Blue Mass Group

Reality-based commentary on politics.

That is why we need disclosure Deval!

By

From previous posts we reported his appointment right after his Justice post to Texaco soon after the $228 million settlement for Civil Rights violations. His huge payback from Coca Cola with an iron clad confidentiality agreement when he left in a huff with management.  Oh yes, almost forgot. There is also the $27,000 per month mortgage payment on two huge mansions at a time when we are entering a housing slump in Massachusetts.

Patrick has been very skillful in turning his civil Rights corporate intimidation pursuits into a profitable business enterprise. A new growth industry perhaps in the mode of Jesse Jackson, one of his close friends. 

There is a lot of fodder here for “distinguished” “non Howie Carr” journalists like Jon Keller and Frank Phillips to digest. This continued  stonewalling in the face of a challenge from a prosecutor like Reilly and an opportunist like Gabrielli will only hurt him in the long run. Even those progressives who are having a love fest with him are starting to wonder about this checkered past.

 

Please share widely!
fb-share-icon
Tweet
0

Comments

  1. I just don’t see the conflict. Please explain in detail, Im a little dense. Sometimes alot.

      • Well RML I can’t even imagine what you are blinded by. Are you so intent on winning you will fabricate, distort and insult a fellow reilly delegate? What you are doing is just plain wrong. I ask you to explain it to me and instead of doing the right thing you insult me. You are reckless and quite frankly dangerous and a detriment to Reilly’s campaig. How can you expect me or anyone to defend your position when you wont even atempt to explain your issue. Even when asked in a non threatening way instead of explaining your issue. So I will ask you once again, Please, explain to me exactly, what is the conflict.

  2. Why won’t Deval come clean with his Ameriquest dealings? How much is this guy getting paid to sit on the board and apparently do-nothing?  Didn’t he just skip a candidates forum on the South Shore because he was at an Ameriquest meeting?  When it comes to Deval Patrick, he takes no responsibility for tough decisions but is front and center on good news.  This guy would be a joke if he wasn’t the darling of the Party activists.

    <

    p>
    Did Deval Patrick abrogate his role as a director as Libby suggests in the Herald? Or, as professed by Doug “Confidentiality Agreements” Rubin, did Deval “work to prevent the layoffs”? 

    <

    p>
    …from the Boston Herald: “The company has made some business decisions today to remain competitive,” Libby DeVecchi, a Patrick spokeswoman, said in a statement yesterday. “Those are separate from Deval’s main focus on the lending compliance issues.”

    <

    p>
    …from the Boston Globe:”As a board member, Deval Patrick worked with management to explore every available option to prevent these layoffs. In the end, this was the judgment of management about how to more effectively deliver their services in a challenging economic environment and a slowdown of the national housing market.”

  3. …do we get to hide behind usernames and come up with comment headlines like “Lies,Evasion and Hush Money.”  So, why don’t you come right out and tell us what you’re accusing him of?  Wait…do you even KNOW what you’re accusing him of?  Are you saying Deval Patrick PERSONALLY lead the charge at Ameriquest to layoff 40 to 90 people?  That he PERSONALLY participated in some sort of fraudulent activity?

    <

    p>
    Or that, god forbid, he has a great job that pays him a bunch of money every year?  A job that, without which, he would never be able to afford to run for governor?

    <

    p>
    Stop being so naive. 

    <

    p>
    And, by the way, Deval is on the campaign trail everyday.  If you’re so concerned about this stuff, why don’t you show up to an event and ask him what the deal is and come back and tell us what he said.  Unless, of course, you don’t really care to know, and just felt like being sensationalistic on the internet.

    • that those who post the most ridiculous headlines tend to not back them up with any sort of facts either, just hyperbole. 

      <

      p>

    • evileddie, I’ll take your comments about usernames under advisement.

      <

      p>
      Didn’t Ted Kennedy and the DSC jump all over Romney in ’94 because Bain was the majority owner of a factory that layed off people?  That must have been different because it wasn’t Deval Patrick.

      <

      p>
      Can Deval do no wrong with the posters on this board?
      Ameriquest continues to screw working class consumers through predatory loans and now firing them (4,500 since November ’05).

      <

      p>
      Deval is on the board of directors and the board of every company has the ultimate duty to make sure that the company is run properly, lawfully and ethically.

      • Didn’t Ted Kennedy and the DSC jump all over Romney in ’94 because Bain was the majority owner of a factory that layed off people?  That must have been different because it wasn’t Deval Patrick.

        <

        p>
        Dunno, because I didn’t live here then.  If you could provide a link to information that supports this accusation that would be helpful.  Thanks.

      • And by the way, I don’t think anyone on here is blinded by “love” for any particular candidate.  But what really gets me is when the level of discussion is lowered.  Like when you question a guy’s integrity simply because he’s in the position to make some serious money working for a major corporation.

        <

        p>
        So what?

        <

        p>
        Don’t just incinuate that something is amiss.  Don’t just say this is an issue “because its an issue.”  Don’t compare Bain Capital with Ameriquest simply because they involve two corporations and two candidates.  How are they similar?  How has Deval benefited specifically from layoffs?  If he was on the board, did he vote?  And if he voted, HOW did he vote?

        <

        p>
        These are all fair questions to ask.  But don’t haul off and jump to conclusions because you’ve got an axe to grind or because you think you have a point to make.

  4. Just FYI, the two facts you cite are hardly new.  The fact that Patrick negotiated a big settlement with Ameriquest when he was at DoJ has been out there for months, as has the fact that he is paid over $100,000 for his service on Ameriquest’s board.  And four meetings a year is pretty standard corporate board fare.

    • Most attornies on either side of the aisle (weird lookin word) push for settlement. It’s a sure thing for both parties unless its ridiculously high or low in comparison to the crime/harm caused.

      <

      p>
      I don’t see anything wrong.

  5. http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2006/05/03/layoffs_by_lender_raise_issues_for_patrick/

    <

    p>
    “As the chief of the US Justice Department’s civil rights division in mid-1990’s, Patrick persuaded Ameriquest to enter into a $4 million settlement with the Justice Department after the company faced charges that it and its corporate affiliates engaged in discriminatory pricing practices. It denied the allegations.”

    <

    p>
    “Patrick’s role with the mortgage company moved into the Democratic primary discussion late last month, when Reilly challenged him to reveal the payment he receives for serving on the board. Patrick has declined to release compensation figures, saying only that he gets more than $100,000 for four or five meetings a year. He has promised to release more income details this month.”

    <

    p>
    So, Deval orchestrates a settlement for Ameriquest for $4 million, which probably could have cost Ameriquest a heck of a lot more money had there not been the settlement, and then Ameriquest “rewards” Deval with a six-figure salary (payback?) to sit on a board where he doesn’t have to do much of anything beyond attending four or five meetings a year.

    <

    p>
    Do I personally believe there is direct impropriety on Deval’s part?  No.  Do I personally believe that there is the appearance of impropriety on Deval’s part?  Yes.  It’s one of those pseudo-skeletons that can create a lot of doubt for voters come general election time if he is the nominee.  Especially with Ameriquest now cutting jobs in Massachusetts.

    <

    p>
    If the impropriety is actual, then it calls into question Deval’s integrity.  If the impropriety is just apparent, but not real, which is probably the case, it still calls into question Deval’s electability.  If GOP dirtbags can “Swift Boat” Senator Kerry after winning Purple Hearts, they can easily take this scenario and spin it to sink Deval’s character with the undecided, non-partisan-affiliated electorate of Massachusetts who will decide the 2006 election (and who have, for the past several elections, voted more on the side of the GOP nominee…).

    • Nobody has actually accused him of anything except his reluctance to disclose. Lets look at the good , the bad and the ugly and in the end the voters can make the judgement call. Sonewalling only maintains doubt in the blogosphere. 

      • “Nobody has actually accused him of anything” but you can put a hell of a lot of insinuation into things, what with posts about “potential conflicts” and whatnot.

        <

        p>
        And yet when asked why this is a problem, you get snarky and accuse people of being “blinded by love”; it’s only BrightonGuy’s post that actually clarifies things.

        <

        p>
        For what it’s worth, I’m a Patrick supporter, but I agree with much of BG’s comment about appearances. And I thought your “blinded by love” comment was entirely unproductive.

    • Here’s what I can’t figure out.  Is it really so wrong that a company wants to hire someone who has intimate details of the other side of the argument?  Isn’t that why people leave one company to go to a competitor?  I think it makes perfect business sense for Ameriquest to want to hire Patrick as he knows better than most what Ameriquest needed to do to clean up their act in the wake of some terrible business practices.  I believe we must be careful when the “competitor” is the American people, there is a higher degree of fiduciary duty.  Patrick was dedicated to changing the practices of Ameriquest when he was at th DOJ so it seems natural to pursue the exact same objective from within the company.  Can’t we say that is what many of us are looking to do?  Right now we are challenging the party from the outside but a worthy objective might be to actually get involved inside the party to help change it from within.

