firedoglake: Abramoff Never Gave A DIME To Democrats!!!!!!! Please Read!

[sweetm2475]

The airwaves are full of the obedient and the credulous this morning trying to tar the Democrats with Jack Abramoff's filthy lucre, so let's set the record straight for those too busy sucking down hairspray fumes to pay full attention. As Media Matters noted when the NYT's Anne Kornblut pimped this crap on Hardball:

Appearing on the December 16 edition of MSNBC's Hardball with Chris Matthews, Kornblut falsely claimed that Abramoff had given contributions to Democrats. Yet a Media Matters for America search of the Center for Responsive Politics database of campaign contributions did not find any contributions from Abramoff to Democrats or Democratic leadership political action committees.

Although Kornblut amended her statement to claim that Abramoff "had his clients donate to Democrats," her comment falsely suggests that Republicans and Democrats are equally enmeshed in the scandal surrounding Abramoff. In fact, while Democrats have received contributions from Abramoff's lobbying groups and his clients, Kornblut's statement ignores the difference between accepting contributions from groups linked to Abramoff, which is legal and proper, and taking contributions in exchange for official actions, which is illegal, and which is at the heart of the ongoing investigations.

Bloomberg:

Between 2001 and 2004, Abramoff gave more than $127,000 to Republican candidates and committees and nothing to Democrats, federal records show. (my emphasis)

http://firedoglake.blogspot.com/2006_01_01_firedoglake_archive.html#113631635821774149

more good links:

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/01/03.html#a6561

http://thinkprogress.org/2006/01/03/house-that-jack-built/

http://www.dccc.org/stakeholder/archives/004125.html

OK guys and gals, get ready, post links if you got 'em, THE SPIN HAS BEGUN and it's in full force!!!!!! Let's not let this one get by. Here's some AMMO to fight back with!!!!!:patriot:

[rodeodance]

1. cable news has said over and over that the Dems are involved without

explaning the details (cnn and msnbc today).

[ktlyon]

6. Bill Press was just on CNN putting it squarely on Republicans

Go Bill go

[oasis]

21. Press had to stop Wolf Blitzer from interrupting him. Wolf could see

that Bill was about to lay it all out for the public to get a clear picture.

[rodeodance]

29. good for him

[PurpleChez]

40. Right on! Screw Blitzer!

[Kurovski]

46. The pubbies and their media whores will call it

"finger-pointing".

How long can this shit go on?

[SkiGuy]

2. Wasn't there one to

Patrick Kennedy though? I saw a chart somewhere of who he gave money to, but I can't find it. Will post if I do.
edit:
found it http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/graphic/2005/12/12/GR2005121200286.html

[spooky3]

14. Kennedy issued a statement that he received funding from

a Native American org. that had contributed to him well before Abramoff entered the picture. Their support of him had nothing to do with Abramoff. Kennedy's been supportive of Native American interests since 1997 or before.

Sorry, I don't have a link directly to his statement, but here's an Arizona Republic article that provides more info:

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/1223hayworth23.html

[SkiGuy]

16. Thanks

There's a lot of casino "action" around here, I'll have to pay attention to Kennedy more with this.

[virtual disobedience]

55. Capital Eye list - Muddying the waters on Abramoff

Here's a list of contributions that I bet gets circulated by Repubs. It looks like it mixes Abramoff contributions with those of anybody he's said hello to:
http://www.capitaleye.org/abramoff_recips.asp

I started a thread on this:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2348828&mesg_id=2348828

[spooky3]

63. thanks--muddying not only the source but also the timing; see

also the points made by MediaMatters (e.g., that receipt of a legal contribution does not by itself provide any evidence of bribery or other illegality):

http://mediamatters.org/items/200601040007

[Brundle_Fly]

3. they always add the tag line...

Abramoff and his "CLIENTS" gave to dems and repukes alike, never just Abramoff gave to dems...

they can say this until someone points it out.

His clients were many, most of them ripped off, they are not under indictment, or even being asked to plead to a crime, so who cares who they gave too, they are not in the scope of the crime.

[TheFarseer]

5. exactly

Some of the Native American tribes he screwed over - tribes that were the victims of his crimes instead of the beneficiaries - just so happened to give to democrats as part of completely seperate actions. No democrats were part of his web of corruption.

