September 2009 - Posts

I'm Tired of Reruns, Isn't it Time For The New TV Season?
29 Sep 2009 3:08 PM

Do you ever get that feeling when you’re watching a rerun on TV that you’d just like to hit fast forward.  You know how the show is going to end, so why not get there a bit quicker.

 

It looks like Bertha Lewis and the ACORN board members know exactly what I’m talking about.  We’ve brought you the story of how ACORN asked Elizabeth Kingsley to conduct a review of their operations in the wake of the long overdue public disclosure of Dale Rathke’s embezzlement and the subsequent cover up. 

 

Kingsley warned the board members of the need for a stricter, more defined corporate structure, more defined employee roles and responsibilities, and the need to segregate tax-exempt money from political money.  She warned ACORN that it was heading down a treacherous road and that if they didn’t heed her advice and “make some hard choices now and ensure they are carried out, they almost certainly will be made for you.” 

 

Here we are one year later.  ACORN’s been caught again.  This time in addition to the Rathke embezzlement and widespread reports of voter registration fraud we’ve got videotaped evidence that ACORN employees provided advice on how to evade IRS regulations and engage in criminal conduct.

 

ACORN has again commissioned an “independent” review of their operations.  But, rather than engage in the thorough and meaningful investigation that is needed ACORN has decided to fast forward to the end of the program.  Today the ACORN advisory board announced that “"this independent and thorough review, commissioned by the ACORN Board, will review a sample of ACORN service programs in several cities and create a written assessment of the program with a set of recommendations to allow the organization to run intake and service programs in an ethical, professional and effective manner” – and one more thing, it’s preliminary findings will be released by the end of October. 

 

Yes, you read that right, October.  While I have the utmost respect for former Massachusetts Attorney General Harshbarger, it’s impossible to conduct a meaningful review of this complex organization in one month’s time.   I’ve seen this show before, isn’t it time for the new TV season?

Share |
Elliot Berke: Prosecutors must not intimidate legislators
28 Sep 2009 12:44 PM

Elliot Berke, RNLA Vice President for Washington, DC Operations, penned an interesting OpEd in today's Washington Examiner concerning the "Speech or Debate" privilege found in the Constitution:

Prosecutors must not intimidate legislators

By: Elliot S. Berke
OpEd Contributor
September 28, 2009

In early August, the Justice Department closed its investigation into former Rep. Tom Feeney, R-Fla. This development wasn't just newsworthy because Feeney lost re-election -- partly due to the cloud of investigation. It also came just weeks after a Washington, D.C., appellate court held that Feeney's statements to the House Ethics Committee were protected by the "Speech or Debate" privilege.

The Feeney decision illustrates why last summer may go down as a seminal season for Speech or Debate jurisprudence. Courts in several jurisdictions actively reviewed the parameters of this arcane constitutional privilege.

The Founders unanimously included the clause in the Constitution to serve as a shield against the intimidation of legislators by the executive branch or lawsuits from private citizens. It is rooted in the parliamentary privilege against coercion by the Crown contained in the English Bill of Rights. It provides members of Congress immunity from civil action and a privilege from being questioned about official matters.

The Justice Department recently argued that adhering to the text of the clause may thwart some criminal investigations. Yet all privileges have the effect of impeding criminal investigations. The government cannot simply water down a privilege because it may make its investigations more difficult.

The greatest example of this constitutional tension occurred in this summer's prosecution of former Rep. Bill Jefferson, D-La. Jefferson was convicted of most of the counts against him on Aug. 5 by a Virginia jury.

That the government was ultimately able to prove its case without using Speech or Debate material is a testament to the balance needed between the privilege and the interests of our justice system. Furthering this balance was the scrutiny the case received by two circuit courts.

While the D.C. Circuit wisely agreed with then-Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and then-Speaker Dennis Hastert's, R-Ill., argument that the FBI's raid of the congressman's office had been unconstitutional, the Fourth Circuit prudently agreed with the Justice Department's argument that a grand jury could hear from Jefferson's aides because discussion about congressional activities was not central to the case.

But there is a need for more clarity by the courts. In the Feeney case, the court evaluated two prior decisions, both involving speech in official proceedings. In the first case, the court had held that a senator's statements to the Senate Ethics Committee were protected because they involved official matters. In the second, the court had held that a congressman's statements to the House Ethics Committee were not because they involved private conduct.

