The OTHER Republican Mega-Scandal

rollhead · January-6th-2006, 12:46 PM

http://www.americanprogressaction.or...WJcP7H&b=83210

ETHICS
The Other Mega-Scandal

Lobbyist Jack Abramoff pled guilty to to fraud, tax evasion and conspiracy to bribe public officials, capturing the attention of Washington's chattering class who believe Abramoff will incriminate numerous members of Congress. (They are probably right.) But another scandal -- which could be equally damaging to powerful conservatives in Congress -- lurks in the shadows. Federal prosecutors have already secured a guilty plea from former Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham (R-CA), who had admitted to "to taking more than $2 million in bribes in a criminal conspiracy involving at least three defense contractors." But the investigation is far from over. In the end, two powerful House chairman -- Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-CA) of the Armed Services Committee and Rep. Jerry Lewis (R-CA) of the Appropriations Committee -- could become ensarled in the legal probe. Both men have close connections to military contractor Brent Wilkes -- who is referred to as "co-conspirator No. 1" in Justice department documents -- and who provided more that $630,00 in cash and favors to Cunningham "for help in landing millions of dollars in federal contracts."

THE DUNCAN HUNTER CONNECTION: Along with Cunningham, Duncan Hunter helped companies who have employed Wilkes -- ADCS Inc.and Audre Inc. -- secure over $190 million for a system to "convert printed documents to computer files" that the Department of Defense said they didn't need. (This included "a $9.7 million contract for ADCS to digitize historical documents from the Panama Canal Zone that the Pentagon considered insignificant.") A 1994 report from the General Accounting Office noted that the DoD "already had the tools for such work." The San Diego Tribune notes "Cunningham, Hunter and their House allies didn’t care. Audre and ADCS were generous with contributions – and ADCS executive Brent Wilkes allegedly was bribing Cunningham." The Tribune concludes, "This isn't governance. This is looting."

THE JERRY LEWIS CONNECTION: Wilkes also employed a lobbyist named Bill Lowery, paying him about $200,000 between 1998-2000. What did all that money buy? Access to House Appropriations Committee chairman Jerry Lewis. According to a three month investigation by Copley News Service, Lewis "has greenlighted hundreds of millions of dollars in federal project for clients" of Bill Lowrey. Meanwhile, "Lowery, the partners at his firm and their clients have donated 37 percent of the $1.3 million that Lewis' political action committee received in the past six years." Copley reports "the essential ingredient in the Lew-Lowery relationship is earmarking, the congressional practice in which special projects, sometimes derided as 'pork,' are slipped quietly into the federal budget without public review." Virtually every client who has signed up with Lowery in recent years "cashed in with earmarks." Lowery was also tight with Duke Cunningham, paying the staff's $1800 bill for their 2001 Christmas party at a fancy restaurant in D.C.

WHY DID THE GOVERNMENT ACCEPT CUNNINGHAM'S PLEA: It is conventional wisdom that the government agreed to a plea deal with Jack Abramoff -- one of the most powerful lobbyists in Washington -- only after he agreed to provide information about people higher up the food chain, powerful members of Congress. The government also gave Rep. Duke Cunningham a plea deal. Why? It stands the reason that he will cooperate in efforts to prosecute more powerful members of Congress, possibly including Hunter and Lewis.

Scott Dolan · January-6th-2006, 01:14 PM

It's all so cutting edge!!

rollhead · January-6th-2006, 01:26 PM

Of course, Republican corruption and theivery are so routine and blase now, it is hardly worth mentioning, right Scottie?

But a 10-year-old blowjob, now, you still find a way to get sanctimonious about, right?

Monte Smith · January-6th-2006, 01:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rollhead

...so routine and blase now, it is hardly worth mentioning, right Scottie?

Kinda like free elections in Iraq.

lynn · January-6th-2006, 01:38 PM

I would be interested to see if Chaney and his connections at Halliburton come under the microscope. Plenty of billionaires made through war profiteering there.

Scott Dolan · January-6th-2006, 01:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rollhead

Of course, Republican corruption and theivery are so routine and blase now, it is hardly worth mentioning, right Scottie?

But a 10-year-old blowjob, now, you still find a way to get sanctimonious about, right?

Corruption in government? Not exactly groundbreaking stuff. But, as long as it still excites you, have at it. It has been around a lot longer than you and I, and will continue to be around long after the JC archives disappear into the great cyber black hole in the universe.

