Louisiana's attorney general has broadened the scope of an investigation of ACORN to include a possible embezzlement of $5 million a decade ago within the community organization, five times more than previously reported.
ACORN Chief Executive Officer Bertha Lewis said the new reported amount is "completely false."
Attorney General Buddy Caldwell has been conducting an investigation of ACORN since June. He issued subpoenas in August seeking documents related to former ACORN International President Wade Rathke and his brother Dale Rathke, who kept the group's books. Those subpoenas were focused on possible ACORN violations for non-payment of employee withholding taxes, obstructing justice and violating the Employee Retirement Security Act. No charges have been made.
The attorney general had inquired in June into an alleged embezzlement within ACORN that happened 10 years ago. The group last year dealt with an internal dispute and a lawsuit involving accusations that Dale Rathke made nearly $1 million in improper credit card charges in 1999 and 2000. The brother and a donor repaid the money.
Caldwell said last month that the statute of limitations presented obstacles to prosecutors taking action on the embezzlement, and that his investigation was not focused on that issue. The subpoena issued Monday changed the tone of the investigation and put a new emphasis on the embezzlement issue.
"Current high-ranking members of ACORN have publicly acknowledged that embezzlement did in fact occur, but the exact amount of the embezzlement was unknown until it was recently acknowledged in a board of directors meeting on Oct. 17, 2008, by Bertha Lewis and Liz Wolf that an internal review had determined that the amount embezzled was $5 million, " the new subpoena says.
The subpoena says, "It is still unclear if some of the monies embezzled are from state, federal or private funds."
The subpoena requests documents from Citizens Consulting Inc., a financial arm of ACORN, and from various accounting and legal consultants in New Orleans. Investigators are trying to verify the issues raised in the subpoena.
"We're going to follow the evidence where it leads us and try to do the right thing," said David Caldwell, head of the attorney general's public corruption and special prosecutions divisions. "We are actively investigating the case, whatever the outcome might be. This is something we are devoting our full attention to."
Posted by: Fred ||
10/06/2009 08:18 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
so, exactly how much was reimbursed?
Posted by: Frank G ||
10/06/2009 12:11 Comments ||
Top||
#2
And they still had more than sufficient left over.
Posted by: Richard Aubrey ||
10/06/2009 12:40 Comments ||
Top||
Greg Craig, the top in-house lawyer for President Barack Obama, is getting the blame for botching the strategy to shut down Guantanamo Bay prison by January so much so that hes expected to leave the White House in short order.
But sources familiar with the process believe Craig is being set-up as the fall guy and say the blame for missing the deadline extends well beyond him.
Instead, it was a widespread breakdown on the political, legislative, policy and planning fronts that contributed to what is shaping up as one of Obamas most high-profile setbacks, these people say.
The White House misread the congressional mood as it found out abruptly in May, when the Senate voted 90-6 against funds for closing the base after Republicans stoked fears about bringing prisoners to the U.S. The House also went on record last week opposing bringing Gitmo detainees here.
The White House misread the public mood as roughly half of Americans surveyed say they disagree with Obamas approach. A strong element of NIMBY-ism permeates those results, as Americans say they dont want the prisoners in their backyards.
But most of all Obamas aides mistook that political consensus from the campaign trail for a deep commitment in Washington to do whatever it takes to close the prison.
The administration came in reading there to be wide support for closing Guantanamo at home and abroad, and I think it misread that attitude, said Matthew Waxman, a Columbia law professor who held Defense and State Department positions on detainee policy. In general, they were right .but there was very little willingness to accept the costs and risks of getting it done.
The White House declined to make Craig available for an interview, or discuss the Gitmo deliberations in detail, but several allies and even some critics scoffed at suggestions that Craig bears the main responsibility for the missteps.
This clearly was a decision that had the full support of the entire national security team, said Ken Gude, who tracks Guantanamo issues for the liberal Center for American Progress think tank. Its typical Washington that someone has their head on the chopping block, but its ridiculous that its Craig.
The implication that this was the brainchild of the White House counsel is not really credible, said Elisa Massimino of Human Rights First.