Judge Brett Kavanaugh described this test as "fine slicing" and called on the full circuit to replace the arbitrary test with one that adheres to the Constitution's text. The Ninth Circuit should adopt this logic when it inevitably considers Arizona court decisions holding that negotiations then-Rep. Rick Renzi, R-Ariz., undertook as part of land exchange legislation were not protected because they amounted to nonlegislative acts.

Public office is a public trust. That no one is above the law is especially true of those who are serving in our legislatures. But the ability to investigate allegations of public corruption can't be limitless. Our elected legislators must have confidence in their ability to stand unintimidated by federal prosecutors about matters within the scope of their legislative duties.

The third branch is doing our democracy a service when it continues to clarify and respect this essential balance between the first two branches of our government. As the Supreme Court has said elsewhere, an uncertain privilege is little better than no privilege at all.

Elliot S. Berke is a former counsel to the Speaker of the House and the House Majority Leader, as well as a former federal prosecutor.

 

Share |
DOJ Civil Rights Division and Section 5
28 Sep 2009 9:14 AM

RNLA Member Hans von Spakovsky has an interesting look today in the role of some DOJ attorneys in the Civil Rights Division at National Review Online. He explores their use of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act to ensure that Democrat majorities are maintained, instead of using it for its intended purpose.

 

Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act may not look like a political weapon. But in the hands of certain government lawyers, that’s exactly what it has become.
It requires certain (mostly Southern) states to get “pre-clearance” of their voting-rules changes from the Justice Department. The problem, as I have written before, is that the liberal career lawyers in the Voting Section of the Civil Rights Division have converted the statute over the years into a weapon designed primarily to benefit the Democratic party.
These highly partisan bureaucrats have no compunction about ignoring the actual requirements of the law. And they typically exhibit a disturbingly patronizing attitude towards African-Americans.
...

In other words, a handful of Justice Department bureaucrats have effectively been empowered to control much of the political structure of the South and aid Democratic-party interests.
...


This cynical manipulation of federal power to benefit one political party over another — an all-too-common feature of the Civil Rights Division’s agenda during Democratic administrations — underscores that the only real source of refuge from these political machinations is the Supreme Court. Only the Supreme Court, by striking down Section 5 as unconstitutional, can cauterize the bleeding. It’s too bad the court ducked its opportunity earlier this year; here’s hoping that another case will give the Justices a second chance soon, and that the court won’t avoid the issue the next time around.

 

The rest of the article is well worth the read.

Share |
Defund ACORN Act: A Bill of Attainder?
25 Sep 2009 3:49 PM

Much has been made in recent days surrounding the constitutionality of the Defund ACORN Act, the legislation passed last week by the House by a vote of 345 to 75. Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-NY) took to the House floor following the vote and proclaimed that the bill was an unconstitutional Bill of Attainder. A Congressional Research Service report released today declared "that a court may have a sufficient basis to overcome the presumption of constitutionality" of the bill.

Hans von Spakovsky refutes these arguments over at Heritage with: "Defunding ACORN: Necessary and Proper, and Certainly Constitutional." Please click here to read von Spakovsky's excellent analysis of the constitutionality of the bill.

Share |
Here We Go Again
25 Sep 2009 11:32 AM

Albert Einstein defined insanity as “doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.”

 

This week ACORN announced that they have hired former Massachusetts Attorney General Scott Harshbarger to conduct an “independent” investigation of the group.  We’ve been down this road before.

 

After Dale Rathke’s embezzlement of nearly $1 million came to light, the ACORN board instructed attorney Elizabeth Kingsley to conduct a thorough investigation of the organization.  Ms. Kingsley and her firm Harmon, Curran, Spielberg & Eisenberg LLP were retained to review the interrelationships of the ACORN COUNCIL and report back on any areas of concern.

 

Ms. Kingsley did her job – and did her job well.  She conducted an investigation and produced a report that was presented to ACORN and 10 ACORN affiliates.  These affiliates include Citizen’s Consulting Inc. and Citizens Services Inc.

 

In the report Kingsley discussed the need to properly institute and maintain corporate forms.  The need to wall off political and election related activities.  The need to formalize and better explain the relationships between the various ACORN affiliates.  She also reviewed the Rathke embezzlement.

