Another Bush crony another scandal - Page 3 - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

raveneye · 11-08-2005, 02:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MojoPeiPei

That is speculation and assumptions, and indictments don't mean anything without convictions.

As stevo himself pointed out, indictments require legal evidence. That's the point. Evidence is more than "speculations and assumptions".

So there is legal evidence of criminal activity within the bush administration, on at least two separate, independent fronts.

Mojo_PeiPei · 11-08-2005, 02:58 PM

My speculation was in regards to Rekna's regirgitation of the Bush lied line, which are speculation and assumptions.

In all criminal cases there is almost always evidence, it isn't always wise to hold a presumption of guilt because of an indictment alone.

Rekna · 11-08-2005, 03:43 PM

We know that the whitehouse knew the Nigir documents were fake before they presented them. We also know that they knew the claim that Saddam was aiding AQ was more than likely false (from their own internal reports). Both of those were presented as strong cases to go to war. Now what else do we know, we know the all the other claims proved to be unfounded it is safe to say there is evidence to suggest that information may have been miss represented. There is at least enough to warrent an investigation. Unfortunatly with the republican controlled house and senate this motion is being stonewalled.

Rekna · 11-08-2005, 03:53 PM

Here is an article from a source you can't claim is biased against republicans on the AQ link (emphasis added).

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,174708,00.html

Quote:

WASHINGTON — A government document raises doubts about claims Al Qaeda (search) members received training for biological and chemical weapons in Iraq, as Senate Democrats on Sunday defended their push for a report on how the Bush administration handled prewar intelligence.

Democrats forced the Senate into an unusual closed session last week as they sought assurances the Intelligence Committee would complete an investigation of intelligence about Iraq before the U.S.-led invasion in March 2003.

Republicans said the session was a stunt and that the report, after nearly two years, was nearly complete. They did agree to appoint a bipartisan task force to review the committee's progress and report by Nov. 14.

"We cannot have a government which is going to manipulate intelligence information. We've got to get to the bottom of it," Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., said on NBC's "Meet the Press."

Newly declassified portions of a document from the Defense Intelligence Agency (search) showed that the administration was alerted that an Al Qaeda member in U.S. custody probably was lying about links between the terrorist organization and Saddam Hussein's Iraq.

The document from February 2002 showed that the agency questioned the reliability of Al Qaeda senior military trainer Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi (search). He could not name any Iraqis involved in the effort or identify any chemical or biological materials or cite where the training was taking place, the report said.

The DIA concluded that al-Libi probably was deliberately misleading the interrogators, and he recanted the statements in January 2004 , according to the document made public by Sen. Carl Levin, top Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee.

"In other words, he's an entirely unreliable individual upon whom the White House was placing substantial intelligence trust," said Sen. Jay Rockefeller (search), a member of the Intelligence Committee.

"And that is a classic example of a lack of accountability to the American people," Rockefeller, D-W.Va., told CNN's "Late Edition."

Levin said in a statement that the declassified DIA material — which he had requested from the agency — indicates that the administration's use of prewar intelligence was misleading and deceptive.

Levin said President Bush, Secretary of State Colin Powell and intelligence and diplomatic officials cited, months after the information from the defense agency in February 2002, chemical and biological training by Iraq as they gathered support for the war.

"This newly declassified information provides additional, dramatic evidence that the administrations prewar statements were deceptive," Levin said. "More than a year before Secretary Powell included that charge in his presentation to the United Nations, the DIA had said it believed the detainee's claims were bogus."

White House press secretary Scott McClellan told reporters with Bush on his South American trip that he had not seen a report about the documents. McClellan said issues about postwar intelligence have been explored in the past and that steps have been taken to ensure the administration has the best intelligence possible.

"If Democrats want to talk about how intelligence was used, all they need to do is start by looking at their own comments that they made. Because many of their comments said we cannot wait to address this threat," McClellan said.

On the Sunday news shows, Republicans accused Democrats of trying to use faulty intelligence for partisan political purposes and pointed to Democratic support for the resolution giving Bush the authority to go to war.

"Whether it is from defense intelligence, whether it's from the CIA, whether it's from other sources around the world, and we need to get that right to make the right decisions," said Sen. George Allen, R-Va. "But what we don't need is a bunch of partisanship.

Sen. Orrin Hatch, D-Utah, said a previous Senate report showed nothing improper in the handling of the intelligence, and he called the closed session "a political stunt."

"We all know that the intelligence with regard to these matters was flawed. We found that out since that it was flawed," Hatch said on "Face the Nation" on CBS. "I think everybody on the intelligence committee, everybody in the administration relied on flawed intelligence."

In fact, Rockfeller, reminded that he voted to give Bush the authority to go to war and made statements suggesting Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, said Sunday, "I mean, I was dead flat wrong."

raveneye · 11-08-2005, 03:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MojoPeiPei

In all criminal cases there is almost always evidence, it isn't always wise to hold a presumption of guilt because of an indictment alone.

Sure, but that doesn't mean indictments are meaningless. What proportion of criminal indictments lead to conviction in the U.S.? Isn't it somewhere like 80-90%? If someone is indicted, the chances are very high that they will be convicted.

Of course we should presume innocence, but at the same time, especially when we're talking about the highest levels of government, we should be prepared for the most probable outcome, which is conviction. These people have enormous power, this is not like someone off the street caught shoplifting.

Rekna · 11-08-2005, 04:05 PM

i think it should also be mentioned that the level of evidence needed to convict your normal person off the street vrs someone with lots of money or power is vastly different. I think we should all acknowledge that a person with lots of money/power is much more likely to be aquited given the same evidence than a normal every day person.

Mojo_PeiPei · 11-08-2005, 04:09 PM

In a common criminal case agreed Rekna, not the same for government personnal facing indictment, in that case I would say the tables flip against them.

Rekna · 11-08-2005, 04:11 PM

perhaps, i guess it would depend on the circumstances, who is the judge, the ruling party, and the public outcry.

shakran · 11-08-2005, 10:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stevo

Now shakran says I should stop supporting bush because he has low approval ratings.

Ahh, no, I pointed out that you're in the minority. I didn't say that low approval numbers mean you should stop supporting him. I'd have to be pretty stupid to come up with that logic, since the reverse would be true, which would mean I was wrong not to support him when his numbers were up.

However, he did go from a 90% approval rate in September of 2001 to a 35% approval rate now. Any time a president falls by 55 percentage points, it's an indication that perhaps you should sit up and take notice.

Quote:

This thread is a joke.

Of course it is, and you're the one who made it a joke. You now admit that you're only supporting bush because other people don't support him. You admitted that you're just trying to tick us off. In short, you admitted that you're a troll. And since the people here are net-savvy, we don't feed trolls. You might as well go away now.

raveneye · 11-09-2005, 05:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rekna

I think we should all acknowledge that a person with lots of money/power is much more likely to be aquited given the same evidence than a normal every day person.

I agree, but my guess is that most bush supporters will be resistant to this idea for obvious reasons. It's not hard to predict what the spin will be when these people get convicted.

But the main point I'm trying to make is that, at this level of government, the idea that "indictments are meaningless without convictions" couldn't be further from the truth. We place our lives, our livelihoods in the hands of these people. We trust them, depend on them. An indictment at this level is a serious violation of the public trust. This is why it is unethical for a person at this level to remain in a position of power. This is why all the indicted individuals I mentioned resigned immediately.

One obvious "meaning" of such indictments is that it is time for a serious, honest accounting from the administration on the issues/evidence relating to them. The administration of course is not being upfront, they are stonewalling, which in my opinion is not good for this country.

Elphaba · 11-19-2005, 03:51 PM

Lebell has chosen to believe that this thread is identical to Host's recent thread concerning actual indictments against Abramoff. *This* thread has been highjacked in so many directions that I find that hard to believe, but whatever.

I am going to reconstruct Host's new, but now locked thread as best as I can.

Elphaba · 11-19-2005, 03:59 PM

Host posted on 11/18/05:

Quote:

Disclaimer: If you do not like a lot of detail and complications in your political corruption sagas, I can guarantee that the Abramoff "story" is no the one for you. I want this to be the thread where members can post new developments concerning the Abramoff related investigations, and political commentary and opinion. This could be the biggest web of interwined corrupt political relationships of the new century in Washington.

It's time for a thread devoted ti indictments related to lobbyist Jack Abramoff's criminal activities, because there is a potential that there will be a lot of them, and Abramoff had very close ties to republican politicians; (and to some democrats) Tom Delay, Bob Ney, Bush appointees Karl Rove, Susan Ralston, and even some dealings involving Bush, himself. Republican activist Grover Norquist and christian coalition founder Ralph Reed teamed to collect and process money thrown off from Abramoff's lobbying for indian tribes, and a senate committee headed by John McCain has unearthed Abramoff ties to a former undersecretary in the dept. of Interior, the federal department that administers native American affairs. The white house chief procurement officer, James Savarin, was already indicted in the same investigation in september.

There is plenty of background from my research here:
http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showpo...327&postcount=3

The most interesting thing is the story that Susan Ralston screened all of Karl Roves calls and pre-submitted all new callers to Grover Norquist. If Norquist approved, a caller was permitted to talk to Karl. Norquist is a republican operative who holds no elected office or political appointment. Susan Ralston, before coming to the white house in 2001, was a key assistant to Jank Abramoff.

Here is the Nov. 18, 2005 indictment:

Quote:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...1801428_pf.html
Scanlon Charged With Conspiracy to Defraud

By PETE YOST
The Associated Press
Friday, November 18, 2005; 4:20 PM

WASHINGTON -- In a widening scandal on Capitol Hill, the government charged a partner of lobbyist Jack Abramoff on Friday with defrauding Indian tribes of millions of dollars in a scheme that lavished golf trips, meals and campaign donations on a member of Congress.

