Showing posts with label Corruption. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Corruption. Show all posts

Blagojevich Likely to Lose State Pension

But he also has a federal pension, available at age 62, for the three terms he served in Congress.

At Chicago Tribune:

SPRINGFIELD — Ex-Gov. Rod Blagojevich stands to lose a $65,000-a-year state pension as a felon, but he's likely to be eligible for $15,000 a year in federal retirement pay for his time as a congressman.

The defrocked Democrat also would be eligible for a refund of about $128,000 in personal contributions he made to the state's retirement fund.

Such is the financial fallout Blagojevich and his family face following Monday's guilty verdict on 17 corruption counts and last year's conviction for lying to the FBI.

Blagojevich served 10 years in state government — four years as a state representative and six as governor — before he was impeached and tossed from office in January 2009. Had he not been convicted of any crimes, Blagojevich would have been able to draw a $65,000-a-year state pension beginning Dec. 10, when he turns 55.

No ruling has been made on whether he can collect the state pension.

Gloria Molina, L.A. County Supervisor, Said She'd Like to 'Cut the Testicles Off' Agency Executive Under Her Authority

Los Angeles County government is a lot like the Cook County political machine. A bastion of Democrat Party power, top officials run government like fiefs, and they wield power in the style of the big city party bosses of yore.

In an article today, the Los Angeles Times reports that the Los Angeles County board of supervisors has sought to kneecap County Chief Executive William T. Fujioka. He is CEO for the County, in charge of managing a $23 billion budget and over 100,000 employees. Apparently Fujioka, whose grandparents were sent to internment camps during World War II, is a hard-knuckled administrator, having honed his political skins navigating the rough and tumble of L.A.'s east side gang scene growing up. On the job as County CEO since 2007, Fujioka initiated an administrative reorganization that worked to take power from the hands of the elected board:
The county plan to centralize authority was the brainchild of Fujioka's highly respected predecessor, David Janssen. The new chief executive was to have increased responsibility over the department heads who guide the delivery of services for 10 million constituents, ranging from housing the skid row homeless to defending exclusive hillside neighborhoods from mudslides.

Fujioka was given more staff, and his office's budget climbed 53% to $43 million in four years. Eventually, Fujioka was to have received greater power to hire and fire most agency chiefs.

Under the new structure, supervisors were to have taken a back seat in day-to-day operations. The structure presumed the high level of respect and openness Fujioka's predecessor enjoyed. But most supervisors and their staffs have served for decades and developed expertise and deep interests in certain issues, and the transfer of trust did not come naturally.
No doubt.

It turns out that board members Michael Antonovich, Gloria Molina, and Zev Yaroslavsky moved "to strip the Children and Family Services and Probation departments from Fujioka's control." There's more to the story at the link, including some ugly politics among members of the board, but this passage really caught my attention, and looks like an abuse of power:
While a majority of Fujioka's elected superiors may be critical, his subordinates praise him. County managers have complained about pointed attacks and contradictory direction from board offices in the past. "It's a very scary thing if you are a lowly department head," said Janice Fukai, the county's alternate public defender. "If you go in with the CEO, you feel a little more insulated and a little more protected."

Fujioka's backers say he has been particularly frustrated by some of the supervisors' interventions in the children's services agency, which has been grappling with child fatalities following errors in handling cases. It is one of the departments being taken away from Fujioka. Molina is especially hands-on, summoning top agency officials to her office to demand explanations. In one instance, she said she would like to cut the testicles off an executive because of problems in the agency, according to officials familiar with the exchange.

Molina declined to comment on the incident but said, "At the end of the day, we as supervisors are literally blamed and held accountable for the outcomes of these children."
Gloria Molina's homepage is here. Clicking her page begins a photographic slide show of her service, beginning with a photo of Molina posing with President Barack Obama and ending with a shot of her posing with Former President Bill Clinton.

Photobucket

Photobucket

Her appearances with Democratic presidents form the bookends of a career in Los Angeles government spanning 20 years. In that time she's clearly developed an authoritarian style, which features crude and threatening accounts of her treatment of administrative subordinates. That Supervisor Molina refused to answer questions about the comment, as the Times indicates, is not surprising:
Molina declined to comment on the incident but said, "At the end of the day, we as supervisors are literally blamed and held accountable for the outcomes of these children."
In a time of fiscal austerity, government officials at all levels have been coming under increased attention. But I think it's fair to say that it's especially inappropriate for an L.A. County Supervisor to announce she wants to "cut the testicles" off subordinate agency officials, and when asked about it to further denigrate them as "children."