 

Kingsley reached many conclusions after her thorough review:

  • “if it is not possible to invest substantially more time, attention, and resources in the infrastructure necessary to support what this multi-faceted operation has grown into, it may be necessary to downsize.  These organizations have grown tremendously over the years.  With maturity must come some added discipline.”

  • “The organizations also lack an adequately documented delineation of 501(c)(3) from non-501(c)(3) work.” 
  • “I have not looked in-depth at the handling of federal grant funds, nor am I an expert in that area.  However, event with the little information I have, there are concerns that must be raised.”

These are only some of the highlights.  Kingsley reviewed ACORN’s operations and warned them that “if you do not make some hard choices now and ensure they are carried out, they almost certainly will be made for you.”  As we see the government start to look into ACORN Kingsley's warning seems prescient.

 

If ACORN didn’t reform in response to Kingsley’s investigation, why should we trust that ACORN will reform in response to Harshbarger’s investigation?  That's just insane.

It's time that we recieve a thorough and complete government investigation of ACORN.

 

Share |
Treasury Agrees to Formal Review of ACORN
24 Sep 2009 3:13 PM

Fox News is reporting that "Treasury Inspector General J. Russell George has sent a letter to Sen. Susan Collins, R, ME, and Rep. Darrell Issa, R-CA, agreeing to conduct a formal review of ACORN and IRS's oversight of ACORN and other nonprofits. Collins and Issa recently sent letters requesting investigations of seven Inspectors General." This comes in the wake of the announcement yesterday that the IRS was "severing ties" with the organization. "The Internal Revenue Service said it would no longer include ACORN in its volunteer tax assistance program. The program offered free tax advice to about 3 million low- and moderate-income tax filers this spring. ACORN provided help on about 25,000 returns, the IRS said." As we noted earlier in the week, the Department of Justice Inspector General has also announced an investigation.

You may recall that the RNLA called on the Inspector General of HUD and the Justice Department to conduct an investigation. There have been similar repeated requests by members of Congress to open the books on ACORN and investigate where the taxpayer money goes and how it was used.

by Justin Riemer | with no comments
Filed under: , , , , ,
Share |
ACORN Sues Filmmakers and Breitbart
24 Sep 2009 12:56 PM

Politico reports that ACORN and fired ACORN employees Tanja Thompson and Shera Williams have filed suit in the Circuit Court for Baltimore City against Breitbart.com and filmmakers James O'Keefe and Hannah Giles:

In the complaint, ACORN alleges that the filmmakers entered into the organization's offices in July with a "hidden camera and microphone" and taped employees Tonja Thompson and Shera Williams. Both employees are listed as plaintiffs on the complaint, filed in the Circuit Court for Baltimore City.

The crux of the lawsuit centers around a Maryland law which makes it illegal to tape someone without their consent – ACORN is alleging O'Keefe and Giles did so.

ACORN is asking for $500,000 in damages to be awarded to each of the employees filmed by O'Keefe and Giles, and ACORN itself wants $1 million in damages.  

Breitbart.com, one of the suit's defendants, is run by conservative activist Andrew Breitbart, whose Web site BigGovernment.com first posted most of O'Keefe and Giles' videos. Breitbart has appeared on television with the filmmaking duo, and has a content-sharing relationship with the Drudge Report.  

The specific statutes listed in the complaint are Md. Cts. and Jud. Proceedings §§ 10-402(a) and 10-410. Section 10-402(a), in part, states, "it is unlawful for any person to: (1) Wilfully intercept, endeavor to intercept…, any wire, oral, or electronic communication." In addition, the statute states it is unlawful to "wifully disclose" or "use" the "contents of any … communication…," obtained through the interception. Section 10-401, the definition section, adds some color to the verbiage. Section 10-410, the penalty provision of the statute, entitles the defendant to recover:

(1)      Actual damages but not less than liquidated damages computed at the rate of $100 a day for each day of violation or $1,000, whichever is higher;

(2)      Punitive damages; and

(3)      A reasonable attorney's fee and other litigation costs reasonably incurred.