[aquart]

50. They had given to Democrats regularly BEFORE Abramoff.

What changed was being compelled to donate to Republicans.

[myrna minx]

4. We have to keep this handy for the barrage of RW talking points.

:kick:

[carolinalady]

7. Question-

Harry Reid is listed as accepting from his clients then it states that he worked in favor of those clients. Isn't that just as bad?

[jsamuel]

8. There is a difference between getting bribes and taking donations

for working for something you were already working for because your constituents want you to work for it.

However, I would prefer there were no corporate donations allowed to anyone at all.

[snooper2]

9. Yes it is...and hopefully all those involved on both sides of the aisle

will go down...

[Straight Shooter]

10. No, it isn't.

Reid's allegiance was already set before any money was forthcoming. He would have voted as he voted regardless of any contribution. It was his duty to his constituents. Anyone who claims otherwise is trying to muddy the waters.

Reid never got one cent from Abramoff. Not one cent.

Now, someone explain to me how george w. bush received money from Abramoff and/or his clients.

[Catrina]

12. No, I don't think accepting donations from

constituents is at all illegal, if it were, every single member of Congress and the Senate would now be under investigation.

Thanks to the OP for not allowing this spin to go unanswered. I noticed it as soon as the Abramoff scandals began to appear in the media. They have not reported much on these scandals in the nearly two years since they began to surface. But as soon as it became apparent that this story can no longer be ignored, they started with the 'Dems did it too', which is totally false.


Abramoff, Kidan and Scanlon have all admitted to committing crimes. Their crimes are a sad statement on how our political system was hi-jacked by Republicans where it appears, Congressmen and other Republican officials, were bought and paid for. All three were originally Young College Republicans, which is where Abramoff and Kidan met. Norquist was their mentor.

In another thread, I posted the indictments in the Abramoff affairs so far, and not one of them is a Democrat.

Under investigation that we know of, are more Republicans. Rep. Bob Ney has been informed that he is under investigation for accepting bribes from Abramoff. Tom Delay has also been named as under investigation for his dealings with Abramoff. Rep. Burns, Doolittle, Sen. Cornyn, also names mentione as possibly under investigation. Also all Republicans.

Not to mention Ralph Reed, Grover Norquist and already, White House official, Director of Procurements, Safavian, has already been indicted. Republicans, all of them!!

Staff members of Tom Delay, his wife, Doolittle's wife, are suspected of being paid with Abramoff money. More Republicans. I did see ONE report that implied that Democratic staff members may have been suckered into dealing with Abramoff, but no proof so far.

Iow, what we have as far as proof goes, are the various indictments and guilty pleas which are documented. No speculation, no spin and all of them are Republicans.

Those officially named as 'under investigation' so far, are also all Republicans ~

Abramoff gave a huge amount of money to the Bush campaign, enough to get him a spot on Bush's 'Rangers' list. Have we heard any media whore mention that, or claim that this makes Bush part of the scandal? This was a direct contribution!! Not a donation from a client of Abramoff!

Connections have been made between Duke Cunningham and Abramoff also.

So, as usual, the media seems incapable of just delivering the facts, and chooses to throw out what, so far, is merely speculation and even worse, mis-leading information. Because it is not illegal for politicians to receive money from lobbyists or their clients. And that is not the issue in the Abramoff affairs.

The issue is that if someone, like Bob Ney, actually did something to help Abramoff's interests, as he did, when he entered complaints about Boulis (the murdered owner of Sunkruz who sold the Casinos to Abramoff and Kidan) not once, but twice, and also received large sums of money from him, then there is a crime. Especially since Bob Ney's entry into the Congressional Record, while it benefitted Abramoff, had nothing at all to do with his own constituents.

I agree with the OP. This scandal is a Republican scandal and prominent Dems need to get on the Media's case immediately, complain, kick and scream, demand airtime, bring with them when they are on the air, the list of Republican indictments, charges and guilty pleas from just this past year alone, and we are only starting on the Abramoff affairs.

I'd be happy to do the research for them. I think someone already has compiled a long list of Republican crimes from the past year, with who's in jail, who's going to jail, and who's copping pleas. It's staggering, the corruption that is being unearthed in that Party.

