Dodd/Conrad vs. Issa the Inquisitor

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


Is Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) out of line? Senators Chris Dodd (D-Conn.) and Kent Conrad (D-N.D.) are questioning the California Republican’s motivations for investigating Countrywide Financial’s VIP loan program, through which both of the Democrats received financing. “I find it very odd to be investigated and never given a chance to give my side of the story,” Conrad tells Politico. “I think that’s unusual.” Says Dodd, who’s hanging on for dear life to his Senate seat: “This is just too coincidental.”

Issa’s a pretty committed ideologue, so trying to stir up trouble for his Democratic rivals certainly wouldn’t be out of character. But even if his motivations are political, that doesn’t mean Countrywide’s lending practices and influence-peddling loan program shouldn’t be thoroughly investigated. A different question is whether it’s appropriate for Issa to be investigating fellow lawmakers in the first place. Former House general counsel Stanley Brand says Issa has stepped “way, way out of bounds” and that the House oversight committee in general lacks the authority to investigate the ethics of a Senator. That job belongs to the Senate ethics committee, a body not known for its hard-nosed investigative prowess but which is nevertheless moving forward with an inquiry into the Countrywide loans handed out to Dodd and Conrad.

As I noted yesterday, Issa has been leaning on oversight chairman Edolphus Towns to sign on to his Countrywide investigation in a bid to get the blessing of the full committee to subpoena records from Bank of America, which took over the collapsed mortgage lender in 2008. Towns has appeared reluctant to do so—and given the way Dodd and Conrad are reacting, it’s not difficult to see why. He said yesterday that he’ll decide by the end of the week whether he’ll wade into the Countrywide matter. If Issa has indeed crossed a line, as Brand contends, it may not be a bad move for Towns to do so if only to gain greater control over the direction of the investigation.

Meanwhile, elsewhere in Congress, the mortgage market implosion is very much under scrutiny. The Wall Street Journal reported [sub req’d] today that the Senate’s Permanent Select Subcommittee on Investigations has subpoenaed finance firms including Goldman Sachs and Duetsche Bank “seeking evidence of fraud.” The Journal explains:

The congressional investigation appears to focus on whether internal communications, such as email, show bankers had private doubts about whether mortgage-related securities they were putting together were as financially sound as their public pronouncements suggested.

Follow Daniel Schulman on Twitter.

AN IMPORTANT UPDATE ON MOTHER JONES' FINANCES

We need to start being more upfront about how hard it is keeping a newsroom like Mother Jones afloat these days.

Because it is, and because we're fresh off finishing a fiscal year, on June 30, that came up a bit short of where we needed to be. And this next one simply has to be a year of growth—particularly for donations from online readers to help counter the brutal economics of journalism right now.

Straight up: We need this pitch, what you're reading right now, to start earning significantly more donations than normal. We need people who care enough about Mother Jones’ journalism to be reading a blurb like this to decide to pitch in and support it if you can right now.

Urgent, for sure. But it's not all doom and gloom!

Because over the challenging last year, and thanks to feedback from readers, we've started to see a better way to go about asking you to support our work: Level-headedly communicating the urgency of hitting our fundraising goals, being transparent about our finances, challenges, and opportunities, and explaining how being funded primarily by donations big and small, from ordinary (and extraordinary!) people like you, is the thing that lets us do the type of journalism you look to Mother Jones for—that is so very much needed right now.

And it's really been resonating with folks! Thankfully. Because corporations, powerful people with deep pockets, and market forces will never sustain the type of journalism Mother Jones exists to do. Only people like you will.

There's more about our finances in "News Never Pays," or "It's Not a Crisis. This Is the New Normal," and we'll have details about the year ahead for you soon. But we already know this: The fundraising for our next deadline, $350,000 by the time September 30 rolls around, has to start now, and it has to be stronger than normal so that we don't fall behind and risk coming up short again.

Please consider pitching in before moving on to whatever it is you're about to do next. We really need to see if we'll be able to raise more with this real estate on a daily basis than we have been, so we're hoping to see a promising start.

—Monika Bauerlein, CEO, and Brian Hiatt, Online Membership Director

payment methods

AN IMPORTANT UPDATE ON MOTHER JONES' FINANCES

We need to start being more upfront about how hard it is keeping a newsroom like Mother Jones afloat these days.

Because it is, and because we're fresh off finishing a fiscal year, on June 30, that came up a bit short of where we needed to be. And this next one simply has to be a year of growth—particularly for donations from online readers to help counter the brutal economics of journalism right now.

Straight up: We need this pitch, what you're reading right now, to start earning significantly more donations than normal. We need people who care enough about Mother Jones’ journalism to be reading a blurb like this to decide to pitch in and support it if you can right now.

Urgent, for sure. But it's not all doom and gloom!

Because over the challenging last year, and thanks to feedback from readers, we've started to see a better way to go about asking you to support our work: Level-headedly communicating the urgency of hitting our fundraising goals, being transparent about our finances, challenges, and opportunities, and explaining how being funded primarily by donations big and small, from ordinary (and extraordinary!) people like you, is the thing that lets us do the type of journalism you look to Mother Jones for—that is so very much needed right now.

And it's really been resonating with folks! Thankfully. Because corporations, powerful people with deep pockets, and market forces will never sustain the type of journalism Mother Jones exists to do. Only people like you will.

There's more about our finances in "News Never Pays," or "It's Not a Crisis. This Is the New Normal," and we'll have details about the year ahead for you soon. But we already know this: The fundraising for our next deadline, $350,000 by the time September 30 rolls around, has to start now, and it has to be stronger than normal so that we don't fall behind and risk coming up short again.

Please consider pitching in before moving on to whatever it is you're about to do next. We really need to see if we'll be able to raise more with this real estate on a daily basis than we have been, so we're hoping to see a promising start.

—Monika Bauerlein, CEO, and Brian Hiatt, Online Membership Director

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate