Politics: Schock faked dates on tax shelter documents
I’m not aware of any local coverage of this, which I found in the Chicago Tribune:
Aaron Schock, a Republican state lawmaker making a strong bid for an open U.S. House seat in central Illinois, once notarized documents with false dates while helping his parents set up tax shelters, his own father testified in federal court.
The backdating raises the possibility Schock committed official misconduct, a misdemeanor under state law.
The issue came up in the July trial of three people accused of selling sham trusts and financial packages. The Schock’s were victims of the scheme and were accused of no wrongdoing.
There is no indication that Schock or his parents benefited financially from using the incorrect date, and Schock’s father testified that he used it because that was when he first set up the tax shelters. In an interview with The Associated Press, Schock did not dispute his father’s testimony.
But as a notary public, Schock was required to provide accurate information about witnessing documents being signed. Schock declared that he witnessed the documents being signed on Jan. 1, 2000, but they weren’t actually signed until more than a year later.
Notaries are people who are legally empowered to witness documents and certify their validity.
The article says that is this is to be prosecuted, it would have to be prosecuted by none other than Peoria County State’s Attorney Kevin Lyons. I’m not going to hold my breath. Lyons has a miserable track record when it comes to holding politicians and public employees accountable for obeying the law.
I’m aware of other notaries who have signed off on having witnessed documents being signed when they were not present. Since there was no fraud going on, no harm no foul. But then, none of them were running for Congress. And here’s the thing about running for Congress: There are no do overs.
I guarantee that if Schock were the underdog in this race, and there was undisputed court testimony saying Colleen Callahan fudged a date on documents, in apparent violation of state law, Schock’s campaign Steve Shearer would be whispering the ear of every reporter in the 18th District.
Tags: Aaron Schock, Kevin Lyons
October 14th, 2008 at 4:09 pm
Let me get this straight. If you haven’t decided yet whether your going to vote for Schock or not – listen to this! Back 5 or 6 years ago, Schock notarized some documents for his old man which had the wrong date on them. The old man later got screwed in some tax scam, and so it comes out when dad is tetifying as the victim of said scam. Have I got it right? That clearly makes him unqualified to be our next congressman? I’m not voting for Schock, instead I’m throwing my vote away on the Green guy. But this obsession with Schock is beginning to sound like the right-wingers obsession with you-know-who (rhymes with Osama). I got an idea that I’d like to float. Since the elections are really over and we know who is going to win them all (possible exception of Lyons v. LaHood), why don’t we stop talking about them.
October 14th, 2008 at 4:10 pm
“Since there was no fraud going on, no hard no foul.”
Uh, since they were lying and breaking their oath of office I think that is the very definition of fraud…
PJSTAR has an article up and apparently he could be guilty of a misdemeanor which might make this a much more interesting race…
October 14th, 2008 at 4:32 pm
I meant “he” and “his” as in Aaron, not “they” or “their”.
October 14th, 2008 at 4:38 pm
Your glee is apparent 11 Bravo. With campaign managers like you (based on your previous posts), the GOP certainly needs no enemies 11 bravo. As for me, I think Aaron should be drug into the village square and placed in stocks until election day. After all, this has the moral equivilency of…. of….back dating a check that ultimately didn’t bounce. This IS proof of callahan’s superiority. Scandals should be made of sterner stuff.
And 11 bravo, are you as outraged at Jehan Gordon’s theft of bracelets from the Champagin mall which could have been a felony if only charged as retail theft rather than regular theft? If the namby pamby ex-prosecutor John Pilan had charged her like a real man, then she wouldn’t be in a position to run for office today. Oh, well, if he’d known then that she was going to run for office, he’d have charged her differently. Save your moral outrage for those whose morals are outrageous.
October 14th, 2008 at 4:51 pm
Moral outrage has no place in politics. The elections are over:
Bet the farm: Obama/Biden, Durbin, Schock, Krupa – they’re the winners, its over. The only one left is Lyons v. LaHood, and that one is probably going to Lyons.
October 14th, 2008 at 4:56 pm
Actually gfalkes, I have never held the title of “campaign manager”. You are also wrong about your comparison since last time I checked someone who writes a check does not take an oath of office nor are they appointed by a state agency, they simply have a checking account. So yeah, I’d say there is a little difference and we are talking about an entire year not a few days, not that it really matters since breaking the law is breaking the law.
