- About Us
- Community Guidelines

Advertising on BOR
- Advertise on BOR


We're Counting On You.

Burnt Orange Report is redeveloping our website for the first time in almost a decade.

We're counting on your support to continue providing you free and frequent coverage of progressive issues that matter to Texans.

Help us build a website that is as great as the content we publish on it.

Why did the Tom DeLay investigation stop? Or, there is more than one way to skin a US attorney

by: Texas Nate

Thu Mar 22, 2007 at 03:07 PM CDT

(Bumped. - promoted by Karl-Thomas Musselman)

In the fall of 2005 dominos were falling fast in the Jack Abramoff investigation. And they were falling in one very clear direction, closer and closer to Tom DeLay.

First DeLay's former communications director fell:

On November 21st, 2005, Michael Scanlon, Jack Abramoff's partner in the Indian fraud and bribery schemes, pled guilty to Conspiracy to Defraud the United States.

Then DeLay's former deputy chief of staff fell:

Tony Rudy pled guilty March 31st, 2006 to one count of Conspiracy. He was a former aide to Tom DeLay, a colleague of Jack Abramoff's and then a lobbyist at Alexander Strategy Group. He was named ("Staffer A") as a coconspirator in Abramoff's plea

The charge carries a maximum of five years, but because of Rudy's cooperation, prosecutors will recommend a sentencing range between two years and two years, six months. Rudy will pay at least $250,000 in restitution.

And it looked like the former Chief of Staff was next:

Ed Buckham, one-time chief of staff to Tom DeLay and later Chairman of the lobbying firm Alexander Strategy Group, appeared in Tony Rudy's guilty plea as "Lobbyist B."

According to the plea, Buckham helped in routing $50,000 in payments to Rudy's wife's consulting firm - the money was to bribe Rudy for his help defeating a bill on behalf of Jack Abramoff's client.

The plea also states that Rudy worked to bring other congressional aides on a trip to the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI) in part to benefit Buckham. The CNMI was a client of Abramoff's, but he seems to have shared the CNMI with Buckham.

In January 2006 Buckham shut down his business. In June 2006 the Washington Post revealed this choice nugget:

A registered lobbyist opened a retirement account in the late 1990s for the wife of then-House Whip Tom DeLay (R-Tex.) and contributed thousands of dollars to it while also paying her a salary to work for him from her home in Texas, according to sources, documents and DeLay's attorney, Richard Cullen.

The account represents a small portion of the income that DeLay's family received from entities at least partly controlled by lobbyist Edwin A. Buckham. But the disclosure of its origin adds to what was previously known about the benefits DeLay's family received from its association with Buckham, and it brings the total over the past seven years to about half a million dollars.

Since then.....nothing. No Buckham plea. No indictments. Nothing.....was a U.S. Attorney fired to prevent the investigation from continuing to inexorably close in on Tom DeLay?

Nope. But something very fishy did indeed take place. The lead investigator was given a Federal Judgeship, a new division chief with connections to the GOP machine was appointed (AND REPORTEDLY, TO THE DELAY DEFENSE TEAM ITSELF) and presto...no more momentum in the investigation.

Only trial attorney Martin Garbus spoke up at the time, in two the Huffington Post. First:

President George W. Bush has not made many moves more unethical than offering Noel L. Hillman, the Abramoff prosecutor, a federal judgeship. Hillman has apparently been talking with Bush's representatives since last year, and on last Thursday, he publicly announced he was accepting the appointment.

Let me make this perfectly clear.
At the same time that Mr. Hillman was conducting a grand jury and submitting evidence aimed at Bush's allies and perhaps Bush himself, he was meeting with Bush, who was, in effect, offering him a bribe.

Mr. Hillman, Bush is saying, leave the job, let me put someone else in your stead, someone I want. Forget, says Mr. Bush, that you have been in charge of the investigation for two years, that you have been involved on a day-to-day basis, and that your leaving seriously impedes the investigation.


I do not personally know Mr. Hillman. Thus far, his public actions seem to warrant only applause. But Hillman's boss is Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. Neither has said a word about the offer and its acceptance. The public is entitled to know more.

But Bush is getting away with it. There's been very little press coverage. Alito, Hamas, Iraq, and Oprah Winfrey have buried the story.

The Democrats should insist on the appointment of a special prosecutor to fill Mr. Hillman's position. Attorney General Gonzales should not be permitted to designate Hillman's successor.

This, unlike the botched up Alito hearings, is a war we can win. We should not let Bush appoint his own person, someone like Harriet Miers, Samuel Alito, or the man Bush's father said was the best person qualified for a Supreme Court seat, Clarence Thomas.

And second he outlined the deal with Democrats that got Hillman his ill-gotten bench seat:

We now know there was a political deal between the Bush Administration and New Jersey Democrats to get rid of the Abramoff prosecutor, Noel Hillman, by offering him a federal judgeship in New Jersey.
It's a deal that had been in the making for over a year.

It came about this way. The Democrats wanted Magistrate Federal Judge Susan [Wigenton] to be a federal judge. The Bush Administration said no.

We also know that in 2002 Bush got rid of a prosecutor. U.S. Attorney Black, who was about to indict Abramoff in Guam. That indictment also related to Abramoff's purchasing of influence. It's the modus operandi of this administration. Bush got rid of him, put in his own man, and the Abramoff prosecution ended.

This year the Bush Administration agreed to give the Democrats who they wanted in exchange for the Democrats agreeing to remove the Abramoff prosecutor. Wingenton got her appointment; the Democrats agreed to the removal of Noel Hillman, and he accepted a judgeship.

Next we'll look at where the investigation has gone since Hillman was replaced. Hint: it's a long road to nowhere. If you can't wait, jump ahead to this Legal Times piece.

Copyright Burnt Orange Report, all rights reserved.
Do not republish without express written permission.

Tags: , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email

The Democratic Delusion (3.00 / 2)
Don't be so sure that the investigation was halted simply because of the involvement of Republicans. There were Democrats who were associated with Jack Abramoff as well. Tom Daschle and Harry Reid among them.

Congress is at times just as corrupt as the White House. And when things hit too close to home, they move to protect themselves. Just like the White House does.

Corruption is not just a Republican problem.

Exactly.... (0.00 / 0)
it's a bipartisan one...one of few things that the two parties have in common anymore.


[ Parent ]
Horse hockey (4.00 / 6)
This is not a bipartisan problem. This is a Tom DeLay/Karl Rove GOP problem.

There are individual corrupt Democrats but nothing approaching the power and corruption of this organized racket that's been running DC for the past decade.

My comments reflect my own personal opinion and not those of any client or colleague, current, former or future.

[ Parent ]
Riiiight.... (1.00 / 6)
And the list of corruption from the D's goes on and on and on.....:

An independent counsel who investigated possible tax violations by former Housing and Urban Development Secretary Henry Cisneros charged that the Clinton administration thwarted his efforts to get to the truth.

