Michelle Malkin has two posts (here and here) noting that Claude Allen, the former top Bush advisor who it was revealed Friday had been arrested for a refund scam, has an identical twin brother, Floyd. Whereas Claude scratched his way out of poverty to an important job at the White House, Floyd has led a very troubled life.
Michelle observes, “If it turns out that Claude Allen, a father of three who reportedly has bailed out his troubled twin brother before, tried to protect Floyd Allen and ruined his career out of familial love, that is an extraordinary thing.” No doubt. And it would certainly explain why a man who had apparently led such an exemplary life suddenly threw it all away for less than a week’s salary. (Indeed, he could have probably earned an extra $5000 at work quicker than by running the scam in question.) If Claude is taking the fall for his brother, it is both very sweet and very wrong. His higher duty, after all, is to his wife and children, not his brother.
Update: To be clear, Claude Allen is not claiming that his brother was the actual perpretator. This is merely speculation on the part of some confused as to why someone in his position would have committed such a high risk, low reward behavior.
I should note, too, that this does not have much bearing on whatever political fallout there might be from this case. Even though I follow American politics rather closely, I had never heard of Allen before the arrest report. That’s not to say that he was not an important player; he was. But his lack of fame limits the damage substantially. Further, I can’t imagine anyone otherwise inclined to support President Bush blaming him for the private conduct of an appointee.
To the extent that there is a political question here it is about the way Allen’s dismissal was handled. He was accused of a crime, a fact the administration presumably knew, but a cover story was put out claiming Allen was resigning for family reasons and that he had done great service to the country. If Allen were covering for his brother, nothing would change in that regard.
________