When Obama signed a series of executive orders on Guantanamo during his second full day in office, what grabbed attention was not his promise to close the prison but his pledge to do it within one year.
During the presidential campaign, Obama talked almost daily about closing Guantanamo, but he rarely offered a timeline. His Republican rival, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), spoke in a far greater specificity, proposing to move the Gitmo prisoners to Ft. Leavenworth in Kansas.
However, back in July 2007, Obama co-sponsored an amendment offered by Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) and Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) that called for Guantanamo to close within a year. Obamas primary rival, Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.) was also a co-sponsor.
Some Bush administration officials contend that the one-year timeline was driven by a naïveté on the part of Obamas aides.
To a certain extent, they had drunk a lot of the far-left Kool-aid: that everybody, or most people, at Guantanamo were innocent and shouldnt be there, and the Bush administration was not working very hard to resolve these issues, and that the issues were fairly easy to resolve once adults who were really committed to doing something about it in charge, said one Bush official who met with Obamas aides during the transition on Gitmo. It became clear to me they had not really done their homework on the details.
But even back on Jan. 22, 2009, the same day Obama signed the orders, Craig acknowledged some of the difficulties involved including that some of the detainees can never be tried, a problem Craig called difficult and most controversial.
Now Obamas decision to set a one-year deadline is being widely second-guessed. Craig supported the idea and Craigs allies say that a deadline was needed to persuade foreign governments that Obama was serious. They note that President George W. Bush talked on at least eight occasions about his desire to close Guantanamo and left office with 250 prisoners there.
Simply reasserting the intention to close Guantanamo would not have been sufficient in the international community, Gude said. They had to have a firm date and they had to have a timeline.
Gude had advocated an 18-month timeline to build in a cushion but he said the only real mistakes the White House made involved failing to anticipate the resistance in Congress particularly surrounding the Senates sharp rejection of Obamas $80 million request to close Gitmo.
They made that request without much supporting information and opened the door for Republicans in Congress to make it a Congressional issue and they did it very successfully, Gude said. The White House didnt have a plan to support Democrats who were willing to back up their proposal and it all fell apart.
Craigs backers contend that, if that was the White Houses key misjudgment, other top officials share responsibility for the breakdown.
It seems very unlikely to me that Greg Craig, by himself, engineered a DOD appropriations request, one lawyer close to Craig said.
In retrospect, there were early signs of possible trouble ahead. Within hours of Obama signing the orders, McCain warned of a backlash and said the time frame the president set out would be very difficult to achieve.
A McCain adviser said the Obama team should have known. I dont think they realized how much heat McCain took from conservatives during the GOP primary, said the aide, who asked not to be named. Had they been aware of that I dont think they would have handled it this way ..It shouldnt have surprised anybody.
Today, the National Security Council and Obama senior adviser Pete Rouse are effectively in charge of closing Gitmo, though Press Secretary Robert Gibbs denied Craig had been stripped of his responsibilities on the prison. There are number of people that are working on it, Greg being one of them, Gibbs said.
A review of Guantanamo prisoners is also nearly complete, with about 80 detainees up for release and State Department envoy Dan Fried lining up places to receive them.
Our friends and allies have accepted or agreed to accept more than 30 of the remaining detainees at Guantanamo who cannot be sent home due to humane treatment concerns, and are seriously considering taking others, said a White House official who asked not to be named.
But its been slow. Obamas administration has transferred 17 Guantanamo prisoners to other countries so far compared to 19 by the Bush administration in the first nine months of 2008.
Obama aides have blamed the delays on disarray in government files about the detainees, but several former officials said that is not directly linked to the thorniest questions such as where to locate detainees in the U.S. Those issues that have been kicked down the road are by far the hardest, Waxman said.
#2
"had not done their homework"
What's there to say?
Some screwups appear to be going the administration's way--nationalizing the auto industry may be a catastrophe, but that's a feature, not a bug.
This is a screwup not going the administration's way, which makes it a mistake, not a policy objective.
Didn't do their homework. Like the adults suggested they should.
Geez.
Posted by: Richard Aubrey ||
10/06/2009 15:40 Comments ||
Top||
#3
...it was a widespread breakdown on the political, legislative, policy and planning fronts ...
