Abramoff to Squeal

[Kramer]

http://www.slate.com/id/2116389/

One of many articles out today, this should get quite ugly

[dammuzis]

its another "when does a large donation become a bribe" issue
really if the shit hits the fan on this im sure both parties will be clamering for finance reform for donations

personally i think the politicians running should only be allowed to debate opponents on tv and that shouldnt cost them a dime

[mappatazee]

clamouring

[Arlos]

I've said before and I'll say it again, there needs to be a constitutional amendment that changes the way elections happen. There needs to be a pool of public money that is divided equally among all people running for an election, and that needs to be the ONLY money they are allowed to spend. That includes gifts of services as well, ie, no saving some of the pool money by accepting free air time from a supporter that has a radio station, etc.

I'd even be willing to pay more taxes to pay for this, because it might actually mean we get some real changes in Washington. No more "victory goes to he who has the biggest war chest", etc. It would even mean that the smaller parties get a more equal shot, because they get just as much money to spend as the major parties. It'd also mean that there'd be a much broader range of people that would stand a chance of being elected, which would be a good thing.

Anyway, I look forward to how this is going to unfold, especially as (at least according to the article I read) pretty much all of his donations have gone to Republicans and not Democrats, and anythign that hurts the Republican majority is good in my book. heh.

-Arlos

[Lyion]

It ain't just GOP people, although I'm sure it'll be more GOP than Dem.

Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nevada, appears to have collected more than $65,000 in Abramoff-linked contributions between 2001 and 2004

I'd love true, fair campaign finance reform, but I don't think it's really possible. We'd just see more and more fat cats like George Soros pony up cash to influence the election in non direct ways.

[Eziekial]

You know I used to think that the type of solution Arlos proposed above was un-american and would take us one step closer to a totalitarian form of government. Now I realize that we are already there and need to figure out a way to mitigate the damage our ignorance has wrought. We are simply not capable of educating ourselves on the platforms and principles of our election candidates and holding them accountable for their actions once elected.

[Lyion]

You know I used to think that the type of solution Arlos proposed above was un-american and would take us one step closer to a totalitarian form of government. Now I realize that we are already there and need to figure out a way to mitigate the damage our ignorance has wrought. We are simply not capable of educating ourselves on the platforms and principles of our election candidates and holding them accountable for their actions once elected.

The problem is we are a two party system currently, and until we have a methodology in place to allow us to be multi party with real consequences and open elections, and yet retain our federalism and separation of powers, then we'll continue to be where we currently are.

[Arlos]

Hey, if there were Democrats that behaved illegally, they need to be tossed out too. Corrupt is corrupt, I don't care which party they're in, they need to be gone.

Apparently Tom Delay was just about joined at the hip with Abramoff. Here's an article from Robert Scheer of the LA times on this:

Abramoff's Crimes Are Indicative of Deeper Cesspool

January 4, 2005 - Top Republican lobbyist Jack Abramoff is set to sing, and his long list of former buddies in Congress and the Bush Administration are quaking in anticipation of possible indictments stemming from the consummate Beltway hustler's crass reign as the king of K Street.

"Casino Jack," a former head of the College Republicans and a "Pioneer"-grade fundraiser for the Bush 2000 campaign, pleaded guilty to three felony counts of conspiracy, mail fraud and tax evasion in D.C. yesterday and is set to appear in Florida today to plead guilty to fraud and conspiracy on separate charges. Abramoff and other defendants also must repay over $25 million to defrauded clients and $1.7 million to the IRS.

But most important for the nation is that Abramoff is now detailing the massive web of corruption he spun inside the Beltway which has already snared a top Bush official, procurement chief David H. Safavian, on charges of lying and obstructing a criminal investigation, and reportedly threatens dozens of other D.C. players.

"When this is all over, this will be bigger than any [government scandal] in the last 50 years, both in the amount of people involved and the breadth to it," Stan Brand, a former U.S. House counsel who specializes in representing public officials accused of wrongdoing, told Bloomberg News. "It will include high-ranking members of Congress and executive branch officials."

Some of the Wild West feel of this Beltway corruption was captured in Saturday's Washington Post expose, "The DeLay-Abramoff Money Trail." It documents in chilling detail how, among other scams, Abramoff funneled a portion of the millions he had been skimming from Indian casino operators with a cool million from two Russian energy moguls through a shell organization called the U.S. Family Network -- and from there into the coffers of politicians in a position to help his clients.

Ironically touting its commitment to "moral fitness" for the nation, the front group with the multi-million dollar budget had a single staff member housed in the backroom of a capital townhouse it owned and rented out to other organizations linked to Abramoff and Tom DeLay -- the latter's staffers called it, ominously, DeLay's "safe house." This is apparently why DeLay felt the need to tout the U.S. Family Network in a 1999 fundraising letter as "a powerful nationwide organization dedicated to restoring our government to citizen control."

It was run by Edwin A. Buckham, DeLay's former chief of staff, whose lobbying firm, the Alexander Strategy Group, carried Delay's wife Christine on its payroll. But the moral "fitness" of such cronyism pales in comparison to the scandal of how Abramoff drummed up support for his varied clients under the cover of conservative morality.