 In fact, plaintiffs are suing defendants jointly and severally for compensatory damages of $500,000 for the individual defendants, and $1 million for ACORN; "liquidated damages of $1,000 per plaintiff against all defendants, jointly and severally; punitive damages in the amount of $1 million per defendant; plus reasonable attorney's fees and other litigation costs. …"

The suit is ironic for two reasons. One, over the weekend ACORN CEO Bertha Lewis said: "I have to thank the undercover folks because they sort of did us a good service." How is suing those that performed "a good service" for you and demanding millions of dollars from them a thank you? Second, why is ACORN so quick to jump back into bed with the two former employees it fired because, to quote an ACORN official, they "did not meet ACORN's standards of professionalism"? Filing a lawsuit as a co-plaintiff is not a very effective way for ACORN to disassociate itself from its disgraced former employees

 RNLA Chair David Norcross responded to the news of the suit with the following quote:  

We must ask ourselves, when is enough, enough? ACORN claims to be taking the potentially criminal allegations against it seriously, yet instead of embracing real, meaningful reform, it chooses to blame the messenger. Where there is smoke, there is fire. ACORN has been engaged in fraudulent voter registration for years, they have wasted and abused taxpayer dollars, they have maligned their own members when they spoke out against the corruption within the organization, and now they are suing the individuals who exposed additional, illegal behavior. ACORN should view the current situation as an opportunity to truly reform itself and place the interests of its members first, and they can start by re-examining the report by Elizabeth Kingsley and addressing the malfeasance and dysfunction running rampant within their organization.

Share |
ACORN: Corrupt, Liberal, and on the Taxpayer's Dime
23 Sep 2009 1:46 PM

The House Republican Conference has released a great set of talking points out that outline the issues with ACORN and also what House Republicans have done to combat ACORN in recent days.  See below for what they've been saying and also be sure to check out their site for more information and to see what else they've been up to lately!

Acorn—Corrupt, Liberal, and on the Taxpayers’ Dime

September 17, 2009
Online at:
http://www.gop.gov/policy-news/09/09/17/acorn-corrupt-liberal 

BACKGROUND

ACORN, the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, touts itself as being the nation's largest community organization of low- and moderate-income families. But the corrupted organization and loyal Democrat ally has proven itself once again to be a mere front for groups to undermine democracy, the economy and civility-all at the expense of the U.S. taxpayers. The activist group became infamous last year when it was investigated for voter registration fraud in 15 states. To date, some 70 ACORN workers have been convicted for voter fraud registration.

On July 23, 2009, Representative Darrell Issa (R-CA), Ranking Member of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, issued an in-depth report on the structure and operation of ACORN. The report, Is ACORN Intentionally Structured As A Criminal Enterprise states, "The evidence contained in this report proves that ACORN's stated purpose to promote grassroots civic participation has been perverted through fraudulent and illegal acts. The weight of evidence against ACORN and its affiliates is astounding. This syndicate of tax-exempt organizations has coordinated and implemented a nation-wide strategy of tax fraud, racketeering, money-laundering and manipulating the American electorate."

The Democrats' ties to ACORN are strong. In October of 2008, The Wall Street Journal reported, "[T]he Obama campaign paid $832,000 to an ACORN affiliate. The campaign initially told the Federal Election Commission this money was for ‘staging, sound, lighting.' It later admitted the cash was to get out the vote." In Congress, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has repeatedly blocked attempts restrict ACORN's access to federal funds. And according to the Wall Street Journal's John Fund, President Obama "ran a voter-registration program for an Acorn partner (Project Vote) and then worked for Acorn as a lawyer on key cases."

There have been numerous media reports on ACORNS activities. On September 9, 2009, CNN reported, "Arrest warrants were issued Wednesday for 11 Florida voter registration workers who are suspected of submitting false information on hundreds of voter registration cards, according to court documents. The FBI and the Florida Department of Law Enforcement were serving the warrants in Miami. Six people are already in custody, officials said. The workers were employed by ACORN to canvass neighborhoods in Florida and assist people in registering to vote ahead of the 2008 election...Authorities allege the workers submitted false information on the cards, which were to be submitted to the Miami-Dade Supervisor of Elections."

On September 10, 2009, Fox News reported, "ACORN officials videotaped telling a 'pimp and prostitute' how to lie to the IRS." The videotape documented ACORN officials in its Baltimore, Maryland, Brooklyn, NY, Washington, DC and San Bernardino, CA offices advising "the pimp" on how to get a housing loan, launder money, and falsify tax documents for a proposed brothel that would employ underage girls smuggled into the U.S. from a foreign country.

