1
   

The Abramoff scandal investigation

 
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Jan, 2006 09:55 am
mysteryman wrote:


It probably will look worse,but "look" does not mean "is".
I prefer to wait till the facts come out,instead of throwing out a blanket accusation.

For someone that brings up Clinton so much you seem to have a problem with the meaning of the word "is."

I can't begin to count the number of times you have blanketed Clinton with accusations.
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Jan, 2006 09:58 am
parados wrote:
mysteryman wrote:


It probably will look worse,but "look" does not mean "is".
I prefer to wait till the facts come out,instead of throwing out a blanket accusation.

For someone that brings up Clinton so much you seem to have a problem with the meaning of the word "is."

I can't begin to count the number of times you have blanketed Clinton with accusations.


What have I accused him of?
Be specific,dont give generalities.
Also,please show me the specific accusation...what post?
When did I say it?
What was the context?

Dont make a charge you cant back up!!
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Jan, 2006 10:07 am
Yargh! No more Clinton!

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Jan, 2006 12:17 pm
MM,

You can start here....

Clinton warned in 1996 about OBL


and now back to the FEC facts..

www.fec.gov

Abramoff never gave money to any Democratic candidate.
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Jan, 2006 03:49 pm
parados wrote:
MM,

You can start here....

Clinton warned in 1996 about OBL


and now back to the FEC facts..

www.fec.gov

Abramoff never gave money to any Democratic candidate.


Did you actually READ the document I linked to?
It stated exactly what I said.
It was a statement of fact,not an accusation.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Jan, 2006 03:57 pm
Facts about Clinton? Well, here are facts about Bush.


9/11: Bush Knew PERSPECTIVES HOME
A collection of compelling articles, which refute, or, at the very least, call into question, the assertions that Bush and his administration had no prior knowledge of events that would lead to the 9-11 tragedy.

A note about the articles.

* * *

Meacher sparks fury over claims on September 11 and Iraq war
September 6, 2003

"...the war on terrorism is a smokescreen and that the US knew in advance about the September 11 attack on New York but, for strategic reasons, chose not to act on the warnings."
[LINK]

Who Knew? The unanswered questions of 9/11
September 3, 2003

"CBS reporter David Martin revealed that weeks before the attacks, the CIA had warned Bush personally of Osama Bin Laden's intent to use hijacked planes as missiles. That followed the damaging exposure by The Associated Press's John Solomon of a pre-9/11 FBI memo from an officer in Phoenix warning of suspicious Middle Eastern men training at flight schools?-a warning that went unheeded."
[LINK]

U.S. Clamps Secrecy on Warnings Before 9/11
August 7, 2003

"The committee managed, 'inadvertently,' it says, to get some contents of a key briefing Bush received in August 2001. It included 'FBI judgments about patterns of activity consistent with preparations for hijackings or other types of attacks; as well as information acquired in May 2001 that indicated a group of Bin Ladin (sic) supporters was planning attacks in the United States with explosives.'"
[LINK]

Bush's 9-11 Secrets
July 31, 2003

"The U.S. government had received repeated warnings of impending attacks?-and attacks using planes directed at New York and Washington?-for several years. The government never told us about what it knew was coming."
[LINK]

9/11 report, Rice remarks in conflict; Investigators say Bush got specific data on threats
July 29, 2003

"...the briefing given to the president a month before the suicide hijackings included recent intelligence that al-Qaida was planning to send operatives to the United States to carry out an attack using high explosives."
[LINK]

The Secret Saudi Flight on 9-13 Could be the Key to the Bush-Saudi-Al Qaeda Connection
May, 2003

"One has to wonder when George W. said, "You're either with us or against us" - just exactly who he meant by "us." "Us" is beginning to look like a Bush-Saudi-Al Qaeda conspiracy, especially when one includes the well-known business ties between George H. W. Bush, James Baker, and the Bin Laden family through the infamous Carlyle Group."
[LINK]

The Secrets of September 11
April 30, 2003

"One such CIA briefing, in July 2001, was particularly chilling and prophetic. It predicted that Osama bin Laden was about to launch a terrorist strike 'in the coming weeks,' the congressional investigators found. The intelligence briefing went on to say: 'The attack will be spectacular and designed to inflict mass casualties against U.S. facilities or interests. Attack preparations have been made. Attack will occur with little or no warning.'"
http://www.msnbc.com/news/907379.asp?0cv=CB10

