We needed an update on the situation and a new blog for the comments. Previous discussions about GGV and Laveist can be found at the links below.
Last we heard, the prosecutor was looking into it. It stands to reasons that Laveist must have been asked to give an account of his foundation and what it did with the money, however much received. If I recall correctly, GGV did make a claim that they didn't give it all in one go, that it would be in installments, but I can't find the article. Not that it matters, the time to regulate campaign finances, commissioners business interests and their 'foundations' passed long ago.
By the way, I don't agree with the case being closed about vote buying, but I will explain more in my own post later on tonight.
Great post
Hady Nufyet | Mon, 2007-04-30 16:04
We needed an update on the situation and a new blog for the comments. Previous discussions about GGV and Laveist can be found at the links below.
Last we heard, the prosecutor was looking into it. It stands to reasons that Laveist must have been asked to give an account of his foundation and what it did with the money, however much received. If I recall correctly, GGV did make a claim that they didn't give it all in one go, that it would be in installments, but I can't find the article. Not that it matters, the time to regulate campaign finances, commissioners business interests and their 'foundations' passed long ago.
By the way, I don't agree with the case being closed about vote buying, but I will explain more in my own post later on tonight.
Hady
Grand Getaway Vacations and Immigration
Grand Getaway Vacations - 5th September 2006
»