TAXPAYER FUNDS

Unfortunately, ACORN receives both taxpayer funding and assistance in recruitment. According to Rep. Issa's report, ACORN affiliates have received more than $53 million in federal funds from 1994 to 2008 and substantially more indirectly from federal block grants that States and cities receive. The group could also get a portion of up to $8.5 billion more tax dollars from the economic stimulus bill enacted in February and the 2010 federal budget.

The Washington Examiner reported, "An ACORN affiliate has just submitted applications for over $6 million in government funding...ACORN Institute has filed two separate [applications] with the Commerce Department...One in the amount of $3,172,042 and the other in amount of $2,999,903." Additionally, on June 26, 2009, Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA), Chairman of the Financial Services Committee, introduced legislation (H.R. 3068), to direct $2.5 billion in TARP dividends to two housing trust funds and $4 billion of the remaining $700 billion original TARP funds to subsidize foreclosure prevention-funds that would be assessable to ACORN through neighborhood stabilization programs.

REPUBLICAN SOLUTION

On September 15, 2009, Republicans introduced the Defund ACORN Act (H.R. 3571). The legislation would prohibit any organization, including ACORN, that has been indicted for violations of State or federal election laws, or that employs an individual who has been indicted for violations of state or federal election laws, from accessing federal taxpayer dollars.

Share |
ACORN and the AGs
23 Sep 2009 9:44 AM

Mark Fitzgibbons has put together a great article regarding ACORN, state attorneys general and their investigation or lack thereof.  This article is a must read for anyone interested in getting to the truth about ACORN.

ACORN and the AGs

By Mark J. Fitzgibbons
<http://www.americanthinker.com/mark_j_fitzgibbons/>

ACORN being called a criminal enterprise
<http://www.usnews.com/blogs/peter-roff/2009/09/21/the-case-for-acorn-as
-a-criminal-enterprise.html> . Despite years of warning signs that
ACORN was violating the law, many state attorneys general
<http://www.christiannewswire.com/news/6260811571.html> have not
investigated the organization or brought enforcement actions. State
attorneys general, besides being the chief enforcement officers for
violations of state laws, claim unique law enforcement authority over
nonprofits
<http://www.naag.org/enforcement_of_charitable_organizations.php> .

The reasons for inaction by state attorneys general may explain why
ACORN is such a problem. ACORN has developed close ties, to put it
mildly, with many state attorneys general as well as others deep in the
Democrat establishment. The relationship between ACORN and Democrats may
be described as symbiotic.

Democrats have not only provided taxpayer money
<http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/09/acorn_and_the_ags.html#> to
ACORN, but have benefited from ACORN's endorsements, its other
election-related activities such as get-out-the-vote, and even its
litigation on behalf of leftwing policies. ACORN actually considers
itself a "partner" with liberal big government on many matters ranging
from the United States Census
<http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/acorn_census_partner/2009/03/18/1932
18.html> to programs run by the Department of Housing and Urban
Development <http://www.hud.gov/local/wi/news/2009-05-06.cfm> (HUD).

State and local politics, of course, act as feeders for national
politicians. Steve Malanga's excellent book, The New New Left
<http://www.amazon.com/New-Left-American-Politics-Works/dp/1566636442>
explains how ACORN, various unions and other leftwing causes have come
to dominate politics in some cities and states, and have relied largely
on taxpayer money and ties to Democrat politicians to do so.

The position of state attorney general has become a particularly big
feeder, and we see many national politicians who are former state AGs.
This begs the question: where ACORN has been violating laws, was it
doing so with the imprimatur if not outright assistance of Democrat
attorneys general, who seek to curry favor with the Democratic
establishment?

That brings us to the importance of ACORN's first scorecard of attorneys
general, issued in 2008, "Attorneys General Take Action: Real Leadership
in Fighting Foreclosures
<http://acorn.org/fileadmin/ACORN_Reports/2008/agreport.pdf> ." The
18-page report and scorecard describes attorneys' general active
involvement with ACORN's policy goals on housing.

ACORN graded attorneys general on their efforts to help ACORN's agenda.
The issues ranged from supporting federal legislation introduced by such
luminaries in the nation's mortgage
<http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/09/acorn_and_the_ags.html#>
debacle as Connecticut's Senator Chris Dodd, to using taxpayer money in
support of ACORN's litigation and other efforts. The report has pictures
and special mention of six attorneys general who received A+ from ACORN.