Is Bush A Liar - or is memory serving him badly?
Posted October 10, 2002

http://www.visualjournalism.com/Files/
reviews/bush911/pageBig.shtml

FBI Warned D.C. It Was A Target
September 25, 2002

"A Minnesota FBI agent investigating Zacarias Moussaoui testified yesterday that he notified the Secret Service weeks before Sept. 11 that a terror team might hijack a plane and 'hit the nation's capital.'"
http://www.nypost.com/news/nationalnews/57848.htm

Moussaoui Warnings Ignored
September 24, 2002

"An FBI supervisor, sounding a prophetic pre-Sept. 11 alarm, warned FBI headquarters that student pilot Zacarias Moussaoui was so dangerous he might 'take control of a plane and fly it into the World Trade Center,' a congressional investigator said in a report Tuesday."
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=512&ncid
=716&e=4&u=/ap/20020924/ap_on_go_co/attacks_intelligence

America had 12 warnings of aircraft attack
September 19, 2002

"American intelligence received many more clues before the 11 September attacks than previously disclosed, that terrorists might hijack planes and turn them into weapons, a joint congressional committee was told yesterday."
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/
story.jsp?story=334633


U.S. Was Aware on bin Laden Threat
September 19, 2002

"Basically, we know that bin Laden had the means and the intent to attack Americans, both at home and abroad."
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=512&ncid
=716&e=5&u=/ap/20020919/ap_on_go_co/attacks_intelligence

9/11 Probers Say Agencies Failed to Heed Attack Signs
September 19, 2002

"U.S. intelligence agencies received many more indications than previously disclosed that Osama bin Laden's terrorist network was planning imminent "spectacular" attacks in the summer of 2001 aimed at inflicting mass casualties."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A36754-2002Sep18.html

9/11 report documents credible clues
September 18, 2002

"The U.S. intelligence community received a surprising number of credible reports of a likely terrorist attack prior to Sept. 11, including some threats to domestic targets, according to a congressional report to be unveiled today."
http://www.msnbc.com/news/809370.asp?pne=msntv

U.S. knew of 12 plots for jet attacks
September 18, 2002

"Plan to attack WTC was among warnings that preceded 9/11, panel told."
http://www.msnbc.com/news/809484.asp

Panel Presents 9/11 Intelligence
September 18, 2002

"An intelligence briefing two months before the Sept. 11 attack warned that Osama bin Laden ( news - web sites) would launch a spectacular terrorist attack against U.S. or Israeli interests, congressional investigators said Wednesday."
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=542&ncid=703&
e=1&u=/ap/20020918/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/attacks_intelligence

Spy Agencies Had Pre-9/11 Threats on U.S. Soil
September 17, 2002

"U.S. intelligence agencies picked up threats of attacks inside the United States and of using airplanes as weapons during the spring and summer before last year's Sept. 11 attacks, but were more focused on the possibility of an assault overseas, a congressional source said on Tuesday."
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=578&ncid
=578&e=1&u=/nm/20020917/ts_nm/attack_
congress_intelligence_dc

Ashcroft Flying High
July 26, 2001

"In response to inquiries from CBS News over why Ashcroft was traveling exclusively by leased jet aircraft instead of commercial airlines, the Justice Department cited what it called a "threat assessment" by the FBI, and said Ashcroft has been advised to travel only by private jet for the remainder of his term."
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2001
/07/26/national/printable303601.shtml

Bush briefed on hijacking threat before September 11
May 16, 2002

"President Bush's daily intelligence briefings in the weeks leading up to the September 11 terror attacks included a warning of the possibility that Osama bin Laden's al Qaeda network would attempt to hijack a U.S.-based airliner, senior administration officials said Wednesday."
http://www.cnn.com/2002/US/05/15/bush.sept.11/index.html

Revealed: The Taliban minister, the US envoy and the warning of September 11 that was ignored
September 7, 2002

"Weeks before the terrorist attacks on 11 September, the United States and the United Nations ignored warnings from a secret Taliban emissary that Osama bin Laden was planning a huge attack on American soil."
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/politics/story.jsp?story=331115

Why would Osama bin Laden want to kill Dubya, his former business partner?
July 3, 2001

"A plot by Saudi master terrorist, Osama bin Laden, to assassinate Dubya during the July 20 economic summit of world leaders, was uncovered after dozens of suspected Islamic militants linked to bin Laden's international terror network were arrested in Frankfurt, Germany, and Milan, Italy, in April."
http://www.onlinejournal.com/Special_Reports/Hatfield
-R-091901/hatfield-r-091901.html

