November 2009 - Posts

Now That He Is President, Obama Likes the Patriot Act
30 Nov 2009 12:48 PM

When the USA PATRIOT Act was enacted in 2001 it included multiple sunset provisions. Parts of the Act were reauthorized in 2005 and 2006. Congress is again revisiting the Act as three provisions are set to expire.

The three provisions set to expire are:

1. The Records provision. This allows federal investigators with a court order to compel anyone to hand over "any tangible thing" showing "relevance" to a terrorist investigation from all business, hospitals, and some libraries. According to the U.S. Attorney General's office, there have been 220 such orders issued, but no major case to date has transpired because of information procured from them.

Both the Senate and the House bills renew the provision, but remove that presumption of "relevance" so that the burden of proof falls on the government to report facts and circumstances justifying what the items sought have to do with an investigation. A higher threshold of proof is specified for library circulation records and patron lists in both bills, but the House goes further to add booksellers to that group.

2. The Roving Wiretaps provision. The provision authorizes authorities to track a target by wiretapping any multiple lines of communication without specifically naming a target or what kind of communication they're using to the FISA (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act) courts issuing the warrant. The FISA court grants about 22 such warrants annually, according to a government document.

The House bill renews the roving wiretaps, but puts more restrictions on the government proving an unnamed target as a specific individual to prevent dragnet operations. The Senate leaves the provision as is.

3. The Lone Wolf provision. This provision allows authorities to make use of secret surveillance orders to spy on non-Americans if there is proof that they are engaged in a terrorist activities, but not necessarily involved with a terrorist organization or foreign power. The Lone Wolf provision has never been used.

The Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee, at the President's urging voted to reauthorize the provisions. The Democrats in the House are attempting to narrow the provisions of the act.

With full support from the Obama administration, the Senate Judiciary Committee passed a bill last month reauthorizing the law that has in recent years sparked much controversy over rights to privacy protected under the Constitution, with some minor tweaks.

But House Democrats in the Judiciary Committee went much further reigning in executive authorities and raising the threshold of proof needed to legally seize Americans' personal records and conduct wiretaps on their phones. It also slapped on more restrictions, and required more government auditing, and reporting showing how the process could be modified to enhance civil liberties.

"We have the opportunity to fix the most extreme provisions of that law and provide a better balance," said Rep. John Conyers, Jr., D-Mich., who introduced the House bill, which allows one provision of the Patriot Act to expire.

I'll leave it to you to decide where the right balance is between national security and the provisions of the Patriot Act, but at the very least I encourage you to stay on top of this story.

See the full article here.

by Chris Berg | with no comments
Filed under: ,
Share |
Former Guerrilla to be Next President of Uruguay
30 Nov 2009 10:04 AM

Every now and again I bring you stories of elections from around the world. We've talked about Afghanistan and Iraq, now Uruguay.

Reuters is reporting that a former guerrilla fighter is the winner of Uruguay's presidential election.

Here's some background:

MONTEVIDEO, Nov 29 (Reuters) - A former guerrilla fighter who has pledged to take a moderate path led Uruguay's presidential run-off election on Sunday, according to exit polls and early projections.

Jose Mujica, 74, who waged an armed revolt against a democratically elected government in the 1960s and 1970s and was jailed for 14 years, was ahead with 51.2 percent of the vote, according to a quick count of the ballots by Factum polling group. Two other pollsters made similar projections.

His rival, rightist former President Luis Lacalle, was trailing, the pollsters said.

A Mujica victory would keep in power the ruling Broad Front coalition credited by many Uruguayans with lifting the country out of an economic slump earlier this decade and stoking growth this year in the face of the global slowdown.

Mujica, a farmer and former agriculture minister and senator, vows to continue investor-friendly policies that have helped the economy in one of Latin America's most stable countries to expand for six straight years.

He campaigned praising Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, Latin America's leading moderate leftist, signaling he does not intend to bring Uruguay closer to more hard-line leaders like Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez.