Just take Ohio alone. Do we ever hear anything about the corruption in that state on the MSM? Again, all, so far, Republican. Taft, Noe, now Ney, with more coming??

Then there was the Libby indictment so far in the Valerie Plame scandal, with more Republican indictments likely from that little crime also.

It's hard to keep track of the crooked Republicans who have already been caught, let alone those under suspicion.

We need to pass around the facts to people who rely on the media only for their 'news'. I wouldn't waste any time either watching the 'news' anymore, or writing to them. It's obvious who controls them all, imo.

[chat_noir]

20. Catrina, et al, more on Ney and Suncruz

"The issue is that if someone, like Bob Ney, actually did something to help Abramoff's interests, as he did, when he entered complaints about Boulis (the murdered owner of Sunkruz who sold the Casinos to Abramoff and Kidan) not once, but twice, and also received large sums of money from him, then there is a crime. Especially since Bob Ney's entry into the Congressional Record, while it benefitted Abramoff, had nothing at all to do with his own constituents."


Money, Mobsters, Murder
The sordid tale of a GOP lobbyist's casino deal gone bad.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=41657&mesg_id=41657

[Trevelyan]

37. Howard Dean calls for rejection of Alito (Petition link)

Dear Senator,

President Bush has handed the far-right special interests a special gift by nominating Judge Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court. Alito's extremist record makes him a threat to civil rights protections, environmental protections, privacy rights, religious freedom, and workers rights.

I ask you to vote not to confirm Samuel Alito to a lifetime position on the Supreme Court of the United States.

http://www.democrats.org/page/petition/rejectalito

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/1/4/82550/12447

Dean calls for rejection of Alito (Petition link inside)
by Siberian
Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 06:25:50 AM PDT

This doesn't appear to have been posted here yet but I think it's important that it gets some exposure here. While often there are calls here to 'freep this poll' for no other reason then to try to send a message using an unscientific poll I think petitions are a far more valuable tool for making your voice heard.

Late yesterday Howard Dean sent out an following email to subscribers of the DNC's mailing list calling for Alito to be rejected by the senate. While such a petition may have mimimal impact in swaying the opinions of republicans in the Senate, with a strong following it may have an impact on how unified the Democrats are in opposing Alito.

Dean is hoping to raise an additional 250,000 signatures in the next 48 hours to get the petition over 1 million. If you oppose Alito's nomination please sign this petition. Full text of Dean's email is below the fold...

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

11. Well, if the surrogates greased the Dems palms that's OK.

Right. Our crooks are "not as bad" as their crooks.

Clean them all out, and then start on the rest of those who offer bribes (aka: contibutions/donations) and those who take them for favors rendered.

[Catrina]

15. Well, if you have actual names of Dems

who have been indicted, charged or who have already entered guilty pleas, I'll add them to my list happily. Or if you have even names of Dems who are 'officially' under investigation, I'll add them to that list also.

But so far, all I have seen is the media's spin that 'both dems and repubs' are involved.

Here are some actual facts:

Republican WH official Safavian, arrested and charged in the Abramoff investigation.
Republican Adam Kidan, entered a guilty plea in the Abramoff investigation.
Republican Scanlon, entered a guilty plea in the Abramoff scandal.
Republican Lobbyist, Abramoff, entered a guilty plea in the scandal surrounding his lobbying activities.

Officially named as under investigation:

Republican Rep. Bob Ney, informed that he under investigation for accepting bribes.
Republican Rep. Tom Delay, informed that he too may be under investigation in the case.


Others being 'looked at' as a result of evidence of their association with Abramoff's crimes:

Republican Grover Norquist
Republican Ralph Reed
Republican Sen. Cornyn
Republican Rep. Burns
Republican Rep. Doolittle

Already convicted, through guilty plea in another crime:

Republican Duke Cunningham is also now suspected of having ties to Abramoff's crimes.


Republicans either convicted or under indictment in other crimes, not yet associated with Abramoff, although who knows?

Three Republican Governors, including Gov. Ryan whose administration has generated at least 30 indictments. At least one of these three is currently serving time.