For example, in order to block the ambitions of a rival tribe to the Choctaw Indians who had paid Abramoff millions, the U.S. Family Network sent a mailing to Alabama residents warning shrilly that, "The American family is under attack from all sides: crime, drugs, pornography, and one of the least talked about but equally as destructive -- gambling. We need your help today to prevent the Poarch Creek Indians from building casinos in Alabama." The letter conveniently failed to mention, however, that the U.S. Family Network had received at least $250,000 from the gambling proceeds of the Choctaws.

In another scam detailed in the Post story (which could be quickly optioned by Hollywood for a thriller), players in the mafia-dominated Russian energy industry slid a cool $1 million payment through a now-defunct London law firm into the U.S. Family Network's account -- which was, de facto, a slush fund for the Abramoff-DeLay network.

Citing the Rev. Christopher Geeslin, who served as a titular leader of the U.S. Family Network, the Post reported that Buckham told the reverend the payment was intended to secure Delay's support on legislation forcing the International Monetary Fund to bail out the faltering Russian economy without demanding the country raise taxes on its energy and other profitable industries. Right on cue, DeLay found his way onto Fox News Sunday to take up the Russian's viewpoint: "They are trying to force Russia to raise taxes at a time when they ought to be cutting taxes in order to get a loan from the IMF," he said. "That's just outrageous." The IMF backed down.

This is just an initial peek into the sordid world being revealed by Abramoff and two of his key cronies now spilling the beans to federal investigators. But in the bigger picture, what we are witnessing is the death throes of the GOP "revolution" which once promised to restore morality to Washington but instead sank far deeper into the cesspool of corruption.

-Arlos

[dammuzis]

only problem with your idea arlos is

hey bob ill donate 100k to this charity your chair of if you vote this way

[Captain Insano]

I'd be more interested in banning special interest groups from lobbying (bribing) congress and the senate on a daily basis.

Americans are too fucking stupid to vote anyone decent into office. Jesus H. Christianwagons could run for office and they would vote the other guy on if he even so much as made it through the first round of survivor eliminations.

[Eziekial]

[quote="lyion"][quote="Eziekial"]You know I used to think that the type of solution Arlos proposed above was un-american and would take us one step closer to a totalitarian form of government. Now I realize that we are already there and need to figure out a way to mitigate the damage our ignorance has wrought. [b]We are simply not capable of educating ourselves on the platforms and principles of our election candidates and holding them accountable[/b] for their actions once elected.[/quote]

The problem is we are a two party system currently, and until we have a methodology in place to allow us to be multi party with real consequences and open elections, and yet retain our federalism and separation of powers, then we'll continue to be where we currently are.[/quote]

Italy has a multi-party system as does England and they both suffer from the same issues we do. The real problem is people are simply too ignorant to live in freedom.

[Yamori]

I'd love to see campaign finance reforms such as mandated public listing of all political contribution sources (with similar scrutiny that the IRS would give to tax cheats)... but unfortunately, this will never happen because it would need to be passed by the very people whose corruption we would be trying to stop.

I've said before and I'll say it again, there needs to be a constitutional amendment that changes the way elections happen. There needs to be a pool of public money that is divided equally among all people running for an election, and that needs to be the ONLY money they are allowed to spend. That includes gifts of services as well, ie, no saving some of the pool money by accepting free air time from a supporter that has a radio station, etc.

The problem with this is, there are hundreds/thousands of political parties in the US, many of whom DON'T really deserve any public money. (ie: The Communist Party, Female Circumcision Party, Ghalleger for Prez, ect).

Greater funding power is somewhat of a necessity for legitimate parties that actually have support of a large number of people. I think it would be better to work on removing the stranglehold the democrats/republicans have on the election process (specifically, media coverage) - as well as to make contribution sources very public.

I'm very convinced that if major television stations would start showing major third party candidates (Green/Libertarian mainly), election results would be markedly different - and candidates would *really* have to show what they're made of.

[Arlos]

Obviously, there'd have to be more detail there. Maybe set a minimum % of a given population that would either have to be registered to a given party, or they'd have to get that % in petition signatures in order to get on the official ballot and thus get money. So, for a congressional district, the registration data or petition signees would have to come from that district. For senate, would be from the state in question, for president, nationwide. There's obviously something along those lines in place now, as for any given office, there's only so many candidates that get listed on the ballot. While there are a bunch of minor parties on the ballots, there's none of the truly fringe groups actulaly on the ballots.

Anyway, while I do realize this would give free money to people like Lyndon LaRouche, who is a complete raving psycho, I'd rather see that than our current system.

-Arlos

[Sorina S]

I hope he names em all GOP and DEMS...Let's get the bastards out of government. We aren't stupid we know what politics is all about. Money buys power and power makes more money. It's high time the AG sends a clear message, this shit will not be tollerated. I hope to see jail sentences for everyone involved, it's time to clean house.

[Captain Insano]

I haven't paid any attention to the tom delay thing and am not going to google it.

so what happened in under 5 sentences please?