Bin Laden's Relatives Evacuated From NYC
October 2, 2001

"Patrick Tyler of the New York Times is reporting from Washington: 'In the first days after the attacks on Sept. 11, the Saudi Arabian ambasador to Washington, Prince Bandar ibn Sultan, supervised the urgent evacuation of 24 members of Osama bin Laden's extended family from ther United States fearing they might be subjected to violence.'"
http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/HL0110/S00008.htm

Our Pearl Harbor: The latest NSA revelations suggest the 9-11 plot could have been foiled.
June 21, 2002

"Recent news that the National Security Agency (NSA) intercepted two messages the day before the World Trade Center and Pentagon attacks -- messages that indicated imminent action -- obliges us to reconsider whether the airliner hijackings that led to 3,000 lost lives and $20 billion in property damage could have been foiled."
http://www.prospect.org/webfeatures/2002/06/prados-j-06-21.html
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Jan, 2006 03:57 pm
Facts about Clinton? Well, here are facts about Bush.


9/11: Bush Knew PERSPECTIVES HOME
A collection of compelling articles, which refute, or, at the very least, call into question, the assertions that Bush and his administration had no prior knowledge of events that would lead to the 9-11 tragedy.

A note about the articles.

* * *

Meacher sparks fury over claims on September 11 and Iraq war
September 6, 2003

"...the war on terrorism is a smokescreen and that the US knew in advance about the September 11 attack on New York but, for strategic reasons, chose not to act on the warnings."
[LINK]

Who Knew? The unanswered questions of 9/11
September 3, 2003

"CBS reporter David Martin revealed that weeks before the attacks, the CIA had warned Bush personally of Osama Bin Laden's intent to use hijacked planes as missiles. That followed the damaging exposure by The Associated Press's John Solomon of a pre-9/11 FBI memo from an officer in Phoenix warning of suspicious Middle Eastern men training at flight schools?-a warning that went unheeded."
[LINK]

U.S. Clamps Secrecy on Warnings Before 9/11
August 7, 2003

"The committee managed, 'inadvertently,' it says, to get some contents of a key briefing Bush received in August 2001. It included 'FBI judgments about patterns of activity consistent with preparations for hijackings or other types of attacks; as well as information acquired in May 2001 that indicated a group of Bin Ladin (sic) supporters was planning attacks in the United States with explosives.'"
[LINK]

Bush's 9-11 Secrets
July 31, 2003

"The U.S. government had received repeated warnings of impending attacks?-and attacks using planes directed at New York and Washington?-for several years. The government never told us about what it knew was coming."
[LINK]

9/11 report, Rice remarks in conflict; Investigators say Bush got specific data on threats
July 29, 2003

"...the briefing given to the president a month before the suicide hijackings included recent intelligence that al-Qaida was planning to send operatives to the United States to carry out an attack using high explosives."
[LINK]

The Secret Saudi Flight on 9-13 Could be the Key to the Bush-Saudi-Al Qaeda Connection
May, 2003

"One has to wonder when George W. said, "You're either with us or against us" - just exactly who he meant by "us." "Us" is beginning to look like a Bush-Saudi-Al Qaeda conspiracy, especially when one includes the well-known business ties between George H. W. Bush, James Baker, and the Bin Laden family through the infamous Carlyle Group."
[LINK]

The Secrets of September 11
April 30, 2003

"One such CIA briefing, in July 2001, was particularly chilling and prophetic. It predicted that Osama bin Laden was about to launch a terrorist strike 'in the coming weeks,' the congressional investigators found. The intelligence briefing went on to say: 'The attack will be spectacular and designed to inflict mass casualties against U.S. facilities or interests. Attack preparations have been made. Attack will occur with little or no warning.'"
http://www.msnbc.com/news/907379.asp?0cv=CB10

Is Bush A Liar - or is memory serving him badly?
Posted October 10, 2002

http://www.visualjournalism.com/Files/
reviews/bush911/pageBig.shtml

FBI Warned D.C. It Was A Target
September 25, 2002

"A Minnesota FBI agent investigating Zacarias Moussaoui testified yesterday that he notified the Secret Service weeks before Sept. 11 that a terror team might hijack a plane and 'hit the nation's capital.'"
http://www.nypost.com/news/nationalnews/57848.htm