Republican Gov. Taft of Ohio was indicted, paid a fine and is still in office.
Republican operative, Noe of Ohio, also under indictment for various crimes.

And in the Valerie Plame affair, so far:

Republican WH official, Scooter Libby, five indictments, including 'obstruction of justice.


Then there is the Pentagon Spy case:

Republican Larry Franklin, entered a guilty plea to passing along sensitive info to others.
Republican Pentagon employee, Weissman, charged with passing sensitive info to a foreign nation.
Republican Pentagon employee, Rubin, charged with passing sensitive info to a foreign nation.

Presumably as a result of Larry Franklin's 'cooperation',

Republican Douglas Feith, member of the Bush administration, is now also under investigation.

And in the Conrad Black case (Canada's Rupert Murdoch, recently indicted on several counts by the office of Special prosecutor, Patrick Fitzgerald)

Republican Richard Perle is also under investigation by the same office.


......

That's just from memory, I know there are more. But from memory, I can't think of a Democrat who has been either charged or convicted in any of these crimes.

If there is one, as I said, he/she should be added to the list of criminals who are running this government. I have no problem with that.

I do have a problem with the media clearly spinning this latest crime to evenly divided between both parties. That simply is a LIE!

And we haven't even started on the Abramoff affairs yet, or on the War Lies investigation, or the Domestic Spying case. How on earth can the media declare that there is any comparison between these parties, as they exist today, when it comes to criminal activity and abuse of power?

[glitch]

18. Well said, and I am in awe of your memory. nt

[blm]

19. EXCELLENT REPLY!!!!

Salute to you and your memory.

[Radio_Lady]

22. Catrina, thanks for pulling this all together. We should start sending it

to both national and local media. Nothing like this is out there, at least not from what I've seen.

Appreciate your time and thoughtfulness.

In peace,

Radio_Lady

[rodeodance]

26. yes, thank you for this. and yes---lets all send to media

[Octafish]

24. Now THAT's a post! Thank you, Catrina! Thank-----kyooooooooooooou!

Now. Ah. Mind if I borrow it?

[Stephanie]

25. Republican Burns is a Senator

We could get a Democratic Senate seat for Montana after this. :)

Montana Senator Conrad Burns, who accepted $150,000 in campaign contributions from the lobbyist's operation and helped an Abramoff client score a $3 million federal grant, is the most vulnerable senator. Burns has just announced that he will return the money he took from Abramoff and the lobbyist's clients and associates, but that's not going to be enough to get the senator off the hook legally -- or politically. Up for reelection this year, he has suffered a damaging drop in the polls since details of the scandal have begun to dominate media in Montana, which was already trending in a Democratic direction before the scandal surfaced.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/thenation/20060103/cm_thenation/146591;_ylt=A0SOwmoA_LpDZDwBtwL9wxIF;_ylu=X3oDMTBjMHVqMTQ4BHNlYwN5bnN1YmNhdA--

[Roland99]

27. You forgot about Republican Ky. Gov. Fletcher

Republican Gov. Fletcher of Ky. pre-emptively pardoning nine people in a case of illegal hiring practices in the Dept. of Transportation (hiring Republicans instead of the mandated merit practices)

[Why Syzygy]

28. No names . . .

...
The investigation, which spans at least four law enforcement agencies and 12 FBI field offices, is now clearly targeted on members of Congress and their staffs. Already prosecutors have won pledges of cooperation from two of Abramoff's former partners, Michael Scanlon, a former aide to Rep. Tom DeLay, R-Texas, and Adam Kidan. "The corruption scheme with Mr. Abramoff is very extensive and we will continue to follow it," said Assistant Attorney General Alice S. Fisher at a Justice Department press conference hours after the plea. "We are going to follow this wherever it goes."

In his plea, Abramoff appeared to tighten the prosecutorial noose around Rep. Bob Ney, R-Ohio, a one-time friend of Abramoff who has long since disavowed the relationship.

. . .
The plea also claims that Abramoff corruptly influenced another unnamed congressional staffer by paying his wife's nonprofit company $50,000. The allegation matches press reports of a relationship Abramoff had with Tony Rudy, another aide to former majority leader DeLay, and Rudy's wife, Lisa. A person who matches the description of Neil Volz, a former chief of staff to Ney, is also mentioned in the plea agreement for corrupt dealings with Abramoff. Rudy and Volz, who both work as lobbyists, did not return calls for comment. But the specific targets in the plea account for just a fraction of the investigation, which continues at full speed, said Fisher. Of Abramoff's testimony, she said, "We have not attempted to list each and every statement" in the plea.

Recent reports suggest a long lineup of members of Congress and family who still face scrutiny, including DeLay and his wife, Christine, Sen. Conrad Burns, R-Mont., and Rep. John Doolittle, R-Calif., and his wife, Julie. Dozens more lawmakers, including leaders from both parties, supported the initiatives of Abramoff's clients and were later rewarded by political contributions. All but six of the top 20 recipients of campaign contributions from Abramoff's clients are Republican.

. . .

[redqueen]

67. Then why aren't those six under investigation?

Curious...

[sweetm2475]

32. catrina, mike malloy just read your post!!!!!!!

:applause: :woohoo: :applause: :woohoo: :applause: :woohoo: :applause: :woohoo:

[donkeyotay]

47. Bravo! Those who thought anything substantial had changed in the media

just because they covered Plame are sadly mistaken. Corporate media know who they work for, and it isn't us. If they want to keep spinning this, "they're all crooks" line, though, I suggest we use it as evidence that the only acceptable reform is to get rid of K Street and return representation to the people through publicly funded elections. If people think that's expensive, look at the tip of the iceberg of the cost of this corruption - Corporate Republican corruption.

[Joe Chi Minh]

43. Tough for you to read about all those Republican

indictments, eh, Tierra_y_Libertad? Life can be a bitch.

[Catrina]

60. Wow, thank you all so much for your responses

Sweetm2475, I am stunned, and if I had known Mike Malloy would do that, I would have done some research instead of relying on memory!

As Stephanie pointed out, I did make some errors, such as demoting Sen. Burns. Thanks Stephanie, I can't correct it now, but will remember in the future.

Octofish, since your posts are some of the first I always read, I would be honored if you used the post, although it needs some corrections and btw, I have remembered a few more Republican suspects since I wrote it :-)

Roland99, I did not know about Republican Gov. Flethcher of KY. That makes four governors then! Thanks for info.

Thanks, Radio Lady, feel free to use it and don't forget it's not a complete list, just what I remembered. :-)

Thanks too, Glitch, BLM and Rodeodance ~

Votesnomore, thanks for that article, but it demonstrates what the OP was saying and doesn't answer the question I asked, ie, proof that Dems commit crimes. This is what I mean:

Dozens more lawmakers, including leaders from both parties, supported the initiatives of Abramoff's clients and were later rewarded by political contributions. All but six of the top 20 recipients of campaign contributions from Abramoff's clients are Republican.

Which Democrats 'were later rewarded by political contributions by Abramoff?legal donation from one of Abramoff's clients (the implication that Abramoff's clients were criminals is also a lie, btw. Many of them were victims, as in the case of the Indian tribes who started this whole investigation) did anything illegal, or had any idea that the money he received from 'Abramoff's client' (who may have been a victim also) was rewarded by using his influence? I have seen nothing like that in the case of any Democrat so far, just this kind of thing, which is deliberately misleading!

To clarify, Abramoff's clients included Indian tribes, amongst others, and even Republican non-profits who were innocent of any wrongdoing (if you watched the hearings this was obvious) who were, in fact, the victims of Abramoff's, Scanlon's and Kidan's schemes. The words 'Abramoff's clients' are being used to imply that these people were somehow involved in his schemes. Another deception being used for the sole purpose of casting a lying net over any Dem who got funds from perfectly legitimate organizations.

Maybe to refute this onslaught of deception, we need a list of Abramoff's honest clients, many of whom are asking for compensation, being very legitimate, and having been cheated by him. Otoh, if Abramoff advised some of his clients to donate to Dems but Dems did not know this at the time, it is appropriate to return the money or donate it to charity, imo.


Some more Republicans who are suspect in the Abramoff affairs that I forgot before:

Republican Karl Rove, still being investigated in the Valerie Plame affair. I think I forgot to mention him earlier.