Michael Scanlon, an ex-aide to former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, is headed for federal court Monday on a conspiracy count contained in a criminal information, which typically is a prelude to a guilty plea and full cooperation with government investigators.

The eight-page information says Scanlon and a person identified only as "Lobbyist A" provided "a stream of things of value" to a member of Congress, identified only as "Representative No. 1," to aid their effort to pass legislation.

It has been a matter of public record for more than a year that Scanlon and Abramoff had a fee-splitting arrangement and represented several Indian tribes.

Among the people subpoenaed in the Scanlon and Abramoff investigation was Rep. Bob Ney, R-Ohio, whose name surfaced almost a year ago in a Senate Indian Affairs Committee investigation as having extensive dealings with the two lobbyists and their tribal clients.

Ney early this month started a legal defense fund. He has denied any wrongdoing and says he was duped into backing Abramoff's clients and into taking a golf trip paid for by Abramoff.

Court papers filed by prosecutors say that Scanlon and the lobbyist "sought and received Representative No. 1's agreement to perform a series of official acts."

The acts, said the court papers, included "agreements to support and pass legislation, agreements to place statements into the Congressional Record, meeting with Lobbyist A and Scanlon's clients, and advancing the application of Lobbyist A for a license to install wireless telephone infrastructure in the House of Representatives."

Justice Department spokesman Bryan Sierra confirmed that a hearing has been scheduled for Monday in Scanlon's case, but would provide no details.

Scanlon was once a top aide to DeLay, who stepped down from his leadership post after being charged with violating campaign finance law in Texas. DeLay has denied those charges.

The Senate Indian Affairs Committee is investigating Abramoff and Scanlon and the more than $80 million they were paid between 2001 and 2004 by six Indian tribes with casinos.

In another investigation, Abramoff has been indicted by a federal grand jury in Florida on charges of fraud and conspiracy stemming from his role in the 2000 purchase of a fleet of gambling boats. He has pleaded innocent.

Charges outlined in documents filed Friday allege that Lobbyist A solicited an Indian tribe in Mississippi in 1995 to provide lobbying services on taxes and other issues relating to tribal sovereignty.

The lobbyist then allegedly recommended that the tribe hire Scanlon's company, Capital Campaign Strategies, while concealing the fact the Lobbyist A would receive 50 percent of the profits from the tribe's payment to Scanlon.

The Mississippi tribe paid Scanlon's firm $14.8 million from June 2001 through April 2004, while Scanlon concealed from the tribe that 50 percent of the profit "was kicked back to Lobbyist A pursuant to their secret arrangement."

The court papers detailing the conspiracy charge say that Scanlon and Lobbyist A had identical kickback arrangements for tribes in Louisiana, Texas and Michigan.

Elphaba · 11-19-2005, 04:04 PM

A combination of two posts by Elphaba:

Quote:

I think everyone is familiar with Abramoff's indictment in Florida regarding falsified financial transactions to buy a fleet of off-shore gambling ships. The original owner got a tad perturbed about it, but had the misfortune of being murdered. Abramoff's partner in the deal was "connected" and paid very generous wages to a couple of mafiosa types. Those good fellows have been charged with the murder.

Night time soaps don't get better than this. If you like your news in the form of parody and humor, read Dave Barry's novel, "Tricky Business," which is clearly about Abramoff, et al.

Scanlon and Ney have also been implicated in Abramhoff's SunCruz purchase.

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiheral.../printstory.jsp

Quote:

Posted on Sun, Sep. 25, 2005

CASINO CRUISE INQUIRY
Politician in SunCruz's hot water

The role of an obscure Ohio congressman during negotiations in the sale of Fort Lauderdale-based SunCruz Casinos in 2000 has drawn the attention of federal investigators.

BY JAY WEAVER
jweaver@herald.com

Federal authorities want to know whether an obscure Ohio congressman improperly influenced negotiations in the $147 million SunCruz Casinos deal five years ago as a favor to a politically connected lobbyist and his business partner, according to sources familiar with the investigation.

Rep. Bob Ney, a Republican better known for touting coal shippers in his district, thrust himself into the sensitive sale in March 2000 when he publicly trashed Fort Lauderdale-based SunCruz owner Gus Boulis in Congress.

Sources say investigators want to know whether Ney deliberately sought to handicap Boulis by highlighting his troubles with Florida authorities at a time when the magnate -- pressured by federal prosecutors -- was desperately trying to sell his gambling ships to Washington lobbyist Jack Abramoff and New York businessman Adam Kidan.

In South Florida, Abramoff and Kidan were each charged last month with defrauding lenders of $60 million to purchase SunCruz, which quickly sank into bankruptcy under their ownership.

A spokesman for Ney denied any wrongdoing.

Ney inserted comments into the Congressional Record that condemned Boulis as a ''bad apple'' in the gaming industry -- six months before the sale of his Las Vegas-style gaming vessels in September 2000. One month after the deal closed, Ney inserted more comments into the record that praised Kidan's ``renowned reputation for honesty and integrity.''

He did so at the request of Michael Scanlon, a former communications director to Tom DeLay, a powerful Republican lawmaker from Texas. Scanlon went on to work as a lobbyist with Abramoff and then as a public relations consultant for SunCruz after the sale.

In the midst of the SunCruz negotiations, Ney received thousands of dollars in campaign contributions from Kidan, Abramoff, Abramoff's wife and Scanlon.

Federal prosecutors, along with FBI agents, are trying to determine whether Ney, a 10-year veteran of Congress whose district includes the upper Ohio River, received any other financial benefits in addition to campaign contributions.

According to federal court records, Kidan diverted $310,000 from SunCruz to pay for a luxury sports sky box in the Washington-Baltimore area -- part of Abramoff's GOP fundraising enterprise where he entertained politicians and donors at FedEx Field, MCI Center and Camden Yards.

Abramoff and Scanlon are already targets of a Justice Department investigation into their representation of six Indian tribes that own casinos across the country. They raked in $66 million in lobbying fees from the tribes, who foot most of the bills for the sports sky boxes and possibly other political expenses.

Ney's spokesman said that authorities had not contacted his boss about the SunCruz criminal case or any other Justice Department probe.

''Had he known everything about the background of that individual [Kidan], he wouldn't have done it,'' said Ney's spokesman, Brian Walsh, adding the congressman's campaign committee returned Kidan's $2,000 donations. It's not unusual for U.S. representatives to insert remarks into the Congressional Record, but it's typically done for constituents in their district. What Ney did is uncommon, said Larry Noble, executive director of Center for Responsive Politics, a Washington-based nonpartisan group that tracks money and politics.

''It appears this was not an innocent praising of a constituent,'' Noble said. ``He looks like he's leveraging a business deal. That in and of itself would be problematic. What makes it even more troublesome for Ney is that [Kidan and Abramoff] ran the business into the ground.

''It all gets entangled in this web [amid] a strong sense of scandal,'' he said. ``Ney has to expect to be asked about why he did this.''

The SunCruz case is a political story of strange bedfellows, even by Miami and Washington standards.

`CRUISES TO NOWHERE'

Konstantinos ''Gus'' Boulis, a Greek immigrant who made his first fortune as founder of the Miami Subs chain, ventured into the gambling ''cruises to nowhere'' industry in the 1990s. The SunCruz fleet of 11 ships had 2,300 slot machines and 175 gaming tables and sailed from nine Florida ports and Myrtle Beach, S.C., to international waters.

But Boulis was forced to sell SunCruz in 1999 after federal prosecutors reached a settlement with him on civil charges of violating the Shipping Act because he purchased his fleet before he became a U.S. citizen. Prosecutors kept the settlement a secret so that Boulis could attempt to sell his business at market value.

It didn't remain a secret for very long.

Facing a 36-month deadline, Boulis turned to his maritime lawyer in Washington, Art Dimopoulos, a partner with Abramoff, who led the governmental affairs division at the law firm Preston Gates Ellis. The power broker found Kidan, a businessman whom he got to know as young Republican activists in the 1980s.

Kidan had just sold his Dial-a-Mattress franchise in Washington and was looking to invest an ''eight-figure'' payoff, according to Abramoff. The pair began negotiations with Boulis in January 2000 -- then got a critical assist from Scanlon. He left DeLay's staff that month to work as a public relations consultant and lobbyist for gaming industry clients, among others.

Scanlon asked Ney's office to insert critical comments into the Congressional Record about the SunCruz owner and Ney obliged because of his close relationship with DeLay, according to Ney's spokesman, Walsh.

''He [Ney] didn't have any interaction with Abramoff or Kidan'' regarding the request, Walsh said.

Scanlon, who worked with Abramoff and later as a spokesman for SunCruz, could not be reached for comment.

After Scanlon made his request to Ney's office, the Ohio congressman said he was ''an ardent foe of illegal activity in the gaming industry'' and ``an ardent supporter of consumer rights.''

''I believe that the vast majority of casino owners play by the rules, treat their patrons fairly and provide quality entertainment for individuals and families,'' Ney said in the Congressional Record in March 2000. ``However, there are a few bad apples out there who don't play by the rules and that is just plain wrong. One such example is the case of SunCruz Casinos, based out of Florida.''

He pointed out that then-Attorney General Bob Butterworth reprimanded the company and Boulis for taking illegal bets and not properly paying winnings to their customers.

Three months later, according to court records, Boulis reached a tentative agreement to sell SunCruz to Kidan and Abramoff.