Progressives would be all over this story if a Republican official has made comparable remarks. But this is the Los Angeles big city machine, and County elected officials obviously feel they can act with impunity.

UPDATE: From Russ, in the comments:
I think when she says "children", she is referring to the children under the protective services that have died while under their authority, NOT the supervisors she threatened with castration.
I also got an e-mail from someone objecting to my comment on Molina's reference to "the children." I won't be surprised if some ASFLs contact my college to complain. Democrats and progressives are evil like that. So let's be clear: "The outcomes" may clearly refer to a purposeful act in the active sense, as in the actions of the administrators who have taken power from the hands of the board. Of course Molina might be referring to "the outcomes" of the children in the passive sense, but then again, considering she's threatening administrative subordinates, maybe not. She's a Democrat. They talk down to people like that. Progressives are losers.

Also, linked at Instapundit, because, you know, no one pays attention to this blog, or something:
THREATS OF SEXUAL VIOLENCE FROM A DEMOCRATIC OFFICEHOLDER IN LOS ANGELES ...
I hope the Department Of Justice will investigate this egregious civil rights violation. For that matter, I suspect it’s a violation of California state civil rights law. Gloria Allred, call your office!
Word.

The Left's Media Apologists

Awesome letter to the editor, from Carl Schroeder, at STL Today, "Weiner scandal makes some people thankful for alternative news outlets."
Historically, the press served an extremely important function of holding our elected officials accountable. However, the modern day mainstream media has, for the most part, abdicated this role in order to be unabashed apologists for all things liberal.
RTWT.

Admirers Became Weiner's Online Pursuits

At New York Times, "In Reckless Fashion, Rapid Online Pursuits of Political Admirers":
Gennette Cordova said she did not even think the photo was real.

It was nearly 9 p.m. on a Friday when Ms. Cordova, who was preparing to head out for the night with a friend, logged onto Twitter and discovered that Representative Anthony D. Weiner had sent her a suggestive photo of himself in gray boxer briefs.

“It didn’t make any sense,” Ms. Cordova, a 21-year-old college student in northwestern Washington State, said in her first extensive interview since Mr. Weiner confessed in a news conference Monday to sending her the photo. “I figured it must have been a fake.”

Ms. Cordova’s experience with Mr. Weiner appears to fit a pattern: in rapid and reckless fashion, he sought to transform informal online conversations about politics and partisanship into sexually charged exchanges, at times laced with racy language and explicit images.

Ms. Cordova, who had traded messages with Mr. Weiner, a New York Democrat, about their shared concern over his conservative critics, said she had never sent him anything provocative. Asked if she was taken aback by his decision to send the photo, she responded, “Oh gosh, yes.”

Ms. Cordova spoke to The New York Times as Mr. Weiner faced intensifying calls for his resignation because of his acknowledged online sexual communications with at least six women over the last three years. On Wednesday, House leaders began a concerted effort to persuade Mr. Weiner to step down, worried that the sensational coverage of his online sexual liaisons had created political chaos and was subjecting the Democratic Party to ridicule.
More at that link at top.

I thought he was going to resign on Monday, and the Wall Street Journal reported last night that Weiner was still trying to hang on. I just don't see how he can.

Who Should Trust Anthony Weiner Now? No One. He Should Resign

Watch this clip with James Poulos (via Instapundit). Then read Emily Miller's commentary, "Anthony Weiner Should Resign Now":

Mr. Weiner is out for himself and has shown no regard for his constituents or the duty of his public office. From his embattled stance, it seems that the only way to force him out of office is for the Pelosi- launched ethics investigation to determine what he has lied about and what rules and possible laws he has broken. If he had any decency, he would resign.

Michelle Malkin: 'The Ick-arus of Capitol Hill'

At Michelle's:
Like the mythical jerk who ignored common sense and flew too close to the sun, Weiner keeps flapping his lips while the brouhaha’s heat melts the wax off his sullied wings.
Great essay. And a great interview:

And also:

* Robert Stacy McCain, "Weiner's Week."

