Cracking The Annenberg Cover-Up
Here is a suggestion for cracking the Annenberg cover up - get the Illinois Attorney General involved through the Public Access Counselor.
Amy Ridenour of the National Center for Public Policy Research seemed optimistic on the legal front as well.
As noted earlier, Victoria Chou, a Dean in the College of Education at the University of Illinois, Chicago, was Secretary of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge when it was dissolved in 2002. If she did not donate the archives herself she certainly ought to know who did. Ken Rolling, the Executive Director, either knows the donor or was the donor.
In a related post, Dan Riehl goes through some of the evaluations of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge under Chairman Barack Obama's leadership. "Limited impact" was the phrase used by the Annenberg people; I preferred "failure".
Steve Diamond has links to the key documents here. And a follow-up here.
MORE: P. 7 of the 2000 Annual Report mentions the process by which the Challenge will wrap itself up. Responsibility for final reports and legal matters was placed with Executive Director Ken Rollings and Chief Financial Officer Gopika Malhotra under the supervision of the Board. That should cover the archives as well.

The NYTimes blog now acknowledges the issue.
LUN
Posted by: Danube of Thought | August 21, 2008 at 01:17 PM
At Reverse Spin, Dan Curry suggests that Illinois Attorney General Amy Madigan can use her "Public Access Counselor" office to open access to these documents.
That won't work.
You will bark up that tree, get a response, and it will be the same as what Stanley Kurtz received from the the Richard J. Daley UIC Library.
There is no taxpayer money in the Chicago Annenberg Challenge. There is only a cursory review and consulting work that the principals that formed CAC(Anne Hallet, Warren Chapman, and Bill Ayers). This work was brief in the fact that they met with Chicago Public Schools officials, the Chicago Mayor's office, and the Chicago Teachers Union to gauge their interest in the $500 million Annenberg Challenge.
There is no evidence of taxpayer funds going to the Chicago Annenberg Challenge.
How can you get the Public Access Couneslor involved in something that has nothing to do with government or government funds?
Posted by: Gabriel | August 21, 2008 at 01:36 PM
Cross Posting because I never know there is a new thread until it is too late. Argh.
Hugh Hewitt posted this link this morning:
Los Angeles Times picks up the story of the stonewalling going on about the terrorist's foundation which Obama led.
Posted by: Sara | August 21, 2008 at 01:41 PM
There is no evidence of taxpayer funds going to the Chicago Annenberg Challenge
Who coughed up the matching funds pray tell?
Posted by: glasater | August 21, 2008 at 01:42 PM
Tom re your comment at my site - see page 15 same document The Early Years - 1/3 of way down right-side column. Rollins was hired only "after" the first round of grant making. It was monies given out in that preliminary phase w/o Rollins that were cited as having established CAC's direction, leading, in part, to it's failure. - Dan
Posted by: Dan Riehl | August 21, 2008 at 01:43 PM
The really issue or talking-point is ..
Why didn't Obama put his biggest executive experience on his resume ?
Posted by: Neo | August 21, 2008 at 01:44 PM
LISA Madigan, Illinois AG, daughter of Micheal Madigan, IL House Majority Leader(D), would no sooner pick up this subject than she would investigate Gov. Rod.
Not. Going. To. Happen.
Posted by: Porter | August 21, 2008 at 02:01 PM
And now the other shoe drops... Do you think McCain's "not remembering" how many houses he has might have been a set up for team Obama?
OBAMA’S HOUSING PROBLEM
Brought To You By Convicted Felon Tony Rezko
Via the headlines at Hot Air
Posted by: Ranger | August 21, 2008 at 02:09 PM
someone has to find some ambitious young reporter without much fear who is going to follow this story where it leads. It could be Pulitzer Prize material.
You have an unreconstructed radical terrorist who has a much closer relationship with the candidate than is being admitted; A convicted Chicago real estate hustler, the Daly Machine, and a cover up....almost sounds like a Watergate level story to me.....
Posted by: matt | August 21, 2008 at 02:14 PM
Posted by: Gabriel | August 21, 2008 at 02:17 PM
As far as I can tell, the public records for the Chicago Annenberg Challenge only marginally tell you about the money exiting the organization.
They don't tell you anything about the money arriving at the organization. We'd have to pine through reports from all the known foundations that publicly supported the Annenberg Challenge.
I'm guessing you'll find the Joyce Foundation, The Pritzker Foundation, and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation donating matching funds. The rest probably came from the same sources that now contribute to your the Chicago Fund for Public Education. Those are firms like Chase Bank, the Boeing Corporation, McDonalds, Microsoft, etc.
Posted by: Gabriel | August 21, 2008 at 02:21 PM
I believe the Uof I at Chicago provided office space, rent free, for the CAC. That may make it a legitimate public disclosure issue.