By the end of June 2000, Abramoff, Abramoff's wife, Kidan and Scanlon each gave $1,000 to Ney's political campaign.

One month after the SunCruz sale closed that September, Ney inserted more remarks in the Congressional Record -- this time about Kidan.

''I have come to learn that SunCruz Casinos now finds itself under new ownership and, more importantly, that its new owner has a renowned reputation for honesty and integrity,'' Ney said.

A BAD PREDICTION

Ney predicted that Kidan ``will easily transform SunCruz from a questionable enterprise to an upstanding establishment that the gaming community can be proud of.''

Kidan, Abramoff and their partners ran the business into the ground. The Dania Beach-based company filed for bankruptcy under Chapter 11 on June 22, 2001 -- just nine months after the sale and four months after Boulis himself was gunned down in a still-unsolved, execution-style murder.

Court records show that Kidan paid himself $500,000 as SunCruz's president and spent ''hundreds of thousands of dollars'' on company costs that ''produced questionable or marginal benefits.'' Among them: the sports skybox rental, Kidan's lease of an armored Mercedes-Benz for $207,545.30 and full-time bodyguards.

If you guessed that those same bodyguards are in jail for the murder of Boulis, you win extra points.

Elphaba · 11-19-2005, 04:31 PM

Previously Posted by Elphaba in a locked thread:

Quote:

I was a bit flippant with Abramoff's indictment in Florida, but I am very serious about his alleged crimes involving the manipulation of campaign funds.

Abramhoff's interests in gaming continue to raise questions other than his Florida problem. His federal problems to date are primarily due to his Native American gaming interests, which have compromised many other Washington players.

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/111505G.shtml

Quote:

The Greening of Italia Federici
By Michael Scherer
Salon.com

Friday 18 November 2005

To buy influence at the White House, GOP operative Jack Abramoff gave $500,000 in tribal loot to a Gale Norton pal who heads an "environmental" nonprofit.

Italia Federici swears in before the Senate Indian Affairs Committee in Washington Thursday.

Italia Federici is a minor Republican player in Washington, the sort of dime-a-dozen functionary who can build a career trading favors in backrooms and producing political campaigns for moneyed interests. Her specialty is the environment. She leads a conservative front group called the Council of Republicans for Environmental Advocacy, or CREA, a tiny outfit, originally founded by Interior Secretary Gale Norton, that argues it is healthy for forests to clear-cut trees, good for the air to weaken air-quality controls, and "environmentally responsible" to drill for oil in the Alaskan wilderness.

For the past five years, Federici has limited her public activities to supporting President Bush's environmental plans. She claims that traditional environmentalists, groups like the Sierra Club and Democrats like Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., are dishonest and deceptive. But that is just the public face of Federici. In private, she has played a very different role in Washington, one that has now put her in the middle of one of the largest political ethics scandals in a decade.

On Thursday, she appeared before the Senate Indian Affairs Committee to explain under oath her relationship with Jack Abramoff, the disgraced Republican lobbyist whose exploits have already led to a handful of criminal indictments. For critics of Republican politics, the Abramoff investigations are a gift that keeps on giving. They reveal a world of ethical violations, illegal money transfers, perjury and graft that flowed between some of the biggest names in Republican politics. Already, Abramoff has been charged with fraud; a top White House official, David Safavian, has been charged with perjury; and another former White House official, Timothy Flanigan, has withdrawn from a Senate confirmation process.

Abramoff's dealings have thrown ethical clouds over a number of Republican heavyweights, including Rep. Tom DeLay, R-Texas., evangelical activist Ralph Reed, and anti-tax crusader Grover Norquist. And the investigation is far from over.

Under the direction of Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., the committee has uncovered evidence that suggests Federici entered into an unspoken deal with Abramoff, who is accused of stealing millions of dollars from his Native American clients. He funneled nearly $500,000 in donations from these clients to her environmental organization. In exchange, Federici became his advocate in the inner sanctum of the Bush administration, offering him access to at least two of her close friends, Norton and Deputy Secretary J. Steven Griles. "Ms. Federici would help get inside information about and possibly influence tribal issues within the Interior," explained Sen. McCain, at the start of the hearing.

For her part, Federici flatly denied all allegations that she had done anything untoward. "We provided excellent environmental advocacy consistent with our mission," she said of her work with CREA, which is registered as a nonprofit. "I get a lot of unsolicited e-mail, and I am helpful to all of my friends."

Sitting before the Senate panel, Federici had the bearing of a quiet, sympathetic elementary school teacher. She wore her blond hair loose over her shoulders, and spoke in soft tones. At one point she portrayed herself as an honest subordinate who had found herself working with unethical friends. "Jack was close to 50, a man and a high-dollar donor," she said of his blunt e-mails to her. "I did not feel comfortable correcting his vernacular." But she gave no ground to her inquisitors. She said, instead, that she believed the committee's staff had engaged in a smear campaign against her. She called McCain's investigation a "witch hunt," adding that she believed the senator might hold a grudge because she had opposed a bipartisan bill on air quality that McCain had sponsored.

McCain seemed to take pleasure in the suggestion that he was the one bending ethical rules. He focused instead on the evidence he had compiled. He described multiple e-mails in which Federici responded to Abramoff's requests for help lobbying Interior officials. In April of 2003, for example, Abramoff asked her to find out about a procedural change proposed by the department that had upset his clients. "Hi Jack: I will definitely see what I can find out," she wrote back, before immediately changing the topic. "I hate to bug you, but is there any news about a possible contribution...?"

"Any objective observer would see that there is a connection between contributions to your organization and the work that you would be doing on behalf of Mr. Abramoff," McCain said.

"I attached a second unrelated thought about an environmental project," Federici protested.

"Since your answers are so bizarre, I won't continue," said McCain a few minutes later. "I will let others make the judgment."

The e-mails released by the committee on Thursday certainly presented a damning case. At minimum, it appears Abramoff believed he was buying access to the Interior Department through Federici. He claimed to colleagues that Federici had "juice" at the agency. He claimed that CREA functioned as "Norton's main group outside the department." He offered Federici skybox seats at Redskins games and paid the bill for her meals and cocktail parties at his downtown restaurant, Signatures.

At the same time, Federici appeared to be catering to Abramoff's every wish. She arranged meetings, requested photo opportunities, delivered memos and newspaper articles to Interior officials. She even organized Georgetown dinner parties, under the cover of CREA, so Abramoff's clients could meet with Norton and Griles. "Thanks for all you do for my clients, the cause and me personally," Abramoff wrote her in a 2002 e-mail.

"When my friends reach out to me and ask me to help them with things, I never turn around and say why don't you just do it yourself," Federici said, adding that she paid for her own cell phone to facilitate this process. "I believed at the time that the reason Jack was giving us money is because he was a very generous Republican contributor," she said at another point in the hearing.

"That is unbelievable," said Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D., who is co-chairman of the committee.

There was far less disagreement about what Federici had done with the tribal money she collected from Abramoff's clients. CREA spent it on initiatives that had nothing to do with the Native American tribes, but much to do with furthering President Bush's agenda. In April 2002, for example, CREA ran a $40,000 full-page ad in the Washington Post praising the environmental merits of the president's plan to drill in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

"We are also going to do something mean to Senator John Kerry," Federici wrote Abramoff, a few days before the ad ran. She then described a video CREA had packaged that showed Sen. Kerry leaving an Earth Day celebration and stepping into a gas-guzzling sports utility vehicle. She sent the video to at least two television programs on the Fox News Network, "The O'Reilly Factor" and "Hannity and Colmes." "I am letting EVERYONE know that you are the only reason we have the funding to do this," she gushed to Abramoff in the same e-mail.

At the same time, e-mails show that Abramoff and Federici plotted to use environmental causes to help Abramoff's gambling clients. In December 2002, Abramoff proposed to Federici that she encourage the Interior Department to "say that they are not satisfied with the Environmental Impact Report" of a proposed casino in Michigan that would compete with one of Abramoff's clients. "This is a direct assault on our guys," Abramoff wrote to Federici. Eight minutes later, she wrote back to say she would contact Griles. "I will call him asap," she said. The casino was eventually approved, after a protracted delay.

Sen. Dorgan compared Federici's story to a fairy tale. "You know what bothers me?" Dorgan asked at the end of the hearing. "It's pretty clear that this is one of the most disgusting tales of greed and avarice, and perhaps fraud and stealing. It's unbelievable what we have uncovered here. It's almost sickening to see what we have uncovered. And you come to our table and say, 'Oh, gosh, this is just about friendships.'

"Somehow none of this adds up," he continued. "This committee, in my judgment, has had people testify, and, in my judgment, some of the testimony was fraudulent. We need to find out who, because there are consequences to that."

Dorgan may well have his way. The Senate Finance Committee is beginning its own investigation into the use of nonprofits like CREA by lobbyists like Abramoff. The Justice Department is in the midst of a wide-ranging investigation of Abramoff's lobbying operation. Sen. McCain has suggested the Internal Revenue Service should mount its own investigation. And Dorgan said he will ask for another hearing of the Indian Affairs Committee.

No date has yet been set. But it is clear that Federici, a backroom player in big-money politics, will not have the last word.

Elphaba · 11-19-2005, 05:18 PM

And finally, recreating the post I lost in the lock down.