Republicans in Gale Norton's Interior Dept. several of whom took the fifth during the Senate hearings and at least one, who refused to show up until she was threatened to be picked up by federal marshals, after which she too, took the fifth.

How many indictments may come from that department after the investigation is complete, we can only guess, but Griles, Gale Norton's assistant, has been told he is under suspicion of having allowed Abramoff to use the Dept. for his own agenda. To be honest, I felt sorry for him, and thought him to be innocent, but we'll see.

Imo, it might be worthwhile to put together a complete list of Republicans, either under suspicion in the various crimes being investigated, or charged, convicted or already in jail. It looks like the media spin will continue, as usual.

[Joe Chi Minh]

66. Fascinating to read your list, Catrina. And that list of

Abramoff's honest clients sounds a brilliant response - especially if the good guys in the media do their best to publicise it, while pointing to the distinction, and the media "corkscrews'" busy efforts to confuse the public.

[IndyOp]

13. Kicked, recommended, and bookmarked - I was just looking for this!! (nt)

[Ksec]

17. excellent post amigo

Let us all Spread this around to our fair and balanced corporate whore media pundits.

[DoYouEverWonder]

23. Didn't two DEMS already return money

that they received from Abramoff? Dorgan and one other I believe.

[donkeyotay]

48. This is part of the debunking process here

Dorgan received $5K from a tribe who employed Abramoff as a lobbyist. How could he know that Abramoff included Dorgan on a list of those who money should be sent to? And for this $5K bribe, what quid pro quo took place? Dorgan voted on some legislation that he would have voted on anyway; there is no evidence that I am aware of suggesting that he did a favor for Abramoff or was even aware that Abramoff was involved. He may have thought a democratic lobbyist at Greenberg Taurig was involved, but they are not under investigation, and, unfortunately, this is exactly the way congress operates. They must have money, and this is how it's done. So, the question is if there is evidence that Dorgan accepted a bribe, and there is not.

Abramoff is suspected of laundering illegal corporate money into legal grassroots money, of falsely employing family members in charities as a thinly veiled bribe, of using his political connections to defraud the tribes, of using political contributions to committee members to reward government contracts to his buddies... that kind of thing.

Until a democrat is actually charged and I see some compelling basis for thinking democrats were involved, I will continue to say that Delay got his way - he was the one who demanded that K Street be loyal to the Republicans. So yes, the corporate media is using the return of money from Abramoff clients, (Reid, and others) to taint them with the same broad brush, and they are counting on the same Americans who believed the WMD and ties to al-Qaeda crap to believe this so they can do damage control.

[Nikki Stone 1]

30. Gotta shout this from the rooftops

:kick:
recommended

[ClayZ]

31. Thank You.... K and R

:kick:

[Generic Other]

33. LINK to the article that spelled it out for me so I could understand it

Trust me, if you haven't read it, this one is worth a look. Sorry if I am chewing someone's cabbage twice here, but I have just started to sink my teeth around the reach of this Abromoff scandal!

Top Ten Things You Never Knew About Jack Abromoff
10. ABRAMOFF’S INVOLVED IN SIX CURRENT SCANDALS
9. ABRAMOFF LINKED TO WHITE HOUSE SPY SCANDAL.
8. FIGURE INVOLVED IN ENTERPRISE’S ‘OPENING’ TO CUBA USED ‘BILL OF GOODS’ TO SELL FIRST IRAQ WAR
7.ABRAMOFF INDICTMENT FOR BOULIS MURDER LIKELY
6. ABRAMOFF’S SCANDAL PARTNERS INCLUDE BUSH PIONEERS, THE MOB, U.S. DEFENSE CONTRACTORS, AND "PROFESSIONAL CHRISTIANS"
5.SAFAVIAN INDICTMENT NOT ABOUT HEBREW SCHOOL
4. GUAM PROBE INTO FEMA RIP-OFFS OBSTRUCTED BY OVAL OFFICE
3. CASINO JACK PART OF OLLIE NORTH’S “ENTERPRISE.”
2. ‘ALL OUR SCANDALS ARE THE SAME.”
1. NOTHING IS WHAT IT SEEMS.

http://www.madcowprod.com/10272005.html

[Nikki Stone 1]

34. kick

:kick:

[ComerPerro]

35. This is important to remember. Bookmark this thread

I have a feeling we will be needing these links within these coming weeks...

