Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 14 of 14

Thread: Sen. Dianne Feinsteinís husband wins CA rail contract (985M)

  1. #11
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Last Seen
    10-20-13 @ 04:50 AM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    3,195

    Re: Sen. Dianne Feinsteinís husband wins CA rail contract (985M)

    Tutor-Saliba To Pay $19 million To Settle Airport Fraud Cases- McGraw-Hill Construction | ENR

    Tutor-Saliba Corp. has agreed to pay $19 million to the city and county of San Francisco to settle a 2002 lawsuit that accused the contractor of fraud in connection with minority bidding requirements and inflated change orders.
    http://articles.latimes.com/2006/feb...cal/me-tutor24

    Tutor-Saliba Corp. and several partners have agreed to pay the city and county of San Francisco $19 million to settle a lawsuit alleging that the firm overbilled the city and manipulated minority contracting laws as lead builder on the expansion of San Francisco International Airport.

  2. #12
    Sage
    Hatuey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:30 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    42,039

    Re: Sen. Dianne Feinsteinís husband wins CA rail contract (985M)

    Quote Originally Posted by Bronson View Post
    Except Blum's company has a history of bidding low and then flooding the project with change orders, causing costs to skyrocket. Do try and keep up.

    Wrong see previous posts. Are you a paid shill?

    LA Times and WAPO are blogs? Who knew
    What does that have to do with you being unable to comprehend that this:

    Cheaper cost relative to what?
    The other companies.
    It's simple, Tutor submitted a cheaper alternative.

    It's been proven she changed the rules before to funnel her husband's company millions of dollars in the past. I'm sure this time it was just a coincidence or something
    What does that have to do with your claims that she did it here?

    The rules were altered at the last minute so this company (which has a proven track record of overcharging, committing fraud and other abuses) would qualify. Are you a paid shill?

    DEAL

    Sorry you don't get to make the rules. It's your contention the rules were altered at the last minute and they won the bid only because they have the lowest bid, despite having the lowest technical qualifications and a history of fraud/overcharging. If this project goes over budget, and it surely will after this company floods the project with change orders, you lose and it will be
    No, it's my contention that the board changed the rules to allow a cheaper alternative. Prove otherwise. You already were proven wrong in saying they weren't allowed to submit a bid, when that's exactly what they did. You still haven't showed how cheaper alternative = corruption, and you won't even go as far as explaining why it is that the board can't change it's rules regardless of what it agreed to before.

    MTA Wins $29 Million From Subway Contractor - Los Angeles Times

    Yea I'm sure Feinstein's husband's company being awarded a billion dollar railway project paid for by taxpayers is just a coincidence or something.

    It's not like she has used her influence in the past to funnel his company millions at taxpayer expense or anything. Oh wait, she has

    News & Culture in CA | Dianne Feinstein resigns

    Changing the rules at the last minute without any oversight for a company with a history of FRAUD and OVERCHARGING is questionable at best. Before the rules were altered this company did not meet the standards necessary to qualify for a bid.
    So, no hope you'll be showing us how Feinstein changed the rules here? And of course I get to make the rules considering the unsupported claims you've made. You're not even honest enough to show us how Feinstein changed the rules or what role she had in it. For all you've shown yourself to know, you've yet to prove that this specific case is one where corruption is amock. It's a gut feeling. By the way, should I select the forum you'll be staying at? Oh, and by the way, you still haven't showed us how cheaper $/mile = corruption. Which, remember, was your original claim?
    Last edited by Hatuey; 05-01-13 at 12:12 PM.
    I refuse to accept the view that mankind is so tragically bound to the starless midnight of racism and war that the bright daybreak of peace and brotherhood can never become a reality. - MLK

  3. #13
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Last Seen
    10-20-13 @ 04:50 AM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    3,195

    Re: Sen. Dianne Feinsteinís husband wins CA rail contract (985M)

    Quote Originally Posted by Hatuey View Post
    What does that have to do with you being unable to comprehend that this:
    Dodge noted

    It's simple, Tutor submitted a cheaper alternative.
    Except Tutor has a history of purposely low balling and then jacking up the price later. The lowest bid is not the real price and you know it.

    What does that have to do with your claims that she did it here?
    I haven't made any specific claims that she called some guy or something. You want to believe it's just a "coincidence" because she is a liberal democrat and you are a liberal democrat. I'm sure Jerry Brown didn't know he was awarding Feinstein's husband a billion dollar Government contract

    No, it's my contention that the board changed the rules to allow a cheaper alternative. Prove otherwise. You already were proven wrong in saying they weren't allowed to submit a bid, when that's exactly what they did. You still haven't showed how cheaper alternative = corruption, and you won't even go as far as explaining why it is that the board can't change it's rules regardless of what it agreed to before.
    It's your contention their bid was only approved because it was the lowest bid, despite this company's history of low balling bids and jacking costs up later.

    I said let's make a sig bet that the project goes way over budget. You want to turn into it me finding emails or recorded audio of Feinstein ordering a change in the rules or something. It's laughable. Why can't you make a bet based on the simple fact that this project is going to be built on budget? If you don't think it will be built on budget then just say so. Oh wait you can't, because then you're strawman would come crashing down like a house of cards.

    So, no hope you'll be showing us how Feinstein changed the rules here? And of course I get to make the rules considering the unsupported claims you've made. You're not even honest enough to show us how Feinstein changed the rules or what role she had in it. For all you've shown yourself to know, you've yet to prove that this specific case is one where corruption is amock. It's a gut feeling. By the way, should I select the forum you'll be staying at? Oh, and by the way, you still haven't showed us how cheaper $/mile = corruption. Which, remember, was your original claim?
    You're trying to change the premise now because you're grasping at straws. It's laughable.

    I said repeatedly "I'm sure it's just a coincidence" that Jerry Brown awarded Feinstein's husband a billion dollar Government contract

  4. #14
    Sage
    Gill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    The Derby City
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 10:39 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    8,686

    Re: Sen. Dianne Feinsteinís husband wins CA rail contract (985M)

    Quote Originally Posted by Bronson View Post
    What's really sad is that this stretch is already served by Amtrak. Those crazy Californians will have two taxpayer subsidized, underutilized entities competing against each other.

    • "The America Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money." -- Alexis de Tocqueville





Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •