Saturday, February 22, 2014

The Story of Edward 
“Ed” Mezvinsky 

Do you know this man? He is Edward "Ed" Mezvinsky, born January 17, 1937.

Now, you are probably thinking, “Who the heck is Ed Mezvinsky?”

Well, he is a former Democrat congressman who represented Iowa's 1st congressional district in the United States House of Representatives for two terms, from 1973 to 1977.

He sat on the House Judiciary Committee that decided the fate of Richard Nixon.

He was outspoken saying that Nixon was a crook and a disgrace to politics and the nation and should be impeached.

He and the Clintons were friends and politically intertwined for years.

Ed Mezvinsky had an affair with NBC News reporter Marjorie Sue Margolies and later married her after his wife divorced him.

In 1993, Marjorie Margolies-Mezvinsky, then a freshman Democrat in Congress, cast the deciding vote that got President Bill Clinton’s controversial tax package through the House of Representatives.

In March 2001, Mezvinsky was indicted and later pleaded guilty to 31 of 69 counts of bank fraud, mail fraud, and wire fraud.

Ed Mezvinsky embezzled more than $10 million dollars from people via both a Ponzi scheme and the notorious Nigerian e-mail scams.

He was found guilty and sentenced to 80 months in federal prison.

After serving less than five years in federal prison, he was released in April 2008 and remains on federal probation.

To this day, he still owes $9.4 million in restitution to his victims.


Long before now you were probably thinking, “So what? Another Washington crook and hypocrite? Ho Hum! Does anyone else inhabit the District of Columbia these days?”

Well, here are 
Marc and Chelsea Mezvinsky

That's right. Ed Mezvinsky is Chelsea Clinton's father-in law!

Now Marc and Chelsea are in their early thirties and have recently purchased a 10.5 million dollar apartment in New York City.

If Ed Mezvinsky were Jenna or Barbara Bush's –– or better yet –– Sarah Palin's daughter's father-in-law, the news would be reported endlessly and chewed on avidly, gleefully and ferociously by the enemedia.

And yet liberals would insist there are no double standards in political reporting.

Draw your own conclusions.

If you’re a typical Democrat, you probably think all this is just peachy keen, hunkey dory, and AOK –– or if you don't you'd be loath to admit it, right?

[NOTE: This material had been verified by SNOPES, and most of it appears in Wikipedia under “Edward Mezvinsky.”]


  1. I already knew this. What's the point?

    Should the son be shunned, hated, and reviled for his father's crimes?

    BTW, Mezvinsky's wife, Margolies-Mezvinsky divorced him and was not implicated in any wrongdoing

    Are you trying to implicate Chelsea Clinton and Mezvinsky's son in something? Because there's no evidence of it anywhere.

    You've brought up the fact that the father is a crook. What has that to do with the young couple?

    This story has nothing to do with Democrats or the media thinking it's "peachy keen."

    You seem to be angry that the media hasn't gone after Chelsea and Marc for what the father did.

    But have no fear, this muckraking will alert enough people so that the possibility of making the young couple's lives miserable may come true.

    Is that the point of this story?


    Chelsea-Clinton buys new 10.5-million-dollar apartment scross the street from her husband’s 4-million-dollar ‘starter-pad’ bought just before they married

    I want to know where and how they got the money?

    I’d love to know too how and why Bill and Hillary, who boasted of their poverty, as if it were a virtue, when he campaigned for the presidency are now worth many many millions?

    What have ANY of these people done to EARN or DESERVE their immense good fortune?

    For a party that does a lot of bombastic tub-thumping about the supposed evils of “Income Inequality,” turning a blind eye to the wretched excess of this sort of Conspicuous Consumption seems the very height of hypocrisy.
    As for objecting to any implied assumption of guilt by association:

    ”The Apple Never Falls Far From The Tree.”

    These people quite are obviously are rotten and sodden with corruption, but they are allowed -- even ENCOURAGED -- to get away with it, simply because they are DEMOCRATS. If they were Republicans, they would ling ago have been CRUCIFIED.

  3. Leftist elitists.

    Do they ever do anything truly charitable?

    Do they promote wealth equality by sharing some of their wealth with the less fortunate?

    FT, this statement in your comment above is exactly so: If they were Republicans, they would ling ago have been CRUCIFIED.

    We won't see any such news coverage from the so-called news media.

  4. "What have ANY of these people done to EARN or DESERVE their immense good fortune?"

    Interesting comment from a political p.o.v. that eschews sharing the wealth. Why do you need to know what they've done to deserve their wealth? Did, say, Mitt Romney's immense wealth make you wonder how he got it all? Donald Trump? The Koch Brothers? Just to name a few who are magnitudes wealthier than Chelsea and Marc.

