The Abramoff scandal investigation

Politicians get to Washington and they start liking it too well. Some of them seem to become de-sensitized somehow to what they are doing. I think in the case of lobbyists, they would vote the way they would anyway, so just because a likeminded lobbyist donates, they don't see it as having a connection, and it is not illegal if I understand it correctly unless they expressly agree to do something they would not have done otherwise without the money. It becomes a bribe if there are strings attached so to speak. Also, it is always a crime if they benefit personally with large gifts rather than simply to their campaign budget.

I agree, there are Republican crooks, but there are Democrat crooks as well. I'm not a fan of Abramoff, but I'm betting theres lots more like him that haven't gotten any press whatsoever. I want to see the same enthusiasm for prosecuting criminals on both sides.

BBB
There are three things that could be done to immediately remedy the corruption and influence of lobbyists.

First, forbid the practice of "ear marks" which is the major cause of lobby influence.

Earmarks: http://www.cbo.gov/showdoc.cfm?index=4400&sequence=0

Second, prohibit a vote on any Bill for 72 hours after it's presentation. Too often, congress votes on Bills they haven't had time to read because it is rush through on purpose.

Third, require public financing of campaigns and restore the fairness doctrine on the Media. Take the money out of campaigning and you reduce the constant need to raise money.

Most of the other remedies being proposed won't help much because lawyers will always find a loop hole to overcome them. They also take enforcement and that rarely happens.

BBB

This is what you seem to be saying okie.

I want all crooks kicked out. But lets not concentrate on where the crooks are based on the present investigation. Lets look at where they aren't.

You nailed it!

Re: BBB


Amazing. I think I agree with points 1 and 2.

Parados Quote

Not at all. Concentrate on the crooks when they come to our attention, but don't ignore selected ones. Where theres smoke, lets check it out. What I see is very selective interest in which source of smoke to investigate further. If you want an example, how about Harry Reid? Does he have two sons and a son-in-law who lobby on behalf of corporate clients seeking favors from government in either Washington or his home state of Nevada. Why not investigate that? I recall when Daschle was in office, his wife worked for the airline lobbys. Mysteriously, nice things for the airlines allways seemed to appear in bills that he had a hand in working through Congress. And mysteriously, nice things like contracts and projects for people connected to the lobbyists from Nevada seem to appear in bills. Where were the investigations of these things? In fact, there was no interest whatsoever in those things by the press, let alone the Democrats. Rooting out corruption should be a non-partisan effort, but sadly thats exactly what it isn't now.

Show where Democrats accepted money or favors directly from Abramoff, then it would relevant to this particular thread. If they are guilty, then they should talked about and booted out the same as the republicans who have done the same. Not that I think anyone will actually get booted out over this, in my opinion, the American people don't seem care too much about this anyway except as just something to talk about.

You are right the American people don't care much because they see the big picture. Until quid pro quo can be proven, there is no crime for simply donating to somebody's campaign. Such is difficult to prove and until Abramoff puts the finger on somebody with evidence, this whole discussion strikes me as pointless, as thousands of lobbyists have been in Washington doing the same thing as Abramoff. Democrats love Abramoff because he is mostly a Republican lobbyist. Abramoff being a crook does not make everybody that received his donations a crook as well.

I would remind you that it isn't the Dems driving this investigation; it's the US Justice Department.

If you look at the various cases Abramoff is involved with, and the plea deals he's been offered, you'll see that he is going to do some serious squealing...

Cycloptichorn

Yes, this could still do damage down the road if it spins in the direction the Democrats desire. I don't think people care much about it now, but if significant news comes forth in the future, I admit this one, unlike many others, might have potential for the Democrats. But I see Ney is full speed ahead to go ahead and seek re-election. He doesn't act like a criminal yet.

K Street's New Ways Spawn More Pork
This is why "earmarking" must be banned and a 72-hour hold on all new Bills before voting. Bush cannot be relied on to control the excesses with his line item veto power; he has not used his veto during his terms, because it buys Republican votes to keep his party in power.---BBB

K Street's New Ways Spawn More Pork
As Barriers With Lawmakers Fall, 'Earmarks' Grow
By Jonathan Weisman and Charles R. Babcock
Washington Post Staff Writers
Friday, January 27, 2006; A01

An explosion of special interest funding engineered in part by lawmakers with close ties to lobbyists is drawing increased scrutiny as Congress moves to address concern about corruption that already has led to the conviction of a Republican House member and former GOP lobbyist Jack Abramoff.