* And Yid With Lid, "Reporting of Truth Behind Andrew Breitbart's Weinergate Coverage Proves Liberal Reporter Tommy Christopher's a Mench."

RELATED: At New York Post, "Lewd-pic recipient worn out by Weiner scandal" (via Memeorandum).

Kaboom! Anthony Weiner Scandal Explodes!

I was wrong last night. When I posted on the New York Times's Weiner twitter story I thought perhaps the scandal was peaking. Maybe it was just me, although, yeah, we had the long holiday weekend and establishment D.C. is back to work. But still, Weinergate has taken off exponentially on the web. If People Magazine's on the case, no doubt reports of a congressman's bulging underwear have some, er, longevity. See, "Did Rep. Anthony Weiner Tweet a Lewd Photo to a Woman?" Well, to answer, Weiner denies it, but his story's been changing and most folks on the right are having none of it. See Cold Fury: "Of COURSE he’s lying." Plus, Aaron Worthing and Lee Stranahan, at Patterico's, have some great reporting, for example, here, here, here (hilariously), and here.

And check out Andrew Breitbart's interview on CNN:

Be sure to listen through to Jeffrey Toobin's ridiculous comments about how Breitbart's statements are "outrageous" and that, "look, this is a lighthearted story ... and everybody knows that on the Internet stuff happens ..." And get this: "Look, Twitter is not a very secure environment ... sometimes the information is unreliable ... it doesn't even come from the people it appears to come from ..."

Right. My god, that's almost a criminal. Any wonder everyday Americans get so angry at the pompous cable talking heads who don't know shit, frankly? Well, it's not all bad. See also Liberty Chick, at Big Journalism, "Blame Breitbart!: Salon.com Editor Joan Walsh Lies and Bullies on Weinergate."

So, yeah, I was wrong about this story peaking. Coverage continues to build, at ABC News, for example, "Rep. Anthony Weiner Gets Combative With Reporters About Lewd Twitter Photo."

And of course, keep up on things at Big Government.

Added: Don't miss Michelle's essay, "Weighing in on Weiner." (Fit is hitting the shan.)

Also, at Hot Air, Weiner has a heated exchange with CNN's Dana Bash!

ClaireAir

At New York Times, "Democrats Can’t Afford Mistakes Like McCaskill’s Plane":

Democrats in the Senate face steep odds in 2012. They are defending more than 20 seats against an energized Republican party, which only needs to pick up four seats to win the majority. Five Democratic incumbents are retiring from the Senate, making their seats instantly more vulnerable to Republicans.

In short, Senate Democrats can’t afford to make any mistakes.

Which makes the scandal in Missouri over Senator Claire McCaskill’s private plane the kind of unforced error that could come back to haunt the national party in the days after the 2012 election.
Love it!

Also, at The Blog Prof, "
Irony: Clair McCaskill, caught not paying $287k in taxes, ran campaign ad touting paying of taxes."

What If Gaddafi Holds On?

From Bret Stephens, at WSJ, "Other regimes in the region will wonder just what, exactly, are the benefits of an alliance with a diffident America":

Top government officials and ordinary newspaper pundits are debating whether the U.S. and its allies should intervene militarily against Moammar Gadhafi, perhaps by establishing a no-fly zone. This is the wrong question. The right question is: What happens if Gadhafi holds on?

That possibility no longer seems remote, as the colonel and his loyalists keep a firm grip on Tripoli and start inflicting military reversals on the rebels. A society as brutalized as Libya's will retain a powerful fear of its dictator even in his hour of weakness. Many Libyans will recall how Saddam Hussein crushed the Kurdish and Shiite uprisings of March 1991. They will recall, too, that the first Bush administration—which included then-deputy national security adviser and current no-fly zone skeptic Bob Gates—stood aside as Saddam viciously struck back.

What happened next is one of the darkest chapters of recent memory. An estimated 60,000 Iraqis, perhaps more, were killed in the revolt. Two million fled the country. The Iraqi people had to endure another dozen years under Saddam. The U.S. spent billions enforcing a no-fly zone that was a case of too little, too late. The war that ultimately toppled Saddam's regime exacted another huge toll in lives, including those of more than 4,000 Americans.

Looking back, it's worth noting that all of this may have been avoided if only the U.S. had forbidden Saddam from flying his helicopter gunships, which proved decisive in turning the tide of revolt. So why won't President Obama run the comparatively minor risk of doing similarly in Libya? Does he think he needs the U.N.'s permission? Sadly, he probably does.

