Odd...in his resignation letter he says he apologized to the city already. I don't remember that. It must have been the same time he paid back the city for his fully loaded debacle as promised because I don't remember that either.

As a Ward 3 voter, in a Ward that has been admittedly apathetic but generally disappointed with Cheh I can say with certainty that her political career won't survive this either. We all wondered what in the world she was doing as she hitched her wagon to his, walking him door to door in our ward selling him to everyone.

by Ward 3 on Jun 7, 2012 8:51 am • link • report

Marion Barry must really be laughing about all of this.

I mean, this man had a solid dozen of his personally selected admin chiefs indicted, or arrested for corruption chargesw, embezzlement, pay to play etc during his first two terms.

He hasn't paid his taxes in 7 years, is a decades long crack addict who has failed probationary drug tests 3 times.

Been arrested for DUI, drove a car that had been unregestered for years, personally steered city contracts to his girlfriend and then got paid for the privlige..

All of this on top of being a serial womanizing philanderer and he still has his job. He probably just doesn't get what all the excitement is about.

by Anon43 on Jun 7, 2012 9:07 am • link • report

Phil Mendelson or David Catania are both extremely qualified to be either Council chair or mayor. Phil is the ultimate technocrat's technocrat, being able to recite most laws and codes and their history.
(And he did finally trade in his 10-year old car for a new hatchback).

The fact that the charge against Kwame had nothing to do with the $400K or so loose change from his campaign but rather "overstating income on a loan application" is weird but typical of USAO. As with Barry they usually shy away from offenses involving DC money and DC politicians. (Harry Thomas was the exception).

by Tom Coumaris on Jun 7, 2012 9:10 am • link • report

I have to guess that the USAO had some sort of dirt that says the "missing" $225K in campaign funds was used to pay for personal debt, and with that info they pressured Kwame to plead to a lesser charge to avoid a trial.

Also, what is up with a 10-year-old car being considered a horrible beater? If Mendo really wants to prove he's the antitheses to "fully loaded" he'll downgrade to a 1986 Chevette.

by MLD on Jun 7, 2012 9:15 am • link • report

That's a plea deal for you. According to the WaPo article, discussions around the plea had been ongoing for several weeks. I can't wait to see who gets the center square next month on DC Indictment Theater.

by worthing on Jun 7, 2012 9:16 am • link • report

Oh, and now that MWAA has dropped the PLA preference, let's see if Richmond's grandstanding against the silver line suddenly stops. I'm expecting that $150M to be in the mail tomorrow, Governor.

by worthing on Jun 7, 2012 9:19 am • link • report

@TomCoumaris; no, it isn't "weird". It is a telling pattern of Holder's justice department going after small cases and small fry. Given that it was a home equity loan -- from the Industrial bank of Washington -- I doubt it was actually an income verification loan.

However, the pattern does match up: his is in debt and needs access to cash.

Public Integrety needs to be stopped from bringing charges where there isn't any evidence of corruption. Just like whitewater -- you're giving them too much discovery power to go through and find charges to bring leverage.

by charlie on Jun 7, 2012 9:21 am • link • report

@Steven, from the Post article, I think the GOP quote should be attributed to Issa, not Chaffetz.

by Jacques on Jun 7, 2012 9:23 am • link • report

@Jacques
From the article:
“City leaders keep arguing for more autonomy, but it’s hard to get there when so many people keep getting indicted,” said Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah), a member of the House Government Reform and Oversight Committee, which has jurisdiction over District matters. “This is embarrassing, and the city deserves better.”

Chaffetz added that “by and large, people from outside D.C. don’t view the city leadership very favorably.”

by MLD on Jun 7, 2012 9:26 am • link • report

Strike my previous comment (though you might want to fix the link to go to page one of the Post story).

by Jacques on Jun 7, 2012 9:26 am • link • report

Quite the juxtaposition in these two adjacent posts: Cool "Disco" Dan and Hot "Fully Loaded" Brown.

