the Capitol. Among those with special insight on the issue was Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry, chairman of the health subcommittee of the Senate’s powerful Finance Committee. Kerry is one of the wealthiest members of the Senate and heavily invested in the stock market. As the final version of the drug program neared approval—one that didn’t include limits on the price of drugs—brokers for Kerry and his wife were busy trading in Big Pharma. Schweizer found that they completed 111 stock transactions of pharmaceutical companies in 2003, 103 of which were buys.
“They were all great picks,” Schweizer notes. The Kerrys’ capital gains on the transactions were at least $500,000, and as high as $2 million (such information is necessarily imprecise, as the disclosure rules allow members to report their gains in wide ranges). It was instructive to Schweizer that Kerry didn’t try to shape legislation to benefit his portfolio; the apparent key to success was the shaping of trades that anticipated the effect of government policy. [...]
The Kerry trustees’ impeccable timing in drug company trades was evident again in 2007, when the federal government was weighing whether to discontinue Medicare reimbursement for certain anemia drugs used by cancer patients. When the government announced that it would limit reimbursements, shares in Amgen, one of the drugmakers at issue, dropped 15 percent. Kerry’s wife happened to be an Amgen stockholder but avoided losses; her shares, valued at between $500,000 and $1 million, were unloaded more than a week before the government’s announcement.
Kroft and 60 Minutes didn't mention a word of this. Nor did they mention potentially more serious corruption identified in Schweizer's book as he wrote at Newsweek Saturday:
[A]n examination of grants and guaranteed loans offered by just one stimulus program run by the Department of Energy, for alternative-energy projects, is stunning. The so-called 1705 Loan Guarantee Program and the 1603 Grant Program channeled billions of dollars to all sorts of energy companies. The grants were earmarked for alternative-fuel and green-power projects, so it would not be a surprise to learn that those industries were led by liberals. Furthermore, these were highly competitive grant and loan programs—not usually a hallmark of cronyism. Often fewer than 10 percent of applicants were deemed worthy.
Nevertheless, a large proportion of the winners were companies with Obama-campaign connections. Indeed, at least 10 members of Obama’s finance committee and more than a dozen of his campaign bundlers were big winners in getting your money. At the same time, several politicians who supported Obama managed to strike gold by launching alternative-energy companies and obtaining grants. How much did they get? According to the Department of Energy’s own numbers ... a lot. In the 1705 government-backed-loan program, for example, $16.4 billion of the $20.5 billion in loans granted as of Sept. 15 went to companies either run by or primarily owned by Obama financial backers—individuals who were bundlers, members of Obama’s National Finance Committee, or large donors to the Democratic Party. The grant and guaranteed-loan recipients were early backers of Obama before he ran for president, people who continued to give to his campaigns and exclusively to the Democratic Party in the years leading up to 2008. Their political largesse is probably the best investment they ever made in alternative energy. It brought them returns many times over.
Kroft and 60 Minutes didn't mention one word of this Sunday despite it being prominently featured in Schweizer's book.
Also ignored were other offenders exposed by Schweizer such as Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev.), Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mt.), Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), and Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.).
I guess those names weren't "household" enough for 60 Minutes to bother exposing.
To be sure, I am by no means suggesting this is exclusively a Democrat scandal. Schweizer's book clearly identifies this is a bipartisan problem.
However, by featuring four out of five offenders as Republicans Sunday, 60 Minutes was clearly trying to imply otherwise as it dishonestly protected lawmakers more closely aligned with its political leaning.
- Noel Sheppard's blog
- Login to post comments
















Comments
Watched
Submitted by grammajane on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 2:12am.
it,and as NewsBusters reported, it was a complete bash of Republicans. The "little" episode of madame speaker was a joke. Obviously, the book will have to be read to get the truth.......if it is the truth. CBS advertized all during the football game that this show would make people dislike congress more and it was nothing but so-called facts involving Republicans. Wonder why they didn't wait till next Nov. right before the election to air it??
Obviously the Kroft question
Submitted by motherbelt on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 7:40am.
Obviously the Kroft question to Pelosi was a head fake, to get people to watch.
Typical liberal tactic: when a Democrat gets caught in scandal, "both sides" do it. And they'll prove it by naming the one Democrat and 6 Republicans.
60 Minutes
Submitted by Tugboat Phil on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 7:58am.
Even before the Dan Rather forgery incident, I had ceased watching that show. Since that incident, they should have taken it off the air and gotten rid of the entire crew. Anyone watching 60 Minutes to find the truth on any topic is wasting their time.
I finally saw some coverage of the OWS folks on our CBS affiliate and can understand why some people don't have a true understanding of what a farce it is. Network news shows are merely the propaganda wing of the DNC.
60 minutes
Submitted by rockyracoon on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 8:49am.