ACORN's legal efforts have been described as "essentially extort[ing]
money from banks
<http://www.independent.org/publications/article.asp?id=184> ." Some of
those efforts
<http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ZjRjYzE0YmQxNzU4MDJjYWE5MjIzMTMxMm
NhZWQ1MTA=> appear to have more than just a casual link to the subprime
mortgage
<http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/09/acorn_and_the_ags.html#>
crisis. That of course raises the question of whether Democrat attorneys
general have been complicit in ACORN's questionable, unlawful and
harmful activities

Did ACORN's Democrat Ties Retard Law Enforcement?

ACORN has received tens of millions of dollars in taxpayer funding
<http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/09/acorn_and_the_ags.html#> from
the federal and state governments. That, itself, raises a host of issues
<http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/04/cornerstone_to_the_obama_agend.h
tml> , including opportunities for political corruption on the
taxpayers' dime. The ACORN scorecard of attorneys general is an example
of taxpayer money being used for what are essentially endorsements of
Democrat attorneys general.

An important question that must be asked is, did the ties between ACORN
and Democrat attorneys general retard law enforcement? Since attorneys
general should have been the frontline of law enforcement against ACORN,
but most have already demonstrated an unwillingness to do that job, why
should anyone believe at this juncture those AGs will conduct themselves
more effectively going forward?

A thorough, professional investigation of ACORN could expose more
serious problems linking ACORN and the Democrat establishment
<http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601039&sid=aZ8U4iOoY83w> .

Weaker investigations, obviously, would benefit and even protect
Democrats. Most Democrat attorneys general have ambitions for higher
standing within their Party, and will likely not pursue thorough
investigations that could hurt their own careers.

Before Democrat attorneys general take up, or are asked to take up, any
involvement with investigating ACORN, the attorneys general themselves
must answer some tough questions. It is conceivable some AGs could
eventually be witnesses in, or subject to, investigations themselves.

Already, though, Republicans at the state level, without demanding
answers from attorneys general first, have asked some of ACORN's
highest-graded attorneys general to investigate the organization.

ACORN's favorite Democratic attorneys general who have been asked by
Republicans to investigate ACORN include: California's Gerry Brown (A)
<http://www.sacbee.com/arnold/story/2188602.html> , Connecticut's
Richard Blumenthal (A+) <http://www.connpost.com/ci_13370070> ,
Georgia's Thurbert Baker (A)
<http://www.daltondailycitizen.com/statenews/local_story_261115820.html?
keyword=topstory> , Illinois' Lisa Madigan (A+)
<http://mystateline.com/content/fulltext/?cid=100811> and Maryland's
Doug Gansler (A)
<http://wbal.com/apps/news/templates/story.aspx?articleid=35906&zoneid=2
> . Why are Republicans willing to put foxes in the hen house
<http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/09/acorn_and_the_ags.html#> ?


Did 'Spitzerism' Make ACORN Bigger?

Liberal writer Noam Scheiber coined the term "Spitzerism
<http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/02/magazine/02spitzer.html> " to
describe how now-disgraced Eliot Spitzer used attorney general
investigative and litigation powers to bully banks and other corporate
institutions. Mr. Spitzer also wielded his power to aid and promote
favored liberal causes and entities.

Spitzer's methods encouraged copycat attorneys general, who saw how
using (or abusing) the office of attorney general gave them power and
special influence within the Democratic Party. Instead of fighting
Spitzerism, businesses too often lobbied or cowered, often increasing
political contributions in state races. Mr. Scheiber wrote,
"[Spitzerism] tapped into a 'political goldmine' and could 'help lead
the Democrats out of the political wilderness.'"

Mr. Spitzer and ACORN shared a favorite target: banks. (As the old quip
about bank robbers goes, "That's where the money is.") Spitzerism was
employed to force commercial entities to partner with the Democrat
support system. ACORN eventually was "partnered" with CitiMortgage, Bank
of America, First American Title Insurance Company, and Fannie Mae
<http://www.acornhousing.org/TEXT/mortgage1.php> .

The list of contributors
<http://www.opensecrets.org/527s/527cmtedetail_donors.php?cycle=2008&ein
=134220019> to the Democratic Attorneys General Association ("DAGA")
indicates how seriously the mortgage industry takes the threat of
Spitzerism even in the absence of Eliot Spitzer himself.