Moussaoui Warnings Ignored
September 24, 2002

"An FBI supervisor, sounding a prophetic pre-Sept. 11 alarm, warned FBI headquarters that student pilot Zacarias Moussaoui was so dangerous he might 'take control of a plane and fly it into the World Trade Center,' a congressional investigator said in a report Tuesday."
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=512&ncid
=716&e=4&u=/ap/20020924/ap_on_go_co/attacks_intelligence

America had 12 warnings of aircraft attack
September 19, 2002

"American intelligence received many more clues before the 11 September attacks than previously disclosed, that terrorists might hijack planes and turn them into weapons, a joint congressional committee was told yesterday."
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/
story.jsp?story=334633


U.S. Was Aware on bin Laden Threat
September 19, 2002

"Basically, we know that bin Laden had the means and the intent to attack Americans, both at home and abroad."
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=512&ncid
=716&e=5&u=/ap/20020919/ap_on_go_co/attacks_intelligence

9/11 Probers Say Agencies Failed to Heed Attack Signs
September 19, 2002

"U.S. intelligence agencies received many more indications than previously disclosed that Osama bin Laden's terrorist network was planning imminent "spectacular" attacks in the summer of 2001 aimed at inflicting mass casualties."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A36754-2002Sep18.html

9/11 report documents credible clues
September 18, 2002

"The U.S. intelligence community received a surprising number of credible reports of a likely terrorist attack prior to Sept. 11, including some threats to domestic targets, according to a congressional report to be unveiled today."
http://www.msnbc.com/news/809370.asp?pne=msntv

U.S. knew of 12 plots for jet attacks
September 18, 2002

"Plan to attack WTC was among warnings that preceded 9/11, panel told."
http://www.msnbc.com/news/809484.asp

Panel Presents 9/11 Intelligence
September 18, 2002

"An intelligence briefing two months before the Sept. 11 attack warned that Osama bin Laden ( news - web sites) would launch a spectacular terrorist attack against U.S. or Israeli interests, congressional investigators said Wednesday."
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=542&ncid=703&
e=1&u=/ap/20020918/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/attacks_intelligence

Spy Agencies Had Pre-9/11 Threats on U.S. Soil
September 17, 2002

"U.S. intelligence agencies picked up threats of attacks inside the United States and of using airplanes as weapons during the spring and summer before last year's Sept. 11 attacks, but were more focused on the possibility of an assault overseas, a congressional source said on Tuesday."
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=578&ncid
=578&e=1&u=/nm/20020917/ts_nm/attack_
congress_intelligence_dc

Ashcroft Flying High
July 26, 2001

"In response to inquiries from CBS News over why Ashcroft was traveling exclusively by leased jet aircraft instead of commercial airlines, the Justice Department cited what it called a "threat assessment" by the FBI, and said Ashcroft has been advised to travel only by private jet for the remainder of his term."
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2001
/07/26/national/printable303601.shtml

Bush briefed on hijacking threat before September 11
May 16, 2002

"President Bush's daily intelligence briefings in the weeks leading up to the September 11 terror attacks included a warning of the possibility that Osama bin Laden's al Qaeda network would attempt to hijack a U.S.-based airliner, senior administration officials said Wednesday."
http://www.cnn.com/2002/US/05/15/bush.sept.11/index.html

Revealed: The Taliban minister, the US envoy and the warning of September 11 that was ignored
September 7, 2002

"Weeks before the terrorist attacks on 11 September, the United States and the United Nations ignored warnings from a secret Taliban emissary that Osama bin Laden was planning a huge attack on American soil."
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/politics/story.jsp?story=331115

Why would Osama bin Laden want to kill Dubya, his former business partner?
July 3, 2001

"A plot by Saudi master terrorist, Osama bin Laden, to assassinate Dubya during the July 20 economic summit of world leaders, was uncovered after dozens of suspected Islamic militants linked to bin Laden's international terror network were arrested in Frankfurt, Germany, and Milan, Italy, in April."
http://www.onlinejournal.com/Special_Reports/Hatfield
-R-091901/hatfield-r-091901.html

Bin Laden's Relatives Evacuated From NYC
October 2, 2001

"Patrick Tyler of the New York Times is reporting from Washington: 'In the first days after the attacks on Sept. 11, the Saudi Arabian ambasador to Washington, Prince Bandar ibn Sultan, supervised the urgent evacuation of 24 members of Osama bin Laden's extended family from ther United States fearing they might be subjected to violence.'"
http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/HL0110/S00008.htm

Our Pearl Harbor: The latest NSA revelations suggest the 9-11 plot could have been foiled.
June 21, 2002

"Recent news that the National Security Agency (NSA) intercepted two messages the day before the World Trade Center and Pentagon attacks -- messages that indicated imminent action -- obliges us to reconsider whether the airliner hijackings that led to 3,000 lost lives and $20 billion in property damage could have been foiled."
http://www.prospect.org/webfeatures/2002/06/prados-j-06-21.html
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Jan, 2006 04:05 pm
Dang those facts. Like the fact that Abramoff didn't contribute to a single Democrat.