I was doing my usual clumsy attempts at searching for information via Google, when I came upon the following article. I find much of the information disturbing in that Abramoff and Norquist have been linked with what are believed to be money sources for A'Q. It is my hope that the good folks on this forum will take a critical look into what is being reported here and the supporting links that are provided in support of the claims. If investigations or indictments are underway, I have yet to find them.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/10/17/122311/72

Quote:

Abramoff Scandal Links GOP to Islamic Banks and Tyco Scandals

by leveymg

Mon Oct 17, 2005 at 10:23:10 AM PDT

The other shoe is about to drop on the Republican leadership, now reeling from the indictment of House Republican Leader Tom DeLay and the imminent indictments coming down from the Plame Grand Jury.

Abramoff's influence-peddling operation out of the Greenberg & Traurig law firm are connected to multiple Washington scandals, the nexus of which is lobbying that either illegally benefited Republicans or which allegedly cheated that law firm's clients.

What is less well understood is that Abramoff also served as the registered Washington lobbyist for the Government of Pakistan and is a fixer for Saudi moneymen tied to al-Qaeda and other terrorist groups. Abramoff is further implicated in the financial looting of giant Tyco International, a case that has ties to the Bush Justice Department.

leveymg's diary :: ::

The Indian casino case -- with its gangland murder in Miami and former Tom DeLay staffers -- has thus far overshadowed other, potentially more damaging investigations surrounding GOP fixer and bagman, Jack Abramoff.

Long a fixture of Washington GOP lobbying, Abramoff is now facing a variety of felony charges related to work he did while in the DC office of Greenberg & Traurig (GT), a Miami-based law firm which represented the Bush-Cheney election committee in the 2000 Florida recount court fight.

That legal work for the Bush-Cheney committee was billed out in the hundreds of thousands of dollars, but was never paid back. Federal Election Commission rules say that unpaid campaign expenses must be counted as in-kind contributions after 2 years, far exceeding the limits for that law firm, making them illegal contributions to the Bush-Cheney 2000 campaign.
See, http://rawstory.com/exclusives/byrne/abramoff_florida_r ...

*

Shortly after 9/11, Abramoff registered as a lobbyist for the General Council of Islamic Banks. According to the National Journal (Aug 31, 2002), the consortium was funded to counter the Treasury Department and the FBI's efforts to put an unwanted public spotlight on global terrorist financing coming out of banks in Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states.

Abramoff's lobbyists spread the lie that Islamic banks had not sheltered money used for terrorist networks. Their primary client, chairman of the Council, Saleh Abdullah Kamel, soon after 9/11 became the focus of intense government scrutiny over alledged ties to terrorist activity.

Kamel, whose fortune is estimated at $3 billion, is the chairman of Dallah al Baraka Group (DBG), which is accused of financing al Qaeda and other extremist groups, and he was also the co-founder and major shareholder of Al Shamal Bank in Sudan, an institution in which Osama bin Laden established a personal ownership interest.

Kamel was listed as being one of the seven "main individual sponsors of terrorism" in a report by French counter-terrorism exert Jean-Charles Brisard submitted to the UN Security Council in December 2002. Recall that Omar al-Bayoumi, who provided money to two of the 9/11 hijackers, was once an assistant to the Director of Finance for Dallah Avco, a DBG company that works with the Saudi aviation authority. And the WSJ has reported that the United States believes the Dallah al-Baraka Bank, another DBG company, was also used by al-Qaeda.

Kamel's name appeared in the "Golden Chain," a roster seized by Bosnian authorities in Sarajevo in March 2002 listing Saudi donors to bin Laden.

*

While at Greenberg & Traurig, Jack Abramoff set up a subsidiary lobbying group with a Director of the Islamic Institute, a Virginia group founded by Grover Norquist, a GOP strategy and fundraising heavyweight.

Abramoff and a partner, Kaled Saffuri, operated Lexington Group LLC. This was reportedly not a commercial success, according to The Hill newspaper (04/14/2005): http://www.hillnews.com/thehill/export/TheHill/News/Fro ...

Three years ago, Abramoff and a prominent Islamic activist set up a lobbying firm, the Lexington Group LLC, with the goal of developing more lobbying business for Abramoff's employer at the time, Greenberg Traurig.

The firm existed for at least four months and boasted on its now-defunct website that it represented "major U.S. corporations before the U.S. Congress and the Executive Branch every day." But it never reported any clients, nor did it direct business to Greenberg Traurig, according to public records and an interview with Abramoff's associate in the venture, Khaled Saffuri, now a government affairs adviser with Collier Shannon Scott.

"I expected business to come, and it didn't. It just folded," said Saffuri, who said he was hired by Abramoff to be the Lexington Group's president from May until August 2002, when it closed.

Reportedly, Grover "Norquist and Khaled Saffuri founded the Islamic Institute, which was instrumental in the creation of the Al Qaeda financial network in Virginia. Saffuri was the Executive director of the American Task Force for Bosnia, which lobbied for US military intervention in Bosnia. Osama bin Laden's al-Qaeda organization actively was recruiting and training Arab fighters to fight alongside the Bosnian Muslims. Bosnia had become the focus of the worldwide jihad after the Soviets withdrew from Afghanistan in 1989."
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1571/is_2004 ... ; http://www.libertyforum.org/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=new ...

Norquist's ties to the Saudi-funded Islamist movement in the US go back to 1998, after which Norquist became the principal Washington bridge for radical Islamists to the Republican Party. Frank J. Gaffney writes: http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID ...

The association between Grover Norquist and Islamists appears to have started about five years ago, in 1998, when he became the founding chairman of an organization called the Islamic Free Market Institute, better known as the Islamic Institute. The Institute's stated purpose was to cultivate Muslim-Americans and Arab-Americans whose attachment to conservative family values and capitalism made them potential allies for the Republican Party in advance of the 2000 presidential election. . . .

Unfortunately, some associated with the Islamic Institute evidently had another agenda. Abdurahman Alamoudi, for one, a self-described "supporter of Hamas and Hezbollah," the prime-mover behind the American Muslim Council (AMC) and a number of other U.S.-based Islamist-sympathizing/supporting organizations, saw in the Islamic Institute a golden opportunity to hedge his bets.

**

Abramoff is also tied in with the collapse of Tyco, Int'l, a huge US-based multinational conglomerate that operates in many countries, including Saudi Arabia. Abramoff is accused of bilking that company for millions of dollars in bogus or illegal lobbying expenses while at Greenberg & Traurig:

Tyco's former General Counsel Timonthy Flanigan's testified in late July to the Senate Judiciary Committee. Flanigan had been nominated as Number Two in the Bush Justice Department, and was recently forced to withdraw. This from Flanigan'confirmation hearing:

Durbin: Has Tyco conducted an investigation of Abramoff's activities on behalf of Tyco? If so, what were the results of the investigation?

Flanigan: Tyco has not conducted such an investigation. Greenberg Traurig, however, has conducted its own internal investigation and has informed Tyco of its conclusion that payments made by Tyco to GrassRoots Interactive, LLC were diverted by Mr. Abramoff. Specifically, Greenberg Traurig advised Tyco that Mr. Abramoff caused Tyco's payments to GrassRoots Interactive, LLC to be forwarded to a Greenberg Traurig trust account and, from there, ultimately to entities controlled by Mr. Abramoff. Greenberg Traurig informed Tyco that the funds diverted to the entities controlled by Mr. Abramoff were not used in furtherance of lobbying efforts on behalf of Tyco. This diversion occurred without my knowledge and was in violation of Mr. Abramoff's ethical, fiduciary, and contractual obligations to Tyco.

Tyco and Greenberg Traurig have reached an agreement in principle to settle Tyco's claims stemming from the diversion of funds as described above. Pursuant to the settlement, Greenberg Traurig will compensate Tyco for the funds diverted by Mr. Abramoff.

*

Abramoff's former law firm was the site of other illegal contributions to GOP figures. The WashPost reports: http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A26015-2004Dec ...

"Jack Abramoff had one of the biggest schmoozing operations in town," said Rob Jennings, president of American Event Consulting Inc., an organization that raises funds for Republicans.

A list of skybox fundraising events maintained by Abramoff at his former law firm, Greenberg Traurig, lists 72 events for members of Congress between 1999 and 2003. All but eight were put on for Republicans, many of them members of the House leadership. Some of the fundraising events, including Doolittle's, were not reported as required under federal election laws.

SNIP

Abramoff, once one of the most powerful lobbyists in Washington, was forced to resign from Greenberg Traurig after disclosures earlier this year about the lobbying and public relations fees he and an associate charged a group of Indian tribes. The Senate Indian Affairs committee has tallied fees from six tribes that total $82 million over a three-year period.

SNIP

The big prize for members of Congress was in the more than $3.5 million in federal campaign contributions that six tribes made at Abramoff's direction, two-thirds of it to Republicans. The meals and the games were added perks that provided settings for Abramoff and the 10 or so lobbyists who worked for him to obtain access to members and ingratiate themselves to congressional aides.

SNIP

Abramoff not only lobbied staffers, he regularly hired them. Three former aides to DeLay worked as lobbyists for Abramoff at Greenberg Traurig: former deputy chiefs of staff Tony Rudy and Bill Jarrell; and former DeLay spokesman Michael Scanlon, who formed a public relations company that worked in tandem with Abramoff.

***

Abramoff seems to be the spider at the center of much of the web of criminal influence peddling that have funneled money into the GOP during the past decade, creating ties between the Republican White House and terrorist-linked Persian Gulf bankers.

Grand Jury probes of Abramoff have resulted in a variety of charges. Bank fraud charges have already been filed against him; obstruction of justice charges against David Safavian, the Bush administration's former chief procurement official; and the scandal has resulted in the little-noted withdrawal of President Bush's nomination of Timothy Flanigan, a onetime associate of Abramoff, and General Counsel for scandal-plagued Tyco International, to be the Bush Justice Department No. 2 official.