Mr. Spitzer's successor, New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo, is one
of ACORN's A+ attorneys general.

(Parenthetically: As former secretary of HUD, Mr. Cuomo was successor to
another disgraced Democrat, Henry Cisneros. Mr. Cisneros has shown that
one ACORN specialty, low-income housing, can be lucrative and
influential. Named in 2006 as one of the 50 most influential people in
home building, <http://www.builderonline.com/business/power-on-50.aspx>
Mr. Cisneros had ties to ACORN when he ran HUD. ACORN's materials
describe how <http://www.acorn.org/index.php?id=12443> :


Democratic control of the federal government meant that ACORN
had increased access to top officials with more sympathetic ears. ACORN
members began regular meetings with Henry Cisneros, HUD Secretary under
President Clinton, on a variety of issues. ACORN organizing began to
include more tenant groups under the ACORN Tenant Union (ATU), and
Cisneros was increasingly helpful.


Mr. Cisneros maintained ties to ACORN after leaving HUD under a cloud.
As the mainstream media put it, he most recently "accepted a request"
<http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/nation/6626289.html> to serve on a
six-member advisor board for ACORN. That board has already been subject
to ridicule
<http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/09/16/acorn-audit-already-a-j
oke/> for conflicts of interest and such.)

Mr. Cuomo has a conflict with any ACORN investigation. And Mr. Cuomo's
predecessor as AG, Eliot Spitzer, is a prime example of how Democratic
attorney generals have used their powers selectively to advance the
Democratic agenda, which includes aiding ACORN.

Whether the situation with ACORN will and can expose a vast network of
corruption, use of taxpayer money to promote the Democratic Party, and
retarded law enforcement, depends on who's looking into it. The ACORN
scorecard of state attorneys general should be used, at a minimum, to
show which AGs have a conflict in any ACORN investigation.

ACORN's scorecard may even disqualify some AGs. As a starting point of
which AGs themselves should be held accountable, attorneys general
should be required to disclose, under penalties of perjury, their ties
to ACORN, why they did not act sooner, and who may have urged them to
lay off ACORN.

Whether partners or puppets, enablers or abettors, some if not many
Democratic state attorneys general appear to be involved even
tangentially with, or know of, ACORN's questionable activities, if not
systemic corruption. Whatever role other Democratic politicians played
in ACORN, the attorney general issue presents unique challenges that
must be resolved before investigations of ACORN may be considered
credible and complete.

by Chris Berg | with no comments
Filed under: , , ,
Share |
State Governments Take Action
22 Sep 2009 1:35 PM

We’ve all seen the recent efforts in the House and Senate to begin defunding ACORN.  There is also a movement afoot in states across our great nation to do the same.  As you can see these efforts to investigate and halt government funding of ACORN transcend party lines.   

  • California – Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger called on the state Attorney General to launch an investigation into ACORN.
  • Georgia – Governor Sonny Perdue issued an Executive Order to prevent the Executive Branch from doing business with ACORN
  • Louisiana – Governor Bobby Jindal banned the state from entering into contracts with ACORN and has called for a state investigation.
  • Maryland – Attorney General Doug Gansler has launched an investigation into ACORN.
  • Minnesota – Governor Tim Pawlenty ordered the state to “stop all funding” of ACORN “unless the state is legally obligated” to pay ACORN.
  • Mississippi – Governor Haley Barbour issued an Executive Order to “cut off funding” to ACORN.
  • New York – Governor David Paterson has put a 30 day hold on ACORN contracts.

Keep visiting the Republican Lawyer Blog for continued updates on these developing investigations.

by Chris Berg | with no comments
Filed under: ,
Share |
See the Ad the Washington Times is Talking About
22 Sep 2009 12:50 PM

Today the Republican National Lawyers Association released an ad calling for Congressman Nadler to make good on his promise to investigate ACORN once he had seen "credible allegations."  Washington Times contributer Amanda Carpenter has a great article on the ad and the RNLA's efforts.  http://www.washingtontimes.com/weblogs/back-story/2009/sep/22/gop-lawyers-demand-investigation-into-acorns-fundi/?feat=home_blogs

by Chris Berg | with no comments
Filed under: , ,
Share |
RNLA Responds to DOJ Review of ACORN
22 Sep 2009 9:43 AM

WASHINGTON, DC – The Republican National Lawyers Association (RNLA) Executive Director Michael Thielen today released the following statement in response to news reports that the Department of Justice (DOJ) will conduct a “review into whether ACORN applied for or received any Justice Department grants or funds and whether or not the Justice Department ever carried out any audits or reviews of those funds.”