The new president of Uruguay will take office on March 1 and serve a five-year term.

Lacalle has raised questions about Mujica's militant past, suggesting the former guerrilla fighter would be more radical than he seemed on the campaign trail.

But Mujica said he will stay the course set by outgoing President Tabare Vazquez, Uruguay's first socialist leader. Vazquez is barred from seeking a second consecutive term.

"It's going to be the same dog, but with a different collar," Mujica said.

Share |
DOJ: Oh No, We Can Still Fund ACORN
30 Nov 2009 9:36 AM

Eric Holder's Department of Justice has released a memo that lays out the legal argument allowing HUD to ignore the recent bill (signed into law by the President) that defunds ACORN. It cites problems with the statutory language of the legislation defunding ACORN (P.L. 111-68 Sec. 163), analyzes potential constitutional issues with the government retroactively repudiating a contract, and raises the issue of whether the law is a bill of attainder. Please click here for an Examiner piece criticizing DOJ's handling of this issue.

Share |
Where There’s a Will There’s a Way – ACORN Continues to Receive Federal Funds
30 Nov 2009 9:02 AM

The papers are buzzing with articles discussing the Department of Justice determination that ACORN may continue to receive federal funds already obligated to the organization. You can view the memorandum that started this all at www.biggovernment.com.

Here's what we're hearing:

The Examiner

On the other hand, the Holder Justice Department could simply be flat wrong in its legal reasoning. Not too much of a stretch, considering that Holder decided to drop charges of voter intimidation against the clearly guilty Black Panthers, overruling his own legal staff in the process. It is amazing what this administration will do to protect its supporters.

The New York Times

The deputy director of national operations for Acorn, Brian Kettenring, praised Mr. Barron's decision.

"We are pleased that commitments will be honored relative to Acorn's work to help keep America's working families facing foreclosure in their homes," Mr. Kettenring said.

ABC News

Barron said the language could be interpreted "categorically to prohibit any outlay of money to the identified entities, including pursuant to pre-existing contractual obligations," but, "one could also read the phrase not to prohibit payments made pursuant to a prior binding contractual duty."

Because of this perceived ambiguity, Barron concluded that the law "should not be read as directing or authorizing HUD to breach a pre-existing binding contractual obligation to make payments to ACORN or its affiliates, subsidiaries or allied organizations where doing so would give rise to contractual liability."

*    *    *

The ranking Republican on the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., blasted the DOJ opinion as "political cronyism."

"The bipartisan intent of Congress was clear – no more federal dollars should flow to ACORN," Issa said. "It is telling that this administration continues to look for every excuse possible to circumvent the intent of Congress.  Taxpayers should not have to continue subsidizing a criminal enterprise that helped Barack Obama get elected president.  The politicization of the Justice Department to pay back one of the president's political allies is shameful and amounts to nothing more than old-fashioned cronyism."   

by Chris Berg | with no comments
Filed under: , ,
Share |
ACORN - When the Going Gets Tough, the Tough Change Their Name
29 Nov 2009 9:36 PM

For months ACORN leaders have been quick to dismiss any rumors that they were planning on changing the name of the organization to distance themselves from the negative connotations it has amassed. They've engaged in rampant voter registration fraud, covered up a massive embezzlement and have recently been caught in undercover video stings which have further tarnished the organization's name.

The Politico is reporting that ACORN created an internal document weighing the pros and cons of changing the organization's name. They've released the memorandum:

The memo addresses, in bullet-point format, the pros and cons of a new brand, saying that it has "spent 39 years building the reputation and track record of ACORN." ACORN officials write that the bad image would "blow over" in the next year or two. And they believe that even with a name change, "right-wing attackers will say we are ACORN in disguise – so do we really gain much by going with a new name?"

The group does acknowledge that working with elected officials "is much harder now" and "while some foundations are still will to fund us, more are not."