Now, can we please agree on a non-citrus candidate for November? No more four-way vote splitting.

by Dizzy on Jun 7, 2012 9:36 am • link • report

City leaders keep arguing for more autonomy, but it’s hard to get there when so many people keep getting indicted,” said Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah), a member of the House Government Reform and Oversight Committee, which has jurisdiction over District matters. “This is embarrassing, and the city deserves better.

Is Rep Chaffetz willing to take Illiois' statehood away for the same reason? With the two last Illinois governors actually in jail at the moment, surely Illinois has proven to be incapable to rule itself. "This is GOLD BABY!"

by Jasper on Jun 7, 2012 9:46 am • link • report

Also, let us all congratulate charlie on his advancing to second-degree contrarian black belt. Arguing that we've been too aggressive in combating malfeasance by elected officials - brilliant! It's not so completely irrational or incoherent as to be dismissed as trolling, yet still utterly risible and guaranteed to generate an outraged response.

Well done, truly. A*

by Dizzy on Jun 7, 2012 9:50 am • link • report

Sorry Dizzy, but I live in the real world. I'm judging DOJ and Public Integrity not on the specifics on what is happening in District politics, but saying, overall, they are sucking it hard. Nickle and dime charges against smaller players.

And the basic standard for PI should be "Does the malfeasance apply to the public function of the defendant?" I'll give you, as before the pattern works (Politician deeply in debt and uses his campaign/public money to pay off debt) but as it stands that standard wasn't met here.

But I'm sorry if you can't see that.

How long before we have a majority white council?

by charlie on Jun 7, 2012 10:01 am • link • report

Dizzy- I think the point is more that DOJ does not go after big charges in DC where a lot of public money is involved, and even when they're forced to do something it's more minor charges on a personal level. While Barry was mayor Holder's office had a "hand's off" policy about DC gov't corruption, possibly a matter of being scared to open that Pandora's Box, or possibly politics.

They seem to reluctantly bring charges where there's already a huge amount of publicity and even then prefer to do it on a more personal level than on a public corruption level.

by Tom Coumaris on Jun 7, 2012 10:02 am • link • report

The most serious charges appear to be linked to a mortgage Brown obtained on his 4br Hillcrest Home and not directly tied to his 2008 reelection campaign

Really Kwame Brown? Really? The most serious charge was your personal mortgage? Idiot.

Why did Kwame agree and why did anyone ever expect that he would pay the city back? It's the city's fault that he had it in the first place. It was ridiculous for anyone to think that he should've paid it back.

I do wish our resources were spent on more serious infractions such as HTJ. But I guess the AG is operating in an environment where somebody has to go down, however not serious the charge. Sorta like the DOJ going after John Edwards.

While Barry was mayor Holder's office had a "hand's off" policy about DC gov't corruption, possibly a matter of being scared to open that Pandora's Box, or possibly politics.

Don't you mean "Janet Reno's office?"

by HogWash on Jun 7, 2012 10:09 am • link • report

kwame brown is a small player in DC?

Who are the large players that are not being pursued by Public Integrity? Note, that means folks included in PI's mandate, not issues connected to the 2008 financial collapse not under PI's purview.

by AWalkerInTheCity on Jun 7, 2012 10:10 am • link • report

Self-deletion in order. I shouldn't have called Kwame an idiot because...well go ahead and delete it. It's inappropriate.

by HogWash on Jun 7, 2012 10:12 am • link • report

@HogWash

Holder was head of the USAO for DC in the mid 90s and then Deputy AG.

by MLD on Jun 7, 2012 10:14 am • link • report

I thought I read somewhere in the article(s) that the investigation into his 2008 campaign is still ongoing and this is more or less unrelated to that?

by jj on Jun 7, 2012 10:29 am • link • report

@TomCoumaris; no, it isn't "weird". It is a telling pattern of Holder's justice department going after small cases and small fry.