That pretty much sums up this entire despicable gang. Watch what's next.
WASHINGTON -- President Obama yesterday rolled out the red carpet -- and handed out doctors' white coats as well, just so nobody missed his hard-sell health-care message.
In a heavy-handed attempt at reviving support for health-care reform, the White House orchestrated a massive photo op to buttress its claim that front-line physicians support Obama.
A sea of 150 white-coated doctors, all enthusiastically supportive of the president and representing all 50 states, looked as if they were at a costume party as they posed in the Rose Garden before hearing Obama's pitch for the Democratic overhaul bills moving through Congress.
OOPS! A crowd of 150 doctors gathers in the Rose Garden to support the health-care overhaul -- as White House staffers scramble to hand out camera-ready white coats to those who forgot their own.
The physicians, all invited guests, were told to bring their white lab coats to make sure that TV cameras captured the image.
But some docs apparently forgot, failing to meet the White House dress code by showing up in business suits or dresses.
So the White House rustled up white coats for them and handed them to the suited physicians who had taken seats in the sun-splashed lawn area.
All this to provide a visual counter to complaints from other doctors that pending legislation is bad news for the medical profession.
"Nobody has more credibility with the American people on this issue than you do," Obama told his guests.
The president was flanked by four white-coated doctors at a podium as he delivered his pep talk.
"When you cut through all the noise and all the distractions that are out there, I think what's most telling is that some of the people who are most supportive of reform are the very medical professionals who know the health-care system best," the president said.
"I want to thank every single doctor who is here," Obama said. "And I especially want to thank you for agreeing to fan out across the country and make the case about why this reform effort is so desperately needed."
Underlying the strictly photo-op nature of the event, The Associated Press noted that Obama broke no new ground in his remarks.
The president told the doctors that if they back him, "I'm confident we are going to get health reform passed this year."
The Republican National Committee shot back with a response from Rep. Tom Price (R-Ga.), who was an orthopedic surgeon before being elected to Congress.
"Today, the president wants you to believe that the medical community supports his government takeover of health care. Don't be fooled," Price said.
He said he had spoken to "thousands of my colleagues" who oppose the Democrats' legislation.
House Minority Leader Rep. John Boehner (R-Ohio) said large numbers of doctors fear it would cripple their ability to care for patients.
"Members of the medical community -- who deal with red tape day in and day out -- rightly recognize that the Democrats' government takeover would weaken the doctor-patient relationship that is so critical to making the right health-care decisions," he said.
Obama made no mention of the "public option" -- a controversial government-run insurance plan favored by liberal Democrats -- in his Rose Garden spiel.
A key version of the legislation, which doesn't include the public option, is expected to reach the Senate floor for debate later this month.
Defense Secretary Robert Gates appealed Monday for calm amid intense administration debate over the flagging war in Afghanistan, asking for time and privacy for the president to come to a decision - an apparent message to the commanding U.S. general there who has pressed publicly for more American troops.
Gates' remarks appeared to stand as an implicit rebuke of the man he helped install as the top commander in Afghanistan, Gen. Stanley McChrystal, for his lobbying as President Barack Obama faced a critical week of decision over whether to escalate the Afghan war.
In two appearances Monday, Gates made the point that Obama needs elbow room to make strategy decisions about the war, as the internal White House debate went increasingly public.
"It is important that we take our time to do all we can to get this right," Gates said at an Army conference. "In this process, it is imperative that all of us taking part in these deliberations, civilians and military alike, provide our best advice to the president - candidly but privately."
Later, speaking alongside Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, he praised McChrystal and said no matter what Obama decides, the general will execute it faithfully. Theirs is not to make reply/ Theirs is not to reason why/ Theirs is but to do and die.
#1
asking for time and privacy for the president to come to a decision - an apparent message to the commanding U.S. general there who has pressed publicly for more American troops.
Yes of course, Barry needs....more privacy. You malcontents and non-believers may bring us those suggestions and recommendations in PRIVATE in order that we can ignore them PUBLICALY...right along with the escalating casualty figures.
