Jack Murphy

It is clear the Senate Republicans are discombobulated what with Casey Cagle unable to tie his shoes and demanding people respect his authority a la Cartman.

But the matter of Jack Murphy is ridiculous. The issue is not that there is a civil lawsuit against Jack Murphy.

The issue is that of over 300 failed banks in the nation and 56 in Georgia, only three nationwide are being sued and Murphy’s is one of them. Further, the nature of the suit disqualifies Murphy from sitting on the board of any bank anywhere.

People get sued all the time. That’s not the issue. The issue is the nature of this suit and the fact that the FDIC is not going around willy-nilly suing all the failed banks — just three.

Consequently, I’m going to be using my radio show and RedState’s action center to rally Georgians to call their state senators to remove Jack Murphy until the matter is resolved.

You can go to http://action.redstate.com, click the top link, and find your State Senator. Call and tell him or her that Jack Murphy needs to relinquish the chairmanship of the banking committee until this matter is resolved.

Oh, and tell them to back Tommie Williams against Casey Cagle while you are at it.


  1. Three Jack says:

    it is truly a shame that citizens must fulfill the responsibilities we grant to our elected officials…simple stuff like enforcing common sense ethical guidelines. if the governor, lt. governor, globe trotting speaker, senate majority leader and the all powerful c.o.a. will not immediately force murphy to step aside, then all of them should be taken to task asap.

    why is it so freakin difficult for bible thumping conservatives to act ethically…that’s the least we should expect from these guys. fire murphy or get fired yourselves!

  2. Clint says:

    I contacted my State Senator via email today about this issue and as per usual, didn’t hear back from him. It’s unfortunate that they have to go silent as opposed to standing up for common sense ethics in the Georgia State Senate by asking Sen. Murphy to either resign or step aside until this issue is resolved.

  3. WhatsNew says:

    Since Williams’ COA put Murphy in place and is keeping him in place why would I tell my Sen to support Williams over Cagle? Cagle ran for Lt Gov and won. Anybody that wanted to take him down should have run against him.

  4. Mama_grizzly says:

    Murphy needs to step down. The COA is taking the cowards way out by not addressing it. Maybe they have bankers pulling their strings? Someone should check the financial disclosures of the members of the COA and see how much money they have received from people associated with the banking community.

    • rebelyelp says:

      With the body count piling up, it looks like they are.

      While I agree that Murphy should step aside as chairman, I’ve got serious questions about the FDIC and how they are doing their job.

      It seems to me they are overreacting and their new draconian approach to regulating small community banks is hurting small business in Georgia. One of the things our regulators should be doing is shining a spotlight on the FDIC, and Murphy is clearly in no position to do that effectively.

  5. Toxic Avenger says:

    Erick and I do not agree often, but I agree with you 100% today. From a Democrat to a (s0metimes) rational Republican, thank you.

    Yes, Erick and I both have some common foes, but this just seems like common sense. Should we put a disbarred attorney in charge of Judicial? A doctor without a license to practice in charge of Healthcare? Ray McBerry in charge of Education? The answer is obviously no.

    The FDIC has no reason to go after Murphy for any political reasons. Obviously, they see something insidious going on, and if we are going to have someone charged with regulating banking, the least we can have is someone who is not under very serious investigation for his activities in that very industry.

    Kudos, Erick. I’m on board.

    • macho says:

      Seriously, you are going to compare a civil complaint, for negligence, against Murphy, to Rangel?

      For the record, I think Murphy ought to step aside until this plays out, but let’s keep our behaviors straight.

      • Three Jack says:

        actually yes it is a fair comparison macho. rangel faced ethics charges revolving around his personal finances while acting as chairman of a powerful house committee….murphy faces civil charges filed by the fdic which some might even consider to be more serious while chairing a powerful state senate committee.

        beyond that, both obstinately refused to step aside with rangel finally succumbing to pressure after he was found to be guilty in 11 of the 13 charges against him. murphy should do the honorable thing by voluntarily stepping down as chairman.

  6. galawyer1 says:

    The FDIC is only suing 3 banks nationwide….SO FAR. Already, the FDIC has been authorized to sue 109 banks total and will pursue as many banks as it can to try to recover some of the funds the FDIC paid out when those banks failed. But, because the banks have no money, the FDIC is going after the only money left — the insurance the banks’ directors and officers had. In order to get the insurance funds, the FDIC has to claim that directors and officers, like Murphy, were negligent, or worse, whether they were or not. The claims in a lawsuit are just that — claims — until a judgment is rendered.

    The fact that Murphy has been sued is NOT the issue, and neither the nature of the suit nor the fact that Murphy happens to be the first in what will be a long line of lawsuits does or should disqualify him from serving on the committees to which he was appointed, including the Senate Banking Committee.

    For more info on the FDIC’s litigation plans, see this link: http://www.thestreet.com/story/10965765/1/fdic-readies-lawsuit-onslaught-against-bank-execs.html?cm_ven=GOOGLEN#

    • rebelyelp says:

      How many banks are suing the FDIC? This is not a one way street. I’m not defending Murphy — far from it — but anyone who wants to believe the FDIC is the white knight here is clueless.

  7. FlyOnWall says:

    Forward thinking Democrats are praying the COA keeps their heads firmly in the sand. This is how majorities fall.

    For those keeping score at home, the Senate GOP has already gifted Democrats by approving of their Majority Leader Chip Rogers’ work as a real-life Washington lobbyist. When not being sued and pursued by the IRS, Rogers spent his idle time last year lobbying for Dennis Kucinich’s wife’s PETA front group specifically to retire all chimps from federal research, ban the miltary from using pig guts in combat training or pig carcasses in battlefield surgical training (search for ‘Rogers William’ here http://tinyurl.com/6cdapr).

    Now the COA keeps a man in charge of Georgia banking laws that the FDIC doesn’t trust with an ATM.

    Aren’t these precisely the tools we used to bludgeon Dems into a minority party just a few years ago?

  8. sunkawakan says:

    Do not forget that Rogers and Murphy are part of the esteemed Cherokee county legislative delegation. As is Calvin Hill, who is a member of the House Banking committee, and founder and director of Cherokee Bank. Anyone know if Cherokee Bank is still under a consent ordr?

  9. OleDirtyBarrister says:

    Should we have a failed lawyer in charge of Peach Pundit and Red State?

    A bankrupt debtor in charge of the Ga. Tea Party?

    Just askin.’

    Lord forgive me and bless the pygmies down in New Guinea.

    I’m not entirely comfortable with Murphy, but I’m not ready to condemn him either for reasons I stated in another thread yesterday and for the reasons galawyer stated here today.

    • John Konop says:

      Calling Erick a failed lawyer is harsh and unfair. And I also feel sorry for people who lost their homes and business especially in the tough times.

      Yet you do bring up an interesting issue. I wonder if the Tea Party is for letting people file bankruptcy. This is the ultimate tax payer bailout:

      1) Homes loans are usually (VA, FHA…) guaranteed by a government program at tax payers expense

      2) The bank is guaranteed by tax payers and if the first level of tax payer money is not enough the tax payer are stuck with even a bigger bill when the banks goes under.

      3) Home values/equity dropped via people walking away from their obligations. This is another hit on tax payers not getting a BAIL-OUT.

      It would seem to me that if the Tea Party is consistent with the NO BAIL-OUT policy they would be against letting anyone BK on debt guaranteed by the government. At least GM and many of the banks have paid a lot of the money back. This is why people who make life very black and white are players checkers in a chess match.

Comments are closed.