At issue is a symbiotic relationship between lawmakers well positioned to slip special-interest projects into legislation, and wealthy lobbying groups that raise large sums of campaign funds or provide trips and other benefits to those lawmakers.

In the latest example of these backstage dealings, Rep. John T. Doolittle (R-Calif.) told The Washington Post that he helped steer defense funding, totaling $37 million, to a California company, whose officials and lobbyists helped raise at least $85,000 for Doolittle and his leadership political action committee from 2002 to 2005.

Brent Wilkes, a director of the company, PerfectWave Technologies LLC, and a major contributor to House Republican leaders, was identified as "Coconspirator No. 1" in criminal charges brought against Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham (R-Calif.) late last year. Cunningham pleaded guilty in November and resigned from Congress after admitting he conspired to take $2.4 million in bribes in return for using his office to help Wilkes and another defense contractor, in part by placing earmarks in defense appropriations bills.

Doolittle said in a statement this week that as one of three California Republicans on the House Appropriations Committee, he frequently supports "well deserving projects throughout the state." The statement added that his support of PerfectWave Technology "was no exception and based completely on the project's merits and the written support of the military."

The link between special interests and members of Congress has grown so tight that nearly a dozen House and Senate members who control federal spending have retained lobbying veterans to raise campaign funds for them, and those lobbyists have secured lucrative favors in spending bills.

These relationships have coincided with the rapid growth in the volume of home-state pork-barrel projects, commonly called earmarks, that have swelled appropriations bills in recent years, according to congressional experts and watchdog groups.

"It's the currency of corruption," Rep. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) said of appropriations earmarks.

Since the Republicans took control of Congress in 1994, the number of home-district earmarks jumped from 4,155 valued at about $29 billion in 1994 to 14,211 worth nearly $53 billion 10 years later, according to the Congressional Research Service.

Once a backwater for boutique lobbying shops, the House and Senate Appropriations committees are fueling a lobbying boom in Washington. The hunt for earmarks has become so consuming that lawmakers are neglecting other duties, said Scott Lilly, who recently retired as chief Democratic aide on the House Appropriations Committee. Last year, the committee received 10,000 requests for home-district projects on one spending bill alone -- 25.4 projects per lawmaker, said committee spokesman John Scofield.

"It has become an obsession of the Congress," Lilly said. "That's all they do."

Traditionally, Congress has provided large pots of money to federal, state and local agencies, such as housing authorities and transportation departments, which then funded specific programs based on merit and local need. The Appropriations committees funded specific projects only when they had been vetted and approved by authorizing committees, such as the Armed Services Committee.

But increasingly, lawmakers have gone around authorizers and agency officials to finance pet projects in their home districts. House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) secured $207 million for the "Prairie Parkway" through Kane and Kendall counties in Illinois in last year's major highway law, although the Illinois Department of Transportation is only two years into a five-year study of the project and has not yet determined whether a highway is needed or whether improvements to existing roads would suffice.

The hunt for earmarks on Capitol Hill and on K Street has opened up new avenues for lobbyists and lawmakers to come together. Seven members of the House Appropriations Committee -- Chairman Jerry Lewis (R-Calif.), Ernest J. Istook Jr. (R-Okla.), Kay Granger (R-Tex.), Dennis Rehberg (R-Mont.), John E. Sweeney (R-N.Y.), Rosa L. DeLauro (D-Conn.) and Ed Pastor (D-Ariz.) -- have political action committees headed by registered lobbyists or former registered lobbyists with business before the committee, according to the Center for Public Integrity and campaign records.

David A. Metzner, treasurer of Sweeney's Freshmen PAC, has represented the Association of American Railroads; it is a frequent petitioner of the House Appropriations subcommittee for the departments of Transportation, the Treasury, and Housing and Urban Development, on which the New York Republican sits. Leon G. Billings, DeLauro's treasurer and longtime friend, has represented groups such as the American Lung Association and the Lincoln Pulp and Paper Co. His lobbying registration for the Industry Urban Development Agency targets the Appropriations energy and water development subcommittee's bill.

In the Senate, Appropriations Committee members Larry E. Craig (R-Idaho), Byron L. Dorgan (D-N.D.), Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) and Ted Stevens (R-Alaska) have retained PAC treasurers who have served as Appropriations lobbyists. Richard B. Ladd, treasurer of Stevens's Northern Lights PAC, has lobbied the Appropriations defense subcommittee on the behalf of defense contractors. William C. Oldaker, who heads the PACs of Reid and Dorgan, has lobbied multiple Appropriations subcommittees for the universities, science centers and municipal water districts he has represented, according to Senate lobbying records.

