It’s too bad U.S. Attorney Ronald C. Machen Jr. can’t indict Vincent C. Gray and his 2010 mayoral campaign team under the RICO Act. It certainly seemed as if they were running an organized criminal enterprise.
Two people from Gray’s inner circle essentially have admitted to obstructing justice, offering a bribe and money laundering. Those are all offenses identified under RICO.
Here are the specifics, according to federal court documents: Gray’s campaign orchestrated a series of attacks on the incumbent, Adrian M. Fenty, at various political events in 2010, using minor mayoral candidate and ever mercurial Sulaimon Brown. For that work, Brown was paid hundreds of dollars via money orders, purchased with cash contributions that may not have been reported, as required by law. To conceal their actions, Gray’s campaign lieutenants signed other individuals’ names as purchasers of those money orders.
Some people have demanded Gray say what he knew and when he knew it. Does it really matter whether he, personally, gave the order to perform what amounted to a “hit for hire” on Fenty’s career and character?
It’s clear Gray’s 2010 campaign was neck high in sleaze. District Democratic voters were denied a clean primary election.
Some political operatives have suggested, however, that none of the corruption mattered. The results would have been the same. Fenty was done before any bribe was offered.
Truth be told, the organized effort to deceive the public began even before money orders were passed to Gray’s erstwhile friend. It involved unethical councilmembers who also were Gray’s allies. Consider, for example, the role played by former Councilman — now federal felon — Harry Thomas Jr. in portraying Fenty as corrupt and his administration as a criminal enterprise. It wasn’t by chance that Thomas prolonged a wild and wacky investigation of recreation contracts through the 2010 primary season. Gray took that Thomas-fashioned tag and plastered it around the city, knowing it lacked merit. (What really bothered Thomas was that his crew wasn’t getting a piece of the action, which meant he could expect those kickbacks he had come to love.)
Gray and his team also sought to persuade voters that Fenty had engaged in unethical behavior during the 2008 lottery process. Recently released information suggests they may have been the real culprits.
A willingness to connect the dots provides sufficient evidence of the concerted actions by Gray and his crew. Yes, I supported Fenty’s re-election bid. Despite his obvious flaws, I believed him a better qualified candidate and more concerned about the future of the city — not distribution of the spoils to friends and family members eager for their turn at the public trough.
In short order, federal officials will provide residents all the sordid details about Gray’s 2010 campaign. They will learn how it manipulated finance laws, misrepresented facts and essentially defrauded voters to grease Gray’s entry to the mayoral suite.
But the more important question will be this: What are District voters prepared to do to ensure something similar doesn’t happen again?
Jonetta Rose Barras can be reached at [email protected].
Jonetta Rose Barras’ column appears on Monday and Wednesday. She can be reached at [email protected].