Abramoff is close to most of the Republican leadership, and they have greatly benefited from that relationship. His ties include: President Bush; U.S. Rep. Tom DeLay; Sen. Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania; party strategist Grover Norquist; and former Christian Coalition executive director and Bush campaign official, Ralph Reed.

Such close ties may soon turn out out to be a fatal embrace for these Republican leaders as details of Abramoff's multifaceted web of corruption become clear.

Copyright 2005, Mark G. Levey NOTE: Links above are truncated. Please try these: Sorry, folks, someday I'll learn DKos formatting rules: http://rawstory.com/exclusives/byrne...t_bush_505.htm http://www.hillnews.com/thehill/expo.../abramoff.html http://www.findarticles.com/p/articl...1/ai_113363777 http://www.libertyforum.org/showflat...mber=293718113 http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles...e.asp?ID=11209 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...2004Dec25.html

Host has been trying to draw our attention to Abramoff and his machinations within our government for quite some time. He has routinely been ridiculed, dismissed, or criticized for multiple links in support of his posts. His topics get summarily merged or locked arbitrarily, in my opinion.

He was RIGHT about Abramoff, long before most of us recognized the name.

host · 11-19-2005, 06:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elphaba

And finally, recreating the post I lost in the lock down.

I was doing my usual clumsy attempts at searching for information via Google, when I came upon the following article. I find much of the information disturbing in that Abramoff and Norquist have been linked with what are believed to be money sources for A'Q. It is my hope that the good folks on this forum will take a critical look into what is being reported here and the supporting links that are provided in support of the claims. If investigations or indictments are underway, I have yet to find them.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/10/17/122311/72

Host has been trying to draw our attention to Abramoff and his machinations within our government for quite some time. He has routinely been ridiculed, dismissed, or criticized for multiple links in support of his posts. His topics get summarily merged or locked arbitrarily, in my opinion.

He was RIGHT about Abramoff, long before most of us recognized the name.

I probably will not be allowed to post during Thanksgiving week because of the comment that I will end this post with, Elphaba, so I'll take this opportunity to wish you and every one else who participates or reads the TFP
politics threads, a happy holiday.

I think that it was a misuse of moderation to disallow a thread that has Abramoff's name in the title...I checked and there are not any titled that way on here. Abramoff is not just another "Bush crony". His name will continue to be regularly in the political headlines, and a signifigant number of people in high places will require pardons because of relationships with him.

I want to talk about the most signifigant current issues, and I want to highlight the most important ones. It's becoming increasingly obvious that I cannot do that without interference here. It's not my place to make the decision whether the interference is necessary or appropriate, but I don't see anyone else's efforts impeded because they contibute too much information on this forum...and I'll leave it at that.

Elphaba · 11-19-2005, 09:18 PM

I insist that Hal judge the actions of Labelle in his treatment of Host on this forum. I find it unjust that Host receives punitive action for what appears to be arbitrary decisions, and yet highly dubious posts by others are ignored or encouraged.

Hal, with all due respect, I do not believe that Labelle is able to separate his own political beliefs to fairly moderate this forum. His own topic starter that claimed we owed Bush an apology is another example, if more are needed.

I await your opinion, Hal.

Respectfully,
Pen

Elphaba · 11-26-2005, 01:21 PM

Quote:

by Host: It's time for a thread devoted ti indictments related to lobbyist Jack Abramoff's criminal activities, because there is a potential that there will be a lot of them, and Abramoff had very close ties to republican politicians; (and to some democrats) Tom Delay, Bob Ney, Bush appointees Karl Rove, Susan Ralston, and even some dealings involving Bush, himself. Republican activist Grover Norquist and christian coalition founder Ralph Reed teamed to collect and process money thrown off from Abramoff's lobbying for indian tribes, and a senate committee headed by John McCain has unearthed Abramoff ties to a former undersecretary in the dept. of Interior, the federal department that administers native American affairs. The white house chief procurement officer, James Savarin, was already indicted in the same investigation in september.

New names are being leaked in the investigation of Abramoff, which I presume are a result of Scanlon's cooperation:

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/112605Z.shtml

Quote:

Abramoff Probe Spreads to White House, 4 Lawmakers
Reuters

Friday 25 November 2005

New York - The US Justice Department's probe of Republican lobbyist Jack Abramoff is broader than previously thought, examining his dealings with four lawmakers, former and current congressional aides and two former Bush administration officials, the Wall Street Journal reported on Friday.

Prosecutors in the department's public integrity and fraud divisions are looking into Abramoff's dealings with four Republicans - former House of Representatives Majority Leader Tom DeLay of Texas, Rep. Bob Ney of Ohio, Rep. John Doolittle of California and Sen. Conrad Burns of Montana, the paper said, citing several people close to the investigation.

Abramoff is under investigation over his lobbying efforts for Indian tribes with casinos. He has also pleaded not guilty to federal charges in Florida that he defrauded lenders in a casino cruise line deal.

The prosecutors are also investigating at least 17 current and former congressional aides, about half of whom later took lobbying jobs with Abramoff, as well as an official from the Interior Department and another from the government's procurement office, the Journal said.

Justice Department spokesman Paul Bresson declined to comment on the investigation.

The newspaper said investigators were looking into whether Abramoff and his partners made illegal payoffs to the lawmakers and aides in the form of campaign contributions, sports tickets, meals, travel and job offers, in exchange for helping their clients.

DeLay and Ney have already retained criminal defense lawyers.

Spokespeople for the two lawmakers told the Journal that they have both hired lawyers and have not been contacted by the Justice Department.

Michael Scanlon, a former aide to DeLay and partner to powerful Republican lobbyist Abramoff, pleaded guilty to conspiracy on Monday under a deal in which he is cooperating with prosecutors probing the alleged influence-buying.

Scanlon left DeLay's office and become a partner to Abramoff, who has been indicted for fraud in a separate case in Florida. The plea agreement has been seen as a major advance in prosecutors' efforts to investigate the lobbyist.

I have long suspected that DeLay would ultimately be caught up in his dealings with Abramoff and the whole 'K' Street adventure, but it is still a bit of a shock to see his name leaked. Dolittle and Burns are names that are new to me, and I don't see California and Montana having an obvious interest in tribal gaming. Investigation of Federici of the Interior Department is getting uncomfortably close to Norquist, and I believe there lies the end game when you follow the money.

Host, do you agree, or do you think criminal involvement with Abramoff will rise above Norquist?

Elphaba · 11-26-2005, 03:32 PM

This just in... Burns helps out a Michigan tribe.

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/112605A.shtml

Quote:

Report: Burns Part of Lobbyist Probe
The Missoulian

Saturday 26 November 2005

Helena - The scope of a US Justice Department investigation of indicted Republican lobbyist Jack Abramoff is wider than previously believed and now includes his dealings with US Sen. Conrad Burns, R-Mont., the Wall Street Journal reported Friday.

(Snip)

Burns, up for re-election next year, helped one of Abramoff's tribal clients, the Saginaw Chippewa tribe in Michigan, obtain a $3 million congressional grant to build a school. Because of its Indian gambling, the tribe is one of the richest in the nation and makes annual $70,000 payments to each member.

The Montana senator has denied any wrongdoing. Burns, who headed a Senate subcommittee overseeing the grants, said he pushed for the grant to the Saginaw Chippewa tribe at the urging of Michigan's two US senators, both Democrats.

The Journal said Burns has received $150,000 in contributions from Abramoff, his lobbying partners and his clients since 2001.

In addition, the Journal reported the Justice Department is investigating at least 17 current and former congressional aides, with about half taking lobbying jobs with Abramoff, and two former Bush administration officials. Abramoff hired three Burns aides to join his lobbying firm.

I have to believe that Scanlon knows where to turn all of the rocks. Even so, the behavior of Burns should have produced a red flag long ago. If something like this has been treated as "business as usual", I suspect we have a gravel pit of corruption involving both parties.

Marvelous Marv · 11-27-2005, 10:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elphaba

This just in... Burns helps out a Michigan tribe.

I'm curious... has anyone ever checked on the sources for Robert Byrd's campaign funds? Could they be businesses in WV, by any chance?

Elphaba · 11-27-2005, 12:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marvelous Marv

I'm curious... has anyone ever checked on the sources for Robert Byrd's campaign funds? Could they be businesses in WV, by any chance?

Why don't you check that out, Marv, and get back to us with a new topic?

ajpresto · 11-27-2005, 03:05 PM

I love how now all the Republicans are like, "He doesn't represent me." Hmm... why'd you vote for him in the last election?

It frustrates me that people thought that there was any good in the man.

host · 11-27-2005, 04:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ajpresto

I love how now all the Republicans are like, "He doesn't represent me." Hmm... why'd you vote for him in the last election?

It frustrates me that people thought that there was any good in the man.

I have detailed Bush's (and Rove's and the white house) ties to Jack Abramoff, before, here: http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showthr...on#post1896327

In the interest of making the following more like a sound byte, I'll keeo it brief and we'll start with a question?

What does it indicate, in the categories of integrity and judgment, if a POTUS and his deputy chief of staff (along with the congressional majority leader, and an as yet unknown number of congressmen and senators, christian right, (Ralph Reed) and republican conservative activists (Ie Norquist) develop and maintain close ties with a prominent lobbyist and republican party operator
(president of young republicans at Brandeis U.), such as Jack Abramoff?