"It's completely out of control, and we are not going to reform a system, as far as lobbying is concerned, if we have a process that lends itself to one influential lobbyist with a relationship with one member," Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) told reporters this month.

Chairman Lewis strongly defended his committee, saying that after years of unchecked growth, the value of home-district earmarks retreated in the spending bills for this fiscal year by nearly $3 billion. One bill, funding labor, health and education programs, was voted down by the House the first time it went to the floor, in part because Lewis stripped it of every earmark. The problem, Lewis said, is with the campaign finance system. Lobbyists, such as his friend Bill Lowery, are helping to raise money to keep Republicans in the majority, and Lewis would not apologize for that.

"If you're going to impact public policy, you have to be in the majority," he said. "I don't back off that responsibility at all. Mr. Lowery is only one piece of that, and frankly a relatively small piece of it."

In a series of articles last month, Copley News Service laid out the relationship between the two that included Lowery raising campaign funds for Lewis, the exchange of longtime staff members and the channeling of millions of dollars to Lowery's California clients.

Lowery, the partners at his firm -- Copeland, Lowery, Jacquez, Denton & White -- and their clients have donated more than a third of the $1.3 million that Lewis's political action committee has raised in the past six years. One longtime member of Lewis's staff, Jeff S. Shockey, left Capitol Hill to join Lowery's firm, then returned recently as the House Appropriations Committee's deputy staff director. Letitia H. White, a Lewis staffer for 21 years, began lobbying for Lowery in 2003.

Wilkes, the California businessman linked to the Cunningham corruption case, began tapping federal spending sources in the mid-1990s, after Cunningham helped him win at least $80 million in Pentagon earmarks for a company he ran that converted paper documents to digital images.

In mid-2002, Wilkes became involved with a new company, PerfectWave Technologies LLC. He then retained the Alexander Strategy Group, a high-powered firm operated by former aides to then-House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Tex.), to lobby for defense appropriations. Wilkes was seeking funding for the development of an "automated speech recognition technology."

Shortly thereafter, individuals related to Wilkes and PerfectWave made large campaign donations to members of the GOP leadership, Doolittle and Lewis, who was then chairman of the Appropriations defense subcommittee. PerfectWave is housed in Wilkes's office building in Poway, Calif.

Doolittle and his leadership PAC received at least $85,000 from 2002 to 2005 from Wilkes, PerfectWave associates and their wives, and from Alexander Strategy lobbyists Edwin A. Buckham and Tony C. Rudy and their wives.

Wilkes was successful. Congress approved the first earmark for PerfectWave as part of the fiscal 2003 defense bill, which was passed in October 2002. That $1 million earmark was followed by an installment of $18 million in 2003 and another $18 million in 2004. Doolittle, whose district is in Northern California, was a guest at a fundraising dinner at Wilkes's office in San Diego in the fall of 2003.

Doolittle's office released a letter from a Marine Corps official dated last Feb. 25 that praised the PerfectWave technology. A spokesman for the House Appropriations Committee said there are no additional funds for the project in the fiscal 2006 budget because the Marines have not spent all the money that was earmarked.
-------------------------------------------

Staff writers James V. Grimaldi and R. Jeffrey Smith and researcher Alice Crites contributed to this report

People (Americans) don't care much about anything that happens in government. This is why we are in the mess we are in.

Some have said this will be the biggest scandal in American history. We'll see.

Did you take a survey to determine what Democrats want BTW?

GOP Freezes Jobs List, a Vestige of the K Street Project
GOP Freezes Jobs List, a Vestige of the K Street Project
By Jeffrey H. Birnbaum
The Washington Post
Thursday 26 January 2006

Republican lawmakers yesterday ended their long practice of routinely summoning lobbyists to the Capitol to try to persuade them to hire their aides and colleagues, in the wake of the Jack Abramoff political corruption scandal.

GOP lawmakers for years have regularly presented lists of job openings on K Street to lobbyists to encourage them to hire Republicans over Democrats. The program is a remnant of the K Street Project once championed by Rep. Tom DeLay (R-Tex.) as a way to coerce trade associations and companies to hire Republicans as their top lobbyists and to warn firms that hired Democrats that they would not be welcome.

