committee

The House Judiciary Committee on Tuesday released a report after its own investigation into FireAid, the charity founded by Clippers executives that raised $100 million for wildfire relief efforts in Los Angeles last January.

The investigation — led by Rep. Kevin Kiley (R-Rocklin) under committee chair Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) — began in August when Kiley “sent a letter to FireAid requesting a detailed breakdown of all non-profits that received money from FireAid.” Kiley expressed concern that the money had gone toward local nonprofits rather than as more direct aid to affected residents.

FireAid promptly released a comprehensive document detailing its fundraising and grant dispersals. After reaching out to every named nonprofit in the document, The Times reported that the groups who successfully applied for grants were quickly given money to spend in their areas of expertise, as outlined in FireAid’s public mission statements. A review conducted by an outside law firm confirmed the same.

The new Republican-led committee report is skeptical of the nonprofit work done under FireAid’s auspices — but cites relatively few examples of groups deviating from FireAid’s stated goals.

Representatives for FireAid did not immediately respond to request for comment on the report.

Out of hundreds of nonprofits given millions in FireAid funds, “In total, the Committee found six organizations that allocated FireAid grants towards labor, salaries, or other related costs,” the report said.

The committee singled out several local nonprofits, focused on relief and development for minorities and marginalized groups, for criticism. It named several long-established organizations like the NAACP Pasadena, My Tribe Rise, Black Music Action Coalition, CA Native Vote Project and Community Organized Relief Efforts (CORE), whose activities related to fire relief they found “unclear,” without providing specific claims of misusing FireAid funds.

The report — while heavily citing Fox News, Breitbart and New York Post stories — claims that “FireAid prioritized and awarded grants to illegal aliens.” Yet its lone example for this is a grant that went to CORE, citing its mission for aiding crisis response within “underserved communities,” one of which is “undocumented migrants” facing “high risk of housing instability, economic hardship, exploitation, and homelessness.”

The report said that $500,000 was used by the California Charter Schools Assn., Neighborhood Legal Services of Los Angeles County, Los Angeles Regional Food Bank, LA Disaster Relief Navigator, Community Clinic Assn. of Los Angeles County and LA Conservation Corps “towards labor, salaries, or other related costs,” which the committee said went against FireAid’s stated goals.

Yet the examples they cite as suspicious include NLSLA using its FireAid grant to pay salaries to attorneys providing free legal aid to fire victims, the Community Clinic of Los Angeles “expanding training in mental health and trauma care” through grants to smaller local health centers, and the L.A. Regional Food bank allocating its funds to “mobilize resources to fight hunger.”

The report singled out one group, Altadena Talks Foundation, from Team Rubicon relief worker Toni Raines. Altadena Talks Foundation received a $100,00 grant from FireAid, yet the report said Altadena Talks’ work on a local news podcast, among other efforts, “remains unclear” as it relates to fire relief.

The report’s claims that “instead of helping fire victims, donations made to FireAid helped to fund causes and projects completely unrelated to fire recovery, including voter participation for Native Americans, illegal aliens, podcast shows, and fungus planting” sound incendiary. Yet the evidence it cites generally shows a range of established local nonprofits addressing community-specific concerns in a fast-moving disaster, with some small amounts of money possibly going toward salaries or overhead, or groups whose missions the committee viewed skeptically.

FireAid still plans to distribute an additional round of $25 million in grants this year.

SACRAMENTO — California State Treasurer Bill Lockyer recently said he was retiring from public office next year, so how does he explain filing papers this week to form a campaign committee for a possible run for lieutenant governor in 2018?

He probably won’t run for lieutenant governor in 2018, but the filing allows him to keep his large political war chest in play to influence elections of other candidates, a spokesman said.

As many other politicians have done, Lockyer is exploiting a much-criticized loophole in the campaign finance law so he can continue to use more than $2.2 million in surplus campaign funds after he leaves office next year.