Weird, given the general sophistication of his comments here, I would've thought @charlie understood how plea deals work.

by oboe on Jun 7, 2012 10:45 am • link • report

jj- The article does say that and that may be the official DOJ line, but don't hold your breath.

by Tom Coumaris on Jun 7, 2012 10:50 am • link • report

@FallsChurch, oh, I don't know. I would be nice of PI decidicded to investige why someone stole $60 million from DC. Or why the CIO was siphoning money off to friends. But that's in the past, I guess.

None of this takes away from Kwame. He f**ked up, and we should hold politicans to higher standards. I'm not sure the plea has been releaed, but public humilation -- not criminal charges -- is the best way to deal with this.

I don't know if you read emptywheel, but they have done a good job of detailing why PI is screwing up left and right. And yes, I include the Edwards case in that.

by charlie on Jun 7, 2012 10:51 am • link • report

Hey all, keep it civil. The mods are apparently away, and we don't want another repeat of last week's fiasco.

Seriously.

by David Edmondson on Jun 7, 2012 10:52 am • link • report

re: Silver Line

WAMU quote Connaughton that the commonwealth is IN, for $150 million.

I guess that means phase 2 to the airport is a go. Now its only a question of if LC BoS signs on for their two stops.

by AWalkerInTheCity on Jun 7, 2012 10:56 am • link • report

@Hogwash
Why did Kwame agree and why did anyone ever expect that he would pay the city back? It's the city's fault that he had it in the first place. It was ridiculous for anyone to think that he should've paid it back.

No. Presuming you're referring to the false information provided for loans, it's Kwame Brown's fault for committing fraud (among other things, surely, as the plea bargain suggests).

I do not understand anyone's desire to defend an elected official who just admitted that he is a criminal.

by worthing on Jun 7, 2012 10:57 am • link • report

@charlie

So your complaint is that they're bringing "Nickle and dime charges against smaller players" ??? As AWITC says, how are Kwame or Harry Thomas or Vince Gray's top aides smaller players? In terms of the charges, since we're talking about plea deals here, presumably things were negotiated down. Still, indications are that the campaign finance investigation on Kwame is continuing, especially since it is likely to implicate people other than just Kwame himself. Likely he could've been charged with other counts for his personal financial chicanery (creation and possession of a forged instrument, say?).

I'm also not sure I understand the objection to PI involved in bringing a valid but (seemingly) unrelated charge. Is this a procedural objection? Would you rather they have transferred the matter to some other DOJ branch? If the Fraud Section is investigating some accountant and they find child pornography on his computer, should they not pursue that?

@Tom

The vast majority of corruption both in DC and the country as a whole is perfectly legal. The only difference between people like Thomas and Brown and people like Jim Graham and Vincent Orange is that the latter two are smart and savvy enough to keep all of their corruption on the other side of the criminal line. Barry was that way too.

by Dizzy on Jun 7, 2012 10:58 am • link • report

I realize Brown has engaged in a number of missteps and possibly illegal conduct.

However,with respect to these charges, how does this conduct differ from that of the millions of people who took out larger mortgages than they could afford over the last 5-7 years based on misrepresentations about income and assets?

by ah on Jun 7, 2012 11:01 am • link • report

McDonnell wins the day for taxpayers and the Rule of Law! Bravo. Arrogance is beaten by common sense on the Silver Line. Too bad GGW didn't champion this for the taxpayers of Virginia...but thankfully the enlightened Governor did.

Dulles Rail board backs down on union-friendly deal:
http://washingtonexaminer.com/local/transportation/2012/06/dulles-rail-board-backs-down-union-friendly-deal/699281

by Pelham1861 on Jun 7, 2012 11:02 am • link • report

It's kind of weird. A fairly minor count of bank fraud seems almost pedestrian by the standards of the DC council.

Yes, we should hold politicians to a high standard, but I'm surprised that he's resigning over this.

(And, for whatever it's worth, I think it's fine to call him an idiot. It's not civil discourse, but it really is pretty idiotic for a public official to lie about his income on a loan application.)

Oh, and please no control board, for the love of God. Oversight and transparency are fine, but please let us make our own mistakes. I also suspect that DC's under far more scrutiny, and that there are plenty of local officials elsewhere around the country that get away with this stuff all the time.

by andrew on Jun 7, 2012 11:03 am • link • report

Ah, there it is:

"A day after he resigned and was charged with felony bank fraud in federal court, former D.C. Council Chairman Kwame Brown was charged with violating the District's campaign finance laws during his 2008 re-election campaign. In a court filing today in D.C. Superior Court, prosecutors say Brown authorized a relative of his to open a "side account" for campaign contributions, from which that relative made cash expenditures on behalf of the campaign in excess of $50—which meant they should have been reported."

http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/looselips/2012/06/07/kwame-brown-campaign-finance-charge/

by Dizzy on Jun 7, 2012 11:05 am • link • report

Dizzy- The "criminal line" is whatever DOJ wants it to be and whether a person is a "target". I'd say that line on public, not personal, corruption in DC is somewhere on the other side of Pluto.

by Tom Coumaris on Jun 7, 2012 11:05 am • link • report

wow- that sure shut my mouth quick. Should have read new comments before posting.

If the feds are actually going after the 2008 campaign then Gray may be in more trouble than I thought possible.

by Tom Coumaris on Jun 7, 2012 11:08 am • link • report

JASPER: While Ilinois is an ongoing cesspool of corruption..it is not Constitutionally mandated as is the District. Home Rule should never have been granted here. It has been rampantly corrupt since day one and a taxpayers disgrace. Sadly the work of good citizens in the District have been overshadowed by the outrageous actions of far too many officials. And sadly, the unemployment in the most disadvantaged of neighborhoods has remained constant.

by Pelham1861 on Jun 7, 2012 11:10 am • link • report

Charlie,

I would be nice of PI decidicded to investige why someone stole $60 million from DC. Or why the CIO was siphoning money off to friends.

I agree PI should investigate those things and should have gotten jail time for Edwards. I agree there are problems with PI. But, none of this implies that PI shouldn't have gone after Kwame for bank fraud.

And the basic standard for PI should be "Does the malfeasance apply to the public function of the defendant?"

Agreed but the actual standard is "does prosecuting the politician promote the AG's career?" While that approach ensures prosecution resources are not directed at the worst offenders, it doesn't in any way absolve the lesser offenders of their wrongdoing. Basically, DC lucked out because it got DOJ prosecution resources it shouldn't have gotten under a more efficient system.

Also, given the fact that Kwame plead down to this lesser crime, there is likely a bigger crime he's not being prosecuted for. Don't forget they ended up getting Al Capone on tax fraud...not for killing anyone.

by Falls Church on Jun 7, 2012 11:21 am • link • report

While Ilinois is an ongoing cesspool of corruption..it is not Constitutionally mandated as is the District. Home Rule should never have been granted here. It has been rampantly corrupt since day one and a taxpayers disgrace.

The only reason DC had such strict federal oversight in the first place was because of the huge 19th century corruption when they had a mayor the first time around.

This has been a failed experiment. The US should have located the Capital in a "real city" or, at the very least, made the district so small that only the barest skeleton of a population would have been allowed to live there.

by JustMe on Jun 7, 2012 11:23 am • link • report

This has been a failed experiment.

The experiment seemed to have succeeded for many years, but perhaps the approach has outlived its usefulness and benefits.

Putting aside the "skeleton" approach, locating the capital in another city would run into many of the same problems that result from a desire for federal control of a federal enclave. If the capital were located in (say) St. Louis, why would anything be really different?

by ah on Jun 7, 2012 11:40 am • link • report

Thanks for pointing to the Singapore article; I've heard that their permit scheme was politically controversial, but it's interesting to see just how. It's a marvelous application of market principles to the problem of traffic congestion -- a complement to their congestion-charging scheme, which variably tolls many major roads. Rather than externalizing the costs of congestion by having big traffic jams, Singapore chooses to internalize the costs by taxing cars so heavily that traffic jams never form.