[dennisnyc]

36. i've been busy correcting this spin, too. Thanks for the links!

[StateSecrets]

38. Dennis Hastert, Abromoff & Vanity Fair Article

http://www.villagevoice.com/news/0601,ridgeway,71514,6.html

Mondo Washington
Abramoff Lobbying Scandal: Big Timber Falls Hard
Hastert on tainted money: Okay, okay, I'll give it back

by James Ridgeway
January 4th, 2006 10:11 AM


WASHINGTON, D.C.--With leaders of both parties compromised in the Jack Abramoff lobbying scandal, questions now center around Republican Dennis Hastert, speaker of the House, who yesterday shed himself of tainted campaign contributions totaling $70,000. He gave the money to an unspecified charity.
...

Hastert, often viewed as a weak Speaker and little more than a frontpiece for indicted majority leader Tom Delay, recently was linked to another potential political campaign scandal. Vanity Fair last fall ran an article in which Sibel Edmonds, the former FBI translator blocked by a government gag order from telling what she knows about the FBI operations around the time of 9-11, describes how, in her days as an FBI interpreter, she ran across wiretaps of Turkish officials discussing campaign contributions to various politicians, including Hastert.

"Some of the calls reportedly contained what sounded like references to large-scale drug shipments and other crimes," wrote Vanity Fair. "To a person who knew nothing about their context, the details were confusing and it wasn't always clear what might be significant. One name, however, apparently stood out--a man the Turkish callers often referred to by the nickname 'Denny boy.' It was the Republican congressman from Illinois and Speaker of the House, Dennis Hastert. According to some of the wiretaps, the F.B.I.'s targets had arranged for tens of thousands of dollars to be paid to Hastert's campaign funds in small checks. Under Federal Election Commission rules, donations of less than $200 are not required to be itemized in public filings."

The magazine went on to point out that there had been a large amounts of money--some $483,000 from 1996 through December 2002--in non-itemized contributions to Hastert's re-election committee. Edmonds said the phone recordings made repeated references to Hastert's role in first supporting, then unexpectedly opposing, a House resolution declaring the killing of Armenians in Turkey as genocide. Hastert claimed he withdrew the resolution after then President Clinton said it would hurt U.S. interests in Turkey. There is no evidence Hastert himself knew anything about this, and his spokesman denied any connection to Turkish lobbyists or groups. He also denied any wrongdoing.

[erpowers]

39. Good Point

I am happy that this is coming out. The media is trying to spin this issue by point out that Abramoff's clients gave to Democrats. They never point out that Abramoff never gave to Democrats.

[nashville_brook]

41. *K Street Project* -- no dems BY DESIGN

sweet sweet schadenfreude

[Joe Chi Minh]

42. Could the Democratic Party sue?

[Kurovski]

44. Media Matters is absolutely terrific.

It's worth a bookmark, and makes a great homepage.

The usual Republican whine of "But THEEEY do it tooo!" is almost always just another lie, or a half-truth.

Everyone involved must go.

[Strawman]

45. Too bad the MSM cultivates cynicism

The "They're all crooks" meme strikes a familiar chord with the public.

But eventually, * and the Repugs are going to lose this war of attrition. If people do have "scandal fatigue" they may attempt to relieve it by throwing the bums out.

[donkeyotay]

49. If the "they're all crooks" meme is too successful

maybe the American people who have been so badly failed by this pay-to-play politics will demand a return to representative government based on citizenship not political connections and dollars. Maybe they'll demand an overhaul of the corporate free press, too, while they're at it.

[Name removed]

51. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[gkhouston]

53. they did not take money from Abramoff himself

and accepting money from Abramoff's clients is legal provided those donations were not given in exchange for official actions.

I'm not naive enough to say there's never been a crooked Dem, but this particular scandal is heavily, quite possibly exclusively, Republican.

[Name removed]

56. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ClassWarrior]

62. A moment of silence for the dearly departed.

:party:

NGU.

[gkhouston]

64. oh, you'll take any excuse to party.

Still hung over from New Year's Eve?