I can't remember the last time I watched this newsy show. Once the football game is over I change the channel. Socialist propaganda is not good for my health and well being.
Facts are like kryptonite to the liberal.
Did you really think they
Submitted by buddyc on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 11:18am.
Did you really think they would expose democrat corruption? Did you really?
They sacraficed a has been, Pelosi and put the scarlet letter on Republicans.
I realize you want to trust 60 minutes, but you are nuts to do so.
Republicans should deal with CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN as the enemy because they are the enemy. They are the enemy of this Country.
Kroft and Pelly should be paraded around in orange jump suits, then given life in prison with the drug addict criminals they created and defended.
60 minutes I won't waste
Submitted by Dukehoopsfan on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 10:14am.
Thanks for this. I recorded the show on DVR because I had other plans. Now I can use my time better.
Nothing surprising about this.
Submitted by KyWriter on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 10:27am.
Like the rest of CBS, 60 Minutes is in the tank for Obama. Steve Kroft is merely another Obamaphile minion doing his job.
I just don't see how conservatives can win with
Submitted by Lipton on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 10:39am.
the media leaning so far left and controlling the message.
It seems like they (the media) are becoming more and more partisan to the point where they are all but advocating single party rule. Is it getting worse? Or just my imagination?
One can only hope...
Submitted by KyWriter on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 11:15am.
...that such egregious bias is finally being noted by the viewing public and it is beginning to take a toll on ratings. Actually, I think that has been the case for some time, if you look at the difference between Fox's huge numbers and the rest of the MSM's weak showing. But I think the MSM is becoming even more discredited every day and its attempt to counter its losses by being even more biased will merely accelerate the trend.
I knew this would be the theme
Submitted by Boudin on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 11:43am.
When I saw the promo's. The propaganda is getting very predictable
Well
Submitted by Boudin on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 9:18pm.
Oops
I watched this and was not at all suprised
Submitted by ohio granny on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 1:02pm.
No mention of Harry Reid and his sons and their land deals in Nevada. No mention of Conyers and his corrupt writing of the tax code and not even following it. I could go on and on naming crooked democrats. Nancy Pelosi was the only corrupt and crooked democrat Steve Croft could find???. Imagine that. According to CBS it is the republicans who are the most corrupt.
That is the first time in years I have even watched anything on CBS and it will be the last time for a long time. Thanks CBS you just proved again how biased you are and there is nothing missed by writing your network off. I have deleted CBS from my cable lineup. Now I cannot even land on your channel by accident.
Kudos Noel! Bret Baier mentioned your NewsBusters article on
Submitted by Rush Fan on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 9:55pm.
CBS's bias cherry picking reporting on his Special Report show today.
I hate to be picky, Rush Fan...
Submitted by Jer on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 10:01pm.
But I thought Bret Baier was supposed to be a "straight news" guy.
Jer
Aw c'mon Jer
Submitted by kata on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 10:05pm.
You live to be picky.
What do you suppose the context of Mr. Baier's comments were?
I've also heard Baier reference the AP.
Submitted by Radical1979 on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 10:15pm.
He is most definately on the left.
Jer......You can be as picky as you want. As I mentioned in
Submitted by Rush Fan on Tue, 11/15/2011 - 12:31am.
a previous post (a post you did not respond to), a person such as yourself, who is capable of setting fire to a police station using an M-79 grenade launcher, is no one to disagree with about anything, especially his pickiness.
I just hope that you won't retaliate against any of the other posters here at NewsBusters who disagree with you, and who don't realize the terror and destruction that you are capable. ♥♥ :-) ♥♥
Now if you will allow me to answer your previous question without getting angry and upset at me, I consider Bret Baier's Special Report show to be the most comprehensive and fair news program on television. As an avid fan of Bret Baier (as well as Rush), I am impressed with the amount of news, information and commentary Bret packs into a one hour show.
However, if you disagree with my opinion of Bret Baier and his Special Report news show, I will retract what I wrote immediately. I certainly don't want to upset you with my comments.
regards, RF
p.s. You questioned whether Bret Baier was a "straight news" guy. Bret Baier is married to a very attractive woman, and is definitely a "straight news" guy. Perhaps you are confusing Bret Baier with Shepard Smith's leftist news show.
p.s.s Not that there's anything wrong with that
Rush Fan...Please forgive me.
Submitted by Jer on Tue, 11/15/2011 - 12:51am.
I just now read your earlier post for the first time. [Thanks for linking it. That was fun. Then and now.] True, I'm in a bit of an ornery mood because all the bickering on the other thread over the burning question: "Is Tom Friedman Really A Radical Leftist" caused me to miss my Monday night Martial Arts and Gator Wrestling practice.
Yes, I'm plenty tough. And the girls really dig it. But I would never, ever cause you any harm. At least not until after you've answered a couple of final questions I have about FireFox--which will be the subject of a forthcoming PM.
Later, buddy...
Jer