This definition from Answers.com:
"Drawing against balances credited to uncollected checks. By writing checks drawn on two or more out-of-town banks, a person temporarily short of cash can write an interest-free unauthorized bank loan or temporarily inflate his account balance to improve his chances of getting a loan. For example: a person deposits a $1,000 check in bank ABC, drawn on funds in bank XYZ. Before the first check clears he deposits a $1,000 check in bank XYZ, drawn on the first bank, and a $2,000 check drawn on bank XYZ in bank ABC. By carefully timing the checks, he has accumulated $3,000 in fictitious balances. Check kiting schemes can be very elaborate, and have been known to cause bank failures. Kiting is best controlled by monitoring unpaid checks in the process of collection."
From Capitolfaxblog, January 2006:
Note to Anon 2:10… the deadline for electronic filing is midnight.
If you plan on checking out reports, be careful, since some of our politicians are very clever in using the D-2 forms to mislead the public.
A number of years ago, my Alderman here in Chicago (Joe Moore of the 49th Ward), kept loaning money from his campaign fund to Bob Creamer’s Citixen Action (Creamer, Cong. Jan Schakowsky’s husband, is awaiting sentening in federal court on check-kiting charges, I believe).
Each time Moore loaned Creamer money, it was repaid within a short span of time (only to see another loan a few days later). Creamer did kick in a small amount of additional money in return, but this only amounted to (as I recall) less than $30 for loans of about $30,000. The resulting activity on Moore’s D-2 made it look like he had received this huge sum of money, when in fact almost all of it was from his own campaign committee to begin with!
As for Cegelis, I was under the impression that federal candidates (those running for Congress) do not file with the State Board of Elections, unless they have a secondary committee to help out local campaigns. Cegelis and the other federal candidates file with the Federal Election Commission, under an entirely different set of restrictions, requirements and guidelines. That is probably why Cegelis’ campaign committee with the State Board of Elections has such a small sum of revenue.
RANDALL SHERMAN
Secretary/Treasurer, Illinois Committee for Honest Government
Joe Moore's Loans to a Criminal
This should make for an interesting investigation after the election. Win or lose, Moore will lose. The evidence out there is HUGE, but nobody has dug deeply enough. Are you listening, Mr. Fitzgerald?
The following makes for compelling reading, and illustrates the weird relationship that Alderman Joe Moore has to Robert Creamer, Congressman Jan Schakowsky's criminal husband. Before you read the following, though, have a look at the invitation pictured here (click for a larger image). It's an invitation to honor the criminal Robert Creamer. Nice, huh?
Below, we see that Moore and Creamer would loan each other money, then pay each other back just days later, back and forth, back and forth, back and forth, frequently and frantically. Why? Perhaps it's just coincidence, uh huh, but Robert Creamer pleaded guilty to, amongst other things, check kiting. And what is "check kiting?"
This definition from Answers.com:
"Drawing against balances credited to uncollected checks. By writing checks drawn on two or more out-of-town banks, a person temporarily short of cash can write an interest-free unauthorized bank loan or temporarily inflate his account balance to improve his chances of getting a loan. For example: a person deposits a $1,000 check in bank ABC, drawn on funds in bank XYZ. Before the first check clears he deposits a $1,000 check in bank XYZ, drawn on the first bank, and a $2,000 check drawn on bank XYZ in bank ABC. By carefully timing the checks, he has accumulated $3,000 in fictitious balances. Check kiting schemes can be very elaborate, and have been known to cause bank failures. Kiting is best controlled by monitoring unpaid checks in the process of collection."
From Capitolfaxblog, January 2006:
Note to Anon 2:10… the deadline for electronic filing is midnight.
If you plan on checking out reports, be careful, since some of our politicians are very clever in using the D-2 forms to mislead the public.
A number of years ago, my Alderman here in Chicago (Joe Moore of the 49th Ward), kept loaning money from his campaign fund to Bob Creamer’s Citixen Action (Creamer, Cong. Jan Schakowsky’s husband, is awaiting sentening in federal court on check-kiting charges, I believe).
Each time Moore loaned Creamer money, it was repaid within a short span of time (only to see another loan a few days later). Creamer did kick in a small amount of additional money in return, but this only amounted to (as I recall) less than $30 for loans of about $30,000. The resulting activity on Moore’s D-2 made it look like he had received this huge sum of money, when in fact almost all of it was from his own campaign committee to begin with!
As for Cegelis, I was under the impression that federal candidates (those running for Congress) do not file with the State Board of Elections, unless they have a secondary committee to help out local campaigns. Cegelis and the other federal candidates file with the Federal Election Commission, under an entirely different set of restrictions, requirements and guidelines. That is probably why Cegelis’ campaign committee with the State Board of Elections has such a small sum of revenue.
RANDALL SHERMAN
Secretary/Treasurer, Illinois Committee for Honest Government
This definition from Answers.com:
"Drawing against balances credited to uncollected checks. By writing checks drawn on two or more out-of-town banks, a person temporarily short of cash can write an interest-free unauthorized bank loan or temporarily inflate his account balance to improve his chances of getting a loan. For example: a person deposits a $1,000 check in bank ABC, drawn on funds in bank XYZ. Before the first check clears he deposits a $1,000 check in bank XYZ, drawn on the first bank, and a $2,000 check drawn on bank XYZ in bank ABC. By carefully timing the checks, he has accumulated $3,000 in fictitious balances. Check kiting schemes can be very elaborate, and have been known to cause bank failures. Kiting is best controlled by monitoring unpaid checks in the process of collection."
From Capitolfaxblog, January 2006:
Note to Anon 2:10… the deadline for electronic filing is midnight.
If you plan on checking out reports, be careful, since some of our politicians are very clever in using the D-2 forms to mislead the public.
A number of years ago, my Alderman here in Chicago (Joe Moore of the 49th Ward), kept loaning money from his campaign fund to Bob Creamer’s Citixen Action (Creamer, Cong. Jan Schakowsky’s husband, is awaiting sentening in federal court on check-kiting charges, I believe).
Each time Moore loaned Creamer money, it was repaid within a short span of time (only to see another loan a few days later). Creamer did kick in a small amount of additional money in return, but this only amounted to (as I recall) less than $30 for loans of about $30,000. The resulting activity on Moore’s D-2 made it look like he had received this huge sum of money, when in fact almost all of it was from his own campaign committee to begin with!
As for Cegelis, I was under the impression that federal candidates (those running for Congress) do not file with the State Board of Elections, unless they have a secondary committee to help out local campaigns. Cegelis and the other federal candidates file with the Federal Election Commission, under an entirely different set of restrictions, requirements and guidelines. That is probably why Cegelis’ campaign committee with the State Board of Elections has such a small sum of revenue.
RANDALL SHERMAN
Secretary/Treasurer, Illinois Committee for Honest Government
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Another example of Joe Moore encouraging crime.
ReplyDeleteI just love this neighborhood. Way to lay the smackdown Tom. What a line, "Win or lose, Moore will lose." Classic.
ReplyDelete