Monday, January 18, 2010

Denish, complicit, complacent, or what exactly?

When State Senator Tim Eichenberg revealed his unwillingness to invest a half million dollars in a run for Lt Governor because he believed sitting Lt Governor Diane Denish could not win, because she was either complicit or complacent in the Pay to Play corruption in Santa Fe, the focus went immediately to "complicit" and a chorus arose which continues unabated;

"... nobody can prove anything!"
The simple truth is that it is unlikely that anything will be "proved" even against Gov Bill Richardson, despite overwhelming circumstantial evidence that substantial contributions to his various causes, yielded the contributors the opportunity to "invest" hundreds and hundreds of millions of tax dollars, reaping huge financial rewards in the process.

A key player in the investments scandal, as part of a plea bargain, admitted;
“... on numerous occasions, ... he ... recommended proposed investments that were pushed on him by politically-connected individuals in New Mexico, knowing that these politically-connected individuals or their associates stood to benefit financially or politically from the investments and that the investments were not necessarily in the best economic interest of New Mexico.”


If the "politically-connected"
were minor players,
not Richardson or Denish,
it is fair to wonder why the
major players, Richardson and
Denish
, either knowingly
permitted, or negligently allowed
the plunder.

Denish is skirting her
responsibility for failing to stop
the plunder by arguing that nobody can "prove" that she shared in it. That is not enough

She needs to explain how all of this went down, within her eye and earshot, without her knowing anything about it.

She was either complicit, complacent, or completely clueless.

Or am I missing something here?




photos Mark Bralley

No comments: