ACORN and its affiliates received $200,000 in Justice Department grants between 2002 and 2009, according to a report issued Friday by the department's inspector general.
No DOJ grants went directly to ACORN, but a handful of grants were awarded either to ACORN affiliates or to other organizations that sub-contracted projects to ACORN.
The report, requested by House Judiciary Committee ranking member Lamar Smith (R-Texas), also found a few instances of ACORN mismanagement of federally contracted work.
For example, ACORN received a $20,000 sub-contract to do community outreach on crime prevention in New York. The organization that contracted with ACORN has not released the funds yet, claiming that ACORN submitted reimbursements "outside the scope of the agreement," including "fringe benefits" for the salaried staffer working on the project.
In another instance the city of Phoenix contracted with the "ACORN Institute" to receive about $9,000 to canvass citizens and raise awareness about a tax credit and a tax assistance program. The city hasn't paid ACORN yet due to "poor reporting by the ACORN Institute regarding another project not related to DOJ grant funds." Phoenix is trying to terminate its contract with ACORN.
The DOJ did not audit the funds that went to ACORN or its affiliates, but did conduct an audit of one of the organizations that contracted with an ACORN affiliate. That audit concluded that the organization "did not properly manage the grant and did not adequately monitor some of its 36 sub-grantees, including the [American Institute of Social Justice]," an ACORN affiliate.
Smith seized on the report to call for a broader review of ACORN activities.
"Given the willingness of some ACORN employees to ignore the law, it comes as no surprise that the IG's report found several instances in which ACORN and its affiliates failed to adhere to proper procedures," Smith said in a statement.
"Because the Justice Department's review found only small amounts of taxpayer dollars going to ACORN, it is imperative that the Inspectors General from federal agencies that have provided millions to ACORN undertake the same kind of review. The Justice Department IG's report may prove to be just the tip of an iceberg-sized fraud."
Posted by: Fred ||
11/21/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
South Carolina lawmakers plan to formally consider the possible impeachment of Gov. Mark Sanford for the first time next week.
House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Harrison told The Associated Press on Friday that he will gather a seven-member panel on Tuesday to begin discussing whether to begin proceedings that ultimately could remove the Republican governor.
The Columbia Republican says the panel will begin talking about whether Sanford was neglectful when he left he state for five days in June without telling staff where he was going. When he returned, the governor confessed to going to Argentina to see his lover.
Harrison said he plans to send an impeachment resolution to the full Judiciary Committee by Christmas.
Posted by: Fred ||
11/21/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Well, the S.C. lawmakers earlier tried secession and that didn't turn out to well.
_________________
Old saying about S.C. by a Northern abolitionist: "South Carolina is both the smallest (Southern) state and the world's largest lunatic asylum."
Earlier this week, we brought you the story of SEIU's alleged ballot fraud during a union election in Fresno, CA. SEIU's fraud wasn't against political opponents or some evil capitalist. No, SEIU's fraud was against a brother/sister labor union.
SEIU has been engaged in a fire-fight with the National Union of Health Workers. For SEIU, it isn't enough that workers are unionized, but they must be unionized AND their dues flow into the purple political machine. The video features SEIU official David Regan, who ran the union's voting campaign. Keep in mind, again, the "opponents" he mentions aren't Republicans or businesses, but another labor union.
We hold out no hope that federal labor officials will seriously investigate SEIU's fraud. Its President, Andy Stern, is, after all, America's most frequent White House guest.
Still, that doesn't mean the public shouldn't be informed of SEIU's actions. We have a treasure trove of information on SEIU's fight with its fellow union. It is a story that will unfold here over the coming weeks.
Didn't unions used to do thuggish things like that all the time, back in the olden days?
Posted by: Fred ||
11/21/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
It's fascinating, watching the new journal of record emerging, just as the New York Times once emerged from the competition.
Breitbart: There's a lot of hypocrisy and the dust has settled for ACORN and at the end of the day they've recognized that Eric Holder, the Attorney General, has not initiated an investigation into ACORN after we now have seven tapes. There were five initially that came out, ACORN was defunded by the Senate, was defunded by the House, lost it's link to the Census; while all that damage occurred, Congress didn't come in to investigate them, obviously not the Attorney General's office, and they've now realized let's get back into business because they realized that the dust settled and they were not being investigated, it was Hannah, James, and me who were being investigated, that's why we've been forced to offer this latest tape.
Hannity: Are you saying, Andrew, that there are more tapes?
Breitbart: Oh my goodness there are! Not only are there more tapes, it's not just ACORN. And this message is to Attorney General Holder: I want you to know that we have more tapes, it's not just ACORN, and we're going to hold out until the next election cycle, or else if you want to do a clean investigation, we will give you the rest of what we have, we will comply with you, we will give you the documentation we have from countless ACORN whistleblowers who want to come forward but are fearful of this organization and the retribution that they fear that this is a dangerous organization. So if you get into an investigation, we will give you the tapes; if you don't give us the tapes, we will revisit these tapes come election time.
Hannity: This is a blockbuster, what you're saying here. You guys have more tapes, you'll release them before the election, that could have a big impact on the election, obviously...
Posted by: Fred ||
11/21/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
"I want you to know that we have more tapes, it's not just ACORN, and we're going to hold out until the next election cycle, or else if you want to do a clean investigation, we will give you the rest of what we have, we will comply with you, we will give you the documentation we have from countless ACORN whistleblowers who want to come forward but are fearful of this organization and the retribution that they fear that this is a dangerous organization. So if you get into an investigation, we will give you the tapes; if you don't give us the tapes, we will revisit these tapes come election time."
"I love it when a plan comes together -"
John 'Hannibal' Smith
Mike
Posted by: Mike Kozlowski ||
11/21/2009 5:16 Comments ||
Top||
#2
I would strongly advise them to give copies of those tapes to a bunch of different people in other countries, to be released in case a corrupt federal judge puts out an injunction against them.
I can almost guarantee that this is being considered against them as well.
Even more importantly, they need to get incriminating evidence against some of the real behind the scenes powers, personally implicating people like George Soros, who can order a halt to any investigation. Or order ACORN destroyed to save their own sorry asses.
#3
I suggest, or would hope that the traditional American side (which included all colors and strips) funds probes such as the one these two kids pulled off...the mission goal could be..."Efforts designed to expose, weed-out and humiliate entities that are engaged in the use of tax dollars and/or resources that have elements of corruption, waste and abuse or intimidation for causes that are not covered by the constitution".
#4
This is also aimed at Jerry Brown, who as California Attorney General has threatened to investigate O'Keefe and Giles, but is also runing for governor and has ties to Acorn.
#5
I can only believe that Breitbart has done his homework. He knows by the releasing of the earlier Acorn tapes that he has been targeted, in many ways, including physically. I would think that backups have already been made and safely stored.
Like the old CIA expression, "If you kick the king....."
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
11/21/2009 11:46 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Mr. Breitbart formerly partnered with Drudge, of DrudgeReport.com fame, before striking out on his own.
Posted by: Perry Stanford White ||
11/21/2009 12:54 Comments ||
Top||
#8
This is also aimed at Jerry Brown, who as California Attorney General has threatened to investigate O'Keefe and Giles
I am Governor Jerry Brown
My aura smiles
And never frowns
Soon I will be president...
Carter Power will soon go away
I will be Fuhrer one day
I will command all of you
Your kids will meditate in school
Your kids will meditate in school!
[Chorus:]
California Uber Alles
California Uber Alles
Uber Alles California
Uber Alles California
Zen fascists will control you
100% natural
You will jog for the master race
And always wear the happy face
Close your eyes, can't happen here
Big Bro' on white horse is near
The hippies won't come back you say
Mellow out or you will pay
Mellow out or you will pay!
[Chorus]
Now it is 1984
Knock-knock at your front door
It's the suede/denim secret police
They have come for your uncool niece
Come quietly to the camp
You'd look nice as a drawstring lamp
Don't you worry, it's only a shower
For your clothes here's a pretty flower.
DIE on organic poison gas
Serpent's egg's already hatched
You will croak, you little clown
When you mess with President Brown!
When you mess with President Brown!
Congressional Democrats could be careening toward a head-on collision with the White House over $200 billion in leftover bailout money Ā money that Republicans think should simply be returned to taxpayers.
The Treasury Department is pushing for fiscal prudence and wants to use the money to pay down the deficit and keep a small rainy-day fund in case of economic catastrophe.
But Democrats are salivating over the possibility of $200 billion in unspent money.
Posted by: ed ||
11/21/2009 10:07 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I'm "salivating over the possibility" of ridding this county of the Democrats in 2010,2012,and 2014. Spend the $200 BILLION and the D stands for Dismissed .
#4
Those Donks wanting the money - just pair them off, tie their left hands, and give each partner a knife. If they really want the money to buy another election for their district, let them fight for it. No substitutes. Sell the television rights for the Treasury. We'll see how important it is for them.
The New York Daily News is reporting that Rudy Giuliani is "very likely" going to run against appointed incumbent Senator Kirsten Gillibrand for the remaining two years of Hillary Clinton's Senate term in 2010. I'd rather he take out Chuckie Schumer ...
A new poll from Marist shows Giuliani leading Gillibrand 54%-38%--he's even carrying New York City by a statistically insignificant 48%-45%--and in the five polls taken in September, October and November he's leading by an average of 51%-39%. In addition, pollster Scott Rasmussen reports that Gillibrand leads former Governor George Pataki by only a 45%-42% margin. In the four polls taken since August on this pairing, Pataki leads Gillbrand by an average and microscopic 43%-42% margin.
A Giuliani or Pataki defeat of Gillibrand would make electoral history. Since direct election of senators came in, no incumbent Democratic senator from New York has been defeated for reelection. Royal Copeland, first elected in 1922, died in office in 1938. Robert Wagner, first elected in 1926, resigned in 1949 because of ill health. James Mead, chosen in a special election to replace Copeland, was reelected in 1940 and ran for governor, unsuccessfully, in 1946. Herbert Lehman, elected in a 1949 special election to replace Wagner, was reelected in 1950 and did not run for reelection in 1956. Robert Kennedy, elected in 1964, was murdered by a Palestinian terrorist in 1968. Daniel Patrick Moynihan, first elected in 1976, did not run for reelection in 2000. Charles Schumer, first elected in 1998, is still serving. Hillary Clinton, elected in 2000 and reelected in 2006, resigned in 2009 to become secretary of state.
In contrast, seven of the eight Republican senators from New York since direct election of senators came in have been, sooner or later, defeated for reelection. William Calder, elected in 1916, was defeated 53%-41% by Copeland. James Wadsworth, elected in 1914 (the same year in which the loser in the Democratic primary was the 34-year-old Assistant Secretary of the Navy Franklin Roosevelt) and reelected in 1920, was defeated 46%-42% by Wagner in 1926. Irving Ives, elected in 1946 and 1952, did not run for reelection in 1958. John Foster Dulles, appointed in July 1949 by Governor Thomas Dewey to fill Wagner's seat, was defeated 52%-48% by Lehman in November 1949. (I bet you didn't know that metro Washington's international airport was named for a New York senator, did you? Well, of course he was also secretary of state.) Jacob Javits, elected in 1956 and reelected three times, was defeated in the Republican primary by Alfonse d'Amato in 1980; running on the Liberal line, Javits received 11% of the vote that year, while d'Amato was elected over Democrat Elizabeth Holtzman by a 45%-44% margin. Charles Goodell, appointed by Governor Nelson Rockefeller to fill Kennedy's seat, won 24% of the vote in a three-way race in 1970, running behind Conservative nominee James Buckley's 39% and Democratic nominee Richard Ottinger's 37%. Buckley, running this time on the Republican and Conservative lines, was defeated 54%-45% by Moynihan in 1976. Alfonse d'Amato, elected in 1980 and reelected in 1986 and 1992, was defeated 55%-44% by Charles Schumer in 1998.
Republicans have held the governorship of New York for almost half the time--46 years--since direct election of senators there began in 1914. But they've had a hard time holding on to Senate seats, while Democrats have always been reelected when they've run for another term. That precedent would be broken if Gillibrand is defeated. On the other hand, a Gillbrand defeat would be in line with another New York senatorial precedent: the two senators who took their seats by gubernatorial appointment, Dulles and Goodell, were both defeated at the next election.
Posted by: Fred ||
11/21/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Giuliani is a RINO and should be ignored or expelled. He lacks perlshine and should be cast off. Isn't there someone who supports the gold standard in the Republican Primary? If not why not. If not why vote.
Posted by: Perry Stanford White ||
11/21/2009 7:52 Comments ||
Top||
Posted by: Mike N. ||
11/21/2009 11:00 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Actually Cuba is awesome this time of year climate wise. I suggest the fortifications of the inner harbour of Havana as a 1st venue. Then maybe go fishing. Remember to take lots of asprin, tylenol and (wymen stuff) because the workers paradise over looks some things.
Also--- toilet seats.... you will want one.
Posted by: Perry Stanford White ||
11/21/2009 11:56 Comments ||
Top||
A new poll from Rasmussen may foreshadow a tough primary fight down the road for Republican Sen. John McCain (Ariz.) in 2010.
In a hypothetical match-up against former Rep. J.D. Hayworth, who is reportedly considering a 2010 bid, McCain holds only a two-point lead, besting his potential opponent 45 percent to 43, according to Rasmussen.
That means Hayworth is already polling within the margin of error -- a tough spot for any incumbent to be in, especially one who formerly won his party's presidential nomination.
Nevertheless, Rasmussen is quick to point out that the winner of the GOP primary could sail through the general election, as Democrats are still without a strong candidate.
Posted by: Fred ||
11/21/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
...as Democrats are still without a strong candidate.
It appears McCain is probably available without too much of a change in his principles. They'll at least have name recognition.
#8
It's a PRIMARY. That's what primaries are for. Hayworth is a smart dude and more politically reliable than the Mavericky POS
Posted by: Frank G ||
11/21/2009 13:11 Comments ||
Top||
#9
Enough.
You may wish for Mr. McCain to retire or be defeated, fine.
No wishing for death. We don't wish for Americans to die here at the Burg. Note the obvious exception for Americans who have clearly committed treason and murder (e.g., Major Hasan). Other than that, it doesn't matter how odious you think an American citizen might be, we don't write such things here.
It's a bright line for us moderators. Comments that do that go straight to the sinktrap.
AoS.
Posted by: Steve White ||
11/21/2009 13:21 Comments ||
Top||
#10
McCain has been very good - to McCain. He's already faced one recall attempt some years ago (whereupon he promptly tacked-right).
That said, it's what primaries are for. As David Broder wrote recently, the Republicans have a long tradition of fighting it out in the primaries and the lesser elections. It's up to the various factions - including moderates - to make their case.
Posted by: Frank G ||
11/21/2009 16:11 Comments ||
Top||
#13
McCain is the main reason I surrendered my Trunk party membership in 2006. There has been no more of my $ to the Party since then. The Gang of 14, Campaign Finance Reform, and Immigration Reform are some of the the reasons the Republicans are in danger of joining the Whigs. The party showed time after time that not only did they not respect Conservatives in the morning, they didn't respect them at the time.
No more Rinos. If it means losing, then lose honestly.
#14
McCain was the backstabbing Media's designated Republican Golden Boy (aka designated loser). "Maverick" had no ideological base or economic policy and much of his Senate career consisted of backing ruinous policy (e.g. immigration, unrestricted imports, muzzling his own party). His run was based solely on self gratification and the intense friendly media focus upon him (and sucking the oxygen from the other candidates) as the "acceptable" Republican, at least until he got the Repub nomination.