Sen. Rick Santorum (R-Pa.), who is seeking reelection, chaired meetings on the Hill at which lists of Republican staff aides looking for work were distributed to lobbyists. (Kevin Lamarque - Reuters)

Yesterday, the staff director of the Senate Republican Conference said that a K-Street-job-vacancies memo - the heart of Congress's remaining involvement in the effort these days - will no longer be distributed during high-level meetings hosted by the conference on Capitol Hill between lawmakers and lobbyists. Responsibility for the listings migrated from the House to the Senate several years ago, according to lobbyists.

While lobbyists and others could still obtain the information elsewhere, the change removes the formal involvement of lawmakers from the process and any implied encouragement by them to transform K Street into a Republican bastion.

In addition, the decision could provide a public relations benefit to Sen. Rick Santorum (R-Pa.), the conference head and the person who has long chaired the lobbyist meetings. He is facing a tough reelection fight this year that has been made even tougher by Democratic accusations that he is too close to lobbyists and the GOP's K Street jobs operation.

In recent years, the effort has become less aggressive and now includes in its non-congressional component a job listing service on the Internet.

Participants describe the meeting as an information exchange at which Santorum and other GOP senators discuss their priorities and collect intelligence from lobbyists. Toward the end of the meetings, which begin at 8:30 a.m. every other Tuesday, a representative of the Republican National Committee distributes the document that lists who in Congress is looking for work and what jobs are available. A discussion of jobs sometimes ensued.

Asked whether the document will continue to be passed out during those meetings, Mark D. Rodgers, the conference's staff director, said, "Since the RNC is already widely distributing the jobs list, we have decided it is duplicative to hand it out and will no longer do so." But Brian Jones, a spokesman for the RNC, said the data were not easily obtainable. "It's not public information," Jones said.

The decision to drop the list comes as Santorum is being disparaged by his opponents in Washington and at home as the "liaison to the K Street Project." Senate Minority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) last week said Santorum is "as responsible as anyone in the world for the K Street Project." He added that Santorum was unsuited to serve in his current role as the Republicans' point man in the effort to overhaul lobbying laws.

Those sorts of assertions are "one of a series of problems" Santorum has in his race this year against Pennsylvania state Treasurer Bob Casey Jr., said Stuart Rothenberg, a nonpartisan election analyst. "Santorum at the moment is the No. 1 most vulnerable Republican senator seeking reelection," Rothenberg added.

A Republican Conference aide said there is "no connection" between Santorum's meetings and the K Street Project, and Santorum has said that everything he has done in the meetings is appropriate. Last week, Santorum characterized the meetings as a way for Republicans to get their points of view disseminated in Washington.

"If you're going to affect public policy in a positive way, you've got to get your message out," Santorum said. "That's what the project that I've been involved with has been about, period."

Democrats have also been passing around jobs memos of their own during Monday meetings between lobbyists and congressional chiefs of staff. A spokesman for the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee said the "job bank" document - as the Democrats called their listing - has not been distributed for months and "there's no plan to put it back in place."

But Democratic attacks on Santorum and the K Street Project will continue, lawmakers said. Yesterday, Reid and Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) wrote Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), chairman of the Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs, to ask for an investigation of the project. "What we seek to do is just shine a little sunlight on this K Street Project and have one of our committees investigate what happened so that we can see if there's legislation needed," Schumer said.

Grover Norquist, president of Americans for Tax Reform, said that he pioneered the project in the late 1980s and continues to urge companies and associations to hire free-market advocates via a Web site called the K Street Project. But when Democrats and others refer to the project, they speak more generally about the efforts of DeLay and his colleagues on Capitol Hill after the Republican takeover of the House in 1994. The House ethics committee privately warned DeLay in 1998 about threatening the Electronics Industry Alliance with retaliation for hiring a prominent Democrat.

Yesterday, Collins's committee held a hearing on lobbying legislation that highlighted the range of opinions Congress will have to bridge if it is to pass a bill that deals with abuses of travel, fundraising and other matters. Former senator Dick Clark (D-Iowa), director of the nonpartisan Aspen Institute Congressional Program, urged a ban on lawmakers' trips that include "in any way, shape or form the participation of lobbyists."

But John M. Engler, president of the National Association of Manufacturers, said information-gathering trips are essential for lawmakers. Private groups should be allowed to fund some of them, within ethical guidelines, he said.

Prosecutor Will Step Down from Lobbyist Case
Prosecutor Will Step Down from Lobbyist Case
By Philip Shenon and Elisabeth Bumiller
The New York Times
Friday 27 January 2006

Washington - The investigation of Jack Abramoff, the disgraced Republican lobbyist, took a surprising new turn on Thursday when the Justice Department said the chief prosecutor in the inquiry would step down next week because he had been nominated to a federal judgeship by President Bush.

