A Cesspool


Alum does digging about the forthcoming Allbritton Center for the Study of Public Life, with unhappy results:

But do you know what else Robert Allbritton has done in his short career? Well, he was President and CEO of Riggs Bank, a local financial institution in Washington, DC, owned by the Allbritton family. And why does the Allbritton name sound vaguely familiar? Well, in March he resigned as president in disgrace. Why? Let’s ask the Washington Post!

The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, which has closely monitored Riggs since early last year and must approve any senior executive appointments, was informed of Allbritton’s replacements, the company said. Riggs was fined a record $25 million by the OCC last spring for failing to comply with anti-money-laundering laws, and in January the bank pleaded guilty and paid a $16 million fine for failing to prevent possible money laundering by former Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet and officials of the West African nation of Equatorial Guinea.

That’s right. It’s turn out that the Allbritton family is widely believed to have personally assisted Certified Evil Dictator Augusto Pinochet in hiding his assets from the various courts that are trying to seize them. Want more? Read another Post article. Robert’s father Joe seems to have been the major culprit–although some random low-level employees took the legal fall–but it’s hard to believe my illustrious brother in Wesleyan alumdom was not part of some very bad things.

I don’t know what I think about this. Granted, the guy is seriously sketchy (check out the comments about The Politico on our previous post), but am I alone in thinking we might be jumping the gun a little here?

(Visited 3 times, 1 visits today)

20 thoughts on “A Cesspool

  1. bbound

    The money coming from Allbritton is a restricted special donation. It’s the kind of donation, increasingly common these days, that allows outside money to have a pretty substantial effect on curriculum. So the question is how much control this money will exert on the school. Was Wesleyan looking to start a Center for the Study of Public Life? Probably not. Granted, Wesleyan has long wanted to expand course offerings in the social sciences, and Davenport has been slated for use as an expansion of PAC for some years. So it is not that the funding is unwelcome, I’m sure. I just hope that the faculty, and not the Allbrittons, will be in charge of the intellectual content. I wonder, for instance, if the proposed emphasis on quantitative methods comes from the Government department, or from the Allbrittons. Something to ask your professors about this fall.As I said in the rest of my original post, I’m not opposed to accepting the money–hey, that’s $5 million dollars that won’t be donated to the RNC!–I just would like to see some acknowledgement of the larger situation. It’s hard to blame the fundraisers at Wes for not wanting to splash Allbritton scandals over the announcement, but one hopes they know they are playing with fire.

  2. bbound

    The money coming from Allbritton is a restricted special donation. It’s the kind of donation, increasingly common these days, that allows outside money to have a pretty substantial effect on curriculum. So the question is how much control this money will exert on the school. Was Wesleyan looking to start a Center for the Study of Public Life? Probably not. Granted, Wesleyan has long wanted to expand course offerings in the social sciences, and Davenport has been slated for use as an expansion of PAC for some years. So it is not that the funding is unwelcome, I’m sure. I just hope that the faculty, and not the Allbrittons, will be in charge of the intellectual content. I wonder, for instance, if the proposed emphasis on quantitative methods comes from the Government department, or from the Allbrittons. Something to ask your professors about this fall.As I said in the rest of my original post, I’m not opposed to accepting the money–hey, that’s $5 million dollars that won’t be donated to the RNC!–I just would like to see some acknowledgement of the larger situation. It’s hard to blame the fundraisers at Wes for not wanting to splash Allbritton scandals over the announcement, but one hopes they know they are playing with fire.

  3. bbound

    The money coming from Allbritton is a restricted special donation. It’s the kind of donation, increasingly common these days, that allows outside money to have a pretty substantial effect on curriculum. So the question is how much control this money will exert on the school. Was Wesleyan looking to start a Center for the Study of Public Life? Probably not. Granted, Wesleyan has long wanted to expand course offerings in the social sciences, and Davenport has been slated for use as an expansion of PAC for some years. So it is not that the funding is unwelcome, I’m sure. I just hope that the faculty, and not the Allbrittons, will be in charge of the intellectual content. I wonder, for instance, if the proposed emphasis on quantitative methods comes from the Government department, or from the Allbrittons. Something to ask your professors about this fall.As I said in the rest of my original post, I’m not opposed to accepting the money–hey, that’s $5 million dollars that won’t be donated to the RNC!–I just would like to see some acknowledgement of the larger situation. It’s hard to blame the fundraisers at Wes for not wanting to splash Allbritton scandals over the announcement, but one hopes they know they are playing with fire.