McCain's loss to the Communist has done immense damage to the country. Much more than losing a war. The permanent multi-trillion yearly drag being added to the national economy is sucking what little excess wealth is created after the $700-1000 billion yearly trade deficits. Just the planned and advertised increase in the national debt is $10 trillion over the next 8 years, though, taking into account the $3 trillion increase in 2009, Obama is set to accomplish that goal in 4 years. That's hundred's of billion's of our wealth being extracted every year just to pay the interest, piling one upon the other, and a hole Diverse (i.e. Balkanized) America is not likely to dig itself out of.
So in keeping w/ Rantburg policy, I no longer wish McCain to FOAD, just FO.
Posted by: ed ||
11/21/2009 17:28 Comments ||
Top||
#15
So in keeping w/ Rantburg policy, I no longer wish McCain to FOAD, just FO.
That's the spirit!
Posted by: Steve White ||
11/21/2009 18:13 Comments ||
Top||
#16
The same media which praised McCain during the primaries (and then stabbed him in the back again and again during the general election) is the same media which is saying now that Sarah Palin is unacceptable.
The Senate Select Committee on Ethics has completed its investigation of Sen. Roland Burris, and his office is trumpeting its finding that he committed no "actionable violations of the law." What his press release didn't mention is that the committee also found he had provided "incorrect, inconsistent, misleading or incomplete information" about his appointment to the Senate. Which is senatorese for, "Pants on fire!"
Where did His Ego fall short of complete truthfulness? He first denied having any contact with Gov. Rod Blagojevich or his representatives about being appointed to Barack Obama's vacant seat. Then he said only that he had talked with the governor's former chief of staff, Lon Monk. At that point, despite its skepticism, the Senate let him be sworn in.
Then, and only then, did Burris amend his earlier testimony to admit contacts with five other Blagojevich cronies. Later yet, he acknowledged conversations with the governor's brother--including one in which (as a wiretap revealed) he promised to donate to the governor's campaign, offered to try to raise money for him, and expressed an intense desire for the Senate job. All of which sounded like a quid pro quo.
Why didn't he provide that information sooner? Because if he had, the Senate wouldn't have seated him. He lied to get an office he lusted after, and that he couldn't have gotten any other way.
The result is that he gets to call himself a senator and can boast that he's never been indicted. But to most Illinoisans, Burris will always be remembered as a lying snake.
Posted by: Fred ||
11/21/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Why are we solicitously slandering snakes? What have they done to you?
Now that Sarah Palin and Rupert Murdoch are raking in the bucks with her Going Rogue-a-palooza, Obama's forces are trying to cash in on it too.
Organizing for America, a fundraising arm of the DNC, sent an email to supporters today in an attempt to raise $500,000 off her assertion this fall that Democratic health care bills would create panels of government bureaucrats to decide end-of-life care.
"It's dangerous. Remember, this is the person who coined the term 'Death Panels'-- and opened the flood gates for months of false attacks by special interests and partisan extremists. Whatever lie comes next will be widely covered by the media, then constantly echoed by right-wing attack groups and others who are trying to defeat reform," reads the email from Organizing for America national director Mitch Stewart.
The email asks Obama supporters to donate $5 to "help push back against Sarah Palin and her allies."
Posted by: Fred ||
11/21/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
They should sell her book. I suspect they would rake in more than $5 a pop.
My theory is that the response to Palin is little different than the hysterical response of the NYT and AP to the Drudge report. The liberal left has had it's day. Times change. In Palin they see the threat to their dominance.
#3
I think that Obama lives with a tight inner circle that acts as an echo chamber. The White House honestly believes that their attacks on Tea Parties, Limbaugh and Fox were successful in defining them as extreme right wing and that normal people don't take them seriously.
I believe the expression you are looking for is "Central Committee".
Posted by: ed ||
11/21/2009 11:41 Comments ||
Top||
#5
They just keep playing Rule 12:
Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.
Only it is not working so well these days. But they still believe.
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
11/21/2009 11:41 Comments ||
Top||
#6
You're right with the society at large, AP. But it still distracts the rubes, sorry, the true believers in the fever swamps who think all the current problems are Dubya's/Cheney's/Palin's fault. Can't blame a Nobel Prize winning Messiah, can we?