- U.S. Rep. William Jefferson (D-La.) is under criminal investigation by the U.S. Justice Department for possible bribery in exchange for promoting business deals in Africa

- Federal prosecutors alleged in court documents that Ernest Newton, a former state Democrat Connecticut senator worked with a reputed mobster and his associate to try to stop police raids on businesses and advance their business interests

- Clarence Norman Jr., the longtime powerbroker of Brooklyn NY Democrats was found guilty of intentionally soliciting illegal campaign contributions.

- A top aide to Jim Black, the Democratic speaker of the state Legislature of North Carolina, resigned amid reports he had received payments from a company hoping for the lottery contract. The State Board of Elections is investigating Black's campaign finances. The investigation comes after the group Democracy North Carolina said it found evidence that video-poker operators were funneling money through unsuspecting donors to Black's campaign.

- West Virginia Logan County Clerk Glen Dale "Hound Dog" Adkins admitted to selling his vote for $500 in the 1996 Democratic Party primary, while Perry French Harvey Jr. pleaded guilty to conspiring to bribe voters in last year's Democratic contest

- Former Democat Gov. Donald Siegelman of Alabama was charged in a "widespread racketeering conspiracy" that includes accusations he took a bribe from former hospital executive Richard Scrushy for a key state appointment.

- Frank Ballance - a former Democrat Rep. from North Carolina was sentenced to four years in federal prison for conspiring to divert taxpayer money to his law firm and family through a charitable organization he helped start. Ballance, was a state senator before being elected to Congress in 2002, also agreed to repay $61,917 and to forfeit $203,000 in a bank escrow account in the name of the John A. Hyman Memorial Foundation.

- Five Democratic activists in Wisconsin accused of slashing the tires of vans rented by Republicans on Election Day 2004 are currently on trial

- Chuck Chvala, a Former Democrat Wisconsin Senate Majority Leader was sentenced to nine months in jail for felony misconduct in office and illegally funneling campaign contributions. Chvala had reached a plea deal with prosecutors earlier this year, admitting to charges that he directed a state employee to run a political campaign and used an independent expenditure group to funnel campaign contributions to a fellow Democrat.

- Brett Pfeffer, a former legislative director to Rep. William Jefferson, D-La., pleaded guilty to aiding and abetting bribery of a public official and conspiracy.

- Raymond Reggie, a New Orleans political Democratic consultant and fund-raiser who is Senator Kennedy's brother-in-law was sentenced to a year in prison yesterday after pleading guilty to bank fraud charges.


[ Parent ]
Pretty fast with the GOP talking points (3.25 / 4)
But can you point to one instance in which any of those Democrats coordinated with one another in a systematic way?
Anything that's resulted in multiple US Congressmen pleading guilty to felony counts like Duke Cunningham and Bob Ney before the investigations abruptly stopped?

My comments reflect my own personal opinion and not those of any client or colleague, current, former or future.

[ Parent ]
Hearings so important to correct more than corruption for money (0.00 / 0)
Abramoff's and Ney's HAVA stripped evidence from elections. No more paper ballots with e-voting.

Abramoff's lobbyists are tied to private army Blackwater.

Is draining the strength of our soldiers and our military in Iraq on purpose?


Book Review: Jeremy Scahill's "Blackwater"
by SusanG
Sun Mar 25, 2007

The Rise of the World's Most Powerful Mercenary Army
By Jeremy Scahill
Nation Books, Avalon Publishing
New York, 2007

  Blackwater is quickly becoming one of the most powerful private armies in the world, and several of its top officials are extreme religious zealots, some of whom appear to believe they are engaged in an epic battle for the defense of Christendom. .... For its vaunted American forces, Blackwater has expanded the mercenary motivating factor (or rationalization) beyond simple monetary gain (though that remains a major factor) to a duty-oriented, patriotic justification.

Jeremy Scahill's Blackwater would be a masterpiece of the genre of futuristic sci fi were it not so regrettably real. It's got all the twists and turns and secret corners of a Hollywood thriller: records and contracts that can't be traced, shady characters recruiting other shady characters in violent Third World nations, extremist religious figures lurking in the background of a mysterious unregulated company that uses PR tactics worthy of Orwell. Unfortunately for America, we're living the plot in real time.


The two most detailed story lines follow the four mercenaries killed in Fallujah and the rise of Blackwater founder Erik Prince. Scahill in the former case was able to interview the families of the mercenaries and follow their lawsuit against the company, which has hired such notables as Kenneth Starr to cut off discovery at every turn by bouncing issues into sympathetic courts and pleading national security issues. The families' gradual understanding that despite its PR overtures, Blackwater was most definitely not on their side is painful. Scahill's description of the early life and subsequent career of secretive Blackwater founder Erik Prince, a right-wing Christianist who has welded the perfect vehicle for his beliefs in fundamentalism, militarism and privatization/corporatism, is research at its finest.


The use of these contractors raises an even more alarming prospect, if followed to its logical conclusion: why not cut governments out altogether? As multi-national corporations continue to grow and exercise a power greater than that of many nations, what's to prevent them from employing their own private armies - as they do now with smaller, more passive security forces - and ignoring all laws of any country, the ones they're occupying or the ones they're at least nominally registered in?

As it is, Blackwater is floating around the world, according to Scahill, recruiting in countries with some of the most heinous human rights records and long and sordid histories of utilizing death squads. Your Solutions, a rival mercenary provider to Blackwater, actually hired the Honduran soldiers pulled out of Iraq by the Honduran government and sent them right on back to the region to fight under a private contract. Blackwater has hired and trained South Africans and soldiers who served under Pinochet in Chile.

More disturbing is the current push of Blackwater and the mercenary industry to repackage itself to meet domestic and humanitarian needs. First, consider this passage from Scahall, describing the first-ever "World SWAT Conference and Challenge," held at the company's North Carolina facility, where:

  ... there would be a SWAT Olympics, where teams from across the United States and Canada would compete in a series of events televised by ESPN. [Army Lt. Col. David Grossman, author of the book On Killing] spoke of a "new Dark Age" full of Al Qaeda terrorism and school shootings... "Embrace the warrior spirit," he shouted. "We need warriors who embrace that dirty, nasty four-letter word kill!"

Totally aside from the surreal weirdness of having these events broadcast on ESPN, consider those "warrior spirit" quotations and realize that Blackwater was on the streets of New Orleans in the aftermath of Katrina faster than the federal government was. And think about how the company, according to Scahill, is now making a push, with its massive lobbying arm behind it, to get into the border patrol business as well, with founder Prince talking up savings and efficiency.


What Scahill rightly calls this "repackaging mercenaries as peacekeepers" is going on through presentations to government officials - both in this country and to officials in such places as Jordan - under the beloved conservative banner of privatization, efficiency and incredible lobbying efforts (the same lobbyists, in fact, who are threaded throughout the Abramoff scandal).

[ Parent ]
Kucinich plans to investigate the privatization of war (0.00 / 0)
from: http://www.thenation...