And getting sanctimonious about a 10 year old blowjob? Good lord............

Should I just send you pictures of myself in sexy poses so you don't have to continually drum up these fantasies about me to jack off to?

Scott Dolan · January-6th-2006, 01:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Monte Smith

Kinda like free elections in Iraq.

I missed that thread.

But I'd have to assume that rollie, or one of the other balanced political pundits around here did.

lynn · January-6th-2006, 01:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scott Dolan

Corruption in government? Not exactly groundbreaking stuff. But, as long as it still excites you, have at it. It has been around a lot longer than you and I, and will continue to be around long after the JC archives disappear into the great cyber black hole in the universe.

Man that sounds just like my 85 year old mother who can manage to justify anything this administration does.

Thank god we live in an age where these guys can't hide behind in their smoky backrooms dealing away our treasury into their own private bank accounts.

Wait a minute...that's exactly what they are doing. Too bad they got caught! It's only wrong if you get caught.

Scott Dolan · January-6th-2006, 02:05 PM

Show me where I justified anything, lynn.

If you're dumb enough to think that this is something totally new to politics, and introduced by the Bush admin, more power to you. and if you're also dumb enough to think that this kind of thing doesn't happen in Democratic circles, or that if you convict and remove any and all Republicans that this type of thing will cease to exist in government, more power to you, once again.

Now, I will go on the assumption that you really aren't that fucking stupid, lynn.

Gordon B · January-6th-2006, 02:16 PM

Lynn, I'm curious, can you come up with any examples of corruption by Democrats?

bostontricky · January-6th-2006, 02:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rollhead

THE JERRY LEWIS CONNECTION

I'm beginning to see the light here...

Scott Dolan · January-6th-2006, 02:19 PM

Hahahaha........

Scott Dolan · January-6th-2006, 02:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gordon B

Lynn, I'm curious, can you come up with any examples of corruption by Democrats?

*insert Jeopardy music here*

rollhead · January-6th-2006, 02:41 PM

Well, in case you Republicans haven't noticed it was your pack of lying hypocrites who ran on bringing "integrity" to get back in public office.

It was and is Republicans who decry the lack of "values" -- i.e., William Bennett, et al, all while endulging in their own vices.

It is the Republicans who talk, ad nauseum, about "family values," which I am assuming includes bribery, graft and corruption.

It is Republicans who justify the fact that millions of Americans live in poverty because they don't have the right "values" of enterprise and hard work, all while showing how they are "enterprising" enough to grease the right palms to get rich.

It is the Republicans who damn public service while turning over expensive, no-bid contracts to their friends in places like Halliburton, while claiming they are for "efficiency" in government.

It is the Republicans who tar Democrats with the "tax and spend" label, while they are spending the nation into the greatest deficits ever seen on the planet.

In short -- Republicans have taken the notion of hypocritical corruption to new nose-bleed heights.

You Republicans want it both ways -- you want to preach against stealing, all while grabbing as much ill-gotten gain as fast as possible.

Then -- like the lying, theiving hypocrite that the Republican Abramoff is -- you want to ask for "GOD's" forgiveness, at the same time you congratulate yourself on how righteous you are and how much better you are than those heathen, atheists humanist liberals.

Lynn is absolutely, 100 percent, dead on:

Quote:

Originally Posted by lynn

Wait a minute...that's exactly what they are doing. Too bad they got caught! It's only wrong if you get caught.

Scott Dolan · January-6th-2006, 02:51 PM

Man, I hope rollie remembered to pack his chute.

rollhead · January-6th-2006, 03:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scott Dolan

Man, I hope rollie remembered to pack his chute.

And I hope the chute wasn't packed by one of Abramoff's clients, or another heavy contributor to the Republican Party, who got a multi-million dollar, no-bid chute-packing contract.

Because, as we know, the one "value" that Republicans have that trumps all their other "values" is how they "value" money -- and why pay someone competent to do a life-and-death job when that only cuts into your profits?

You should be thankful you aren't a coal miner under this adminstration because it doesn't believe health and safety regulations should cut into corporate profits.

You, Coda and Monte don't mind it if a few dozen miners are killed for the sake of the free market, do you?

I hope you don't get sick anytime Scotty, because we know what this FDA thinks about pulling dangerous drugs off the market. (Let the free market rule! Right Scotty? What does it matter if we get a few dead bodies here and there?)