And yes, I think Gordon’s candidacy, and her numerous run-ins with the law, has all but been a disgrace for local dems. However, since I am not in that district nor am I a democrat I am not as concerned about that situation.
And I also have not made a decision who to vote for in this race, I am not thrilled with my party’s candidate and I am turned off by Callahan’s positions regarding the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Somewhat off topic…I am also kind of miffed at something I read a few days ago where she referred to herself as the wife of a former Marine as if that somehow made her more qualified. Don’t get me wrong, the relatives of those in the military do have a unique perspective, but not one that qualifies them for public office…
October 14th, 2008 at 5:01 pm
Let’s assume like Billy and gfalkes are morally correct, and Schock’s backdating caused no financial benefit to anyone. So then what’s the big deal? Well, then why would he lie? If it benefited no one, what’s the point?
The question then becomes whether or not he is reckless enough with the truth that he would just lie for no reason. If it wasn’t for anyones benefit I would almost be MORE concerned since it shows a tendency of playing loose with the truth for no other reason than he could.
October 14th, 2008 at 5:17 pm
If a tree falls in a forest and there is no one there to hear it, does it make a sound? No, but now that we have blogs, we can all pretend we heard it, and speculate as to what kind of sound it was, and whether people should have heard it, and they must be rednecks or libberals to have not heard it and yadah and yadah and yadah!
October 14th, 2008 at 5:27 pm
“I am also kind of miffed at something I read a few days ago where she referred to herself as the wife of a former Marine as if that somehow made her more qualified.”
Any marine will tell you that “once a marine – always a marine”. I wonder if those were Callahan’s exact words?
October 14th, 2008 at 5:31 pm
And how could anybody not have made up their mind yet about any candidate? Obama or McCain, Schock or Callahan, Gordon or Krupa, Lyons or LaHood, you can’t tell the deference yet? Each is as different has they probably can be. The whole problem with our electoral process is that it is far too long. Why do we need more than a couple of weeks to make up our minds. If the process were shorter, we wouldn’t have all this negative campainging. Just take a few minutes to compare the candidates and vote. Does anybody reallly think that this notarygate thing is going to make any difference? How can it? For Schock to lose, thousands who have already decided to vote for him would have to change their minds. That isn’t going to happen. Come to think of it, the real reason our national system is so screwed up is that most (the vast majority) have already made up their minds who to vote for and have by doing so made themselves irrelevant to the campaigns. Think about it. It took a financial meltdown of historic proportions to give Obama a lock on it. Up until a couple of weeks ago, the whole presidential campaign on both sides was aimed at a few thousand in the whole country who hadn’t decided who to vote for.
October 14th, 2008 at 5:34 pm
Nobody cares, Billy & 11Bravo. The guy could dress up like Alfred E. Neuman and go running through the streets shouting “ollie-ollie-oxen-free” and he’d still get 70% of the vote. Give it up.
October 14th, 2008 at 5:34 pm
Well, if the election were held YESTERDAY, we all would have cast our vote not knowing about thus little scandal.
The election season is long because good leaders run marathons, not sprints.
October 14th, 2008 at 5:42 pm
Give what up? Commenting on issues of concern to the public? Nope.
October 14th, 2008 at 7:11 pm
So this 7 or 8 year old incident involving something Schock notarized for his father is what Callahan and national Democrats found after digging and digging only to spring it a few weeks before the election?
If Schock’s father is fair game, what about Callahan’s husband? Why exactly was he disciplined and barred from attending or showing pigs at the Illinois State Fair? Doesn’t Colleen farm with him? Was it a fight over illegal cheating? Was she in on it? Hummm.
The election can be about issues or petty gotcha. But if it’s gotcha, then it should be equal on both sides.
October 14th, 2008 at 10:33 pm
Aaron Schock, As smart and knowledgeable as Sarah Palin, and as ethical and honest as Bill Clinton. Sure sounds like a winning formula to me. Another piece in the narrative forming around Schock and his judgement.
October 15th, 2008 at 8:08 am
Well… Callahan just got my vote… So tired of people lying and “fudging” the truth to get what they want or feel they need. If you would lie about something that you personally don’t gain from, you’ll lie for and about anything. I don’t trust him, not that I did to begin with…