I'm asking because I have learned the following about Abramoff's own judgment and integrity. (Look up each point, if you are curious, it's all available on the internet):

Abramoff chose Adam Kidan to be his partner in the purchase of Suncruz Casino Ships. As an attorney, Abramoff has access to <a href="http://www.lexisnexis.com/productsandservices/">Lexis-Nexus</a> and should know how to conduct a background check. If you are partnering with someone in a $147 million purchase, you should know their background.

I've learned that Suncruz majority partners were Abramoff and Kidan. Another friend at the Preston Gates lobbying firm, Ben Waldman, owned ten percent of Suncruz and served as president in the new partnership. Waldman has been a close aid to Pat Robertson during his 1988 campaign for president:
http://newtimesbpb.com/Issues/2001-02-22/news.html

Suncruz hired Michael Scanlon as it's spokesman in 2000. Scanlon had influenced congressman Bob Ney of Ohio to publish unflattering remarks (at least twice) about original Suncruz owner, Gus Boulis, to impress Boulis as to the Abramoff & partners' clout when they needed to pressure Boulis into agreeing to the sale.

Adam Kidan's mother Judy Shemtov, was murdered; shot in the face in her Staten Island home in 1993. Brooklyn thug, with mafia ties, Chris Paciello drove the getaway car in that robbery of Kadin's stepfather's safe. (Sami Shemtov, former Israeli soldier who grew rich in the pornography business).

Sami Shemtov had suspicions that Adam Kidan was involved in the botched robbery and murder of his wife, and he sued his stepson, Adam Kidan for $250,000. Kidan lost the lawsuit and his license to practice law in New York.

Chris Paciello was not arrested until 1998, and by that time he was the owner of two flashy South Beach, Fl. nightclubs, and had briefly dated Madonna and became friends with numerous other celebrities. Paciello retained criminal lawyer Roy Black, and managed to parlay info that he had about a major NYC mob boss, into a slot for himself in the federal witness protection program, where he is reported to currently be participating.

Abramoff should have known all this when he agreed to partner with Kidan.
Kidan filed papers for Suncruz loans where he claimed to have personal assets at the time, of more than $25 million, while the truth was that he had almost no assets.

It seems that an appetite for power and money eclipsed the judgment, of Abramoff, Scanlon, Bush, Rove, Delay, Ney, Safavian, and....we'll see who else, won't we?

Ponder that fundamentalist muslims, (at least three) a week before they attacked with four hijacked airliners on 9/11, were reported by the SPTimes and the AP, in late sept., 2001 newspaper articles, to have visisted a Suncruz casino ship.

ajpresto · 11-27-2005, 04:44 PM

I can follow you to a point but I don't think that I can draw the logical conclusion that Abramoff, etc, allowed 9/11 to happen.

I'm a very, very liberal person. To a fault, even. I still am not 100% convinced that al Queda had anything to do with the attack on the WTC. I haven't seen conclusive evidence of all of the strings being tied up. However, I have seen a good bit of information, thanks to the 9/11 commission report, etc.

Anyway, I don't think that 9/11 could have been prevented by Abramoff, etc.

host · 11-27-2005, 05:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ajpresto

I can follow you to a point but I don't think that I can draw the logical conclusion that Abramoff, etc, allowed 9/11 to happen.

I'm a very, very liberal person. To a fault, even. I still am not 100% convinced that al Queda had anything to do with the attack on the WTC. I haven't seen conclusive evidence of all of the strings being tied up. However, I have seen a good bit of information, thanks to the 9/11 commission report, etc.

Anyway, I don't think that 9/11 could have been prevented by Abramoff, etc.

Disclaimer: I am not saying that these thugs had any connection to 9/11 attacks.

I am saying that our president has no credibility and that he got that way via his own poor judgment and via the judgment of the folks who he chose to appoint, or take money from, or associate with. When a POTUS chooses to have a key assistant (Susan Ralston) of a man like Abramoff, come to work for him in the West Wing of the white house, and continue his own cozy relationship with Abramoff that apparently dates back to at least 1997, and has a history of attempting to impede our right to know about what did happen on 9/11 and what he did or did not consider before going to war in Iraq, things like the following should be considered. There is much that we do not know, but we should be vigilant. I guarantee that we are in for more surprises and disappointments from our federal elected officials:

Quote:

http://www.sptimes.com/News/092701/n...ked_to_l.shtml

"Employees on a SunCruz gambling ship that sails from John's Pass think some of the hijackers in the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks were gambling on the ship the week before the attacks. One name on the passenger list from a Sept. 5 cruise is the same as one of the suspected terrorists' names, [Michael] Hlavsa said. A cash advance was taken out on that passenger's credit card, he said."

Quote:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...4/MN102970.DTL

"In addition to Atta, 33, and Al-Shehhi, investigators are telling business owners that Nawaq Alhamzi, age unknown, Ziad Jarrahi, 26, and Hani Hanjour, 29,
stayed in Las Vegas off and on between May and August. They say the group -- which chillingly included a hijacker from each of the four flights -- made at least six trips here."

And this is an offense to my intelligence and that of all Americans who don't have wool for a hide:

http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report_Ch5.htm
For now the reports above seem as curious to me as this line, near the bottom of the page, in the 9/11 Commission Report :

Quote:

"To date, the U.S. government has not been able to determine the origin of the money used for the 9/11 attacks. Ultimately the question is of little practical significance."

Note to mods...if you haven't accepted that the truth is becoming stranger than fiction in Washington, there is already a place for posts that are deemed too contraversial for TFP Politics: http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showthread.php?t=88318

ajpresto · 11-27-2005, 05:10 PM

I don't think that this falls into the realm of paranoia.. yet.

Elphaba · 11-27-2005, 05:21 PM

Quote:

http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report_Ch5.htm
For now the reports above seem as curious to me as this line, near the bottom of the page, in the 9/11 Commission Report :

Quote:
"To date, the U.S. government has not been able to determine the origin of the money used for the 9/11 attacks. Ultimately the question is of little practical significance."

Thank you, Host. My comment on the article posted at #95 has drawn no response. Abramoff's and Norquist's involvement with known A'Q money sources would seem worthy of a "look" don't you think?

host · 11-27-2005, 05:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ajpresto

I don't think that this falls into the realm of paranoia.. yet.

No... Elphaba, I don't agree. We'll wait until Bush's approval rating falls below Nixon's historical rock bottom of 25 percent...after he resigned in '74. We'll make former Bush supporters, the ones who voted for the "lesser of two evils", last November, and thereby cursed us with "four more years", beg the next congress launch an actual open investigation, where everyone testifies openly, and under oath, with no restrictive ground rules.

I make the effort to nearly exclusively use first class links in every point that I post here. The mods who have sent several of my past posts over to paranoia, do not seem to fully consider that seemingly outlandish points that are documented by reliable reports, should have a place in our discussions here.

The underlying reasoning is that some of the things that I post, and some of the opinions that I float about them, are out of the realm of the reasoning of some readers. I hope that current events will change that restraining factor here.

Chris Paciello also was reported to be seen once in Miami with Jay-Lo, and he had his hand placed on her butt.

Elphaba · 11-27-2005, 05:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by host

Chris Paciello also was reported to be seen once in Miami with Jay-Lo, and he had his hand placed on her butt.

TMI....

Elphaba · 11-27-2005, 05:39 PM

The Miami Herald has provided additional information concerning Ney's involvement.

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/112705E.shtml

Quote:

Feds Probing SunCruz Links to GOP
By Jay Weaver
The Miami Herald

Saturday 26 November 2005

Federal investigators are scrutinizing a $10,000 donation made five years ago by SunCruz Casinos to a Republican campaign committee on behalf of an Ohio congressman.

When U.S. Rep. Bob Ney assailed the owner of SunCruz Casinos in 2000, it seemed puzzling that an Ohio lawmaker would go out of his way to attack a South Florida businessman who was trying to sell his floating gaming empire.

It turns out, according to federal investigators, Ney publicly called SunCruz founder Konstantinos "Gus" Boulis a "bad apple" in exchange for the company's new owners contributing $10,000 - in his name - to a national campaign fund to help elect Republicans to Congress.

The latest disclosure is another South Florida link in a long-running Washington scandal that revolves around the influence-peddling of powerful lobbyists who collected tens of millions of dollars from their clients and also led investors to buy Dania Beach-based SunCruz Casinos.

Law enforcement sources say that just weeks after the controversial sale to Washington lobbyist Jack Abramoff and his business partner Adam Kidan in September 2000, the two men took $10,000 from their gambling business and donated the money to the National Republican Congressional Committee on Ney's behalf.

Ney, who has not been charged but has received a federal subpoena from the Justice Department, is being investigated in two public corruption probes - one in Washington and the other by the U.S. attorney's office in South Florida.

Washington prosecutors say the Republican lawmaker and others received "things of value" - golf trips, meals, campaign contributions - from lobbyists and their clients, mainly Indian tribes. South Florida prosecutors say Ney unduly influenced the $147.5 million SunCruz sale by using his congressional power to handicap Boulis in return for campaign donations from Abramoff, Kidan and others involved in the gambling cruise purchase.

Although Ney did not receive the $10,000 directly, investigators believe that SunCruz's donation in his name to the National Republican Congressional Committee amounts to an improper gift because the then-obscure Ohio congressman stood to gain in stature with the GOP congressional leadership, including House Republican leader Tom DeLay of Texas.

Ney, through a spokesman, denied any wrongdoing.

"We don't have any further comment on any aspect of the investigation other than to reiterate that Congressman Ney is cooperating fully with the Justice Department," Ney's spokesman, Brian Walsh, said Friday via e-mail.

