How could this make sense? Why would someone so 'distant' from ACORN, engage legal support of it and pay for that from the Presidential campaign?
Yesterday Sarah Palin said; "...Obama says that his only involvement with ACORN was when he represented the group as a lawyer. But what about the training that he provided ACORN in the past and ACORN staff, and his role in past ACORN voter registration efforts. And then, there’s the two hundred thousand dollars that he got for ACORN when he was on the board of the Woods Fund. And the fact that ACORN endorsed him this year and they’re working pretty hard on his behalf."
Bob Bauer a lawyer for the Obama campaign fired off a scathing letter to Attorney General Michael Mukasey, and co-addressed it to Nora Dannehy, the prosecutor in charge of looking into any potential issues with the firings of attorneys. The Obama campaign officially charged, "an unholy alliance of law enforcement and the ugliest form of partisan politics." This follows similar attacks from John Conyers, who logically would be supporting ACORN and has not taken the Obama position of 'nope, never, whattaya mean', David Iglesias, a discredited and totally untrustworthy former U.S. Attorney and they dug up Gerry Hebert Ex DOJ Voting Rights Chief to claim even so much as a look-see violates the DOJ's Manual on Federal Prosecution of Election Offenses.
John McCain and the GOP have taken the ACORN issue to the people, who have a right to know their Presidential election will be stolen (and it will). People are wondering what would happen if Obama was tied to ACORN. Well, Obama is legally defending ACORN, using campaign contributions to do it.
How can he distance himself from ACORN now?