Post a response to this discussion thread
You crack me up.
It does not matter that Albert Gore, Jr. owned no stock if, as "an officer or employee of the executive branch of the United States Government," he "[participated] personally and substantially... through decision, approval, disapproval, recommendation, the rendering of advise, [or] investigation... in a... contract... in which, to his knowledge, he, his spouse, [or] minor child... has a financial interest". 18 USC § 208.
Your arguments should instead be focused on the fact that Albert Gore, Jr. did not "personally and substantially" have anything to do with the Elk Hills sale. It was an open bid process, and presumably, if Occidental Petroleum had won the contract improperly, their competitors would have raised objections at the time, or reporters would have uncovered it by now. Alternatively, if Albert Gore, Jr. was "personally and substantially" involved in the sale (and perhaps, as Vice President he is so by definition), argue that his involvment was not impermissible despite the fact that his father made money on the deal (which he stands to inherit) because it did not violate 18 USC § 208.
Personally, I doubt Albert Gore, Jr. spent any time at all lobbying for Occidental Petroleum's bid, but, even so, people can still feel uneasy about the transaction and think the whole thing was "shady," just like they can with Cheney and Halliburton.
Post a response to this discussion thread
And check this out: The Top Posters' Page