I have some glancing experience with CASA as well. The foundation I worked for was active in housing issues, with a focus on Native Americans but also immigration issues. Rather like ACORN, which we also funded. (Giving away dead rich guy’s money - oh,my, what fun! Giving it away to causes they would have HATED! Even better!)
Like ACORN, they were do-gooders, so earnest they made my teeth hurt, so sincere they made me want to drink. A level of involvement that made me a bit ashamed, I made a comfortable living giving away money, they took that money and Did Good. Like ham and eggs, the chicken is involved, the pig is committed.
Mostly housing issues, some community organizing, especially among immigrants. A bit of voter registration. Which made them enemies. What!? you say, how can something so inherently good as voter registration drives make one any enemies? Well, it makes you enemies among the sort of people who are not thrilled with recruiting more voters. Starts with “R”. “R”, me hearties, “R”! “R”!
Not enemies who will slip cyanide into your organic green tea, or cut the brake lines on your fifteen year old Volvo. But still, people who would be more pleased if you simply ceased to exist. Enemies who would seize an opportunity to do you dirt. Like, for instance, if they could prove, or even suggest, or even insinuate…that you had some designs for voter fraud.
Which they knew. Hurt their feelings a bit, to have enemies who object to such worthy pursuits as community organization. (Note: this was long before the murder of ACORN.) But they knew that they were waltzing blindfolded in a mine field, one wrong step, and goodbye CASA.
If for no other reason than funding. Charitable foundations are wussies, they watch their step very, very carefully. One word, one hint of anything remotely illegal or other than kosher, and the checks stop coming, goodbye to the luxuries of Goodwill suits and Motel 6.
Promote voter fraud amongst illegal aliens? Not a fucking chance. No fucking way, Jose. Of course, I could be wrong, it happened once in '68, when I thought I had made a mistake. But I very much doubt it. No. Just no.
As to what would motivate a lawyer who’s politics are just to the left of Calvin Coolidge to attend their meetings? Haven’t a clue, not making any suggestions, here. Perhaps an insinuation, one that can be dropped into the discourse like a gumball into a quiche, with a semantic trap door available to bolt into if challenged? But that would be wrong.
Bricker wouldn’t have had to report to authorities, a word dropped into the ears of CASA governing body would have swiftly resulted in stern words and fond farewells. A word to us, their funders, would have assholes puckering in dismay, pens poised hesitantly over checks that may not be signed. Did I mention that foundations are total wussies?
And whatever were you doing there, Counselor? Someone who is markedly unsympathetic to leftish populism of even the mildest stripe? And not once, but several times? A youthful indiscretion, perhaps, a halting misstep away from the path of political error? I make no suggestions, mind, or at least none that I cannot explain away with excruciatingly precise semantic distinctions.
Just, you know, asking questions.