The one-page document also discusses the optics of a name change, saying it "should be very obvious that we are not going to choose a new name because funders or politicians want us to."

The memo also acknowledges that it has encountered organizations and individuals who want to work with group but "can only do so if [ACORN changes] its name."

"(W)e should probably think through this problem carefully and figure out what it all means for our ability to survive and thrive without losing a lot of ground over the next year or two," the memo reads.

Its interesting reading. See the full article here.

by Chris Berg | 1 comment(s)
Filed under:
Share |
Wednesdays on the Steps – The Takings Clause
25 Nov 2009 9:01 AM

I live outside of Washington DC and each spring hundreds of thousands of tourists descend upon the city. It's our nation's capitol, and it's an amazing place to visit. Tourism is at the heart of a case the Supreme Court has decided to review.

The Supreme Court has agreed to hear a case which could determine whether the judiciary "can eliminate important property rights and leave the owner without a remedy." The case came about due to tourism. Some Florida landowners have decided they would rather have no beach at all than have a beach covered in tourists. Florida had launched a beach restoration initiative to rebuild eroding land. The refreshed coastline however becomes public property.

That is what Florida's beach restoration and renourishment program has been doing statewide for years, pumping in wide new strips of sand to save eroding shorelines.

But the Lindsays and other homeowners challenged the program because it comes with a catch: The new strips of beach belong to the public, not the property owners. They feared their waterfront view of bleached sand and sea oats would include throngs of strangers toting umbrellas and coolers.

The Florida Supreme Court disagreed that the homeowners' property rights had been infringed upon just because their waterfront property line may not actually touch the water.

And that decision, in turn, has created a new challenge from the landowners: that the state high court ditched 100 years of common law to endorse the popular beach renourishment program, depriving them of their constitutional rights.

It is the latter charge that created the unusual case that the U.S. Supreme Court will hear next week. Justices will examine a concept they have pondered for more than 40 years without resolution: whether a decision by the judicial branch, rather than the executive or legislative, can create the kind of taking of private property forbidden by the Constitution.

Read the full story here.

Also this week the New York State Court of Appeals has cleared the way for the use of eminent domain to seize property to build a new arena for the New Jersey Nets. ACORN has been a proponent of the development plan, but this decision seems at odds with the constituency they claim to defend.

The Associated Press - Tuesday, November 24, 2009; 12:27 PM ALBANY, N.Y. -- New York's top court ruled Tuesday that the state can use eminent domain to force homeowners and businesses to sell their properties for a massive development in Brooklyn that includes a new arena for the New Jersey Nets.

In a 6-1 ruling Tuesday, the Court of Appeals said the Empire State Development Corp.'s finding that the area was blighted was enough to justify taking the land.

A group of tenants and owners claim the seizure is unconstitutional. They argue that developer Bruce Ratner's proposed $4.9 billion, 22-acre Atlantic Yards project mainly enriches private interests, while the state constitution requires public use for taking land.

"The constitution accords government broad power to take and clear substandard and insanitary areas for redevelopment," Chief Judge Jonathan Lippman wrote for the majority. "In so doing, it commensurately deprives the judiciary of grounds to interfere with the exercise."

Share |
This Thanksgiving I Am Thankful for Ethics Investigations
24 Nov 2009 12:44 PM

Well, just kidding, I don't think we'll be seeing many of those. But we are seeing an uptick in ethics stories in the press. Just this week the Washington Post questioning whether Congressmen are swayed by their stock portfolios and the investigation of Representative Mollohan. Now we see Andrew Cuomo taking campaign contributions from attorneys whose clients he is investigating.

Nov. 23 (Bloomberg) -- New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo's campaign fund took tens of thousands of dollars from law firms representing clients his office investigated or accused of wrongdoing, state records show.