But -- to play it safe -- I would give a sample of your psychotropic drugs to your dog, Scotty, before you start on a new batch. Oh, I forgot, you wouldn't mind it if your life was a casuality of the "free market," would you?

You would be a friggin hero!

Hell, you would jump out of the plane WITHOUT a chute.

Scott Dolan · January-6th-2006, 03:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rollie

You, Coda and Monte don't mind it if a few dozen miners are killed for the sake of the free market, do you?

Actually, I wish a whole lot more had died. A dozen or so is hardly worth the ink wasted to report it.

Quote:

Let the free market rule! Right Scotty?

Wrong.

Let's socialize it all and let the government run it. That way all the companies out there that supply doctors offices and hospitals with equipment and supplies can fight for that government contract. And the losers can all go to hell, because they'll no longer be of any service. Unemployment will grow, but who cares, baby??!! We'll all have the sort of coverage that gives us the oppurtunity to take a number and wait!

Quote:

You would be a friggin hero!

But I already am. Especially when I step on quasi socialists, like yourself, beat you down, steal your money, rape your dog, set your house on fire, and run off with your wife.

So, you busted me. I'm a hardcore, rightwing, cold hearted, liberla killin, lyin, cheatin, thief of a motherfucker.

rollhead · January-6th-2006, 03:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scott Dolan

So, you busted me. I'm a hardcore, rightwing, cold hearted, liberla killin, lyin, cheatin, thief of a motherfucker.

You forgot hypocrite

rollhead · January-6th-2006, 03:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gordon B

Lynn, I'm curious, can you come up with any examples of corruption by Democrats?

Gordon, I am curious, can you come with any examples of widespread efforts by Republicans to really try to solve the corruption problem? Or don't you think that corruption benefits Republicans more than Democrats?

I mean with all the mega-rich corporations out there who are spending billions to avoid being regulated, don't you think that Republicans have a lot more to lose if the system is cleaned up?

Don't you think that Republicans are benefitting from the fact that Dick Cheney only allowed energy CEOs to design our energy policy?

What kind of profit -- the sine qua non of all GOP decision making -- would be in it for Republicans to hear all sides of an issue?

Certainly the Republicans would fight publicly funded campaigns tooth and toenail, as being "socialistic" and "anti-free market."

Of course, there is the case of John Rowland, the former REPUBLICAN governor of Connecticut who is in prison now for corruption.

How many Republicans, like Rowland, will have to be serving time in prison before they decide to assume that honest government has any kind of "value"?

Or do you think that the "free market" -- like I do -- precludes honesty on the part of Republicans?

I mean Rowland got Cuban cigars and champagne as contract kickbacks, do you think that Republicans -- who value wealth and the trappings of wealth so much -- would actually give up free champagne?

(Another rank Republican hypocrisy: they are the forefront of the Cuban embargo, but they are at the front of the line to get a Havana.)

In the first years of Rowland's third term, rumors began circulating that contractors doing business with the state paid for and made improvements to his weekend cottage, that he benefited improperly from the sale of a condominium in Washington, D.C. at an inflated price, that he took gifts from subordinates in state government, and that he took partial ownership in businesses immediately before they were granted state contracts. These eventually led to federal investigations and then indictments of some of Rowland's close aides, who then cooperated with federal investigators.

Rumors continued that the investigation was building a case against Rowland himself; Rowland publicly denied the allegations.

However, in December 2003, Rowland abruptly appeared on television and admitted that work had been done by contractors on his cottage at no charge, and that his earlier statements to the contrary were untrue. Matters were exacerbated when his wife, Patty Rowland, wrote a caustic/sarcastic/satiric poem deriding the media for investigating her husband's admitted wrongdoing.

He claimed that since the work was done he had paid the contractors in full, but in January 2004, an official investigation began into charges of corruption, and whether he should face impeachment.

On April 30, a special investigation panel started the impeachment process. On June 18, the Connecticut Supreme Court required Rowland to appear before the investigative panel seeking his testimony, which could have resulted in him giving evidence against himself in the ongoing criminal investigation. On June 21, Rowland's lawyers announced that he would resign. The resignation went into effect at noon on July 1.

On December 24, 2004, Rowland entered a plea of guilty to stealing honest service. The Hartford Courant reported that the plea came after the assistant US Attorney Nora Dannehy was planning to convene a grand jury to investigate racketeering and conspiracy charges against him. His plea bargain included granting his choice of the judge who would impose his sentence.