By now, millions of Americans are familiar with Anita Dunn, who recently resigned her post as Barack Obama's White House Communications Director after it was learned that she had previously cited Mao Zedong, the late Communist dictator and mass murderer, as one of her "favorite political philosophers." By contrast, few people know anything substantive about Dunn's husband, Robert Bauer, who has replaced Gregory Craig as President Obama's White House Counsel. Craig resigned abruptly on November 13, after having repeatedly denied, for weeks, that he had any plans of stepping down.
A 1976 graduate of the University of Virginia School of Law, Robert Bauer bleeds Democrat blue. He has served as counsel to the Democratic Senatorial and Congressional Campaign Committees for many years. In 1999 he was counsel to Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle, the South Dakota Democrat who led his party's defense of Bill Clinton in the latter's impeachment trial. Each day during the trial proceedings, Bauer and Democratic leaders strategized on how they could best help Clinton beat the charges against him -- perjury, abuse of power, and obstruction of justice.
In 1999-2000, Bauer was general counsel to the Bill Bradley for President Committee. Also in 2000, he filed a racketeering lawsuit against then-House Majority Whip Tom DeLay, accusing the Texas Republican of extortion and money laundering. In 2004 Bauer served as general counsel to the Democratic National Committee during the presidential campaign of Senator John Kerry. Today Bauer heads the political law group at Perkins Coie, the powerful, Democrat-aligned Seattle law firm that represents, among others, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, Richard Gephardt, and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.
Bauer forged a close affiliation with Barack Obama after the latter was elected to the U.S. Senate in 2004. He became Obama's private attorney and then, when the Senator declared his candidacy for President in February 2007, Bauer was appointed as general counsel for Obama's presidential campaign -- a project dubbed "Obama For America" (OFA). In January 2009, when OFA merged with the Democratic National Committee and became known as Organizing for America, Bauer retained his position as the entity's general counsel.
During the 2008 presidential campaign, Obama, who has never made his original birth certificate available for public scrutiny, hired Perkins Coie to defend him in court cases challenging his status as a "natural born" U.S. citizen -- a status upon which Obama's eligibility to hold the office of President is contingent. According to Federal Election Commission records, OFA has already paid Perkins Coie $1,352,378.95 for its legal services in these cases.
Also in 2008, Bauer was intimately involved in Obama's controversial decision to break the pledge he had made to accept public funding for the presidential campaign. Bauer and Obama based that decision on their calculation that the candidate was a fundraising powerhouse who would be able to collect far more money via his own efforts than he could ever get from the public financing system.
While Obama campaigned against Democratic rival Hillary Clinton, and then against Republican opponent John McCain, Bauer quietly wrote letters to television-station managers and to Assistant Attorney General John Keeney, contending that Federal Election Commission (FEC) rules forbade the airing of any anti-Obama television ads that made even the barest mention of the Senator's well-documented association with former Weather Underground terrorist Bill Ayers. Bauer filed FEC complaints against groups that were seeking to run such ads, and he intervened on Obama's behalf to prevent the American Leadership Project -- a pro-Hillary organization -- from running TV spots exposing the strong support Obama had received from the thuggish Service Employees International Union. The SEIU is led by former New Leftist Andrew Stern, who was taught the tactics of radical activism at the Midwest Academy, the training ground established by former Students for a Democratic Society radicals Paul and Heather Booth. Stern also has close ties to the billionaire financier of far-left causes, George Soros, and sits on the Executive Committee of the Soros-funded America Coming Together -- a massive get-out-the vote project for Democrat candidates. Bauer himself has lent his legal expertise to ACT.
In 2009 Obama hired Bauer as legal counsel to represent him in a criminal probe investigating whether former Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich may have sought -- with Obama's (or Rahm Emanuel's) knowledge -- to sell to the highest bidder the U.S. Senate seat Obama had vacated when he assumed the presidency.