Boies Schiller & Flexner LLP, a New York law firm led by David Boies, gave Cuomo $35,000 this year, records show. The firm represents former American International Group Inc. Chief Executive Officer Maurice "Hank" Greenberg in a civil fraud case the attorney general is pursuing. Lawyers defending Dell Inc., Deutsche Bank AG and a former state political party chief in Cuomo cases also contributed to him, records show.

Cuomo's donation forms ask contributors to sign a statement saying they have no "matter" pending with him. That rule "does not extend to attorneys representing persons or entities with matters before the NYS Attorney General's office," the form states, mirroring predecessors' policies. The exception creates the appearance of impropriety, ethics experts said.

"If Cuomo doesn't want to accept contributions that have the appearance of being corrupting, then he would need to include those attorneys as well," said Allison Hayward, a former Federal Election Commission chief of staff and counsel who teaches legal ethics at George Mason University School of Law in Arlington, Virginia.

Middlemen, such as lawyers, are sometimes seen as a bigger threat to an official's integrity than their clients, because "they are working the political system for a profession, and the public sees them as insincere and manipulative," she said.

See the full story here.

by Chris Berg | with no comments
Filed under:
Share |
These Turkeys Lead a Pretty Lavish Life
24 Nov 2009 12:02 PM

With Thanksgiving just days away it's time for an old Washington tradition – the annual Presidential pardoning of a turkey. This will be Obama's first year in the White House, and the tradition lives on. As I read the article though, it strikes me that with their suite at the Willard and trip to Disneyland, these turkeys are living a pretty posh life.

From U.S. News:

Each year, a presidential pardon saves the National Thanksgiving Turkey and his "alternative" from the holiday oven. This year will be no different. President Obama gets his chance with the national gobbler on Wednesday.

*          *          *

But along with keeping Pecan living, Mickey's magic is working for two older birds. The 2007's turkeys, May and Flower, are still showing off their stuffing at Florida's Disney World.

The two birds Obama will pardon next week will join Pecan in California.

This year's turkeys are expected to get the royal treatment, just like Pumpkin and Pecan did. Those two spent the night before the pardon in a suite in Washington's posh Willard Hotel and then were flown first-class to Disneyland to head up the Disney Thanksgiving Day Parade. They then went to live at Big Thunder Ranch in Frontierland, where the two Obama birds also will live.

by Chris Berg | with no comments
Filed under: ,
Share |
DOJ Investigates Congressman, but Congressman Controls DOJ Budget
24 Nov 2009 10:06 AM

Yesterday I opened up my Washington Post and found a story discussing whether Members of Congress should recuse themselves from votes based on their stock portfolios. Today we've gone one step further, should a Member of Congress control the budget of the agency that is investigating him? The Department of Justice has been investigating Representative Alan Mollohan for the last three years. Mollohan is a Democrat from West Virginia whose finances and efforts to create and fund non-profits in his District have been called into question. Mollohan chairs the Appropriations subcommittee that oversees the budget for the Department of Justice and FBI.

For three years, Rep. Alan Mollohan has chaired the important Appropriations subcommittee that controls the Justice Department's $65 billion budget. At the same time, he has been under a Justice Department investigation, according to documents and two sources briefed on the probe. The investigation has centered on the West Virginia Democrat's finances and nonprofits he created and helped fund in his district, and has put him in the unusual position of wielding control over an agency at the same time it is probing his conduct and contractors he helped while in office. Some congressional watchdog groups, including the one whose complaints about Mollohan triggered the probe, think the House leadership has created a clear conflict of interest by allowing Mollohan to continue to chair the subcommittee.

"There are a hundred ways he can influence what happens with the department's funding -- without one vote. Everything goes through his committee," said Ken Boehm, chairman of the National Legal and Policy Center, a conservative watchdog group that alleged in a complaint that the congressman had not reported the nature and increasing value of his real estate investments. "If that's not a conflict of interest, I don't know what is."