Abramoff contributed over $80,000 to Republicans in the last 5 years and $0 to Democrats. Abramoff is accused of giving money to congressmen in exchange for personal favors. quid pro quo.

Just the facts ma'am.

But don't let those facts keep you from claiming Dems got money from Abramoff.. We wouldn't want to stick to the facts alone.
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Jan, 2006 07:59 pm
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/02/AR2005060202158.html

"Most lobbying firms here are bipartisan, to give their clients access to key lawmakers of both major parties. Abramoff's group was no exception. "
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Jan, 2006 08:01 pm
okie, It doesn't matter; all those that broke the law must go to prison. No exception.
0 Replies
 
slkshock7
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Jan, 2006 09:31 pm
Capitaleye wrote:
In more Abramoff-related news, two Senators have announced that they will return more than $217,000 in contributions linked to the infamous lobbyist, The New York Times reported. The Senators, Conrad Burns, (R-Mont.) and Byron Dorgan (D-N.D.) made clear that they are attempting to distance themselves from Abramoff and have called on other members to return the contributions. Political strategists, working on behalf of possible challengers for the 2006 mid-term Congressional elections have made it publicly known that they will publicize Abramoff contributions in races where they are attempted to oust the incumbent. "This is an important step that all public officials should take in order to renew the faith" of voters, Burns told the Times. Of the top 25 Congressional recipients of political money linked to Abramoff, 19 are Republican and six are Democrats. Burns is returning $150,000 in contributions linked to Abramoff, including money he received from American Indian clients. Since 1999, he has received $49,590 from Abramoff's tribal clients. Dorgan, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Indian Affairs Committee, is returning $67,000. In October, Sen. Jim Talent (R-Mo.) became one of the first lawmakers to return Abramoff contributions.


http://www.capitaleye.org/inside.asp?ID=195

Other news sources have reported other democrats offering their abramhoff-tainted money to charity. So can someone please explain to me why Dorgan and other Dems are suddenly returning and/or donating large chunks of money to charity?
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Jan, 2006 09:39 pm
I believe their motive is clear in the piece you quoted.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Jan, 2006 09:52 pm
They were caught red-handed (sorry for the pun), and they think the return of tainted money will clear their dirty names.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 Jan, 2006 05:36 am
slkshock7 wrote:
Capitaleye wrote:
In more Abramoff-related news, two Senators have announced that they will return more than $217,000 in contributions linked to the infamous lobbyist, The New York Times reported. The Senators, Conrad Burns, (R-Mont.) and Byron Dorgan (D-N.D.) made clear that they are attempting to distance themselves from Abramoff and have called on other members to return the contributions. Political strategists, working on behalf of possible challengers for the 2006 mid-term Congressional elections have made it publicly known that they will publicize Abramoff contributions in races where they are attempted to oust the incumbent. "This is an important step that all public officials should take in order to renew the faith" of voters, Burns told the Times. Of the top 25 Congressional recipients of political money linked to Abramoff, 19 are Republican and six are Democrats. Burns is returning $150,000 in contributions linked to Abramoff, including money he received from American Indian clients. Since 1999, he has received $49,590 from Abramoff's tribal clients. Dorgan, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Indian Affairs Committee, is returning $67,000. In October, Sen. Jim Talent (R-Mo.) became one of the first lawmakers to return Abramoff contributions.


http://www.capitaleye.org/inside.asp?ID=195

Other news sources have reported other democrats offering their abramhoff-tainted money to charity. So can someone please explain to me why Dorgan and other Dems are suddenly returning and/or donating large chunks of money to charity?


If that is a serious question, the serious answer is that they are seeking to escape the taint of Abramoff's money. True for dems and republicans both.

But I'm guessing you are suggesting that Abramoff is, as President Bush deceitfully claimed, an equal money dispenser and so no particular or unique taint ought rightfully to be placed on the republican party. But Abramoff was not an equal money dispenser. And more to the point, that isn't the key issue in any case, which is why DeLay was pushed out by his own party last week and it's why the Republicans have now moved into damage control mode.

