Fannie Mae paid D&M $500k over three years.  Typical gross profit margins are around 10%.  So D&M made $50k before taxes.  Let’s say that corporate taxes are 30% so net profits are $35k.  Furthermore, lets say that Davis holds roughly half ownership of D&M and recieved took home about $18k over a 3 year period.

OMG!!!!! Davis made a whopping $6k per year from Fannie Mae!!!  HOLY F&CK!NG SHIT BATMAN!

And given he does own half the company he probably isn’t making middle class wages either. He’s probably pulling in some serious cheese.  Let’s say he’s making $500k/year. 

You really mean to tell me that Davis pulling in a GINORMOUS 1% of his income from Fannie makes him every bit dirty as Fannie Mae’s frakin Chairman? Really?

Rick Davis is the treasurer and a corporate director of  Davis & Manafort.

http://www.newsweek.com/id/160713

The presence of an individual’s name within a company name does not signify any current relationship.  For example, Strauss, Wells, Edison and Bell are no longer involved in the companies bearing their names.

In moving, even tentatively, into this new area of lending, Fannie Mae is taking on significantly more risk, which may not pose any difficulties during flush economic times. But the government-subsidized corporation may run into trouble in an economic downturn, prompting a government rescue similar to that of the savings and loan industry in the 1980′s.

If you want to claim that Davis has committed the sin of owning stock in a company that is effected by Fannie Mae, then, well, I’m sure that’s true of most everyone.  BFD

Who do you think the ‘Davis’ is in Davis & Manafort?

It is not like owning stock in a company. Don’t be naive.

Secondly, they pull the same ‘nefarious’ connection.  That is that paying Davis & Manafort = paying Davis even though Davis no longer works there.

If you want to claim that Davis has committed the sin of owning stock in a company that is effected by Fannie Mae, then, well, I’m sure that’s true of most everyone.  BFD

Newsweek:

http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs/stumper/archive/2008/09/24/on-davis-s-ties-to-freddie-mac-mccain-gets-boomeranged.aspx

AP:

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jnhZ5ehM97b5g022vv1cHSheTh1gD93CV4F80

Basically, when Davis put out a statement earlier this week or last week that he had no connection to Freddie or Fanny since 2005, some Freddie Mac insiders who knew better decided to talk to the press. They appear to have to talked to Mike Isikoff at Newsweek, and an AP reporter as well as NYT reporters.

The McCain denial is a non-denial denial. It is a forceful statement that denies something different than what the NYT article said. The naive reader might believe they are denying what the NYT story said, but they are not.

Surely this is exactly what you expected from mike, isn’t it?

Mike has taken Obama’s command to "take it to the enemy" to heart. He’s a good soldier.

CosmicConservative’s last blog post..Cosmic’s iPod Sampler?

Do you have some kind of credible source for that, or are you relying on The New York Times to defend The New York Times?

Ok, Rick Davis has not drawn a salary or "compensation" from Davis Manafort, but he still is an owner of the firm. This is a very strange arrangement. Freddie Mac was paying $15,000 a month over 3 years to Davis Manafort, a total of almost $500,000, for nothing. Davis Manafort was apparently not doing anything for Freddie Mac. What on earth did Freddie Mac think it was getting for this money? In all likelyhood they thought they were buy access to McCain and other top Republican figures.

The whole excuse that Rick Davis has not gotten any compensation from Davis Manafort is nonsense. He still owns the firm. He can recieve differed compensation from this in the future.

That is why the McCain campaign is now screaming like crazy, because they have been caught red handed.

Of course there are lots of Democrats that were taking money from Freddie too, so it is no big deal.