Read the full story here.

by Chris Berg | with no comments
Filed under:
Share |
RNLA Calls on Chairman Conyers to Investigate ACORN
24 Nov 2009 7:43 AM

Today, the RNLA issued a letter to Representative John Conyers, Chairman of the U.S. House Committee on the Judiciary, calling for him to convene hearings on ACORN. The letter also points to how fellow committee member Rep. Jerry Nadler has been actively counseling ACORN behind the scenes. RNLA Chairman David Norcross issued the following statement in conjunction with the letter to Representative Conyers:

"Chairman Conyers has the opportunity to do what is right and what also happens to be his job: investigate an organization that has defrauded the U.S. Government and American taxpayers, while willfully and repeatedly breaking our country's laws.  Unfortunately, the member of Congress responsible for undertaking such an effort, Rep. Nadler, has demonstrated that his loyalties lie with those breaking the law and stealing from our nation's citizens as opposed to his constituents and the public at large.  We, therefore, have no other option but to request that Nadler's superior – the chairman of the full committee – assume responsibility and follow through on the Congress's responsibility to defend the interests of those who placed them in a position of authority."

Please click here for a copy of the letter.

Share |
Testify Against ACORN, Get Probation, Not a Bad Deal
23 Nov 2009 3:27 PM

I hope you haven't forgotten that ACORN is actually going to trial in Nevada for violating the state law prohibiting paying voter registration canvassers on a per registration basis. I know I haven't. The breaking news today is that former Las Vegas ACORN field director Christopher Edwards has been sentenced. If you recall Edwards pled guilty and agreed to testify against ACORN.

He's been sentenced to three years probation, fined $500, and ordered to do 16 hours of community service per month.

Edwards promises that "it will never happen again."

We'll see Edwards testify against ACORN when the case goes to trial, likely next April.

See the full story here.

Share |
Senators Coburn and Johanns Offer Orszag a Helping Hand
23 Nov 2009 3:14 PM

Congress has prevented ACORN and ACORN affiliates from receiving federal funds through December 18, 2009. OMB Director Peter Orszag issued a memorandum instructing federal agencies to comply and cease efforts to provide any new federal funding to ACORN. While refreshing to see OMB tell federal agencies to follow the law, Senators Coburn and Johanns rightly point out, how will the agencies know what organizations to defund?

ACORN is a complex organization of more than 361 affiliates. The list seems to grow by the day. I'm not even sure that ACORN's leadership knows exactly how many corporate forms exist. Senators Johanns and Coburn today have sent a letter to OMB Director Orszag requesting that he provide additional guidance to federal agencies. The Senators have provided an initial list of entities housed at the New Orleans ACORN Headquarters and have suggested that Orszag also reference the list of entities contained in the report issued by Republican staff of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform entitled "Is ACORN Intentionally Structured as a Criminal Enterprise?"

See the letter from Senators Johanns and Coburn here.

by Chris Berg | with no comments
Filed under: , ,
Share |
Why Isn’t Anyone Really Investigating ACORN?
23 Nov 2009 1:31 PM

I have a new piece on www.biggovernment.com today which ties together a few of the recent ACORN happenings. It's really time for a meaningful investigation of ACORN.

Why Isn't Anyone Really Investigating ACORN?

by Chris Berg


As we rapidly approach December 18th, the day when ACORN is again eligible to receive federal funds, we still have yet to see a meaningful investigation of ACORN.

 

Last week, the Inspector General of the Department of Justice released a "Review of Department of Justice Grants to the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, Inc. (ACORN) and its Affiliated Organizations."  Unsurprisingly this report "did not find any DOJ direct grants to ACORN."  The report did however reveal approximately $200,000 in sub-grants to ACORN affiliates.  This number pales in comparison to the amount of federal money ACORN and its affiliates have received from other agencies.

 

ACORN and its affiliates have received over $54 million in federal grants from the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).  These are the grants that the government should be investigating.  How did ACORN spend these federal tax dollars?  Were they used for their designated purposes?  Does ACORN owe the federal government a refund?