Quote:
Dreier's dilemma
GOP LEADERS IN CONGRESS must have had quite a weekend devising a crash program to corral the scandal spreading from lobbyist Jack Abramoff. The announcement Sunday that House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert would give the job to Rep. David Dreier (R-San Dimas) had a slapdash feel, with Dreier hastily flying back to Washington from California. He takes charge of a legislative effort low on specifics but intended, in Dreier's words, to "deal with this issue and get it behind us as quickly as possible."

The influence-peddling scandal has been building for months despite efforts to dismiss it as a media-generated spite-fest. Last week, the dam broke. Abramoff struck a plea deal with prosecutors, sending legislators into a frenzy to return or give away contributions from him and his clients. And Abramoff buddy Tom DeLay of Texas said he would not, after all, seek to regain his post as House majority leader once he has dealt with that pesky Texas criminal indictment. DeLay could no longer plausibly dismiss criminal charges as partisan attacks by spiteful prosecutors or credibly deny the taint of Abramoff's luxury golf trips, skybox tickets and lavish contributions.

Dreier is really in a pickle. There is no fast way to get rid of the scandal, and no stomach in the House leadership for legislation that would close the profitable revolving door between legislative offices and the lobbying industry. DeLay's own "K Street Project" (named after the D.C. location favored by lobbyists) demanded that firms purge themselves of Democrats and focus on helping Republicans. Predictably, lobbyists rushed to hire GOP legislative aides and former officeholders. The project is one reason the lobbying scandal isn't very bipartisan.

If Dreier and Hastert were serious, they would take as a starting point a bill by Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) to open the lobbying industry's doings to public scrutiny and to choke off the flow of favors (which in other cultures would be known as bribes). The bill isn't perfect, but it has teeth and has already been introduced in the Senate. Why start over, except in the name of doing less damage to the lobbying trough?

link

Those of us who have been watching and writing about the K Street project for a couple of years now are pleased as punch (at least, I sure am) that this story has finally blown up in the face of many of those guilty and become a public matter. Any dems that get rounded up for crimes of corruption - great! But there won't be many, if any.

The system (that intersection between very big money, lobbyists, and congress) was and is ripe for corruption. This present republican crowd is guilty of falling to the occasion.
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 Jan, 2006 08:24 am
blatham,
You said...
Quote:
Any dems that get rounded up for crimes of corruption - great! But there won't be many, if any.


Are you suggesting that the dems are not now corrupt,are you suggesting that they never have been,or are you saying they havent been caught yet?
0 Replies
 
Roxxxanne
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 Jan, 2006 08:29 am
The Abramoff scandal is a Republcan Scandal just as Watergate was a Republican scandal. To try to spin it otherwise is dishonest.

To try to use the "everybody does it" excuse is laughable.

Absolute power corrupts absolutely.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 Jan, 2006 08:30 am
In any corruption scandal, the party in power tends to be the most corrupt for the simple reason that they are in power.

What is the point of bribing people not in power? It doesn't get you much in return since they can't push your agenda.

As was stated recently. The GOP has achieved the level of corruption in 10 years that it took the Dems 40. The Dems lost power because of that corruption.
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 Jan, 2006 08:42 am
I couldn't have said it better myself.
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 Jan, 2006 09:06 am
Maybe it's time to get a better deal from congress by sending it off shore.

Embarrassed Embarrassed Embarrassed Embarrassed
Just kidding but than again who wants something that does not work?
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 Jan, 2006 09:22 am
mysteryman wrote:
blatham,
You said...
Quote:
Any dems that get rounded up for crimes of corruption - great! But there won't be many, if any.


Are you suggesting that the dems are not now corrupt,are you suggesting that they never have been,or are you saying they havent been caught yet?


Please focus. The subject of this conversation, and of the relevant investigations in progress, relate to the corruption and crimes surrounding Jack Abramoff.

We've posted a LOT of information previously, and if you haven't yet come to comprehend what is going on here, then you either aren't reading or you are just irredeemably dumb. I'll give you one more chance. Get straight on the information in the CSM piece...

Quote:
But before you do your usual "they're all crooks" wave of your hand - don't. This case is different. It is particularly ugly, and it's just beginning.
Christian Science Monitor

Then read this, slowly and carefully...
The DeLay Abramoff money trail

If you demonstrate that you've bothered to get yourself educated here, and to do so with some care, I'll have future conversations with you. Otherwise I simply won't. And there's little reason anyone else should either.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2026 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 02/26/2026 at 06:13:30