… not much happened, as far as I can tell. Here’s a link to a Freep story about it; anyone there and/or hear anything else?
By the way, as far as the argument goes about transparency and state money and taxes and all of that: I think that EMU did what it was obligated and should have done, and that’s that. According to the Freep, B.L.A.C.K. paid 400 bucks for a plane ticket for Kilpatrick to speak and that was about it. Big deal.
Furthermore, my concern as a professor would be to find out where the line is for this “call for transparency” and/or “accountability.” For example, if I teach something in a class suggesting that maybe a communist-style state might not be such a bad idea, that we ought to heed the protests of the “Occupy” movements and consider systematic ways of redistributing wealth in this country, am I going to be called out because I’m teaching controversial issues on the tax dollar’s dime? I would hope not. So, while I’m no supporter of Kilpatrick, I don’t see what exactly is different about him coming in and talking about second chances and about how he was treated unfairly and all the rest.
Oh, there was one thing about the Freep story I didn’t get:
Kilpatrick did not address in specifics his current troubles. He is facing federal public corruption charges. He’s pled not guilty to those.
He walked away from a press conference following the speech when questions were raised about those charges and about allegations he had taken a $10,000 bribe in a bathroom.
Is this an old charge or is this something new?
