Halliburton: Cheney – A 'Risk Factor'

[kskiska]

Newsweek

Feb. 9 issue - Halliburton, the big contracting company that Dick Cheney used to run, is now warning investors that its Cheney connection is what Wall Street calls a "risk factor." No, the company's not talking about the multibillion-dollar asbestos liability that it got stuck with thanks to the Cheney-orchestrated takeover of Dresser Industries. Rather, Halliburton says, the Cheney connection has caused "intense scrutiny" of its operations. "Since nomination as vice president," the company said in a recent SEC filing, "Halliburton has been and continues to be the focus of allegations, some of which appear to be made for political reasons by political adversaries of the vice president and the current Bush administration. We expect that this focus and these allegations will continue and possibly intensify as the 2004 elections draw nearer."

…"Times have changed since the vice president left the company and we understand it is an election year." The bottom line: when you hire a rainmaker CEO like Cheney, you've got to be ready to mop up the puddles he leaves behind.

more…
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/4121538/

[proud patriot]

1. CHECK !

the chessboard is ours Bawahahahahahahahahahaha!

[maggrwaggr]

2. translation: "we can't get away with our usual crimes"

because we're under so much scrutiny.

Poor babies

[central scrutinizer]

3. what about treason

Halliburton continued doing business in Iraq in contravention to the sanctions in 1998. This enabled Iraq to rebuild some of its infrastructure and sell oil. Saddam Hussein wasn't spending it on helping his people - he was spending it on his military. Thus, the US soldiers killed during the combat part of the invasion were shot with bullets with Halliburton's name on them.

[joeunderdog]

10. If Iraq was a "Gathering Threat" as they are now asserting, why did the VP

lead the world in the business he did with the terrorist nation of Iraq in the 1990's? When will a Dem respond to this whole notion of "Saddam is a bad guy/gathering threat/danger to the safety of the US" with asking why Cheney felt good about funding his devious terrorism by supplying him with equipment to make money?

BTW, Halliburton feeling persecuted is a smoke screen. They have had every major SEC violation thrown out since Dicky got in. They have gotten more than their money's worth out of our VP. If the stock was so risky, why has it had the nice ride it has had in the last 3 years while we all ride the Bear?

[dw]

4. Sell. SELL. SELLLLLL !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Oh, wait. I don't own any....

...never mind.

Bwahahahahaha.

[Blue-Jay]

5. Nice words, but

it won't stop them from re-hiring him this December. Just watch and see.

[DemoTex]

12. In December Cheney will no longer be a "risk factor."

He will be a pardoned insider, and Hell-i-burton will scoop him up as a "rain-making" CEO (if his ticker is still ticking). Cheney will again, shamelessly trade on his connections with ME potentates, the Pentagon, and the BFEE's Carlyle Group.


It's all about oil.

[Robbien]

6. They get contracts because of Cheney. Bad press is just the price tag.

Did they think they would get all the sweetheart deals and not pay the price tag that comes with it? With the media such as it is, I guess they did. But now it is time for payback.

[MidwestTransplant]

7. Democracy: Cheney - A "Risk Factor"

[yellowcanine]

8. translation: we are in some deep shit and the ass covering

and scapegoating begins now. Developing......

[hippiechick]

9. hmmm .... choice ... be VEEP or be CEO ... hmmm ....

yep, I think Unca Dick's gonna be retiring from public life within the next few months .... "to spend more time with his family" ... of course ...

:eyes:



:hippie:

[legin]

11. What this means is they are going to get smarter

In the profit column: All the lovely lucrative contracts the crooks get for having Cheney working for them.

In the loss column: That it is obvious to the entire world that they are in fact crooks.

The aim for all companies: To maximise profits and minimise losses. They will think of a way around this problem for the future.

[legin]

14. Possibly the mistake was

To have one very high level, very much in the public eye, official that acquires their contracts.

Perhaps three or four lower ranking officials could have got the same contracts without it being quite so obvious.

[Flubadubya]

13. Hey Halliburton... take a lesson from the Patriot Act!

If you don't have anything to hide, you don't have anything to worry about. Just ask Crisco Asscroft, he'll tell ya!