8/3/2019 Motley Response to DC Office of Campaign Finance and the DC Auditor[1] (1)

1/2

1

Reverend Anthony J. Motleys Response to the Media

With Regard to the DC Office of Campaign Finance Report and

A Report from the DC Auditor on Earmark Funding

As I listened to and watched the recent unfolding of the Shirley Sherrod story that

embroiled the Department of Agriculture, White House and even the NAACP, I was

reminded of my own situation here in the District of Columbia as it relates to the Marion

Barry investigation and the subsequent Bennett Report.

Ms. Sherrods reputation was sullied as a result of false allegations, mis-

representation of videotape documentation, statements taken out of context, and

individuals in authority quick to condemn and to judge.

In my case, as a result of a biased investigative report, which subsequently has

been refuted by the recent DC Office of Campaign Finance Report regarding Mr. Barry

and the DC Auditors Report on Earmark Funding, I have been tainted with the

appearance of impropriety and questionable ethical conduct.

The reports from both the DC Office of Campaign Finance and the DC Auditor

determined that there were no laws broken and that the earmark funds expended were in

fact spent in accordance with the granting agencys process and internal accounting

procedures. In other words the claims made by the Bennett Report against those

identified in the report, including myself, were from the very beginning, suspicious andnarrowly-focused.

Moreover, Bennetts reports of alleged falsification of documents were not true.

No money from a scholarship fund was spent on items other than for its intended

purpose. The charge that I received monies as a consultant with no justification was not

true. And finally, the charge that there was an allocation of funds beyond the fiscal year

program period was equally untrue. However, it should be noted that the media,

especially the printed media, along with some blogs, have been quick to take what was

reported in the Bennett Report as the truth and nothing but the truth. Unfortunately, those

who practice this brand of irresponsible journalism have chosen not to print the results of

the investigation which determined that the rule of law was not violated. Instead, the

opinions of those with questionable motivations and suspicious political interests remain

standing.

8/3/2019 Motley Response to DC Office of Campaign Finance and the DC Auditor[1] (1)

2/2

2

I have been ridiculed in the papers and on the internet, accused of something I did

not do. And for the things that I did do, nothing was sinister or illegal. However, the

public wouldnt know because some in the media refuse to come back with a story to

give balance to the ugliness first reported in the Spring of this year.

Like Shirley Sherrod, I believe that I deserve my chance in the public forum to

inform the people of the outcome of the rule of law investigation and the auditors report.

With these two reports, along with the internal investigation conducted by my own

organization, which has found no wrongdoing or criminal activity on my part, I should be

able to move forward personally and professionally.

In conclusion, I maintain my earlier position that those of us investigated by Mr.

Bennett and his team were simply targeted because of our association with Mr. Barry and

were treated like criminals from the very beginning of the investigation. Now that Mr.

Barry has been exonerated of any wrongdoing by the very agencies responsible for

determining the rule of law, not just simply stating an opinion, I think that it is

encumbered upon all media, especially the print media and blogs, to report the truth and

not just the opinion of an investigative body that was hell bent on finding something

wrong even if they had to distort the facts and state things out of context.

Reverend Anthony J. Motley

Social Entrepreneur/Engineer