    • Hello….It was AMERIQUEST that funded $5 Million the Swift Boat 527!  That is a fact.  I know it is crushing to all of his supporters, but Deval was on the board that approved the $5 million dollars to fund the ad.  He should have to answer to his fellow Democrats for backstabbing Kerry.
      BTW, board members are not hired.  They are elected.  They are not employees.  Directors are by law expected to demonstrate independence from management.  If he isn’t doing “much about anything” then he is derelict in his capacity as a board member.  If that’s the case he should just resign.  If he is doing something he should just take responsibility, that’s all. 

      • Now you’re saying that Deval Patrick funded the Swift Boat ads?  Deval Patrick was in Sen. Kerry’s election night war room.  That is a fact, and not innuendo.

        <

        p>
        You’ve lost whatever credibility you have.

      • Did Deval vote to approve the 5 million dollar paymen? If so can we have the link please. And as far as your leap that he was on the board that funded it, you are in the country that elected Bush, so you must have voted for him

  6. I’m not familiar at all with the policies of disclosre, Ameriquests inner workings, or these particular layoffs.

    <

    p>
    Please let me know how Deval disclosing how much money he earns from Ameriquest would tell us all what role he had (or lack thereof) in laying off 40-90 people in MA?

  7. Expect to hear more and more from Reilly’s supporters in the coming months about Patrick’s failure to disclose his income, although he will have to identify the sources of his income in a campaign finance report soon.  There’s a bit of truth here, as public disclosure, in my mind, would be a good idea.

    <

    p>
    But what isn’t a good idea is for Democrats to release every detail about their incomes, giving the Republicans ammunition, while the Republican candidates keep their information private.  Remember – Romney went after Shannon O’Brien four years ago for her financial affairs, even though O’Brien really had nothing to hide – and all the while Romney kept his information confidential.  I for one hope Gabrieli and Patrick stick to their guns and refrain from unilateral disarmament on financial disclosures.

    • Deval said during the debate that he will comply with campaign finance regulations so I really don’t see what the big issue is, other than a fishing expedition for Reilly’s Rapid Response Team. 

      <

      p>
      Your point about unilateral disarmament is well taken, but another point I would add is right NOW Deval Patrick is in compliance with current campaign finance disclosure laws. 

      <

      p>
      If people are not satisfied with that law, they should work to get those laws changed.

      <

      p>

  8. To everyone who’s saying that Mitt Romney should have disclosed his tax return or that Patrick/Gabrielli should disclose their tax return, I have a couple of questions:

    <

    p>
    1)  Why are you spending so much time insisting on voluntary disclosure instead of pressuring/lobbying the state to make this disclosure part of the political process?

    <

    p>
    2)  What specific information does a tax return provide that isn’t disclosed by the income disclosures that all governatorial candidates have to release?

    <

    p>
    From what I’ve seen, these points haven’t been made clear at all, which makes the tax return issue more of a witch hunt than a substantive policy debate about how the governance of the Commonwealth is best established.  I still don’t understand why I need to know Tom Reilly’s wife’s tax return.  What do I gain that wouldn’t be told to me by Reilly’s income disclosure?

    <

    p>
    And Patrick’s employment choices after leaving the Clinton administration make a lot of sense.  They match his employment experience, play to his strengths, and paid him a lot of money.  It’s not like he was being hired to be some sort of figurehead; his experience in civil rights law is substantial, though for all I know he could be a corporate lapdog.  The tough part for Patrick is that he needs to show that his corporate jobs weren’t inherently evil even though he probably has some level of attorney-client confidentiality or corporate confidentiality for each job.  It’s kind of a no-win situation.  Personally, I give him the benefit of the doubt on taking on some tough jobs based on his employment background and his explanations, but I can see it becoming a problem if he can’t convince the general public.  And, honestly, if I wanted a more ethical Board at Ameriquest, wouldn’t I theoretically be looking for someone like Patrick who knew the government’s side and the civil rights side of the problems the company was facing?

  9. Deval Patrick is not releasing his income tax returns because he, not his wife, is running for governor and they file jointly.

    <

    p>
    He will be filing the financial disclosure statement required in MA and has already said he will disclosure all sources of income and the exact amounts he was paid from each source – which is more that is legally required. It will be nice when people can start dealing with that actual information, rather than speculation.

    <

    p>
    Last Friday night at the event in Manchester he was asked specifically about his role with Ameriquest. He gave a detailed answer: Ameriquest realized they blew it and wanted to correct the situation. They asked for his help (yes, knowing of his expertise) and he agreed. His role was to oversee the settlement negotiations and, going forward, to make sure a system – including monitoring – is in place so that the bad behavior is not repeated. He said that is the tough work, involving much more than simply cutting a deal on how much money is to be paid. He was asked why he does not resign from the board and said he still had more work to do there and would not resign until he was satisfied with what had been accomplished. He said he has been paid, well paid, for that work and that he is worth it. NOTE: The audience did not seem to have a problem with someone being well paid for their work.

    <

    p>
    He was also asked about his house in the Berkshires. He said the size is about 1/2 what was described in the Globe article. He talked quite openly about how he and Diane did not know what to make of that Globe article, as it seemed that “we not supposed to have these things” and you had to read to the end of the article to find out that they could afford them. Rather than “clear cutting” the mountain top they sited it at the edge of a 200 year old meadow. They relocated some apple trees and had to cut down only about 7 other trees. They incorporated all kinds of “green” construction approaches, to rest as lightly as possible upon the land, including taking advantage of passive solar, using recyled tire roof shingles.

    <

    p>
    Someone else suggested that people with questions about Deval’s corporate background should get out to hear him and ask him those questions. I fully agree. The fact that the Globe is not printing his answers does not mean that Deval is stonewalling.

    • I agree with what you wrote as to substance. But as to appearance, all people will hear from Reilly is: “I released my returns. I have nothing to hide. Patrick has gotten huge payouts from at least one company he used to regulate, maybe more. He won’t release his tax returns. You do the math.” The distinction between tax returns and financial disclosure statements, and between what is required and what candidates should do, will be lost on most voters I think.

  10. Is it just a ridiculous rumor or is there confirmation that Ameriquest’s parent board, with Deval Patrick sitting on it, gave $5 million to the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth?

    <

    p>
    Obviously, I can’t imagine Deval would have voted for such an appropriation, but it is exactly that type of move that should prompt a progressive, partisan-Democrat board member to quit the board in disgust.

    <

    p>
    Is there confirmation of this somewhere?

    • Roland Arnall, Ameriquest’s CEO, privately gave $5 million to the Swift Boat effort.  The Board of Directors didn’t give to that.

      <

      p>
      Now, why Deval would help recommend this guy to be an ambassador of this country? shrug  Can’t help ya there.

      • (1) Do you know if it was his own money, or money he got, perhaps for example by a special bonus, that was specifically approved by the Board. (2) Did the Swifties get any other money from Ameriquest. (3) What political candidates did Ameriquest give money to while Patrick was on the Board.

      • Where is the confirmation?  Swift Boats didn’t have to release donor lists so there is no compulsory public record.  I am NOT trying to be confrontational, I just don’t know if I missed the link to the proof of the donation.

  11. Okay, so after rereading the comments thus far I think it’s pretty clear that we can agree on a few things:

    <

    p>
    (1) Deval has ties to AmeriQuest, where he made a substantial amount of money.
    (2) That if Deval becomes governor he will sever those ties
    (3) Despite the severance of ties, that will not change his loyalties.
    (4) Since we know that he has a financial tie to AmeriQuest, any action as governor that would have an effect on AmeriQuest or similar companies can be looked at with this information in mind.
    (5) The voters, watchdog groups, the House and the Senate can be on the watch for unreasonable/unfair actions on the part of Governor Patrick. Hopefully these groups of people are doing that anyway.

    <

    p>
    How does the amount of money Patrick made effect number 5? To what extent will his association change anything once he’s governor? And how will releasing how much money he makes from AmeriQuest tell us any more about his positions? I really want to know, and I’m not saying that as a “partisan”? What am I missing?

    • afertig, I happen to believe that the amount of money Patrick makes from sitting on Ameriquest’s Board of Directors is highly relevant.  In no small part, the actual amount is relevant because Deval Patrick has sold his relationship with Ameriquest as a “White Knight” story. 

      <

      p>
      Ameriquest is not a nice company.  In fact, 49 states came to that conclusion.  This is not the kind of company that most people would want to associate themselves with.  However, Deval Patrick was willing to join their Board of Directors.  According to Deval Patrick, he was invited to join their Board to help clean up their predatory lending problem.  According to Deval Patrick, he played a central role in negotiating the settlement and straightening the company out.  According to Deval Patrick, he should get a share of the credit for the fact that Ameriquest is heading in the right direction.  According to Deval Patrick, his involvement with Ameriquest is a profile in altruism.  All of this is well and good except that, so far, this is all according to Deval Patrick.  Where is the independent verification?  Maybe it is coming.