Normally, an elected official would have to close his campaign committee no later than nine
months after the date he leaves office or the term of office ends.

But many politicians form new committees for offices they do not intend to seek so they can continue to have use of the money for years to come. That way they can contribute to candidates and causes using political funds rather than personal funds.

“His decision to retire from elective office stands,” spokesman Tom Dresslar said. “He hasn’t changed his mind. But at this point he doesn’t want to completely foreclose any options in 2018.”

“Besides, to make sure he can continue using the money to support select candidates and causes beyond 2014 he was gonna have to transfer his campaign funds to a new committee eventually. He decided the sooner the better,” Dresslar said.

ALSO:

States try to tackle ‘secret money’ in politics

States crack down on campaigning nonprofits

Obama picks California watchdog for FEC

patrick.mcgreevy@latimes.com

¿

Dec. 24 (UPI) — Special counsel Jack Smith is requesting that the full video of his deposition before the House Judiciary Committee on his investigations into President Donald Trump be released to the public.

Smith’s attorneys sent a letter to committee Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, on Thursday asking that his closed-door deposition be released. During the deposition, Smith defended his decision to file charges against Trump for allegedly trying to overturn the 2020 election.

“Mr. Smith respectfully requests the prompt public release of the full videotape of his deposition. Doing so will ensure that the American people can hear the facts directly from Mr. Smith, rather than through second-hand accounts,” wrote Lanny A. Breuer and Peter Koski, Smith’s lawyers, in the letter.

“We also reiterate our request for an open and public hearing. During the investigation of President Trump, Mr. Smith steadfastly followed Justice Department policies, observed all legal requirements, and took actions based on the facts and the law. He stands by his decisions,” the letter said.

“I was there. There is no reason not to release the video and transcript,” Rep. Dan Goldman, D-N.Y., said in reply to a CBS News reporter’s post about the letter on X, The Hill reported. “If @Jim_Jordan refused Jack Smith’s request for a public hearing – like every other Special Counsel – because he allegedly wanted to avoid the 5-minute rule, he got that.”

Jordan has said he had not ruled out public testimony.

Smith’s opening remarks were published by The Hill.

“Our investigation developed proof beyond a reasonable doubt that President Trump engaged in a criminal scheme to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election and to prevent the lawful transfer of power,” Smith said.

“Our investigation also developed powerful evidence that showed President Trump willfully retained highly classified documents after he left office in January 2021, storing them at his social club, including in a bathroom and a ballroom where events and gatherings took place.

“He then repeatedly tried to obstruct justice to conceal his continued retention of those documents,” he said.

Smith said during his testimony that he’d do it again with the same facts.

Rep. Kevin Kiley, R-Calif., told The Hill on the day of Smith’s testimony that he wouldn’t be against public testimony.

“I do think that we’re dealing with unprecedented events here, so it’s entirely appropriate. And I think people on both sides, maybe for different reasons, think that what happened here bears scrutiny,” Kiley said.

Dec. 17 (UPI) — Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis is facing a Georgia state Senate committee over her attempts to prosecute President Donald Trump in a 2020 election interference case as well as her hiring of Nathan Wade, with whom she had a romantic relationship.

Willis has fought the subpoena requiring her to appear before the committee since the summer of 2024. Her attorney is former Georgia Gov. Roy Barnes, who said she maintains that the committee’s actions are politically motivated.

Barnes argued before the Georgia Supreme Court on Dec. 9 that the subpoena to testify issued by the committee is invalid because it was issued after the legislature adjourned.

The committee plans to ask about her decisions regarding the case against Trump and his supporters, some of whom pleaded guilty to charges. Sidney Powell, Jenna Ellis, Kenneth Chesebro and Scott Hall took plea deals after agreeing to testify. Trump later gave them all federal pardons.

Wade and Willis were removed from the case, and Willis fought to stay on the case, but lost her appeal. The case against Trump was dropped after a new prosecutor took over the case.