It would be a great inspiration for residential parking permit schemes: just count the number of available spaces and hold an auction to set the price for the spaces. You're always guaranteed a space, and revenue is maximized. No, you don't have certainty over the price you'll pay, and that appears to be politically unpopular even there, in a country where car ownership is low and market mechanisms are well understood.

by Payton on Jun 7, 2012 11:47 am • link • report

@ Pelham:it is not Constitutionally mandated as is the District

And? Does the Constitution say it can not have home rule?

Also, the Constitution is silent on the subject of secession, or reverting a state back into a territory. Hence, the US Congress could very well decide to take statehood from Illinois for failing to have a decent functional government.

It took some states (Utah for instance) quite some convincing to be allowed into the union. Good governance was a major issue (aside from religion). It seems odd such standards go overboard once in the union.

But we're getting off-topic here.

by Jasper on Jun 7, 2012 11:48 am • link • report

It's not a failed experiment, it's a function of the fact that the council is so small. With only 13 members, it is very easy for bad influences to corral enough members to make a difference. I think if the council were larger you would see less blatant graft.

The "failed experiment" is city politics period. People who feel like they're big shots and have some power to make things happen at a local level. They have less scrutiny than politicians at the national level (because both the media and general population pays less attention) so bad shit can happen more easily. Chicago anyone?

Or is the argument that DC is uniquely unfit to govern itself? That's just stupid.

by MLD on Jun 7, 2012 11:51 am • link • report

@MLD, Holder was head of the USAO for DC in the mid 90s and then Deputy AG.

Oh thanks! I guess I was a bit confused by Tom mentioning the DOJ and following up w/info about Holder.

@Worthing Presuming you're referring to the false information provided for loans, it's Kwame Brown's fault for committing fraud (among other things, surely, as the plea bargain suggests).

Brown promised and some citizens expected him to repay the cost of his use of the Navigator. Why would you think that I was referring to his home loan, especially when him making retribution for that was never an issue?

by HogWash on Jun 7, 2012 12:08 pm • link • report

@HogWash - Because today's news is about Kwame's bank fraud and you didn't reference the Navigator issue in your comment. My apologies for misunderstanding you. My comment regarding the fact that he just copped to a federal felony still applies to your notion of this being a "not serious" charge.

by worthing on Jun 7, 2012 12:54 pm • link • report

@Pelham Home Rule should never have been granted here. It has been rampantly corrupt since day one and a taxpayers disgrace.

Well, if you want to clean up corruption, the way to do it is to put it under control of the U.S. Congress. There's no corruption there.

But then we don't really have Home Rule, do we? Congress already has oversight, and that doesn't seem to be fixing things. Furthermore, there was corruption even when there was no home rule, so it's wrong to blame that.

But I will agree that it is time to end home rule. What we need is statehood.

by David C on Jun 7, 2012 12:59 pm • link • report

Well, it looks like more developents:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/dc-politics/kwame-brown-charged-with-misdemeanor-count-in-2008-campaign/2012/06/07/gJQAU4d9KV_story.html?hpid=z2

"Brown was charged by federal prosecutors Thursday in D.C. Superior Court with one count of making an “unlawful cash campaign expenditure,” a misdemeanor. The court papers say that Brown knew that one of his relatives, who did not serve as his campaign treasurer, opened a bank account at Industrial Bank, which they called the “side account.” It was supposed to pay for “get-out-the-vote” efforts. In September 2009, about a year after the election, the court papers say, the relative made a cash “campaign expenditure” in excess of $50 to “a person in connection with a single purchase and transaction.”"

Even more bizzare.

They also reported Mendleson is on track to become interim chair.

by charlie on Jun 7, 2012 1:59 pm • link • report

In fairness, most major cities have been/are pretty corrupt, but they have enough institutional experience with corruption to ensure that the city manages it efficiently. DC never got to that point.

by JustMe on Jun 7, 2012 2:52 pm • link • report

but they have enough institutional experience with corruption to ensure that the city manages it efficiently. DC never got to that point.