Rowland was sentenced on March 18, 2005, in New Haven, Connecticut to one year and one day in prison, four months house arrest, three years probation and community service. On April 1 he entered the Federal Correctional Institution in Loretto, Pennsylvania. His Federal inmate number is 15623-014.

rollhead · January-6th-2006, 05:25 PM

Media Reports Wrongly Conflated Political Contributions With Illegal Influence Peddling In Abramoff Case
Submitted by editor on January 6, 2006 - 5:17pm.
Source: Media Matters for America

Various media outlets reporting on Washington lobbyist Jack Abramoff's January 3 plea bargain with federal prosecutors conflated two categories of conduct, one legal and the other illegal, in casting the scandal as bipartisan. The baseless suggestion that any lawmaker who received contributions from Abramoff or his clients -- conduct that is, in and of itself, legal and ethical -- might be implicated in an investigation that is, in fact, focused on possible illegal conduct -- including the receipt of contributions in exchange for something -- allows the media to then characterize the scandal as bipartisan, since both Democrats and Republicans did in fact receive money from Abramoff's clients.

In addition to misleadingly suggesting that recipients of legal campaign contributions from Abramoff are implicated in the scandal, news reports have also ignored the difference between legal and fully disclosed campaign contributions and the other ways in which Abramoff funneled money to lawmakers, which may have been neither legal nor properly disclosed. For example, Abramoff reportedly used a personal credit card to pay for plane tickets for former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-TX), and may also have paid for a golfing trip for Rep. Bob Ney (R-OH) that was purportedly sponsored by a nonprofit organization. These payments for junkets for DeLay and Ney were apparent violations of House ethics rules and were apparently not accurately reported in their House ethics filings -- a far cry from the legal, and appropriately reported, campaign contributions news organizations have lumped them in with. As The Christian Science Monitor reported on January 4, "not everyone who ever took Abramoff-related money or perks is guilty of wrongdoing."

And yet, several in the media have blurred this distinction. On the December 21 broadcast of CBS Evening News, CBS News contributor Gloria Borger reported that Abramoff had "entered into plea negotiations with federal prosecutors," and that "[w]hat's making members really nervous is that Abramoff spread millions in campaign contributions to both parties on Capitol Hill." Borger's description of the issue suggests that the mere act of taking political contributions is suspect.

Similarly, a January 4 CNN.com report suggested that Democrats as well as Republicans will be hurt by the scandal because members of both parties received Abramoff money. According to the report: "Even though Abramoff's political donations were not exclusive to Republicans, Democrats contend that he is a GOP lobbyist and this scandal will hurt Republicans in the midterm elections." And on the January 3 broadcast of NPR's Morning Edition, national political correspondent Mara Liasson said that "more Republicans took money from Jack Abramoff than Democrats. That's almost logical, because they are in the majority." Aside from the fact that Liasson's suggestion that Democrats took money from Abramoff at all appears to be false -- a search of the Center for Responsive Politics' database turned up no data showing any contributions from Abramoff himself to any Democrats -- "political donations" or who "took money from Jack Abramoff" per se are not the issue.

In fact, only one elected official, Ney, has been officially implicated in the scandal. The indictment against Abramoff specifically noted that Ney received from Abramoff "a stream of things of value," including a golf junket to Scotland, tickets to sporting events, meals at Abramoff's restaurant, and campaign contributions. (The indictment referred to Ney as "Representative #1," but The Washington Post reported January 4 that "Ney's spokesman confirmed that Ney is the 'Representative #1' repeatedly mentioned in court documents.")The indictment further noted that Abramoff, in exchange for these gifts, "sought and received" Ney's "agreement to perform a series of official acts to benefit defendant Abramoff's businesses, clients and others."

* If you would like to get MediaChannel's FREE daily Media Savvy newsletter, click here to subscribe.
www.mediachannel.org

Scott Dolan · January-6th-2006, 05:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rollie

Gordon, I am curious, can you come with any examples of widespread efforts by Republicans to really try to solve the corruption problem?

I tried to imagine the weakest responses possible to Gordo's question. The ones I came up with don't even hold a candle to this.

Quote:

Or don't you think that corruption benefits Republicans more than Democrats?

Hahahahaha.................what a blinded, partisan homer.

lynn · January-6th-2006, 05:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scott Dolan

Show me where I justified anything, lynn.