SunCruz's contribution to the National Republican Congressional Committee in November 2000 was made seven months after Ney had condemned the company's founder, Boulis, in the Congressional Record just as he was trying to sell his fleet of ships to resolve a legal dispute with the Justice Department.

He was forced to sell because he was not a U.S. citizen when he acquired his fleet.

Just six days after the donation, Ney praised the new SunCruz co-owner Kidan in the same Congressional Record as a businessman with a ``renowned reputation for honesty and integrity."

Ney's spokesman Walsh said the congressman feels he was duped by Abramoff and his lobbying partner, Michael Scanlon, a former aide to DeLay, into making those statements in the Congressional Record.

Federal investigators don't think Ney was fooled by Scanlon, however.

DC Connections

At the time Scanlon sought Ney's help in early 2000, Scanlon had already left DeLay's office and would soon be working as a lobbyist with SunCruz's future co-owner, Abramoff. He was well-connected to DeLay, the powerful Texas Republican.

Ney agreed to place his critical remarks of Boulis in the Congressional Record in March 2000 after Scanlon asked Ney's chief of staff, Neil Volz, to do the favor. Scanlon and Volz were close friends on Capitol Hill.

After the SunCruz sale in fall 2000, Scanlon wrote e-mails to both Abramoff and Kidan, seeking and obtaining their approval to contribute the $10,000 to the GOP's campaign committee on Ney's behalf, according to one law enforcement source. Scanlon, who did public relations work for SunCruz, also corresponded with Ney's staff about the Nov. 1, 2000 political contribution.

Scanlon and his lobbying partner Abramoff would go on to rake in as much as $80 million from their work with Indian tribal clients that owned casinos - none from Florida. Those fees drew the scrutiny of the House Ethics Committee, Senate Indian Affairs Committee and the Justice Department.

Then, in August of this year, a South Florida federal grand jury indicted Abramoff and Kidan on charges of defrauding lenders of $60 million in the SunCruz sale. Both men have pleaded not guilty and are set to go to trial in Miami federal court in January.

That indictment further spurred the Justice Department's probe into Abramoff's lobbying activities.

On Monday, Scanlon, Abramoff's lobbying partner, pleaded guilty in Washington to conspiring to bribe government officials, including Ney.

In his plea agreement, Scanlon agreed to help federal authorities in Washington and Miami.

He admitted to helping Abramoff and Kidan buy SunCruz by persuading Ney to insert comments into the Congressional Record that were "calculated to pressure the then-owner to sell on terms favorable" to the buyers.

According to court papers, both Scanlon and Abramoff ``engaged in a course of conduct through which one or both of them offered and provided a stream of things of value to public officials in exchange for a series of official acts."

Plea Details

In the plea agreement, Ney is identified only as Representative #1. But both Ney's office and investigators say Ney is the lawmaker cited in the document.

Ney received trips, tickets and campaign donations allegedly in exchange for official acts, according to the plea deal.

The plea agreement lists gifts that Ney was offered or received, including a golf trip to Scotland in 2002; $4,000 in campaign contributions from Scanlon, Abramoff, Abramoff's wife and Kidan in 2000; and a $10,000 donation to the National Republican Congressional Committee made with credit to Ney.

SunCruz is not identified in Scanlon's plea deal as the contributor of the $10,000, but Federal Election Commission records show the gambling business donated that money in 2000. Law enforcement sources confirm that the contribution was made by SunCruz and credited to Ney.

Skybox Payment

According to federal court records, Kidan also diverted $310,000 from SunCruz to pay for luxury sports skyboxes in the Washington-Baltimore area - part of Abramoff's GOP fundraising enterprise where he entertained politicians and donors at FedEx Field, MCI Center and Camden Yards.

In a civil court deposition, Kidan said $236,000 in SunCruz profits went for a skybox in Maryland at FedEx Field in 2000.

The rest of the money went for another box at MCI Center in downtown Washington.

In March 2001, according to FEC records, Abramoff held a fundraiser for Ney at MCI Center.

Boulis, the entrepreneur known for launching the Miami Subs chain, was slain in a mob-style hit on Feb. 6, 2001. Four months later, SunCruz sank into bankruptcy under the new ownership led by Abramoff and Kidan.

Hmmmm....Ohio.

host · 11-27-2005, 05:41 PM

And.... my question, asked again and again....
Where the f**k is the MSM in prominently reporting what I've posted here today, and last week, etc. ?

Google news link for Kidan's mudered mother's name..... resutl? none!
http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&ne...nG=Search+News

Aside from this, in the Oct. 2, Miami Herald

Quote:

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/12795752.htm
Posted on Sun, Oct. 02, 2005

BROWARD COUNTY

Kidan's tale `stranger than fiction'

The New York entrepreneur who purchased SunCruz Casinos finds himself in the middle of the police probe of the gangland-style hit on SunCruz's former owner, Gus Boulis.........

And...dare I post it? In the recent issue of William Kristol's

Quote:

http://weeklystandard.com/Content/Pu...6/376cyikk.asp
Money, Mobsters, Murder
The sordid tale of a GOP lobbyist's casino deal gone bad.
by Matthew Continetti
11/28/2005,

Gambling doesn't destroy people. People destroy people. The gentleman or gentlewoman who decides to gamble makes that decision of his own free will. It's a free market industry, and that appeals to conservatives.
--Michael Scanlon

Again...for those who accuse the MSM of being "too liberal"...of reporting prejudicially against conservatives, or against republicans..... how does all of this, square with your oft posted perceptions?

Elphaba · 11-27-2005, 05:56 PM

Host, we could start an entirely new thread on the current mea culpa of some members of the msp.

And probably should. You or me?

host · 11-27-2005, 09:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elphaba

Host, we could start an entirely new thread on the current mea culpa of some members of the msp.

And probably should. You or me?

I think that I've covered the subject more than once:
http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/search....8&pp=40&page=1

Your turn.....but I don't recommend it. I thought that I made a convincing reply on a branch of the MSM subject, last week, and, it was naive of me to put the work into it that I did..... I should have anticipated that I wouldn't receive a response: http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showpos...&postcount=104

When you post a legitimate article, Elphaba, that is available at "truthout" because of the site's "fair use" notice, it does not matter that it came from an MSM source. "thuthout" is a site that is on the "list" of "guerilla op-ed" sites, so your content and point is on "auto block". You are reduced to preaching only to the choir........

Everyone has to consider that we are all on the same side. IMO, those who thought that Bush was on "their side", or thought that a third party was a viable solution, will have to think again.

The MSM that does sometimes describe things like the following two articles
do, is shrinking. Too many suspect that the LA Times is "too liberal". When and MSM branch reports seomthing new or unique...fact check and draw your own conclusions.

All that is left to do now is to restore the system of checks and balances that was operational and observable, "in action", during the Ken Starr investigations and the impeachment of Clinton. It is in all of our interests to find out is these two reports about Abramoff and the Bush white house are true. The surest way to do that is to vote out republicans in the house and senate in eleven months from now. You cannot use the excuse that democrats spend too much of our money, or that they are too corrupt. What is happening is allowed to go on by voters who voted out the two party balance. No one was concerned that they would be held accountable if they sold their authority to Abramioff. Voters enabled this, and to see people here joke about "Brownie" on another thread, when the man who appointed him and allowed him to resign before he was fired, and allowed him to continue to be paid as a FEMA consultant, is not even blamed, let alone voters admitting their own blame. Indirectly, you voted for Abramoff.

Quote:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washing...off-bush_x.htm
Controversial lobbyist had close contact with Bush team

WASHINGTON (AP) — In President Bush's first 10 months, GOP fundraiser Jack Abramoff and his lobbying team logged nearly 200 contacts with the new administration as they pressed for friendly hires at federal agencies and sought to keep the Northern Mariana Islands exempt from the minimum wage and other laws, records show.

The meetings between Abramoff's lobbying team and the administration ranged from Attorney General John Ashcroft to policy advisers in Vice President Dick Cheney's office, according to his lobbying firm billing records.

Abramoff, a $100,000-plus fundraiser for Bush, is now under criminal investigation for some of his lobbying work. His firm boasted its lobbying team helped revise a section of the Republican Party's 2000 platform to make it favorable to its island client.

In addition, two of Abramoff's lobbying colleagues on the Marianas won political appointments inside federal agencies.

"Our standing with the new administration promises to be solid as several friends of the CNMI (islands) will soon be taking high-ranking positions in the Administration, including within the Interior Department," Abramoff wrote in a January 2001 letter in which he persuaded the island government to follow him as a client to his new lobbying firm, Greenberg Traurig.

The reception Abramoff's team received from the Bush administration was in stark contrast to the chilly relations of the Clinton years. Abramoff, then at the Preston Gates firm, scored few meetings with Clinton aides and the lobbyist and the islands vehemently opposed White House attempts to extend U.S. labor laws to the territory's clothing factories.

The records from Abramoff's firm, obtained by The Associated Press from the Marianas under an open records request, chronicle Abramoff's careful cultivation of relations with Bush's political team as far back as 1997.

In that year, Abramoff charged the Marianas for getting then-Texas Gov. George W. Bush to write a letter expressing support for the Pacific territory's school choice proposal, his billing records show.

"I hope you will keep my office informed on the progress of this initiative," Bush wrote in a July 18, 1997, letter praising the islands' school plan and copying in an Abramoff deputy.

White House spokeswoman Erin Healy said Thursday that Bush didn't consider Abramoff a friend. "They may have met on occasion, but the president does not know him," she said.

As for the number of Abramoff lobbying team contacts with Bush officials documented in the billing records, Healy said: "We do not know how he defines 'contacts.'"....