The prosecutor, Noel L. Hillman, is chief of the department's public integrity division, and the move ends his involvement in an inquiry that has reached into the administration as well as the top ranks of the Republican leadership on Capitol Hill.

The administration said that the appointment was routine and that it would not affect the investigation, but Democrats swiftly questioned the timing of the move and called for a special prosecutor.

The announcement came as Mr. Bush faced a barrage of questions about why he would not make public "grip-and-grin" photographs of him with Mr. Abramoff. The photographs apparently show Mr. Bush and Mr. Abramoff smiling at White House Hanukkah parties and Republican fund-raising receptions.

Mr. Bush's position, which he offered at a news conference on Thursday morning that was peppered with questions about Mr. Abramoff, was that the photographs were so common as to be almost meaningless and that it was part of his job "to shake hands with people and smile." He said he could not remember posing for the pictures, or, for that matter, even meeting Mr. Abramoff.

"I had my picture taken with him, evidently," Mr. Bush said. "I've had my picture taken with a lot of people. Having my picture taken with someone doesn't mean that I'm a friend with them or know them very well."

He said, "I'm also mindful that we live in a world in which those pictures will be used for pure political purposes, and they're not relevant to the investigation."

The White House, which announced Mr. Bush's selection of Mr. Hillman for the court in a routine e-mail message on Wednesday that included 15 other nominations to judgeships and federal jobs, dismissed the calls for a special prosecutor.

"It's nothing but pure politics," said Scott McClellan, the White House press secretary. "The Justice Department is holding Mr. Abramoff to account, and the career Justice prosecutors are continuing to fully investigate the matter."

A special prosecutor would not be especially welcome at the White House. Patrick J. Fitzgerald, the special counsel in the C.I.A. leak case, is more than two years into an investigation that has resulted in the indictment of a top vice-presidential aide, I. Lewis Libby Jr., and has left Karl Rove, the president's chief political adviser, under investigation.

Mr. Hillman's departure from the Justice Department creates a vacancy at the top of the Abramoff inquiry only three weeks after Mr. Abramoff, once one of the city's most powerful Republican lobbyists and a major fund-raiser for Mr. Bush, announced his guilty plea and agreed to testify against others, possibly including members of Congress.

A former senior White House budget official, David H. Safavian, has been indicted in the case on charges of lying about his contacts with Mr. Abramoff, a former lobbying partner. The Justice Department's plea agreement with Mr. Abramoff makes clear that prosecutors are investigating several members of Congress and other public officials who are suspected of having accepted gifts from the lobbyist in exchange for official acts.

Colleagues at the Justice Department say Mr. Hillman has been involved in day-to-day management of the Abramoff investigation since it began almost two year ago. The inquiry, which initially focused on accusations that Mr. Abramoff defrauded Indian tribes out of tens of millions of dollars in lobbying fees, is being described within the department as the most important federal corruption investigation in a generation.

Mr. Hillman's nomination for a judgeship was among the factors cited Thursday by four Democratic lawmakers, two senators and two representatives, in calling on Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales to name a special prosecutor to oversee the corruption investigation.

The timing of Mr. Hillman's nomination "jaundices this whole process," Senator Charles E. Schumer, Democrat of New York, said in an interview. "They have to appoint a special counsel. I think there will be broad support for one."

Representative George Miller, Democrat of California, called the timing "startling" and said, "You have one of the chief prosecutors removed from a case that has tentacles throughout the Republican leadership of Congress, throughout the various agencies and into the White House."

White House officials have said that Mr. Abramoff had no improper dealings with the White House. They have said he attended "staff level" meetings at the White House, but have declined to say with whom. One of his chief connections to the White House was through Susan Ralston, an assistant who worked for him before she worked for Mr. Rove. Ms. Ralston continues to work for Mr. Rove as a top aide.

A Justice Department spokesman, Bryan Sierra, said he had no comment on the Democratic request for a special prosecutor because the department had not received their letter making the request.

Mr. Sierra said in an interview that there was nothing unusual about the timing of Mr. Hillman's nomination and that it would not affect the Abramoff inquiry. "The team that Noel put together is going to remain together," he said. "The investigation should not be impacted." He said Mr. Hillman would be temporarily succeeded as head of the public integrity office by Andrew Lourie, a career prosecutor in Florida.