      <

      p>
      So far, Deval Patrick is only willing to tell people that he makes “more than $100,000” for sitting on Ameriquest’s Board.  But what if the amount is two or three times that amount?  What if it is more?  Where does altruism end and good old fashioned self-interest begin?  There is nothing wrong with self-interest, unless, of course, you were supposed to be motivated by altruism.

      <

      p>
      I do not know if Deval Patrick’s account of his role with Ameriquest is true or not.  Perhaps we will know with time.  What I do know is that he refuses to share exactly what his compensation is for sitting on the Board of Directors of a not-too-nice company.  What I do know that he strongly supported the ambassadorial nomination for  Ameriquest’s CEO, a man who raised millions for Bush and contributed millions to Republican 527’s that based John Kerry.  This isn’t all roses.

      <

      p>
      Al Gore learned this lesson the hard way in 2000: you can’t expect voters to see things only the way you want them to see them.  At some point, the full picture will be revealed.  The amount of Patrick’s compensation matters because it helps fill out portrait that currently contains many gaps.

      • “So far, Deval Patrick is only willing to tell people that he makes “more than $100,000″ for sitting on Ameriquest’s Board.  But what if the amount is two or three times that amount?  What if it is more?  Where does altruism end and good old fashioned self-interest begin?”

        <

        p>
        If it’s not altruistic for Deval to take $300,000 why is it “more” altruistic for Deval to take $100,000? I don’t believe that’s what you’re saying, and I don’t believe that’s really the case. You say that AmeriQuest is not a “nice company.” Okay. So, what does it matter how much money Deval is getting from this “not nice” company? What price tag do you think it takes to buy a conscience?

        <

        p>
        Your argument would be a lot stronger if you didn’t care about how much Deval makes. It makes it seem like you’re just trying to portray him as bad because he’s wealthy and your prime opponent while you’re not attacking others based on their wealth.

        <

        p>
        Let’s make it clearer: if it’s wrong for Deval to be making money off of AmeriQuest, it’s wrong for Deval to making money off AmeriQuest, no matter how much he makes.

        • $150,00 for a genuinely active role is cleaning up the company is a much stronger case for altruism than, say, $300,000 for simply attending 4 board meetings, which looks alot more like self-interest.

        • Amounts do matter. It’s one crime to steal $10, another to steal $1,000 for example. If Patrick was paid $100,000 that is very different from if he was paid $1,000,000 — especially since if the latter was the case saying he was paid “over $100,000” would be disingenuous at best. 

    • afertig – you really wear some rosy glasses, apparently to match the shade of Kool-Aid you’re drinking.

      <

      p>
      Your rather generous 5 points could be re-written to read:

      <

      p>
      1) In the mid-1990’s (which year was it?), Deval, while assistant attorney general, works out a pretty sweetheart settlement for Ameriquest.

      <

      p>
      2) Ameriquest, in August 2004, either in a total coincidence or as direct payback, put Deval on the board of directors, where he makes more than $100,000 a year for attending four or five meetings annually

      <

      p>
      3) In the same summer of 2004, the CEO of Ameriquest, Roland Arnall, bankrolls Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, one of the dirtiest, most dishonest organizations in political history, to the tune of FIVE MILLION DOLLARS.  The organization spread lies about the Democratic nominee for President in 2004, our own Senator John Kerry.

      <

      p>
      4) In late 2005, Deval Patrick endorses the candidacy of Arnall for an ambassadorship, despite the guy’s bankrolling the dirtiest political organization in history.

      <

      p>
      Check out:
      http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2005/11/10/patrick_backs_ameriquest_owner_for_ambassadors_post?mode=PF

      <

      p>
      What do you think of this?

  12. Would any of you really join a company with this history? And hope for a political life????

    <

    p>
    Remember Old Man Potter asking George Bailey to join his company????

    <

    p>
    Well Deval Patrick ain’t no George Bailey!

    <

    p>
    It seems people should get real Deval Patrick is not the first person to take advantage where they could. This is America,  But not matter how you look at it he will be tarnished by this.  If he was planning a political career he made a mistake.
    Is it fatal we shall see

    <

    p>
    Is Deval now wishing he could say 

    <

    p>
    “Take me back Clarence take me back”

Archives