 

The Department of Justice should have answered calls to investigate ACORN's criminal and fraudulent activity.  The evidence continues to mount, and the Department of Justice continues to look the other way.

Read the full story here.

by Chris Berg | with no comments
Filed under: , , ,
Share |
Birds of Feather – Nadler Endorses Gillibrand
23 Nov 2009 12:02 PM

Pop quiz, who is the biggest ACORN supporter in the House of Representatives? If you guessed Congressman Jerrold Nadler, you're correct. Remember when he told us "I will certainly consider a hearing on ACORN if I ever hear any credible allegations"? Apparently, the ever growing mountain of evidence against ACORN is insufficient for Congressman Nadler.

Now in the Senate, which newly appointed New York Senator stood up for ACORN? We all know this one, it's Kirsten Gillibrand. She voted against defunding ACORN – maybe it was due to criticism that she was too far to the Right for the Democratic Party, maybe she truly believes in ACORN, or perhaps it has something to do with the power of the Working Families Party in New York State politics. Whatever the reason, she's now won over the support of Representative Nadler.

The Hill is reporting:

Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) has nabbed the backing of Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.), after all.

When Gillibrand was originally appointed to her seat, Nadler was out front with the criticism of her appointment, labeling her positions too conservative and saying that a lot of Democrats were "upset."

But now that her primary campaign appears to be relatively harmless, the resistant Nadler has come around to Gillibrand. He announced Monday that he will support her 2010 bid for the final two years of Hillary Rodham Clinton's Senate term.

"From protecting a woman's right to choose and standing up for issues of pressing concern to the LGBT community, to fighting for a robust public health insurance option and protecting our environment by working to reduce harmful emissions, Kirsten Gillibrand has been a great partner on many progressive causes," Nadler said. "We have worked closely together to provide our 9/11 heroes and affected community members with the health care and compensation they deserve, and on a variety of other issues facing our State and the Nation. New Yorkers want and need Kirsten on their side and I'm proud to endorse her for U.S. Senate."

by Chris Berg | with no comments
Filed under: , ,
Share |
Breaking ACORN News - If You Do Not Have Time to Shred the Documents Throw Them in a Dumpster
23 Nov 2009 11:45 AM

A few weeks ago the Louisiana Attorney General raided ACORN's main base of operations in New Orleans. The raid was necessary due to reports that computers and documents were beginning to disappear from the offices.

Our friends at www.biggovernment.com today reveal that in San Diego an even more egregious incident occurred. ACORN staffers apparently disposed of significant amounts of sensitive documents on the eve of a visit from the California Attorney General's office. A local private investigator rescued the documents from the dumpster and has begun publicly revealing them on www.biggovernment.com. When the documents go missing before the Attorney General arrives, no wonder ACORN's employees are so confident the Attorney General will find no evidence of wrongdoing.

Shockingly, we now learn that the ACORN office in National City (San Diego County) engaged in a massive document dump on the evening of October 9th, containing thousands upon thousands of sensitive documents, just days prior to the Attorney General's visit.

BigGovernment.com has learned that not only did this document dump occur, but the documents in question were irresponsibly and brazenly dumped in a public dumpster, without considering laws and regulations as to how sensitive information should be treated.

I am a local licensed private investigator. I took it upon myself to keep an eye on what the local ACORN office was up to, in light of the release of the undercover videos. I retrieved these documents from the public dumpster.

Documents shared with BigGovernment.com include information exposing not only the inner workings of ACORN in California, but also personal, sensitive information belonging to employees, members and clients of ACORN. ACORN and its few remaining defenders insist that the "good" ACORN provides outweighs the transgressions exposed in the recent undercover video sting. But, ACORN's massive dumping of these documents and the cavalier manner in which it betrayed the trust of its supporters betrays that talking point. (Unlike ACORN, we have redacted sensitive and personal information.)

Read the full story here.

by Chris Berg | with no comments
Filed under: ,
Share |
More Posts Next page »