Bauer also has worked on issues related to Obama's ties to Tony Rezko, a Chicago-based restaurateur and real-estate developer who was one of the first major financial contributors to Obama's political campaigns in the 1990s. Over a span of several years, Rezko raised hundreds of thousands of dollars for Obama. A few months after Obama was elected to the U.S. Senate in 2004, he and Rezko's wife purchased (in a deal that may have been handled, in part, by Robert Bauer) adjacent pieces of property in Chicago's Kenwood neighborhood. Obama's portion of the deal involved a mansion for which he paid $1.65 million -- $300,000 below the seller's asking price. Meanwhile, Rezko's wife (who had little income and owned few assets) paid the full asking price -- $625,000 -- for a vacant lot adjacent to Obama's mansion. The owners of the house and the lot had stipulated that neither property could be sold unless a deal for the other also closed on the same day. Both deals indeed closed on the same day in June 2005.
At that time, Mr. Rezko, who owed more than $10 million on defaulted loans and failed business ventures, was being hotly pursued by creditors; at least 12 lawsuits had been filed against him and his businesses. Moreover, he was under federal investigation on charges that he had solicited kickbacks from companies seeking state pension business under his friend, Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich, for whom Rezko reportedly had raised as much as $500,000. For more than two years before the property purchases, news articles also had raised questions about Mr. Rezko's influence over state appointments and contracts. Moreover, reports swirled that the FBI was investigating accusations of a shakedown scheme in which Rezko had suggested particular candidates for appointment to a state hospital board.
Posted by: Fred ||
11/21/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Another one of the poor counselors who shield Obama The Unready from conflict, or even scrutiny.
Calling Afghan President Hamid Karzai an "unworthy partner," a key Democratic leader warned Friday that Congress cannot fund an expanded military mission without a reliable ally in Kabul.
If someone would name a demonstrably more reliable ally in Afghanistan, I would consider this to be more than dangerous posturing.
Nancy Pelosi, the speaker of the House of Representatives, said moreover she did not think there was political support for sending more US troops to Afghanistan, as President Barack Obama is contemplating.
"How can we ask the American people to pay a big price in lives and limbs, and also in dollars, if we don't have a connection to a reliable partner?" said in an interview with National Public Radio.
"So, you know, the whole thing is let's not just talk about troops. Let's talk about what is the strategy and what are the resources that are needed in that regard?"
Her comments reflected the deep discomfort among Obama's Democrats over calls by US military commanders for a major buildup in troops to stem a growing Taliban insurgency.
The White House said a decision on whether to send more troops would not come until after the Thanksgiving holiday on November 26.
Currently, there are some 68,000 US troops in Afghanistan, but the options under consideration are reported to range to up to more than 40,000 additional troops.
Pelosi and other Democrats opposed a similar surge in US troops to Iraq two years ago, arguing at the time that more troops were needed in Afghanistan, the main front against Al-Qaeda.
Posted by: Fred ||
11/21/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
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.
ACORN and its affiliates received $200,000 in Justice Department grants between 2002 and 2009, according to a report issued Friday by the department's inspector general.
Earlier this week, we brought you the story of SEIU's alleged ballot fraud during a union election in Fresno, CA. SEIU's fraud wasn't against political opponents or some evil capitalist. No, SEIU's fraud was against a brother/sister labor union.
A new poll from Rasmussen may foreshadow a tough primary fight down the road for Republican Sen. John McCain (Ariz.) in 2010.
The Senate Select Committee on Ethics has completed its investigation of Sen. Roland Burris, and his office is trumpeting its finding that he committed no "actionable violations of the law." What his press release didn't mention is that the committee also found he had provided "incorrect, inconsistent, misleading or incomplete information" about his appointment to the Senate. Which is senatorese for, "Pants on fire!"
Now that Sarah Palin and Rupert Murdoch are raking in the bucks with her Going Rogue-a-palooza, Obama's forces are trying to cash in on it too.
Calling Afghan President Hamid Karzai an "unworthy partner," a key Democratic leader warned Friday that Congress cannot fund an expanded military mission without a reliable ally in Kabul.