[brinstar]

1. a republican got busted for being a cheating slimeball

2. then some more republicans got busted for being cheating slimeballs

3. then this guy abramoff gets nailed hardcore on felony charges in a handful of states

4. when (if? DUN DUN DUNNNN) he goes to trial, he'll sing like a stool pigeon and name off all the other slimeballs he helped in their cheating

5. though this huge bunch of slimeballs counts its members in both major political parties, most of them are republicans-- and not surprisingly, a lot of them have some suspiciously close ties to dubya's gubment

[Harrison]

Bleeeaaat

You people are ridiculous.

Corrupt is corrupt, I don't care which party they're in, they need to be gone.

At least he's thinking clear-cut. I'm sick of the bullshit from everyone, fuck the entire political system.

[brinstar]

explain how i'm wrong harrison

and then explain how throwing your hands in the air and saying "fuck the entire political system" is any less ridiculous than discussing ways to improve the political process

go ahead

[Harrison]

#1 Stop pointing the finger and crying about a specific party you disagree with. Everybody in politics are shitbags, that's how they got there.

#2 You didn't discuss a single fucking thing about ways to improve jack throughout this entire thread. So step down from your pulpit there Reverand Whineass.

[brinstar]

hey you failed, like i thought

read what i wrote again and try to grasp this time that i mentioned there are plenty of democrats in on the slimeballery

and furthermore i was talking about the entire thread, not my post, when i mentioned "discussing ways to improve the political process"

someday you'll realize you don't know everything

(including the correct way of spelling Reverend )

[Harrison]

Way too exhausted and drunk for semantics arguments with a fool.

[Lyion]

The question shouldn't be which politicans are slimeballs. Really, it should be which politicans are not.

The one axiom you can count on is the majority of politicians dealing with Abramoff will have covered their ass. Politicians are amazingly adept at wiggling out of tight places with little collateral damage due to simple denials. Although since it is primarily GOP on this, it'll get a disproportionate amount of air time, so who knows?

[Eziekial]

<== Not a slimeball

[Lyion]

Geez, did anyone NOT take cash from this guy?

http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewPolitics.asp?Page=\Politics\archive\200601\POL20060105b.html

40 of 45 members of the Senate Democrat Caucus have taken money from lobbyist Jack Abramoff, his associates and Indian tribe clients.

Abramoff pled guilty Tuesday to conspiracy, fraud and tax evasion. He also plans to implicate a number of U.S. lawmakers and congressional staffers in a bribery scandal.

Among those named by the NRSC as the worst examples of "Democrat hypocrisy" for taking money from Abramoff and his associates are: Sen. Byron Dorgan, (D-N.D.) who received at least $79,300; Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa), who received at least $45,750; Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), who received at least $68,941 and Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.), who received at least $6,250.

Dorgan is among the lawmakers who have already returned campaign donations or given those donations to charity.

[Phlegm]

Don't worry people. They are giving the money back.

From CBS:

Politicians have been rushing to separate themselves from campaign contributions they took from disgraced former lobbyist Jack Abramoff and the Indian tribes he represented — either by returning them or donating them to charity.

In just the two days since Abramoff pleaded guilty Tuesday in Washington to three federal felonies, more than 40 elected federal officials have given up Abramoff donations, joining a dozen who did so last year.

This week's list was headed by President Bush and most of the Republican leadership, including Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, House Speaker Dennis Hastert, House Majority Leader Roy Blunt and former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, who has legal problems of his own. But some Democrats joined in, including Sen. Hillary Clinton of New York.

"This is called get out in front of a problem instead of letting it define you," Amy Walter, an analyst with the Cook Political Report, told CBS News' The Early Show.

"It's a classic political deal. You have to make sure, one person said to me, that instead of being on the train tracks you get on the train," said Walter.

Republicans dominated the list — not surprising given that Abramoff, a friend of DeLay's, gave far more to them than to Democrats.

Former GOP House Speaker Newt Gingrich told CBS News' Bob Schieffer that the Abramoff scandal is the latest signal of how unhealthy and dysfunctional the lobbying process in Washington, D.C. has become.

"Things were being done that are indefensible and where members and staff were engaged in things that I think you are going to find were clear and absolute violations of House rules," Gingrich said.

Gingrich also said it was time for DeLay, who has temporarily relinquished his leadership post, to step aside permanently.

"I think the House Republican Party has to have an election for a new majority leader at the end of this month or the beginning of February. I don’t see how with all the various allegations it can be possible for them to cleared up in the short run. With no disrespect to Tom DeLay, who should be presumed innocent, that is his right as an American, I think that as a practical matter he can't both go through all of this process and be an effective leader of the House party."

Gingrich said there were "a number of very fine people who could run, any of whom could spend full time being a majority leader without being involved in long sessions with defense lawyers."

The scandal's effect on the 2006 election was on the mind of many who jettisoned the donations.

"I wish it hadn't happened because it's not going to help us keep our majority," conceded Rep. Ralph Regula, R-Ohio.

As Abramoff pleaded guilty to a second set of felony charges Wednesday, this time in Florida, officials said Mr. Bush's 2004 re-election campaign intended to give up $6,000 in donations from the lobbyist, his wife and a client.