The White House had been poised to nominate Mr. Hillman for the bench last year. Mr. Sierra said he did not know why the nomination had been delayed until this week, but he said he believed it had nothing to do with the Abramoff investigation.

In a letter sent to the attorney general on Thursday asking for an independent counsel, Senator Schumer and Senator Ken Salazar, Democrat of Colorado, praised Mr. Hillman's office for the investigation that led to the guilty plea by Mr. Abramoff and his former lobbying partner, Michael Scanlon, a former press secretary to Representative Tom DeLay.

"We applaud its pursuit of Mr. Abramoff and his colleagues," they said. "We have no doubt that if the investigation is left to the career prosecutors in that section, the case would reach its appropriate conclusion. Unfortunately, the highly political context of the allegations and charges may lead some to surmise that political influence may compromise the investigation."

Nominating a Judge or Interfering with an Investigation?
A better question might be: why was Hillman's nomination held off for so long? Was it to try to persuade him to protect Republicans with the promise of a judgeship? ---BBB

Nominating a Judge or Interfering with an Investigation?
By Tim Grieve
Salon.com
Friday 27 January 2006

As the Valerie Plame investigation kept hitting closer and closer to home last fall, the internets starting buzzing with rumors and conspiracy theories: Would Bush pull a Nixon and find a way to fire Patrick Fitzgerald before he could indict anyone?

It didn't happen, but the news from the White House this week raises questions about whether the president is interfering in another investigation that might be getting a little too close for comfort. The president hasn't fired Noel Hillman, the chief prosecutor in the Jack Abramoff case, but he has managed to achieve the same result: Bush nominated Hillman for a seat on the federal bench this week, and Hillman immediately resigned from his job as chief of the Justice Department's public integrity division.

The White House says it's all routine, that career prosecutors are working the case and will continue to do so without a hitch. Some Democrats aren't convinced. California Rep. George Miller tells the New York Times that the timing of Hillman's nomination is "startling." "You have one of the chief prosecutors removed from a case that has tentacles throughout the Republican leadership of Congress, throughout the various agencies and into the White House," he said. New York Sen. Chuck Schumer, who has already called for the appointment of an independent counsel in the Abramoff case, said Hillman's departure "jaundices the whole process."

Adding to Democrats' suspicions: An investigation into Abramoff's activities in Guam ended abruptly in 2002, when Bush replaced the longtime acting U.S. attorney who was running it.

Proof That Bush's Removal of the Abramoff Prosecutor a deal
Proof That Bush's Removal of the Abramoff Prosecutor was a Political Deal to Scuttle the Investigation
Martin Garbus
01.31.2006

On Friday, January 27, immediately after Bush announced Noel Hillman the federal Abramoff prosecutor was leaving his position to become a federal judge, I wrote that it was a political deal to stop the Abramoff prosecution. I posted an article on Huffington Post on January 29th.

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 Wingenton 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.

The approval of the two Democratic Senators from New Jersey was necessary for Hillman's appointment. Corzine gave that quiet approval just before he became governor. Frank Lautenberg on his website issued a press release, today announcing both the Wingenton and Hillman appointments, under the title "President Nominates Federal Judges for New Jersey."

Both Corzine and Lautenberg knew they were removing Hillman.

Why?

Meanwhile the media has made no mention of the story.

It's starting to look like this Abramoff deal goes way deeper than just a little bribery:



Massive fraud by the oil, gas, forestry, and agriculture industries? In America? Who would have thought of such a thing?

This case is going to get a lot worse for the Republicans before it gets better; the more information that comes out, the more it looks like the 'iron triangle' and big business have compromised entire departments of our gov't.

Cycloptichorn

Hat tip to Blueflame

http://www.madcowprod.com/

Interesting article summarizing the links between Adam Kidan and the killing of Gus Boulis.

Cycloptichorn

I also find it to be rather interesting that some of the 9/11 hijackers were apparently staying in the SunCruz casinos the week prior to the attacks.

http://www.sptimes.com/News/092701/news_pf/TampaBay/Hijackers_linked_to_l.shtml

I also find this line from the 9/11 commission report to be rather interesting:



Makes ya wonder where this is all going to lead, doesn't it?

Cycloptichorn

Just when you thought it was going away...

the thread is back!

http://thinkprogress.org/2006/02/08/exclusive-abramoff-emails/#comments



He stated



This seems rather at odds with the WH report that Bush had never 'met' the guy.

Cycloptichorn

"I also find it to be rather interesting that some of the 9/11 hijackers were apparently staying in the SunCruz casinos the week prior to the attacks." Truly amazing.