Kucinich says he plans to investigate the potential involvement of private forces in so-called "black bag," "false flag" or covert operations in Iraq. "What's the difference between covert activities and so-called overt activities which you have no information about? There's no difference," he says. Kucinich also says the problems with contractors are not simply limited to oversight and transparency. "It's the privatization of war," he says. The Administration is "linking private war contractor profits with warmaking. So we're giving incentives for the contractors to lobby the Administration and the Congress to create more opportunities for profits, and those opportunities are more war. And that's why the role of private contractors should be sharply limited by Congress."

[ Parent ]
Slashing van tires - yeah, that's pretty comparable (4.00 / 4)
Also, when you lift a list like this verbatim, as you apparently did from www.boycottliberalism.com,
do you think it might be a good idea to cite your source rather than passing it off as though it was your own work?  Unless, of course, "boycottliberalism" is you, too.

Just sayin'

[ Parent ]
Ok, I did a google search.. (0.00 / 0)
and found it through boycottliberalism...

If you want, I can take the time and go through newsmeat or politicalmoneyline.com...

No different than lifting from the <<==== ward Lone Star Report and Daily Kos, right?


[ Parent ]
I don't care what your sources are (3.00 / 3)
your reasoning is bull.
but if you must post crap obviously grabbed from somewhere else, by all means post the source.

My comments reflect my own personal opinion and not those of any client or colleague, current, former or future.

[ Parent ]
Proof of corruption? (3.67 / 6)
How's this crap hold up in the light of the DOJ  shennanigans? (Read "fuckery").

Did you grok the study by Shields & Cragan that shows the USA's prosectuted Dems at a 7 to 1 ratio?

"Data indicate that the offices of the U.S. Attorneys across the nation investigate seven (7) times as many Democratic officials as they investigate Republican officials, a number that exceeds even the racial profiling of African Americans in traffic stops."

RICO crime in our government, thanks to the GOP machine.  They cheat and lie and steal and think God ordains it.

Wake up & smell the shit!

[ Parent ]
And it doesn't stop there... (1.00 / 3)
Abramoff Democrats:

Patty Murray (D-Wash) - $40,980
Charles B. Rangel (D-NY) - $32,000
Patrick J. Kennedy (D-RI) - $31,000
Harry Reid (D-Nev) - $30,500
Byron L. Dorgan (D-ND) - $28,000
Tom Daschle (D-SD) - $26,500
Brad R. Carson (D-Okla) - $18,300
Chris John (D-La) - $15,000
Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) - $14,500
John Breaux (D-La) - $13,750
Mary L. Landrieu (D-La) - $11,500
Steny H. Hoyer (D-Md) - $11,000
Dale E. Kildee (D-Mich) - $10,500
Barney Frank (D-Mass) - $9,000
Richard A. Gephardt (D-Mo) - $9,000
Max Baucus (D-Mont) - $9,000
Peter Deutsch (D-Fla) - $8,500
Dick Durbin (D-Ill) - $8,000
Frank Pallone, Jr (D-NJ) - $6,000
Nick Rahall (D-WVa) - $6,000
Jon S. Corzine (D-NJ) - $5,000
Fritz Hollings (D-SC) - $5,000
Barbara A. Mikulski (D-Md) - $5,000
Daniel K. Inouye (D-Hawaii) - $5,000
Deborah Ann Stabenow (D-Mich) - $5,000
Xavier Becerra (D-Calif) - $4,523
Tim Johnson (D-SD) - $4,250
Kent Conrad (D-ND) - $4,000
Maria Cantwell (D-Wash) - $3,000
Kalyn Cherie Free (D-Okla) - $3,000
Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif) - $3,000
Richard M. Romero (D-NM) - $3,000
Ed Pastor (D-Ariz) - $3,000
John B. Larson (D-Conn) - $3,000
James L. Oberstar (D-Minn) - $3,000
Brad Sherman (D-Calif) - $3,000
Earl Pomeroy (D-ND) - $2,500
Max Cleland (D-Ga) - $2,500
Gene Taylor (D-Miss) - $2,250
Doug Dodd (D-Okla) - $2,000
Jay Inslee (D-Wash) - $2,000
John D. Dingell (D-Mich) - $2,000
Joe Baca (D-Calif) - $2,000
Carl Levin (D-Mich) - $2,000
C. L. "Butch" Otter (R-Idaho) - $2,000
Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark) - $2,000
Bennie G. Thompson (D-Miss) - $2,000
Robert Menendez (D-NJ) - $2,000
Robert T. Matsui (D-Calif) - $2,000
Rodney Alexander (D-La) - $2,000
Sander Levin (D-Mich) - $2,000
Ron Kind (D-Wis) - $2,000
Ronnie Shows (D-Miss) - $2,000
Rosa L. DeLauro (D-Conn) - $2,000
Willie Landry Mount (D-La) - $2,000
Tom Carper (D-Del) - $2,000
Thomas P. Keefe Jr. (D-Wash) - $2,000
Nita M. Lowey (D-NY) - $2,000
Maxine Waters (D-Calif) - $2,000
Ned Doucet (D-La) - $2,000
John Neely Kennedy (D-La) - $2,000
Lane Evans (D-Ill) - $2,000
Norm Dicks (D-Wash) - $1,500
Rick Weiland (D-SD) - $1,000
Ron Wyden (D-Ore) - $1,000
Tim Holden (D-Pa) - $1,000
William J. Jefferson (D-La) - $1,000
Patrick Leahy (D-Vt) - $1,000
Paul Wellstone (D-Minn) - $1,000
Pete Stark (D-Calif) - $1,000
Peter DeFazio (D-Ore) - $1,000
Mike Thompson (D-Calif) - $1,000
David Phelps (D-Ill) - $1,000
Derrick B. Watchman (D-Ariz) - $1,000
Charles S. Robb (D-Va) - $1,000
Bill Luther (D-Minn) - $1,000
Barbara Boxer (D-Calif) - $1,000
Brian David Schweitzer (D-Mont) - $1,000
Charles J. Melancon (D-La) - $1,000
Eliot L. Engel (D-NY) - $1,000
Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif) - $1,000
Gloria Tristani (D-NM) - $1,000
Grace Napolitano (D-Calif) - $1,000
Joe Lieberman (D-Conn) - $1,000
Henry A. Waxman (D-Calif) - $1,000
Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY) - $1,000
Henry Cuellar (D-Texas) - $500
John Kerry (D-Mass) - $500
Loretta Sanchez (D-Calif) - $500
Shelley Berkley (D-Nev) - $500


[ Parent ]
You're conflating things (3.80 / 5)
I'm guessing (since you didn't cite a source) that you're willfully conflating contributions from the Native American tribes defrauded by Abramoff with contributions from Abramoff himself.
Pretty nice sophistry and good rapid response work from a GOP shill.

My comments reflect my own personal opinion and not those of any client or colleague, current, former or future.