    "These people quite are obviously are rotten and sodden with corruption, but they are allowed -- even ENCOURAGED -- to get away with it, simply because they are DEMOCRATS. If they were Republicans, they would ling ago have been CRUCIFIED."

    Those accusations are backed up by nothing more than eliminationist rhetoric and uncontrolled rage. Where is your evidence for Chelsea and Marc's "corruption?"

    AOW: "Do they ever do anything truly charitable?"

    Please show us the evidence that they don't. My niece is a director with Heifer International, which home base is in Little Rock, AK. She has first hand information about the Clintons' charitable giving.

    Do you?

    What you've published here is an attempt to smear Chelsea and her husband because they're just like the Romneys and the Trumps and the Koch brothers and any other American family that has inherited wealth.

    Neither Chelsea nor her husband has been charged with any crime.

    It must be a real slow news day in GOPerLand.

  5. SHillary probably invested their money for them. Remember when she turned a paltry sum into hundreds of thousands in the futures market?

    She's the smartest woman in the world, and it must be true because the media told us so

  6. Swifton Dedleigh said

    Tut tut! The inexhaustible supply of energy for the expression of unending fury and the outrageous hypocrisy of Accusocrats, Depravocrats and Denialocrats, an Unholy Triumvirate, if ever there was one, never ceases to astonish. So does their apparently infinite capacity to dish it out while resorting to high dudgeon in their arrant refusal ever to take it, no matter how justified it may be.

    If anyone insists on playing stupid games, how did the Kennedys get their fortune? How did John Kerry get his money? Where did Terry McAuliffe get his? How could it possibly be that such a high percentage of congressmen (and women) come to Washington relatively poor and leave as multimillionaires?

    We know how most people with "old money" like the Bush family got theirs. Some forbear or forbears with vision, courage, high intelligence, good luck, and the will to persevere worked for it, earned it, accumulated it, passed it on to their children who keep on inheriting it. We also know that Mitt Romney had a long, distinguished, successful, highly honorable career in business, and thus earned what he has.

    When anyone makes a lot of fast bucks without any noticeable show of talent, superior executive capability, and has no distinguished achievements to his (or her) credit it certainly ought to raise more than a few eyebrows, especially when those people have held or been very close to people who hold positions of public trust and influence.

  7. The moral of the story?

    I suppose if you belong to the right tribe you are endowed with a "get out of jail free card". And you spawn can marry down into the lower class of "the goyim".

  8. Sandra Cassey said

    You can take the hicks out of the sticks but you can't take the sticks out of the hicks. Breeding shows and blood will tell. It's inescapable, as is our imminent doom.

  9. Whene'r unpleasant truths are told
    A leftist soon shows up to scold.

    Facts unflattering revealed
    To leftists will rejection yield.

    When someone dares the truth to tell
    A leftist soon says, "Go to hell!"

    But staring at a looking glass
    The leftist sees a horse's ass!

    Yet he sees only beauty there
    And his bald head replete with hair.

    Richard Bonhomme

  10. Mathilde Gargelwein said

    Isn't that just a fancy way of saying "NYA nya, nya NYA nya," Richard?

    Surely you can find better things to do with your time than that!

    Shame on you!

  11. Egg-ZACK-lee, Thersites!

    Also, you don't find Birds of Paradise hatching from hen's eggs, do you?

  12. This comment has been removed by the author.

  13. I’m sure we will see Pig nose Chelsea run for office and plant her pig nose in the taxpayer public trough for life, just like her two dysfunctional and immoral parents.

  14. Minerva Postelthwairde said

    That fellow Marc looks like he hasn't bathed in several weeks. He also looks stoned out of his mind. I almost feel sorry for poor Chelsea. I wonder what Bill and Hillary had to promise in order to get this sorry looking couple hitched? When Hillary sits in the Oval Office, I'll bet she winds up appointing "Ed" to the supreme court. Something like that. These people are so dirty they stink out loud.

  15. DONAL MacDASTARD said

    Well, Minerva, what else would you expect from chicken shit? Folks of this sort don't have it in them to rise even to the level of chopped liver.

  16. The son would be fine if he wasn't able to spend millions on his new dwelling. The old saying, "Where there's smoke, there's fire applies nicely to this whole scenario.



We welcome Conversation
But without Vituperation.
If your aim is Vilification ––
Other forms of Denigration ––
Unfounded Accusation --
Determined Obfuscation ––
Alienation with Self-Justification ––


Gratuitous Displays of Extraneous Knowledge Offered Not To Shed Light Or Enhance the Discussion, But For The Primary Purpose Of Giving An Impression Of Superiority are obnoxiously SELF-AGGRANDIZING, and therefore, Subject to Removal at the Discretion of the Censor-in-Residence.

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.