Don’t leave any lose money hanging around your house. You’ll never know if Queens congressman Gregory Meeks might come by and snatch it up when you’re not looking.
Don’t tell the NAACP I wrote this, but, Meeks is a Black Hole because money seems to disappear around this guy.
This is about the 6th post, I really lost count, concerning one of the most corrupt congressman in the country that literally gets no national coverage.
Why is that, you’re thinking?
Maybe if Meeks was a senator instead of 1 of 435 representatives in the House, it would be a different story.
Lets get real here.
I think if Meeks was a White Republican from the South; you would be as familiar with his name as you are with your own children.
Yes, my congressman is one of the biggest dirtbags in congress and a discredit to his own race.
That’s right, I said it!
And it’s only because he’s a Black liberal Democrat that the main stream press ignores him and his fraud and misdeeds.
From The New York Post:
Queens Rep. Gregory Meeks has reactivated his personal “mute” button as questions emerge about his curious financial affairs.
Meeks, recall, is under federal investigation for his role, first reported by The Post, with a charity that raised $30,000 for Hurricane Katrina victims, but only delivered $1,392 in actual aid.
Now it turns out that Meeks has been downright forgetful — that’s his excuse, anyway — about a bunch of personal loans he received in recent years.
Not only did he forget to include them on his congressional disclosure forms, he won’t say who provided the money.
Meeks earlier this month disclosed for the first time that he’d received a “personal loan” of between $50,000 and $100,000 from Queens businessman Edul Ahmad — though Ahmad, asked by The Post about his relationship with the congressman, replied: “I have none.”
When asked about that transaction, Meeks suddenly admitted that he’d also received two other loans: one for $40,000, which he got in 2007 and has been repaid, and another the next year for $15,000, which is outstanding.
Meeks insisted that his not listing them on his disclosure form, as legally required, was simply an “oversight.”
But he wouldn’t answer any questions about who loaned him the money and for what reason — both of which he must also disclose by law.
Reports say the loans may be connected to the luxurious home for which Meeks paid $830,000 in 2008 — at a time when his disclosure form listed no cash assets, including retirement accounts, investments or savings.
Full story
Via New York Post
The Last Tradition
No comments:
Post a Comment