[ Parent ]
YOU'RE RIGHT! (3.50 / 4)
But this "conflating"  is just their more adept form of "LYING".

They absolutely reek.

[ Parent ]
I call BULLSHIT! (4.00 / 6)
Here's a link.

NO Democrats got money directly from Abramoff.  Because his clients gave money to Dems DOES NOT MEAN they did it at his behest.  A lot of tribes had given to Dems pre-Abramoff shakedowns.


  Because crooked RICO-stye Republicans cheated people out of lobbying fees, it does not mean they bought & poisoned everything with any connection.
Show a link to campaign donation records from Jack-em-off directly to these Democrats. Do that or SHUT THE FUCK UP WITH THE LIES!


[ Parent ]
If you add all these numbers together (5.00 / 2)
you come up with what the average Republican got from from Abramoff in the average weekend.

[ Parent ]
Well, the largest contribution I see here (0.00 / 0)
is a little over 40k. Which was about as much as Delay's golfing trip cost.

Nate's right. You say that because Abramoff gave 5 cents of out every dollar to Democrats and 95 cents to Republicans it's a bipartisan problem.

That's absolute horseshit and no one is buying it for a second. However, I have to commend you... your inner Machiavellian Republican really appears to be blossoming!

[ Parent ]
So now it's the $ amounts, huh... (0.00 / 0)
that make anything excusable or inexcusable.

And did I affiliate myself with any party on here? No. So if there's any horses**it, I'm responding to it.

And of course Democratic Undergrounders won't buy it. They think it's ok to engage in shady land deals, and even better that it's ok to go jury shopping before starting a trial (hmmm...5  grand juries oughta do it)...

Makes me wonder what the Blue Dogs think...they're hardly heard from on here...about as much vitrol as from the far-right Joe Barton types..., i.e. "I hope he rots to death in jail.."


[ Parent ]
For the record... (0.00 / 0)
I support many "blue dogs" and consider myself most closely aligned with their camp.  And you've clearly heard my voice on this thread.

[ Parent ]
No, corruption is corruption and it's (3.00 / 1)
all inexcusable. The problem is you were trying to paint this overwhelmingly as a political corruption issue when in reality it's a republican corruption issue.

As for your oft repeated claims of independence, I find them largely irrelevant and hard to believe. If it talks like a republican and thinks like a republican, it must be a republican.

The biggest point that you've missed, as Nate and someone else noted, is that money from THE TRIBES went to Democrats. To my knowledge, no money crossed from Abramoff to Democrats. You were even wrong about that.

There is no doubt in my mind that overwhelmingly there is a ton of political corruption in the republican party. Democrats just aren't very good at it (just look at Jefferson).

[ Parent ]
Look, if I were to be called any kind of Republican... (0.00 / 0)
it would be a former Republican or recovering Republican (after all, former TDP Chairwoman Molly Beth Malcolm and former Clinton press secretary Leon Panetta are former Republicans- does that make them lifelong Republicans? No. And on the other side, Bob Barr left the Republican Party last year for the Libertarian Party)

As I haven't been physically active in politics in 2002 (I've been involved in music- playing for various bands), my views have evolved into what would classify me as a libertarian on most issues. Republicans have no place for my views on drug legalization, opposition to state mandated marriage counseling and other requirements on dissolving marriages, opposition to communication decency laws, opposition to the Patriot Act, etc.

And before then, I was once a member of the Palo Pinto County Democratic Club. I once held views that government should serve a strong role in an individual's life.

However, I learned that both major parties believe in a strong governmental role- for Democrats, in an economic sense; for Republicans- in a social sense. I believe that government should be strong in neither, as the pocketbook and the bedroom should be uninhibited altogether.

So for anyone to say that I'm an all-around liberal or all-around conservative is laughable. I'm neither. And not even a moderate- we know what Jim Hightower once said about what's in the middle of the road- yellow stripes and dead armadillos.


[ Parent ]
keep in mind (5.00 / 1)
these contributions weren't from Abramoff. They're from Native American tribes defrauded by Abramoff.
This is utterly irrelevant to anything.

My comments reflect my own personal opinion and not those of any client or colleague, current, former or future.

[ Parent ]
Actually it's very relevant... (5.00 / 1)
"They're from Native American tribes defrauded by Abramoff."

That is very relevant to the issue involved with regard to ethics. And probably explains why the real issue, the way in which the tribes are exploited by lobbyists, law firms and of course by Congress itself, was not pursued further. It wasn't just Abramoff.

[ Parent ]
Wrongness (1.00 / 1)
Yoo-hoo...McCain's Indian affair hearings?  Steven Griles pleading guilty for lying to Congress about his ties to Abramoff?  It was pursued.  Probably will pursued to a deeper level now in the 110th Congress.
  He said it wasn't relevant to include legal donations by third parties (the tribes) to congressmen in the catagory of corrupt payments from Abramoff.
In logic-land, also know as reality, it's not relevant because it is not true.
  Do a little reading up on this crap, please, instead of reiterating ignorance.

[ Parent ]
i have jury duty on monday... (0.00 / 0)
...here in travis county, so maybe there will be a surprise good news!

wait, if i play this properly, do you think this post will/could be used to prevent my selection?

; )

-my comments at BOR are mine, and do not represent anything official from LFT.

Jury ditch (2.67 / 3)
Just tell 'em you don't belive in God....you're out.

[ Parent ]
nah... just talk. A Lot. (0.00 / 0)
You have an opinion or an experience with every  conceivable situation:)

[ Parent ]
And if you want a more notorious source... (0.00 / 0)
Here ya go...


repeating the same crap (3.67 / 3)
with different sources doesn't make it true. Media Matters -- as cited by MsInformed above -- is refuting the Post's crappy reporting.
There's nothing corrupt about accepting money from Native Americans. It was Abramoff's redistribution of gambling money to the GOP that resulted in his felony plea.
Your guys are scum, that is all.

My comments reflect my own personal opinion and not those of any client or colleague, current, former or future.

[ Parent ]
Some of "our" guys are too (3.00 / 2)
The crappy reporting by the Washington Post is what spurred the investigation into Jack Abramoff to begin with. Tends to lend a little credibility to the crap if you ask me.

Jack Abramoff was not the only lobbyist involved and Greenberg Traurig was not the only law firm involved. They just caught. 

Should prove interesting to see if Chris Bell suddenly starts lobbying the Texas Legislature on the issue of casinos.

Like a wise old Indian sage once said, where there are smoke signals in support of casinos on the reservations, there is usually a lobbyist hiding behind the smoke.

And usually the lobbyist is not representing the tribe the lobbyist says wants the casino.

[ Parent ]
when "our" guys are organized enough (3.00 / 2)
To basically merit a RICO prosecution I'll eat my hat.
The GOP went from reformers to the most corrupt congressional delegation in US history in less than 10 years.
It took the Democrats 60+ years to come up with the congressional post office scandal.
There's just no comparison.
Not that we should tolerate corrupt Democrats, but let's cut the crap. DeLay, Inc. was an unbelievably corrupt machine and BushCo. is still operating the White House and executive branch from that same craven play book.

My comments reflect my own personal opinion and not those of any client or colleague, current, former or future.

[ Parent ]
Back to the US Attorneys NOT fired... (3.00 / 2)
That is the other side of the coin that makes the whole story even more chilling - the 'underperfomers' who would not play by the crooked Bushco canon were purged - but what evil was done under the cover of the US Attorneys' offices according to those twisted rules?

...come on guys (2.00 / 4)
Can't you get over this issue?

You won, he's out of office, and you control his seat.

Conservative Yet Pragmatic

[ Parent ]
NO (4.00 / 4)
He committed crimes, more than we know about.
DeLay and company perverted the people's business into a mad quest for partisan power.
He sold access to the highest bidder and used that money to buy more power.
The damage he caused by gutting our Congressional delegation is still ongoing.
This wasn't Jim Wright selling some books in a shady way. It wasn't even Ben Barnes doing a dirty real estate deal or two.
This was wholesale corruption, extortion, and abuse of power on a scale I hope to never see again in my lifetime.
The SOB is still on TV spreading lies and pretending to be principled. He'll get what's coming to him.

My comments reflect my own personal opinion and not those of any client or colleague, current, former or future.

[ Parent ]
Wow (2.33 / 3)
"This wasn't Jim Wright selling some books in a shady way. It wasn't even Ben Barnes doing a dirty real estate deal or two.
This was wholesale corruption, extortion, and abuse of power on a scale I hope to never see again in my lifetime."

This is the same level of crap that Kay Bailey Hutchison put out when she talked about perjury not being perjury in some cases.

This is the same level of crap that Nancy Pelosi put out when she talked about ethics violations by Democrats not being the same as ethics violations by Republicans.

Corruption is corruption. There are no "levels" of corruption with regard to an elected official violating the public trust.

When you believe there is, you are no better than the Republicans who believe there is.

[ Parent ]
What is an ongoing criminal enterprise, Papa? (2.33 / 3)
C'mon Snooks step back from the trees and survey the forest with me a second here...

While corruption is indeed corruption, and it is not unique to either party, what I see at issue here is a question of scale and impact.  And there IS a meaningful difference here.

Which does not excuse ANY public official of either party who has violated the public trust - but to pretend that the wholesale politicization of the US Attorney's office in a way designed to turn elections is not a bigger deal than the venal misdeeds of a single official simply fatuous - and EVERY corrupt public official from that individual to the architect of the subversion of the US Attorney's office should go down.

[ Parent ]
I'm much more worried about felonies than misdemeanors (3.00 / 2)
and I'm much much more worried about systematic, organized criminal activity than I am by isolated incidents.
I'm a big believer in investigating any wrong doing by anyone, and prosecuting where merited by the facts uncovered, and punishing those convicted.
Democrats haven't mounted anything comparable to DeLay's K Street project or the web of money that Abramoff wove.
If they try it, we'll go after them too, but first we got to get a full investigation of the crooks that are already in the dock.

My comments reflect my own personal opinion and not those of any client or colleague, current, former or future.

[ Parent ]
Unless crooks go to jail (5.00 / 1)
they'll keep doing the same things because they work!
  Tom Delay was on CSPAN, at a book event at the Cornell Club (?) and he maintains that private trade groups paid for his golf trip to St Andrews.  Didn't anyone tell him that the receipt showed up on Abramoff's credit card?  He doesn't know wha' hoppen.

[ Parent ]
WHY this matters - Griles plea deal announced (3.00 / 3)
So here you have it writ large, a plea deal that gets the highest ranking Bushco official implicated in the Abramoff scandal off with a slap on the wrist, half of which can be served in home confinement!  Which list did the US Attorneys working this case fall on I wonder?

Griles, an oil and gas lobbyist who became an architect of  President Bush's energy policies while at the Interior Department between July 2001 and July 2005, is the highest ranking Bush administration official implicated in the Washington lobbying scandal.

Prosecutors dropped earlier allegations that Griles did anything improper to help Abramoff or gained anything of value from the former Republican lobbyist, the AP was told. The agreement does not require Griles to help investigators with their grand jury probe.

In exchange for the plea, federal prosecutors will seek no more than a 10-month prison sentence for Griles - the minimum they could seek under sentencing guidelines - but they will agree to let him serve half that in home confinement, according to one person involved in the case.


The Democratic Undergrounders on here... (1.00 / 3)
have one train of thought...Ds aren't that bad...Rs are evil...if it's a story about Dem corruption, it's bulls**t, and by God, if it's a story about R corruption, it's as clean as a whistle-- um like everything Joe Wilson says in his profit-making book. LOL

Gotta love that fringe <<<---- ward hypocrisy.


When it's a fake... (3.00 / 2)
story about Dem corruption like you saying Democrats got "Abramoff money" as you cited above, it IS bullshit.  You are just trying to find some trees to obscure the forest that IS Republican graft.

  I don't like dishonesty in any public figure. But comparing a gravel truck emtying a load to a landslide is just pathetic.

One of the biggest mob tactics used by the GOP has been  this crap of giving government/taxpayer paid no-bid contracts to their favored firms and after they get that money, they donate to the GOP!!  Legal? Maybe. Smelly? Hell yes!  And then it's all a "coincidence". Ask Guv Goodhair.


[ Parent ]
If you want to talk about coincidence... (1.00 / 2)
do you remember when Jan the Man Reno fired ALL U.S. attorneys in 1993? One of them was one who was investigating Rep. Dan Rostenkowski for all kinds of charges (and yes, Rosty Boy did some time for it). Now the libs are screaming and crying about EIGHT attorneys getting fired. EIGHT.

Speaking of mob tactics, mob tactics are when John Sweeney and his AFL-CIO goons are trying to do away with an employees right to vote on unionization by secret ballot.



[ Parent ]
Are you working for the Republicans? (3.67 / 3)
You spend your days trying to derail threads on this site with inane maunderings.  I have to ask, is somebody paying you to do this?  You seem to have a lot of spare time and internet liberty at whatever job you have.

Back to the subject: For the purposes of this discussion, it does not matter one freakin' bit whether some Dems were corrupt.  The issue at hand is Tom DeLay and how the investigation evaporated after the Bush administration moved the prosecutor out of the job.

Rostenkowski was prosecuted, convicted and imprisoned.  He deserved it.  Any pol that goes bad deserves to pay the appropriate price.

It should be DeLay's turn now, but the whole legal process may have been subverted and perverted by an administration that routinely shows a snearing disrespect for the law and the truth.

[ Parent ]
LOL! (0.00 / 0)
If they have the money to pay someone to log onto Democratic blogs/derail the conversation, then perhaps I'm working for the wrong side! :) j/k  Seriously, though, knowing how much more Republicans pay than Democrats (add $20k to $40k onto a Democratic salary to come up with the Republican equivalent), how much WOULD that job pay?!?! :)

[ Parent ]
No, no one's paying me to do this... (0.00 / 0)
it's my time, my dime...and I don't work for any party, as you're a Democratic consultant by trade...so call me David, and I'll address you as Goliath...

My point is that Abramoff is falsely portrayed as a Republican donor, when deeper research indicates that Abramoff's beneficiaries are of both political stripes. Same thing with Enron and Ken Lay, which the fringeLibs tried to skirt around, as well.

Both parties have blood on their hands. But to scrurry to wash the blood off and point fingers at the other side is laughable.

Delay's out of the House. All he's left to do is grind his axe and cry Uncle at R's who "betrayed" him. And I'm sure he'll get convicted. Yes, you heard that from me.

And now we've "MovedOn." Madam Pelosi is the Speaker, and Harry is the Senate Majority Leader. And I'm sure Ronnie Earle will be getting his share of the $$ from the Big Buy movie that he's in.


[ Parent ]
Abramoff is a Republican (0.00 / 0)
Denying that is ludicrous.

Like almost all DC lobbyists, he gave some money to both parties, but focused on one -- the Republicans.

He was deeply involved in the K Street Republican money machine and Republican leadership in both houses.

And, he was a crook who got into crooked deals with a crooked congressman.  Probably because he was indefensible, the Bush administration threw Abramoff under the bus.  DeLay, however, they saved from prison by stifling the investigation.  End of story.

[ Parent ]
Do you have proof they stifled it? (5.00 / 1)
"DeLay, however, they saved from prison by stifling the investigation."

Do you have proof they stifled the investigation?  What exactly did Tom De Lay  do that would support an indictment by a federal grand jury? Other than the crap Chris Bell put in his ethics complaint that the House committee admonished him for putting in there? Put up or shut up.

Tom De Lay may or may not have violated Texas law. That does not mean he violated federal law. You just want him indicted because he is a Republican.  And you are just mirroring the Republicans who want people indicted because they are Democrats.

Violating the law is not the same as violating ethics. And Democrats really have a problem with ethics as well. 

If people would ignore Tom De Lay, he would go back into the sewer. 

Instead you fire up the few supporters he has. And keep their flames going.

[ Parent ]
Well let's see (0.00 / 0)
The actions he took on behalf of Abramoff's clients in the marianas islands for one thing.
And his wife being on Ed Buckham's payroll raises some interesting questions, since the money to pay her came from Abramoff's clients, including a fraudulent charity.
What are former DeLay staffers Scanlon and Rudy telling the DOJ? They already got Bob Ney convicted, do you really think DeLay was any less corrupt than Ney?
And DeLay's the one on CNN, Meet the Press, MSNBC peddling his new book. This BOR post is certainly not behind his come back.

My comments reflect my own personal opinion and not those of any client or colleague, current, former or future.

[ Parent ]
Abramoff was anything that fit his purpose (0.00 / 0)
Jack Abramoff was an opportunist whose only loyalty was to himself.

[ Parent ]
That's not true (5.00 / 1)
Abramoff was president of the College Republicans, right before his close friends Grover Norquist and Ralph Reed held that title.
His contributions were ALL to Republicans.
He was a part of the GOP machine. He never dealt with Democrats.

My comments reflect my own personal opinion and not those of any client or colleague, current, former or future.

[ Parent ]
You are MISREPRESENTING! (1.00 / 1)
Abramoff did not give money directly to Democrats! Put up a link to an FEC record for your proof. Do it! Just do it!

If you do find any (ANY!), give us the numbers so we can calculate the percentage of r's to d's. Do it! Just do it!


[ Parent ]
And also... (0.00 / 0)
Republicans are too boring for me...so I spend more time on this site...I've been a member of both parties at one time or another, but Democrats are more fun to be around...I prefer coffeeshops over country clubs ;)


[ Parent ]
It's only a dull mind that gets bored. (1.00 / 2)
Even my children know that.

[ Parent ]
Get edumucated first, then write. (0.00 / 0)
Go read this summary of "myths and falsehoods in the US attorney scandal"  http://mediamatters....
GW Bush had already asked for all USA's resignations, like Clinton did, aftyer his  FIRST inaguration. But if Clinton did it to stop Rostenkowski's prosecution why did he do time? Perhaps Clinton DOJ "faithfully executed the law" instead of trying to work around laws like the current Bush.  Go read this article too, showing the difference:

Then there is the little change that Bushies slipped into the renewal of the "Patriot" Act that circumvents Senatorial confirmation of the US attorneys that they appoint. Arlen Spector's staff did it, the senator denied knowledge of it and it turns out that staff mamber was someone the Bush administration arranged to work in his office.  Go read about it!  This president (and his men) are actively subverting the Constitution! 

I saw KKKarl on the CSPAN discussing the change and he said the Constitution didn't work quite the way THEY thought it should and the change in confirmation would be more consistant with their view of the Executive function.  I repeat:  he said the Constitution didn't work quite the way THEY thought it should!

Cart/horse Horse/cart??? WTF?

This is the kind of CRIME that makes Rostenkowski's postage stamp graft pale in comparison!  This is the shit you are carrying in your bucket when you defend them with your misrepresentations, conflations and damned lies.

You can call me a liar,but you can't show me lying. You, on the other hand, show everyone you're an asshole


[ Parent ]
And besides... (0.00 / 0)
your media-matters link was referring to a New York Times story, not a Washington Post story. Not only that, but TWO news sources were referring to Abramoff Democrats.

Get your facts straight before making up your usual pile of bovine excrement.


[ Parent ]
all of those stories were making the same point (3.00 / 2)
that conflated tribal giving with Abramoff giving.
the tribes gave to Dems before Jack 'off was on the scene.
I also like how you don't even bother defending DeLay you just launch into your "everybody does it" bull.
I'm all for prosecuting William Jefferson and any other politician -- regardless of party -- caught with hands in the till.
But there's no comparison between DeLay, Inc. and anything by Democrats, even old Rostenkowski was utterly small time in comparison.

My comments reflect my own personal opinion and not those of any client or colleague, current, former or future.

[ Parent ]
So what would make a story credible? (0.00 / 0)
Does it have to be carried on MoveOn.org? LoneStar Report?

And no, I'm not defending DeLay. You couldn't even pay me to. To me, he's a whinybag bitterboy who blames everyone for his downfall.

Illegal donations are just that- illegal. Whether it comes from John Huang or Jack Abramoff. But for anyone to say it's dominant with a particularly party makes me wanna laugh till my sides hurt.


[ Parent ]
And... (0.00 / 0)
The Seattle Times ran the story, too...Are you telling me they're lying also, because it pointed fingers at Democrats?



[ Parent ]
Gosh! (3.00 / 2)
Maybe the story originated with a news service that many papers use.
If I were to xerox a story 100 times, does that make it 100 times more true?


[ Parent ]
The Seattle Times story... (0.00 / 0)
has an Associated Press origin.