#3
"What is really interesting about this whole affair is the reversal of elite opinion. When leaks indicated that the some of the uniformed military were critical of the conduct of the Iraq war under George W. Bush and Donald Rumsfeld, those critics were seen as necessarily speaking truth to power. David Ignatius of the Washington Post argued that the military needed a chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff who would push back against Rumsfeld and the Bush administrations policies in Iraq. The always entertaining Maureen Dowd of the New York Times wondered why Bush refused to take advice from his much more experienced and clear-headed uniformed officers. And one genius at the Huffington Post even called upon the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to relieve Bush as commander in chief for dereliction of duty. Only Bush hatred could get the lefty blogosphere to call for a military coup."
#4
IIUC CNN's BLITZER + CAFFERTY FILE > seems a couple of POTUS BAMMER's Advisors are telling him + SecDef Gates that unless the US commits more troops to AFPAK ala MCCHRYSTAL'S REQUEST, THE USA MAY BE FIGHTING IN AFPAK FOR ANUTHER 20 YEARS = CIRCA YEAR 2030, or thereabouts.
JUST IN TIME FOR COMET APOPHIS [2029/30-2036] + MASSIVE EXPLOSIONS SEEN ON THE MOON FROM EARTH = FUTURE GUAM, courtesy of future OWG-NWO + STARFLEET/EARTH-SPACE COMMAND???
THE SIMPSONS > CHIEF WIGGUMS > THATS ONE HELL OF A [future] OOOOOOOPPPPPPSSSIES, LOU!
(CBS) Congressional Republicans are again demanding that Congressman Charles Rangel step down as chairman of the House tax writing committee, saying his ethics problems make him the poster boy for institutional arrogance.
Democratic support for embattled Rangel will get another test this week. Republicans will introduce a resolution calling for the Harlem Democrat to step down as chairman of the powerful House Ways and Means Committee until ethics probes -- which keep on growing -- are complete.
"These are all violations of the rules of the House," Rep. John Carter (R-Texas) told CBS 2 HD. "Some of them seem to be violations of the rules of the IRS and I don't think the top tax guy ought to be having those kinds of problems."
Carter, author of the "dump Rangel" resolution, said keeping Rangel in his position will be a headache for Democrats and will infuriate voters in next year's midterm elections.
"They don't think that it's fair. They think there's special treatment being given to Mr. Rangel because of his position," Carter said.
CBS 2 HD tried to talk to Congressman Rangel about the resolution, but he did his best to bob, weave and duck at a public press conference he attended. But CBS 2 HD was persistent, both before the event ...
"I'm disappointed in the Congress because everyone's entitled to a full hearing and they're not giving me that," Rangel said.
... And after when CBS 2 had to run a block after he had his car moved in an attempt to make a getaway through a back exit.
When asked how he feels about Congressman Carter's move to have Rangel step aside from Ways and Means, the Harlem Democrat said, "I'm disappointed in him."
During the event Rangel service notice he didn't want any embarrassing questions about the growing ethics storm around him.
"I would hate to see anyone attempt to mar this with questions that are not directly related to this exciting event," Rangel said.
And here's a new twist. Highly placed Democratic sources told CBS 2 HD they have discussed the possibility of using one damaged New York politician to get rid of another.
It centers on having Rangel resign, and giving Gov. David Paterson a dignified way to leave Albany by running for Rangel's congressional seat.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/06/2009 08:26 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Wouldn't make any difference even if they succeeded in ousting Rangel. That District has had the same kind of representation non-stop since I was a kid. No reason to think Rangel's successor would be any different than his ousted predecessor, Adam Clayton Powell.
Gov. Martin O'Malley and the Maryland legislature seem dead set on turning their state into the East Coast version of California - the once happy and prosperous jurisdiction on the West Coast that's now on the verge of chaos and bankruptcy.
One of California's many suicidal impulses was a landmark law it passed in 2006 giving unprecedented authority to the California Air Resources Board to implement regulations aimed at reducing emissions at the state level, including a provision mandating a 40 percent increase in fuel efficiency for new cars by 2016 that is currently being challenged in the U.S. Court of Appeals by the Chamber of Commerce and the National Automobile Dealers Association.