Should the conflict in Libya turn into a protracted civil war, it will mean more killing, more refugees, and even higher energy prices. And should Gadhafi's counteroffensive begin to show results, previously emboldened Libyan rebels could start to panic, and their reversals could quickly turn into a general rout.
Folks can see where Stephens is going with this. It goes without saying that the administration's waffling and timidity is sending powerful signals to the world's tyrants. Iran last year and Egypt last month. Tunisia went under the radar and was expected to be an anomaly by realists like Harvard's Steven Walt. But the message is clear: Don't expect democracy promotion from these amateurs. I like the idea of a no-fly zone, actually. Although I wonder how deep a military commitment the American public will support, particularly without presidential leadership? Not only that, a protracted civil war with massive humanitarian losses could trigger demands for ground troops, and I cringe at the thought of a ground incursion under Barack Hussein's command.

Side note: Bret Stephens is a treasure. He sounds more neocon than Charles Krauthammer. Cool!

Green Energy Plan Wastes Millions at L.A. Community Colleges

I've been busy and meant to post on LAT's series on the bond program boondoggle at the Los Angeles Community Colleges, but this one's too good to postpone. See, "Colleges Green Energy Plan Proves Wildly Impractical; Blunders Devour $10 Million":

Larry Eisenberg had a vision. "Amazing," he called it. "Spectacular."

The Los Angeles Community College District would become a paragon of clean energy. By generating solar, wind and geothermal power, the district would supply all its electricity needs. Not only would the nine colleges sever ties to the grid, saving millions of dollars a year, they would make money by selling surplus power. Thanks to state and federal subsidies, construction of the green energy projects would cost nothing upfront.

As head of a $5.7-billion, taxpayer-funded program to rebuild the college campuses, Eisenberg commanded attention. But his plan for energy independence was seriously flawed.

He overestimated how much power the colleges could generate. He underestimated the cost. And he poured millions of dollars into designs for projects that proved so impractical or unpopular they were never built.

These and other blunders cost nearly $10 million that could have paid for new classrooms, laboratories and other college facilities, a Times investigation found
.
RTWT. The incompetence is astounding.

And the full series is here: "
Billions to Spend: Complete Coverage." And columnist Steve Lopez has this: "Times community college investigation unearths shameful waste."

The district's bond program had incentives for corruption built in from the beginning. There was literally no independent oversight from outside citizens' groups. See the intitial report, "The price of poor planning, weak oversight." Years ago, when my college got its bond program approved by the voters, the administration ended up going with a new contractor after just about a year. I heard all kinds of stories of lush spending with the bond money, for food and Starbucks coffee, and it was probably worse, but should news like that get out to the community there'd be hell to pay. As it is my college's
South Quad complex is often ridiculed as the Taj Mahal amid state budget cuts that have put student needs on the backburner. As for the Los Angeles District, it's like an early-20th century big-city machine --- and a Democrat thing, dontcha know! The Democratic Party of the San Fernando Valley held fundraisers for board member Miguel Santiago: "Reelect Miguel Santiago--Los Angeles Community College District Board of Trustees." And the L.A.'s Democratic Party & Courage Campaign endorsed longtime board member Mona Field: "March 8 Election Recommendations from Pacific Palisades Democratic Club." And get this, Mona Field's got a long record of corruption: "Incompetence and Corruption at LA Community College District Must End":
We have lived through an era where public officials and union leaders lost – indeed gleefully destroyed – their moral compass. The cities of Los Angeles, Inglewood, and others teeter on the brink of bankruptcy because elected city officials and public unions have engaged in years of “mutual money massage”.

The public unions commit funds and campaign resources to “friendly” candidates and those candidates, when elected, have given away the public treasury in the form of outrageous pay hikes and rich pension plans no longer seen in the private sector.
And "LACCD Board President Mona Field Admits to Misuse of Bond Funds."

Added: "Candidates for L.A. Community College District board urge greater scrutiny of system."

Kinda like Chicago and the Obamacrats.

PHOTO CREDIT: "The clock tower at East Los Angeles College was built crooked. It cost an additional $157,000 to fix. (Ricardo DeAratanha / Los Angeles Times / November 3, 2010)."