[Catrina]

58. Link please!! What significance is that list supposed to have?

That is simply a list of politicians with numbers next to their name. Where is the proof that any of those donations came DIRECTLY from Abramoff, with documentation, (emails eg, as in the case of the Republicans) that demonstrate Abramoff was in direct contact with any of those people as he was with Republican lawmakers?

Now, seeing that list thrown up there with a statement that has no merit, no proof, I KNOW it came from the right and is a deliberate attempt to deceive.

The Republicans are in big trouble this time, and their only way out, they think, is to try to include everyone else in there crimes, even if they have to lie about it, because they can't lie about the crimes themselves. There's just too much evidence.

However, we can use this attempt to deceive, to show how they work. Their MO never changes and now that it's old, having been used so often, and obvious to so many more people than when we first encountered their tactics, it's easier to use to demonstrate how deceptive they are.

I will take that list and send it to everyone I know just to show how far they will go, and how stupid they are to think that they can get away with something like this, when we have court records, emails, documentation of the Republican crimes and other evidence of their direct contact with a man they used to be proud to be seen with, and who now claim 'they hardly knew him'. It's almost laughable. They truly are getting desperate.

Meantime, please show that all those payments came directly from Abramoff and that the recipients knew they came from him.. His clients don't count, btw, those donations are LEGAL. They must come from Abramoff, the person must know they are from Abramoff (an email, letter, phonecall or eyewitness would serve as proof. One or all of these proofs is/are available in the Republican cases). Unless you have such proof, that list is simply a list of legal donations to politicians and I'm not sure why it was posted here.

As Reagan used to say 'there they go again'!!

[SidDithers]

59. LMAO...I can't believe you posted this steaming pile of bullshit here too.

Still not posting a link, either, eh? We both know where you got the list, but I still think you should admit to your deceit.

Sid

[Spazito]

61. ROFLMAO, I can pull numbers out of my ass too

and, as you have not provided a credible link or even any link at all, I can only repeat, numbers out of thin air are worth less than squat.

[ClassWarrior]

52. None of the ILLEGAL donations went to Democrats in...

...the Republicon Abramoff Scandal.

NGU.

[DoYouEverWonder]

54. I think that is the correct response

None of the ILLEGAL donations went to DEMS.

[Polemonium]

65. yep that's the right response. Dem's were not bribed

:kick: :kick: :kick: :dem: :kick: :kick: :kick:

[emulatorloo]

57. kick n/t

[onefortheroad]

68. You'd have to wonder why he would give anything...

the the Dems--at least the ones in the House. After all, they aren't running anything.

On the other hand, I suppose I could see him trying to pick off a couple of conservative Dem senators.

Still, I have no idea where this is headed.

[Bridget Burke]

69. Abramoff didn't give anything to Democrats.

Yes, you have no idea....

[Name removed]

70. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ripple]

71. Please help debunk this:

Maybe I should read through the links above more thoroughly, but I don't have a lot of time right now and at first glimpse, I didn't see anything that laid this out specifically.

The following article is on a right-tighty "news" site and was just posted by a freeper I'm debating on another forum:

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

Do we have anything that shows democrats did not receive money directly from Abramoff? I know there are democrats who received donations from some of Abramoff's clients, but that's really a non-issue.

I'm pretty sure one of the guests on CSPAN last night said that democrats didn't receive direct contributions, but I'm having difficulty finding documentation for that. If anyone has a link addressing that issue out specifically, I would really appreciate it if you could post it.

Thanks! :patriot:

[Catrina]

72. Here's the proof you need that Democrats received no

donations from Abramoff:


http://www.capitaleye.org/abramoff_recip.asp?sort=D

There's not one Democrat on that list.

John Aravosis has an even longer list of the Republicans who received donations from Abramoff, going all the way back to 1996. I don't have the link right now, but you can probably get to it by going to his site at www.americablog.com, I think.

[lies and propaganda]

73. exactly. whatever 'donations' were made from whatever

'charities' were dne so in order to implicate Democrats in the end days because they knew the shit was hitting the fans and it was time to take a few of the opposing team down all for fucking politics.

its total bs the spin they are attempting to get away with, this is a great post i will be forwarding!