If you're dumb enough to think that this is something totally new to politics, and introduced by the Bush admin, more power to you. and if you're also dumb enough to think that this kind of thing doesn't happen in Democratic circles, or that if you convict and remove any and all Republicans that this type of thing will cease to exist in government, more power to you, once again.

Now, I will go on the assumption that you really aren't that fucking stupid, lynn.

Everybody does it so I guess it is no big thing. business as usual. and you think I'm cynical.

lynn · January-6th-2006, 05:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gordon B

Lynn, I'm curious, can you come up with any examples of corruption by Democrats?

why the heck should I. you all seem to have that one covered already.

I did feel a little sorry for Tip O'Neil. Didn't he forget to pay for some stamps?

lynn · January-6th-2006, 06:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scott Dolan

*insert Jeopardy music here*

hey soooooo sorry I actually have to work to pay for all this skimming.

rollhead · January-6th-2006, 06:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scott Dolan

I tried to imagine the weakest responses possible to Gordo's question. The ones I came up with don't even hold a candle to this.

Hahahahaha.................what a blinded, partisan homer.

I hate to kick sand the eyes of a 95 pound weakling, but the problem with you Scottie is you don't have the answers to anything.

You just continually pose these irrelevent questions, and do your locker-room "laugh" in every post you make.

In short, you and Gordo and Monte are utterly incapable of putting forth a cogent argument in defense of the systemic corruption of the political party you admire. (Why, kickbacks are part of the free market!)

Instead of responding to the inherent rot in the Republican party, you fall back to your standard response -- blame someone else or trash someone else or -- in your special case give the finger (I am speaking metaphorically (do you know what that is?) here) to someone else.

To you, the "finger" represents the apex, the virtual tippy top of articulate discourse.

Unfortunately, you fail at one of the basic "values" of the Republican Party. You are incapable of showing any intelligent enterprise in your posts on here.

I am afraid to say that in a real Republican world, where the weak are put out on the moutainside to die, you would be the first one to be sacrificed to the Republican "value" of entrepreneurship and self-reliance.

(You should have been smart and been "entrepreneurial" in your choice of a spouse, like Monte.)

And I am sure in while you rattled out your last breath -- and in your gross, unshakable ignorance -- you would still be cursing the "liberlas" and struggling, vainly, to hold up your limp middle digit.

Scott Dolan · January-6th-2006, 06:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lynn

Everybody does it so I guess it is no big thing. business as usual. and you think I'm cynical.

1. What would you propose as a solution to the problem?

2. Do you honestly think corruption in D.C. will ever end?

Scott Dolan · January-6th-2006, 06:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rollie

The problem with you Scottie is you don't have the answers to anything.

I'm still waiting for answer #1 from you.

You also have no ideas. Other than calling whoever you happen to be dealing with in a particular thread Republican slimebags and whatever other highly intellectual term you deem necessary.

You're not even consistant. In one thread it's Gary, (Ollie), and I. In another thread it's (Ollie), Monte, and I. Then you substitute Coda or Gordo into the triumvirate of low class, greedy, evil thiefs. Hell, it's all you've got.

Oh well, at least your spelling is usually a half step above mine.

rollhead · January-6th-2006, 06:18 PM

Publicly funded campaigns are clearly the answer, but the Republicans would jail anyone who seriously suggested that for being a "communist."

And public campaigns would preclude Republicans from gorging themselves at the pig-trough of big corporate interests.

But again, Scottie is only capable of asking "questions." He wouldn't dare try to take the responsibility of providing a cogent answer.

That takes too much work.

Scott Dolan · January-6th-2006, 06:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lynn

hey soooooo sorry I actually have to work to pay for all this skimming.

The clock is still ticking.........

Gordon B · January-6th-2006, 06:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lynn

why the heck should I. you all seem to have that one covered already.

I did feel a little sorry for Tip O'Neil. Didn't he forget to pay for some stamps?

All you had to do was read today's New York Times and you'd have at least one example.

I guess you are not really anti-corruption just anti-Republican.

It looks like McCain and Lieberman are joining forces on new laws restricting gifts from lobbyists. I think the Republicans and Democrats may fall in line this time. I hope they are enforceable.

The truth, Lynn, is that corruption in the U.S. whether it's the Republican or Democratic kind is miniscule compared to corruption in some of your cherished socialist Dictatorships.

Do you think George Bush is really more corrupt than Mugabe or Chavez or the Palestinian Authority?