  4. bbound

    The money coming from Allbritton is a restricted special donation. It’s the kind of donation, increasingly common these days, that allows outside money to have a pretty substantial effect on curriculum. So the question is how much control this money will exert on the school. Was Wesleyan looking to start a Center for the Study of Public Life? Probably not. Granted, Wesleyan has long wanted to expand course offerings in the social sciences, and Davenport has been slated for use as an expansion of PAC for some years. So it is not that the funding is unwelcome, I’m sure. I just hope that the faculty, and not the Allbrittons, will be in charge of the intellectual content. I wonder, for instance, if the proposed emphasis on quantitative methods comes from the Government department, or from the Allbrittons. Something to ask your professors about this fall.As I said in the rest of my original post, I’m not opposed to accepting the money–hey, that’s $5 million dollars that won’t be donated to the RNC!–I just would like to see some acknowledgement of the larger situation. It’s hard to blame the fundraisers at Wes for not wanting to splash Allbritton scandals over the announcement, but one hopes they know they are playing with fire.

  5. bbound

    The money coming from Allbritton is a restricted special donation. It’s the kind of donation, increasingly common these days, that allows outside money to have a pretty substantial effect on curriculum. So the question is how much control this money will exert on the school.

    Was Wesleyan looking to start a Center for the Study of Public Life? Probably not. Granted, Wesleyan has long wanted to expand course offerings in the social sciences, and Davenport has been slated for use as an expansion of PAC for some years. So it is not that the funding is unwelcome, I’m sure. I just hope that the faculty, and not the Allbrittons, will be in charge of the intellectual content. I wonder, for instance, if the proposed emphasis on quantitative methods comes from the Government department, or from the Allbrittons. Something to ask your professors about this fall.

    As I said in the rest of my original post, I’m not opposed to accepting the money–hey, that’s $5 million dollars that won’t be donated to the RNC!–I just would like to see some acknowledgement of the larger situation. It’s hard to blame the fundraisers at Wes for not wanting to splash Allbritton scandals over the announcement, but one hopes they know they are playing with fire.

  6. Anonymous

    hmm has it occured to you that there might be some middle ground between “self-righteous liberal” and “enabler of genocidal dictator?’ (in other words, are you not setting up what we self-righteous liberals call a false binarism?)And my god, this is what passes for politics at this school?

  7. Anonymous

    hmm has it occured to you that there might be some middle ground between “self-righteous liberal” and “enabler of genocidal dictator?’ (in other words, are you not setting up what we self-righteous liberals call a false binarism?)And my god, this is what passes for politics at this school?

  8. Anonymous

    hmm has it occured to you that there might be some middle ground between “self-righteous liberal” and “enabler of genocidal dictator?’ (in other words, are you not setting up what we self-righteous liberals call a false binarism?)And my god, this is what passes for politics at this school?

  9. Anonymous

    hmm has it occured to you that there might be some middle ground between “self-righteous liberal” and “enabler of genocidal dictator?’ (in other words, are you not setting up what we self-righteous liberals call a false binarism?)And my god, this is what passes for politics at this school?

  10. Anonymous

    hmm has it occured to you that there might be some middle ground between “self-righteous liberal” and “enabler of genocidal dictator?’ (in other words, are you not setting up what we self-righteous liberals call a false binarism?)

    And my god, this is what passes for politics at this school?

  11. Anonymous

    So is Wes supposed to wait for the next wealthy alum to donate $5 million instead of using this guy’s money? Every donor doesn’t have to be some self-righteous liberal… it’s better than not having the money at all.

  12. Anonymous

    So is Wes supposed to wait for the next wealthy alum to donate $5 million instead of using this guy’s money? Every donor doesn’t have to be some self-righteous liberal… it’s better than not having the money at all.

  13. Anonymous

    So is Wes supposed to wait for the next wealthy alum to donate $5 million instead of using this guy’s money? Every donor doesn’t have to be some self-righteous liberal… it’s better than not having the money at all.

  14. Anonymous

    So is Wes supposed to wait for the next wealthy alum to donate $5 million instead of using this guy’s money? Every donor doesn’t have to be some self-righteous liberal… it’s better than not having the money at all.

  15. Anonymous

    So is Wes supposed to wait for the next wealthy alum to donate $5 million instead of using this guy’s money? Every donor doesn’t have to be some self-righteous liberal… it’s better than not having the money at all.

Comments are closed.