Posted by: Patrick R. Sullivan | August 21, 2008 at 02:47 PM
That, and the court didn't have to go far to find public interest in the disclosure of Ryan's divorce papers...As I recall it was that some divorce mediation occurred on govt time. But I don't see madigan doing anything.
Posted by: clarice | August 21, 2008 at 02:50 PM
I'll go back and find the link but I know public funds were at least anticipated as part of the matching funds.
Posted by: bad | August 21, 2008 at 02:51 PM
My recollection is that it was the usual foundations--Joyce, Field, PRitzker.
But the Univ of Ill was involved and still is re the records.
Posted by: clarice | August 21, 2008 at 02:53 PM
In fact, funds from other foundations were anticipated to generate matching funds as well which is why I wondered if these sorts of foundations could issue grants in a circular fashion without ever actually dispursing money. Just making it appear that they had.
Posted by: bad | August 21, 2008 at 02:57 PM
The Jack Ryan case will be different, as despicable as that case was anyway. The Ryan's settled their divorce in Family Court. The Tribune argued that because it was a court paid for with taxpayer money AND Jack Ryan was pursuing public office, it became a legitimate case for disclosure. The court ruled in favor of the Tribune with certain exceptions. The privacy of the child must be protected.
Posted by: Gabriel | August 21, 2008 at 03:00 PM
It's shocking how Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn are walking around as free persons and THEIR PROJECTS still receive millions of dollars from commercial organizations.
That's not even the worst part. Bill Ayers has a seat at the table in determining school curriculum for the entire country.
Posted by: Gabriel | August 21, 2008 at 03:03 PM
Here is one of the sources. There are more.
Posted by: bad | August 21, 2008 at 03:04 PM
Page 14 of this doc has more info on expectations for sources of matching funds. It once more details foundations and public funds.
LUN
Posted by: bad | August 21, 2008 at 03:11 PM
Well, Chicaco or CAC to be exact was to match the gift 2 to 1 but did not. It appears they only had $110 million, not $150 million, to play with. Some of the groups listed might have public funds which they gave to CAC but that's not readily apparent to me.
Posted by: clarice | August 21, 2008 at 03:14 PM
Gabriel, I think that was the biggest stretch i've ever heard of. If, however, mere access to public space and services is sufficient, I am certain we will learn that this pupil indoctrination program met on occasion in public schools and worked with publicly paid teachers and school administrators.
Posted by: clarice | August 21, 2008 at 03:16 PM
Clarice
The $60 million is what was raised by 1999. Both of the works sited are assessments of the first three years of CAC. I'm assuming the rest of the matching funds were raised or they wouldn't have received all of the grant. I sent an email to Steve Diamond asking about the matching funds and he replied he was unsure as well.
Posted by: bad | August 21, 2008 at 03:29 PM
From Global Labor:
LUN
Posted by: bad | August 21, 2008 at 03:41 PM
If you want to pine through the publicly available documents that also received money from the Annenberg Challenge - University of Chicago's Consortium of Chicago School Research received money to "review" CAC - you can review those documents at this link.
Posted by: Gabriel | August 21, 2008 at 03:46 PM
The global labor post is dated yesterday morning and our email correspondence was prior to that.
Posted by: bad | August 21, 2008 at 03:47 PM
bad: We need Steve Diamond to disclose more information supporting that statement. I can find the private sources in which he refers, but are the "public sources" actually just the non-profit foundations like Woods, et al?
Posted by: Gabriel | August 21, 2008 at 03:52 PM
Gabriel
His email is listed. Ask for the link. The additional $50 milllion is new news to me.
Posted by: bad | August 21, 2008 at 03:57 PM
I don't know ,bad. $50 million and $60 million used to add up to $110 million when I went to school ages ago.
Posted by: clarice | August 21, 2008 at 04:05 PM
Gabriel Steve Diamonds post starts with this:
There is no link but it is implied the above referenced records are the source of his info.
Posted by: bad | August 21, 2008 at 04:06 PM
Clarice
I think Steve is referring to $110 in matching funds. The grant from Annenberg was 49.2 million.
Posted by: bad | August 21, 2008 at 04:09 PM
Ayers/Wheather Underground ad
Posted by: Topsecretk9 | August 21, 2008 at 04:10 PM
Top,
Link isn't working.
Posted by: Sue | August 21, 2008 at 04:12 PM
On the "housing issue" here the McCain's campaign response....ouch...
"Does a guy who made more than $4 million last year, just got back from vacation on a private beach in Hawaii and bought his own million-dollar mansion with the help of a convicted felon really want to get into a debate about houses? Does a guy who worries about the price of arugula and thinks regular people 'cling' to guns and religion in the face of economic hardship really want to have a debate about who's in touch with regular Americans?"
The only thing they left out is what did Obama have to say about Kerry's mansions and Theresa Heinz and her hundreds of millions....
Posted by: ben | August 21, 2008 at 04:12 PM
Nevermind. It's working now.
Posted by: Sue | August 21, 2008 at 04:12 PM
Thanks for the link, Sara.
The LA Times blog is a good blog, but what is it with this use of the term "espoused violence" that keeps getting printed as a description of the Weather Underground?
Posted by: MayBee | August 21, 2008 at 04:16 PM
RNC Rezko ad
Posted by: Sue | August 21, 2008 at 04:20 PM
I know public funds were at least anticipated as part of the matching funds.
That's very likely. You don't announce a $500 million dollar challenge in the Rose Garden of the White House with the President if you're not trying to put government capital behind your project. Posted by: Gabriel | August 21, 2008 at 03:03 PM
I agree. And where you have federal funds, you should have an audit trail.
Posted by: Barbara | August 21, 2008 at 04:24 PM
In Global Labor's Aug 20 piece (p. 4) he says $110 was all that was raised.
Posted by: clarice | August 21, 2008 at 04:30 PM
That is $110 MILLION.
Posted by: clarice | August 21, 2008 at 04:30 PM
Bill Kristol, who I cannot stand, just told Cavuto he thinks Obama's choice for VP is Jack Reed of Rhode Island. Anyone heard of him?
Posted by: Sara | August 21, 2008 at 04:30 PM
The new McCain ad - again focusing on The ONe.
LUN
Posted by: Jane | August 21, 2008 at 04:35 PM
Clarice
$110 million in matching funds plus the original grant of $49.2 million is a total of nearly $160 million as referenced in The Global Labor article.
Posted by: bad | August 21, 2008 at 04:43 PM
A few observations on this story:
First, there is sufficient evidence available now to conclude (a) That BHO was a poor steward of the funds entrusted to his care; (b) That BHO was a poor CEO because his organization failed to achieve the desired results; and (c) That BHO had a close working relationship with Bill Ayers and actively worked to advance Ayers' leftist educational philosophies under the auspices of the grant.
Second, if the BHO's allies continue stonewalling the documents, the above evidence will go unrebutted, and, if properly presented will lead to the conclusion that BHO is incompetant and dangerous.
Third, race has nothing to do with the issues in this story, so it can be publicized with impunity.
Posted by: Jim Rhoads aka vnjagvet | August 21, 2008 at 04:50 PM
Not sure whether it's sporadic moderation or whether the NY Times blog shut comments on For the Records, but they haven't posted any new ones since around noon, including the comment I left shortly after that. I don't know why that only seems to happen when I haven't bothered to keep a copy of what I wrote.
Posted by: JM hanes | August 21, 2008 at 04:51 PM
Three members of the WU were killed when a bomb in a Greenwich village apartment espoused.
Posted by: sbw | August 21, 2008 at 04:51 PM
Apparently those 7 houses of McCain's include condominiums for investment. At least that was suggested on the Corner at NRO. I'm sure more information is coming to clarify that.
Posted by: bio mom | August 21, 2008 at 04:58 PM
Dan Riehl's website links to the public documents that I am referring to.
He has done yeoman service getting these in one place.
If someone (e.g. Rick) could convert them to a format from which cut and paste excerpts may be made (like he did in the Libby/Plame case), I would be happy to try do a first draft on a synopsis of the doumentary evidence. I don't have a program that converts pdf pics to text.
For the litigators out there, it seems to me that we can use the spoliation principle to our advantage in developing this case. What do you think?
Posted by: Jim Rhoads aka vnjagvet | August 21, 2008 at 05:09 PM
2 houses are investment, 1 his daughter lives in. Three they use on a regular basis and a 4th, from time to time.
When I worked for a Member of Congress, her husband was a very successful antiques dealer. She knew nothing of his business and their finances were kept entirely separate. She used to say, "Bill is off on another buying trip." We'd ask where and she'd shrug, "who knows." They owned 3 houses, one her niece lived in in another state, one she said she wished she would get the time to visit, but she'd never seen, and their main residence in the District.
I don't find it the least unusual that McCain wouldn't know about Cindy's investments. In fact, we set up the system that way. Blind trusts and all.
Posted by: Sara | August 21, 2008 at 05:13 PM
Bad,:"In January of 1995 the formal announcement of the $49.2 million was made. That money would have to be matched by contributions from the private and public sector 2:1 for a total amount over the life of the project of approximately $150 million dollars to be disbursed in Chicago.(Apparently the actual amount raised was an additional $60 million for a total of $110 million.)"
Now, I read this as clearly saying CAC never met its obligation to match the Annenberg grant 2 for 1 and that the total raised and disbursed was $110 million.
Posted by: clarice | August 21, 2008 at 05:13 PM