Maryland is now heading down the same dead end. Despite the worse recession in a generation, the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Act of 2009 mandates a draconian 25 percent reduction in 2006 greenhouse gas levels by 2020. The legislation was largely the handiwork of a strange coalition of global warming activists and union officials, according to Maryland Commons, a now defunct Web site.
In fact, Brad Heavner, state director of Environment Maryland, bragged during an interview with Maryland Commons that his group was the "lead policy/lobbying group" in getting the legislation written and passed after a previous attempt in 2007 failed. "Right after the session in 2007, Gov. O'Malley created the Maryland Commission on Climate Change, we believe in response to this legislation," Heavner said.
Jim Strong, subdistrict director of the United Steelworkers, added that "when you put everyone at the table, and everybody listens, good things can happen."
Except everyone was not at the table. As Paul Chesser of the Heartland Institute noted in a 2008 Examiner op-ed, the commission was the brainchild of the Center for Climate Strategy, "an activist group of climate alarmists" funded by the Rockefeller Foundation.
The CCS convinced states to set up supposedly blue-ribbon panels to give the aura of legitimacy to their radical environmental agenda. The one in Maryland was made up of "a handful of 'experts' like the state's school superintendent and transportation secretary." There were no dissenting voices to point out the damage such stringent environmental regulations would do to Maryland's economy.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/06/2009 08:23 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
... with his appointment of Kevin Jennings to head the Education Department's Office of Safe and Drug-Free Schools, Obama has vindicated those of us who said that the Jones selection wasn't a failure of vetting, but about Obama's appointing a like-minded radical.
Now that Jennings' radical homosexual activism has been exposed, the Obama administration hasn't said: "Oh, sorry, another one slipped through our relatively new vetting process. The president will fire him, and we'll pick someone who reflects the president's values."
The Washington Examiner's Byron York reports that Jennings seems to have the full backing of the White House. Press secretary Robert Gibbs defiantly referred Jennings' critics to the statement of Education Secretary Arne Duncan -- no centrist himself, by the way -- who stated: "Kevin Jennings has dedicated his professional career to promoting school safety. He is uniquely qualified for his job and I'm honored to have him on our team."
Well, America, are you honored to have yet another far leftist on your team and in a position to influence the education of your children, no less?
Kevin Jennings' focus hasn't been safe and drug-free schools, but gay activism, which is why Rep. Steve King of Iowa has called on President Obama to fire him. According to York, King insists that Jennings has no experience in anti-drug work and that his background has not been school safety, but promoting homosexuality in public schools, including at the elementary level.
Jennings not only ran the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network but also founded it, in 1990. Sure, GLSEN purports to be primarily interested in preventing discrimination and violence against gays and lesbians in schools. But promoting homosexuality and demonizing those who don't embrace its values more fairly describes its mission. Karen Holgate of the Capitol Resource Institute put her finger on the MO of such groups when she said: "This whole movement is not about tolerance. It's about redirecting the hate towards anyone who does not agree that homosexuality is a normal, positive and healthy lifestyle."
In 2000, GLSEN, along with the Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, co-hosted a "Teach Out" at Tufts University, in Boston, where organizers instructed public-school teachers how to incorporate positive messages about homosexuality into their curricula. At this conference, GLSEN also led a youth workshop, "What They Didn't Tell You about Queer Sex & Sexuality in Health Class," which was advertised to "youth only, ages 14 to 21."
During the session, one instructor explained the process of "fisting" to the students. Fisting is the consensual insertion by one person of his hand and arm into another person's anal cavity. How is this instruction helpful in preventing bullying?
I'm not sure how the Obama administration will attempt to explain away Kevin Jennings' sordid associations, any more than it can rationalize his admitted failure, as a high-school teacher, to notify the parents of a 15-year-old boy who told him he had had relations with an older man, instead telling the boy, "I hope you used a condom."
How much longer can Obama partisans deny who Obama really is?
Posted by: Fred ||
10/06/2009 08:21 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Considering the reaction of many leftys to Polanski, this should be no surprise.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
OOPS! A crowd of 150 doctors gathers in the Rose Garden to support the health-care overhaul -- as White House staffers scramble to hand out camera-ready white coats to those who forgot their own.