[ Parent ]
Umm... (0.00 / 0)
Isn't that exactly what he meant? That the Seattle Times story shared the same source as the other one and that it was a general wire story picked up by alot of papers?

You're a troll, a hack, and an astroturfer.

[ Parent ]
Back to this post's TOPIC perhaps??? (5.00 / 2)
Let's assume, for the sake of argument, that the US Attorneys were fired because the administration was angry about these investigations (HIGHLY likely). 

In that case, if Bush allows his officials to testify under oath they either: a) lie and say it wasn't.  We have emails saying it was.  Perjury, a felony...  b) They say, heck yes it was.  They've just admitted to OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE, a felony... 

Either way, they end up in jail.  No WONDER he won't let them testify!!!

This issue is freaking HUGE people!!!  Like bigger than anything we can fathom.  WE HAVE AN IMPEACHABLE OFFENSE!  Neither the Attorney General nor the President exists beyond the law, NEITHER has the authority to OBSTRUCT JUSTICE!  Sure, the US Attorneys serve at the pleasure of the President, but if one is fired solely to stop an investigation then Obstruction has occured!!! 

Our side has to play our poker hand REALLY REALLY carefully here.  We have to look like we "just want the truth" to force the testimony which will nail them.  And force records to be turned over. 

OUR job, as bloggers/activists/etc is quite simple: WE MUST CREATE THE FRAME THAT OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE IS BAD!  We must get it out there that the President fired a US Attorney to protect a friend/cover up a CRIME!  We need every single message delivery system we have to push this message.

Furthermore, whichever "real" candidate for Pres says this first will instantly become the frontrunner.  Since New Mexico is one of these states, Bill Richardson has the absolute MOST to gain.  Plus, does he have standing, as a Gov of NM to work with his AG to open an investigation into any violations of state law covering up a crime might entail?

Distraction through disinformation, distortion and denial (3.00 / 2)
That is the real end of the Rethuglican supporters who dial in - they are trying to crank the "signal to noise" ratio beyond the point that rational discourse can occur - witness his tagging my post as a DU person and mischaracterizing the positions here... but then addressing his statement in a rational fashion means he is achieving exactly his purpose, derailing ANY honest examination of the continuing criminal enterprise that the Bush White House has turned the US Department of Justice into.

[ Parent ]
Simple solution... (3.67 / 3)
Stay on message... Obstruction of Justice...  Covering up a massive criminal conspiracy to elect Republicans and harm Democrats... Using the FBI and Justice Dept as his own personal political wing...  Keep repeating them OVER AND OVER AGAIN!  We have the facts on our side and are correct, but it will take us being more effective in the public discussions to win this thing.  And let's, for once, quit attacking Rove exclusively and say THE PRESIDENT AND HIS ADVISORS did this.  What did Bush know and when did he know it?!? 

[ Parent ]
Speaking of denial? (1.00 / 1)
What do you call writing off an Associated Press story about Abramoff Ds as "lies?"

Is that not denial? Or to be PC, is it "exhibiting a refusal to acknowledge an asserted fact?"


[ Parent ]
Simple question... (3.00 / 1)
Did the President knowingly fire US Attorneys who were investigating Republican operatives/office holders who were breaking the law?  Forget all the rest, it's a distraction and a rather simple attempt to muddy the waters and I, for one, won't take the bait.  Did he knowingly do this?  If he didn't, then who exactly authorized the firings and where was the President on this important decision since they serve at the pleasure of the PRESIDENT and not the pleasure of Harriet Myers or Karl Rove?  Where does the buck stop in this White House?  Who's accountable/responsible?

The LAW is what matters here and we're dealing with obstruction of justice, plain and simple.

[ Parent ]
Why, thank you for asking... (2.67 / 3)
Yes, yes,  he did!  That's precisely why they won't take an oath, don't want a transcript and wish to restrict what CAN be asked of the co-conspirators.

No, no, wait! You said "Did the President knowingly fire US Attorneys..."  He probably didn't know or care what his folks told him to sign. Either way: IMPEACH  INDICT  IMPRISON

[ Parent ]
Oy vey (3.00 / 2)
"The LAW is what matters here and we're dealing with obstruction of justice, plain and simple."

Rule of law finally went out the window during the Clinton Administration with regard to obstruction of justice. On the part of both the Democrats and the Republicans. 

You can call for impeachment a hundred times a day and every time you do you will find Nancy Pelosi standing there like the proverbial brick wall. She has made it clear there will be no impeachment proceedings. So why bother with all of this?

Because some Democrats see an advantage to keeping him in office and publicly persecuting him. Hoping it allows them to gain the White House. Which is what the Republicans did with Clinton.

It worked with Clinton. It may not work with Bush. It may merely enrage Republicans to vote straight tickets again and do so in large enough numbers to make it easier for them to ignore their party having fixed another election. The few Republicans, I should add, who have a problem with that.

Most don't. Most Republicans view politics as a football game. Without rules and without a referee. But you know what?  Most Democrats seem to as well. 

I suspect most Democrats would fix elections as well if given the opportunity. Some probably do. 

LBJ wasn't the first Democrat to fix an election. I doubt he was the last.

[ Parent ]
My understanding (0.00 / 0)
My understanding was that she meant it was off the table for Bush.  I never heard her say anything about any of his officers.

Either way, it's not a hard story to spin that she said that with all the knowledge she had at the time.  These new revelations constitute an impeachable offense, yada yada..

[ Parent ]
Thanks for illustrating my point Star... AGAIN! (2.00 / 2)
The bottom line in the context of this thread is a big SO WHAT?  To mimic a former SecDef, Is that to say there have ever been any crooked Dems?  My goodness gracious yes! 

Is that relevant in a discussion of a systematic attempt to subvert the DOJ and turn each US Attorney into an extension of the GOP? NO!

It is anything besides the most pathetic form of apologist seeking to trivialize current misdeeds?  My goodness gracious no!

[ Parent ]
Not trivializing anything (3.00 / 2)
Just pointing out that the corruption is so extensive and permeates so much that there is nothing you can do about until you address it without pointing a partisan finger. 

[ Parent ]
There's nothing partisan in the finger I'm pointing (3.67 / 3)
at DeLay and the US DOJ. There's clearly something criminal that went on and a failure to investigate fully.
it's not my fault these creeps didn't include any Dems in their schemes.

My comments reflect my own personal opinion and not those of any client or colleague, current, former or future.

[ Parent ]
Remember... (0.00 / 0)
The President and his advisors are engaged in a massive coverup of criminal corruption and have obstructed a federal investigation and already committed perjury. 

This only has legs if we keep the message alive.

[ Parent ]
Nate (may I call you Nate?) (0.00 / 0)
I DO want to point a partisan finger at Tom Delay. Actually two...the middle fingers of each hand!

"I hope he is watching, because I am doing this as hard as I can."