It's hard to argue against the notion that the city actually is being managed efficiently. At least all evidence suggests such.

by HogWash on Jun 7, 2012 3:09 pm • link • report

To those who suggested the Capitol should have been placed in another city...well that's not the issue we are dealing with. Anyone one moving into the District...and no-one was forced to do so...then they should have known 'representation' was not automatically a part of their life.

Yes, many cities are corrupt. Far fewer suburban communities face such corruption. Perhaps when you foster a population who feel 'entitled'...you get exactly what you want...people who feel entitled but few who understand honest achievement.

Statehood is likely not going to happen for the District in this century...not with one party in control here. Plus, it would likely never pass Supreme Court adjudication any way.

however, I would certainly favor large portions returning to the State of Maryland with Federal 'enclaves' designated. Then the citizens of the former 'district' would have full voting and representation rights.

by Pelham1861 on Jun 7, 2012 3:16 pm • link • report

@Pelham1861, there shouldn't be any constitutional question as to DC statehood. Article One, Section Eight, the constitutional provision creating the District of Columbia, is silent as to what territory constitutes the seat of government, just its maximum size. In theory, nothing would stop Congress from shrinking DC just to an uninhabited monumental core and proposing the rest for admittance as a new state. If it were otherwise, the retrocession of Arlington and Alexandria would have been unconstitutional.

The only real constitutional "question" about DC statehood, as opposed to the currently insurmountable practical political barriers, would be the need to repeal the 23rd Amendment, lest the rump monumental core somehow get three electoral votes. But presumably the two could be linked, so that Congressional admission of the District as a state only occured after enough states ratified a repeal of the 23rd Amendment.

by cminus on Jun 7, 2012 3:37 pm • link • report

Yes, many cities are corrupt. Far fewer suburban communities face such corruption

I'd like to see some evidence to back this statement up. Nothing I've seen validates it.

But presumably the two could be linked, so that Congressional admission of the District as a state only occured after enough states ratified a repeal of the 23rd Amendment.

And require 2/3rds of the states to ratify DC statehood? If that were going to work we could give DC statehood with an amendment and not need the federal enclaves (and fix the other territories too).

No, we should get statehood first, and then clean up the mess that the 23rd amendment makes. Coupling the two will doom the effort.

by David C on Jun 7, 2012 3:48 pm • link • report

A quick Google search of "suburban corruption" brought up the following:

http://online.wsj.com/article/AP7ddb81a612d6445495533ab5912f2c66.html

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=11&articleid=20110419_11_A7_CUTLIN395937

http://chicagoconstructionlaw.blogspot.com/2012/04/construction-corruption-charged-in.html

Why can't we city slickers be as virtuous as the cul-de-sac dwellers? Cities were also not the only ones to have political machines, such as Delaware Co.'s War Board in suburban Philly. Long Island's GOP was caught demanding a contribution from public employees in the 80s.

by watcher on Jun 7, 2012 5:00 pm • link • report

For urban planners:

Phil Mendelson is the immediate past president of the Association of Metropolitan Planning Organizations:

http://www.ampo.org/

by Tom Coumaris on Jun 7, 2012 6:58 pm • link • report

No, we should get statehood first, and then clean up the mess that the 23rd amendment makes. Coupling the two will doom the effort.

I think that's rather the point. ;)

Actually, there's no reason that DC shouldn't have representation in both the House and Senate. But even in the 19th century, DC had a large black population, and so there was a block of racist Southern Senators who blocked representation. The most hardcore of the Southern racists ran the Committee on District Affairs, and pretty much held control over DC until Nixon.

It's understandable that those who want to continue those policies hide behind the Constitution, but there's no there there.

by oboe on Jun 7, 2012 7:29 pm • link • report

I was reading "The Personal Memoirs of Julia Dent Grant" the other day (that's President Grant's wife). In it she talks about a conversation she had with him about DC representation wherein she said "Washington is the capital of the United States, the South as well as the North. The people of the District must have a representative who will vote for their interests sometimes." To which Grant replied "Yes, that is only just."

So, yeah, this is an old problem.

by David C on Jun 7, 2012 10:21 pm • link • report