“We applaud the announcement by the Inspector General of the Department of Justice that he is opening a review into ACORN.  In July of 2008, RNLA Co-Chair Cleta Mitchell appeared before the House Judiciary Committee and called for DOJ to conduct a thorough investigation of ACORN.  In March of 2009, RNLA Vice President Heather Heidelbaugh provided Congress with testimony regarding fraudulent and possible criminal violations by ACORN.  And just last week, RNLA filed a formal complaint with the DOJ requesting an immediate and thorough investigation of ACORN.  While Congressman Nadler may not believe that ‘credible allegations’ against ACORN exist, we are pleased to see this matter receiving the serious attention it deserves.”

Mitchell Testimony: http://judiciary.house.gov/hearings/pdf/Mitchell080724.pdf

Heidelbaugh Testimony: http://judiciary.house.gov/hearings/pdf/Heidelbaugh090319.pdf

RNLA Complaint: http://www.rnla.org/RNLALettertoOIG9-15-09.pdf

by Chris Berg | with no comments
Filed under: , , ,
Share |
RNLA's Co-Chair Cleta Mitchell on Fox News
21 Sep 2009 2:12 PM

As many of you may know, ACORN has been in the news recently.  For months the RNLA has been at the forefront of exposing ACORN.  Recently, Cleta Mitchell, RNLA Co-Chair, appeared on Fox News to discuss ACORN.  Here is the video of her interview:

Share |
The Data Behind the RNLA HUD Complaint
21 Sep 2009 2:01 PM

On September 15, 2009 the Republican National Lawyers Association filed a complaint with the Office of the Inspector General of the Department of Housing and Urban Development.  The complaint called for a thorough and complete investigation of ACORN and its massive web of affiliated organization.

 

HUD has given ACORN and its affiliates over $54 million dollars over the past decade.  In light of recent high profile media investigations into ACORN’s criminal and fraudulent activities the Federal Government has an obligation to investigate whether your tax dollars were spent in furtherance of criminal and fraudulent activity.  If ACORN and affiliates misspent or misused these grants from the Federal Government they have an obligation to repay the money.

 

Among the supporting documentation to the complaint the RNLA released some pretty staggering data.  The RNLA compiled data regarding the officers and directors of ACORN’s various affiliates.  When we started sifting through this data we noticed that the same people appear to be in control of each of these affiliates. 

 

The data doesn’t lie.  ACORN placed a trusted few individuals in control of each of their affiliates.  For example two individuals served as “Assistant Treasurer” to over 30 different ACORN affiliates.  These affiliated organizations routinely transferred large sums of money between and amongst the various ACORN entities.  Is it appropriate for someone to serve as “Assistant Treasurer” to numerous organizations that are routinely transferring money between themselves?

 

The complaint revealed that over the past decade at least $85 million dollars has changed hands between ACORN affiliates.  This data is only the tip of the ice berg.  A full forensic accounting is needed to unravel the interlocking relationships of ACORN and its affiliates.

by Chris Berg | 1 comment(s)
Filed under: , ,
Share |
Welcome to the Republican Lawyer Blog
21 Sep 2009 1:51 PM

Welcome to the new one stop shop for the latest news of interest to the RNLA!  We hope to use this space to communicate news about upcoming events, news items of interest to our Members and visitors, and possibly the occasional guest post from leading Republicans around the country.

Thanks for visiting the new blog and we look forward to seeing your comments in the comment section that will be open on each and every post.  The only thing that we ask is that you follow the following guidelines, which are used by numerous blogs, when making a comment:

We subscribe to RedState.com’s well-written rules:

  1. No profanity.
  2. No personal attacks.
  3. No harassment or demonization of a particular individual.
  4. No disruptive behavior or off-topic remarks for their own sake.

Thanks and welcome to the Republican Lawyer blog and please let us know if you have any questions or suggestions!

-The Republican Lawyer

Share |