[ Parent ]
Hey guys! (0.00 / 0)
Just stopping by here on my spring break to say this:
1. Stop bickering, this is a partisan D site
2. Typing from DeLay's district right now I can tell you, he's a jerk
3. Keep your eyes on the prize, making him slimed and irrelevant.
4. Get Lampson re-elected.

Some Republicans have had enough... (0.00 / 0)

"Four board members of the American Conservative Union, one of the oldest and best established voices of the conservative movement, resigned recently when DeLay was brought onto the board."

And his book no doubt will create even further problems as more Republicans read it.  He was immoral but now is a righteous Christian.  He was unethical but got the job done and so that is all that matters. 

He proclaims himself to be the voice of the  true conservative Republicans in this country. Some of those true conservative Republicans no doubt will move to put a muzzle on him. Because he doesn't really represent them. Or speak for them.

In a way, no one does at this point. They are becoming the "moral minority" finally in this country.  And they can thank Tom De Lay for that.  As can we in a way.

Bottom Line (0.00 / 0)
Look, Tom Delay is nothing more than white trash and like most white trash he eventually ran afoul of the law. He's a flim flam man that wanted to use his office to make himself, his whore daughter, and all his crooked friends rich.
Delay has nothing to offer, he only wants to take and take, legally or illegally.
The idea that there are people out there that are willing to defend him or his actions are beyond me. This moron lost the R majority in the House because he is a crook, end of story.
The thing that absolutely kills me is that Delay was using campaign donations to pay his wife and daughter something like 500K over 4 years for "fund raising" activity. Right. How can anybody not see that as outright theft? "they earned it" Sure.
F Tom Delay, Dying in jail would be too good for that POS.

The Goody Box (0.00 / 0)
Apparently politicians use their campaign funds for a lot of things.  Things that most of us would object to. If we knew.

I doubt Tom De Lay gets out of bed in the morning without calling an attorney to see which side of the bed to get out on. 

Reality is that ethics went out of the American ethos a long time ago. 

It is never a question of whether something is ethical. Only a matter of whether something is legal. And in a growing number of cases juries are overruling the attorneys who tell their clients something is legal and saying no, it was not.

But of course the attorneys then appeal and get a judge or two, or buy a judge or two,  to say yes, it was. 


[ Parent ]
'To Russia, Love Tom DeLay' (5.00 / 1)
  The U.S. Family Network, a public advocacy group that operated in the 1990s with close ties to Rep. Tom DeLay and claimed to be a nationwide grass-roots organization, was funded almost entirely by corporations linked to embattled lobbyist Jack Abramoff, according to tax records and former associates of the group.

  During its five-year existence, the U.S. Family Network raised $2.5 million but kept its donor list secret. The list, obtained by The Washington Post, shows that $1 million of its revenue came in a single 1998 check from a now-defunct London law firm whose former partners will not identify the money's origins.

  Two former associates of Edwin A. Buckham, the congressman's former chief of staff and the organizer of the U.S. Family Network, said Buckham told them the funds came from Russian oil and gas executives. Abramoff had been working closely with two such Russian energy executives on their Washington agenda, and the lobbyist and Buckham had helped organize a 1997 Moscow visit by DeLay.

  The former president of the U.S. Family Network said Buckham told him that Russians contributed $1 million to the group in 1998 specifically to influence DeLay's vote on legislation the International Monetary Fund needed to finance a bailout of the collapsing Russian economy. ...

  In addition to the million-dollar payment involving the London law firm, for example, half a million dollars was donated to the U.S. Family Network by the owners of textile companies in the Mariana Islands in the Pacific, according to the tax records. The textile owners -- with Abramoff's help -- solicited and received DeLay's public commitment to block legislation that would boost their labor costs, according to Abramoff associates, one of the owners and a DeLay speech in 1997.

  A quarter of a million dollars was donated over two years by the Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians, Abramoff's largest lobbying client, which counted DeLay as an ally in fighting legislation allowing the taxation of its gambling revenue. ...

  Two former Buckham associates said that he told them years ago not only that the $1 million donation was solicited from Russian oil and gas executives, but also that the initial plan was for the donation to be made via a delivery of cash to be picked up at a Washington area airport.

  One of the former associates, a Frederick, Md., pastor named Christopher Geeslin who served as the U.S. Family Network's director or president from 1998 to 2001, said Buckham further told him in 1999 that the payment was meant to influence DeLay's vote in 1998 on legislation that helped make it possible for the IMF to bail out the faltering Russian economy and the wealthy investors there.

  "Ed told me, 'This is the way things work in Washington,' " Geeslin said. "He said the Russians wanted to give the money first in cash." ...

  No legal bar exists to a $1 million donation by a foreign entity to a group such as the U.S. Family Network, according to Marcus Owens, a Washington lawyer who directed the IRS's office of tax-exempt organizations from 1990 to 2000 and who reviewed, at The Post's request, the tax returns filed by the U.S. Family Network.

  But "a million dollars is a staggering amount of money to come from a foreign source" because such a donor would not be entitled to claim the tax deduction allowed for U.S. citizens, Owens said. "Giving large donations to an organization whose purposes are as ambiguous as these . . . is extraordinary. I haven't seen that before. It suggests something else is going on.

  "There are any number of red flags on these returns." ...


What saith BOR about this copy and paster? (0.00 / 0)
McBlogger? TexasNate? MsInformed? Anyone?

Or will he go unscolded?


[ Parent ]
Cut & paste (0.00 / 0)
Not my purview to scold this behavior. The paster does give links at the bottom, which one would assume is the source.

[ Parent ]
Which Russians? (0.00 / 0)
The communists or the oligarchists? If you look carefully at the "capitalism" of Russia and China, it is not capitalism but oligarchy.  Which is what our capitalism has become as well as our democracy.

And it is neither Democratic or Republican. It is merely the greed of a few and the few are both Democratic and Republican.

The Bush agenda is the agenda of oligarchy and it is an agenda that was there long before either of the Bushes entered the political arena. To better understand the oligarchy, merely use an anagram.

Oilgarchy is oligarchy.

[ Parent ]
Connect With BOR

2014 Texas Elections
Follow BOR for who's in, who's out, and who's up.

Candidate Tracker:
-- Statewide Races
-- Congressional Races
-- State Senate Races
-- State Rep. Races
-- SBOE Races
-- Austin City Council

Click here for all 2014 Elections coverage


Make a New Account



Forget your username or password?

Texas Blue Pages

Texas Blue Pages
A career network for progressives.


Shared On Facebook

Burnt Orange Reporters
Editor and Publisher:
Katherine Haenschen

Senior Staff Writers:
Genevieve Cato
Joe Deshotel
Ben Sherman

Staff Writers:
Omar Araiza
Emily Cadik
Phillip Martin
Natalie San Luis
Katie Singh
Joseph Vogas

Byron LaMasters

Blogger Emeritus:
Karl-Thomas Musselman

Read staff bios here.

Traffic Ratings
- Alexa Rating
- Quantcast Ratings

Powered by: SoapBlox