ACORN Deal Is Nuts
Rep. John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI) is the Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee. He had heard testimony from several people early this year that led him to say that his committee would hold hearings to get to the bottom of accusations made against ACORN. ACORN, as you'll recall, was among the organizations quite instrumental in getting Obama elected as president. He had been an employee of ACORN in Chicago prior to becoming a state senator.
The accusations that triggered Conyers' decision included voter fraud, a protection racket, tax violations and campaign finance law violations.
Conyers' decision to investigate ACORN, as you'd expect, caused quite some consternation amongst Democrats.
He suddenly, yesterday, advised that there would be no investigation since "powers that be" had advised him to not go there. He refused further comment. The "powers that be" could be Rep. Stony Hoyer, second in command of the House, or Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), the House Speaker, or the White House...or all three. There are no other "powers that be" who might have gotten Conyers' attention to the degree that was apparent.
Had Conyers made this decision himself, he would've stated that fact along with a reason or two to support this 180 degree shift in his position. The fact that he made no such statement, and that he refused further comment, tells us everything we need to know except by whose command this decision was taken.
I suspect we know the flowchart arrangement; I suspect that the President suggested to Rahm Emanuel, and Rahm suggested to Pelosi and Hoyer, and the word came down to Conyers. Conyers has been around long enough to understand what he had to do.
But, much worse than this brute force tactic is this: there must be a lot of dirt under the ACORN tree to warrant such an abuse of power. Will we ever know for sure? ACORN is the subject of some 14 different lawsuits over such issues; maybe one or more of those decisions will provide the answer.
The accusations that triggered Conyers' decision included voter fraud, a protection racket, tax violations and campaign finance law violations.
Conyers' decision to investigate ACORN, as you'd expect, caused quite some consternation amongst Democrats.
He suddenly, yesterday, advised that there would be no investigation since "powers that be" had advised him to not go there. He refused further comment. The "powers that be" could be Rep. Stony Hoyer, second in command of the House, or Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), the House Speaker, or the White House...or all three. There are no other "powers that be" who might have gotten Conyers' attention to the degree that was apparent.
Had Conyers made this decision himself, he would've stated that fact along with a reason or two to support this 180 degree shift in his position. The fact that he made no such statement, and that he refused further comment, tells us everything we need to know except by whose command this decision was taken.
I suspect we know the flowchart arrangement; I suspect that the President suggested to Rahm Emanuel, and Rahm suggested to Pelosi and Hoyer, and the word came down to Conyers. Conyers has been around long enough to understand what he had to do.
But, much worse than this brute force tactic is this: there must be a lot of dirt under the ACORN tree to warrant such an abuse of power. Will we ever know for sure? ACORN is the subject of some 14 different lawsuits over such issues; maybe one or more of those decisions will provide the answer.
Comments