.........The documents show his team also had extensive access to Bush administration officials, meeting with Cheney policy advisers Ron Christie and Stephen Ruhlen, Ashcroft at the Justice Department, White House intergovernmental affairs chief Ruben Barrales, U.S. Trade Representative Robert Zoellick, Deputy Interior Secretary Steven Griles and others.

Most of the contacts were handled by Abramoff's subordinates, who then reported back to him on the meetings. Abramoff met several times personally with top Interior officials, whose Office of Insular Affairs oversees the Mariana Islands and other U.S. territories.

In all, the records show at least 195 contacts between Abramoff's Marianas lobbying team and the Bush administration from February through November 2001.

At least two people who worked on Abramoff's team at Preston Gates wound up with Bush administration jobs: Patrick Pizzella, named an assistant secretary of labor by Bush; and David Safavian, chosen by Bush to oversee federal procurement policy in the Office of Management and Budget.

"We have worked with WH Office of Presidential Personnel to ensure that CNMI-relevant positions at various agencies are not awarded to enemies of CNMI," Abramoff's team wrote the Marianas in an October 2001 report on its work for the year.

Abramoff's team didn't neglect party politics either: There were at least two meetings with Republican National Committee officials, including then-finance chief Jack Oliver, as well as attendance at GOP fundraisers.

In 2000, Abramoff and his team were connected enough to both political parties to boast of obtaining early drafts of the platforms each adopted at its presidential nominating convention.

"In the case of the Republican platform, the team reviewed and commented on sections dealing with insular territories to ensure appropriately positive treatment. This was successful," the Preston Gates firm wrote to Marianas.

"In the case of the Democratic Party platform, the team assisted in drafting early versions of neutral language relating to the territories," the firm wrote. "However, heavy intervention by the White House eventually deleted positive references to the CNMI."....

.........he Marianas' lobbying paid off — it fended off proposals in 2001 to extend the U.S. minimum wage to island workers and gained at least $2 million more in federal aid from the administration.

Abramoff's team bragged to the cash-strapped Marianas government that the taxpayer money would cover its lobbying bill: "We believe that this additional funding — along with other funds we expect to secure by the end of the year — will make clear to even our biggest critics that we pay for ourselves," Abramoff teammate Kevin Ring wrote in October 2001, copying in Abramoff.

Quote:

http://www.journalstar.com/articles/...8743258322.txt
Lobbyist Abramoff is subject of probes from Guam to D.C.
By WALTER F. ROCHE JR. / Los Angeles Times

WASHINGTON — A U.S. grand jury in Guam opened an investigation of controversial lobbyist Jack Abramoff more than two years ago, but President Bush removed the supervising federal prosecutor, and the probe ended soon after.

The previously undisclosed Guam inquiry is separate from a federal grand jury in the District of Columbia that is investigating allegations that Abramoff bilked Indian tribes out of millions of dollars.

In Guam, a U.S. territory in the Pacific, investigators were looking into Abramoff's secret arrangement with Superior Court officials to lobby against a court reform bill then pending in the U.S. Congress. The legislation, since approved, gave the Guam Supreme Court authority over the Superior Court...

Quote:

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/wa...investigation/
Bush removal ended Guam investigation
US attorney's demotion halted probe of lobbyist

By Walter F. Roche Jr., Los Angeles Times | August 8, 2005

.........In Guam, a US territory in the Pacific, investigators were looking into Abramoff's secret arrangement with Superior Court officials to lobby against a court reform bill then pending in Congress. The legislation, since approved, gave the Guam Supreme Court authority over the Superior Court.

In 2002, Abramoff was retained by the Superior Court in what was an unusual arrangement for a public agency. The Los Angeles Times reported in May that Abramoff was paid with a series of $9,000 checks funneled through a Laguna Beach, Calif., lawyer to disguise the lobbyist's role working for the Guam court. No separate contract was authorized for Abramoff's work.

Guam court officials have never explained the contractual arrangement. At the time, Abramoff was a well-known lobbying figure in the Pacific islands because of his work for the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands and Saipan garment manufacturers, accused of employing workers in what critics called sweatshop conditions.

Abramoff spokesman Andrew Blum said the lobbyist ''has no recollection of his being investigated in Guam in 2002. If he had been aware of an investigation, he would have cooperated fully." Blum declined to respond to detailed questions.

The transactions were the target of a grand jury subpoena issued Nov. 18, 2002, according to the subpoena. It demanded that Anthony Sanchez, administrative director of the Guam Superior Court, turn over all records involving the lobbying contract, including bills and payments.

A day later, the chief prosecutor, US Attorney Frederick A. Black, who had launched the investigation, was demoted. A White House news release announced that Bush was replacing Black.

The timing caught some by surprise. Despite his officially temporary status as the acting US attorney, Black had held the assignment for more than a decade.

The acting US attorney was a controversial official in Guam. At the time he was replaced, Black was directing a long-term investigation into allegations of public corruption in the administration of then-Governor Carl Gutierrez. The probe produced numerous indictments, including some of the governor's political associates and top aides.

Black, 56, had served as acting US attorney for Guam and the Northern Mariana Islands since 1991, when he was named to the post by the president's father, President George H. W. Bush.

The career prosecutor, who held a senior position as first assistant before accepting the acting US attorney job, was demoted to a staff post. Black's demotion came after an intensive lobbying effort by supporters of Gutierrez, who had been publicly critical of Black and his investigative efforts.

Black declined to comment for this article.

His replacement, Leonardo Rapadas, was confirmed in May 2003 without any debate. Rapadas had been recommended for the job by the Guam Republican Party. Fred Radewagen, a lobbyist who had been under contract to the Gutierrez administration, said he carried that recommendation to top Bush aide Karl Rove in early 2003.

After taking office, Rapadas recused himself from the public corruption case involving Gutierrez. The new US attorney was a cousin of ''one of the main targets," according to a confidential memo to Justice Department officials.

Rapadas declined to comment and referred questions about his recusal to Justice Department officials who did not respond to requests for comment.

Quote:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...-2004Dec2.html
L.A. Times To End National Edition

By Frank Ahrens
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, December 3, 2004; Page E02

The Los Angeles Times is killing its printed daily national edition at the end of the year, saying the Internet and other electronic distribution channels have made the paper copy irrelevant........

........There will be no staff cuts, said Martha H. Goldstein, a Times spokeswoman......

Quote:

http://www.usatoday.com/money/media/...job-cuts_x.htm
Posted 11/16/2005 7:22 PM

'L.A. Times' to cut 85 newsroom jobs
LOS ANGELES (AP) — In the latest high-profile job cuts in the newspaper industry, the Los Angeles Times announced Wednesday it is cutting about 85 newsroom positions, or approximately 8% of its editorial staff.

Some of the cuts already have come through attrition and some will come through a voluntary separation program, editor Dean Baquet wrote in an e-mail to staff. The balance will come through layoffs by year's end......

Quote:

http://www.honors.umd.edu/HONR269J/a...row540309.html
Edward R. Murrow
See it Now (CBS-TV, March 9, 1954)
"A Report on Senator Joseph R. McCarthy"

.........Murrow: Because a report on Senator McCarthy is by definition controversial we want to say exactly what we mean to say and I request your permission to read from the script whatever remarks Murrow and Friendly may make. If the Senator believes we have done violence to his words or pictures and desires to speak, to answer himself, an opportunity will be afforded him on this program. Our working thesis tonight is this question:

If this fight against Communism is made a fight against America's two great political parties, the American people know that one of those parties will be destroyed and the Republic cannot endure very long as a one party system.

We applaud that statement and we think Senator McCarthy ought to. He said it, seventeen months ago in Milwaukee.

McCarthy: The American people realize this cannot be made a fight between America's two great political parties. If this fight against Communism is made a fight between America's two great political parties the American people know that one of those parties will be destroyed and the Republic cannot endure very long as a one party system..........

Elphaba · 11-28-2005, 12:02 AM

Today, I compared with a friend the current standing of the US in regards to the 14 principles of fascism. It's been well over a year since the last time we did that. Sadly, there are only a few people here that have the slightest understanding of the term, and it has already been shown that raising any comparison of the kind is heresy on this forum. (Which is one of the 14 principles).

You are threadjacking your own topic and the US media is worthy of a new one under CURRENT circumstances. Allow me, sir.

SecretMethod70 · 11-28-2005, 12:16 AM

One can only hope that the public begins to demand more accountability...I think the terrible mismanagement of Katrina relief has left a lasting impression on the public and, slowly but surely, sentiments are changing. The question, of course, is whether or not they are changing enough to create enough pressure for some serious consequences for the administration.

On a side note, regarding host's comment on third party voters. I voted third party and live in a state where there was never a question as to who would be the winner. My vote for a third party candidate had no impact on the outcome of the election whatsoever and I knew going into the voting booth that voting for a third party candidate stood no chance of impacting the outcome of the election. There were many states like this, and discouraging people in those states from voting for third parties is, IMO, detrimental to the democratic process. Now, if you want to urge people who live in states where there IS a question as to who will win to not vote for a third party candidate, that I can understand. In fact, during this past election, there was a vote exchange website (working on the honor system of course) where people in swing states who would like to support a third party could pair up with people in safe states and exchange votes. Most third party voters recognize that in a close election, and in a swing state, it may not be the best idea to vote for a third party, but that does not apply to many, or even most, voters. Not to mention, this past election was won by 3,012,499 votes and all non-Republicrat votes combined were only 1,224,611. Then take into account that, of the 99,336 "other" votes, many of them were actually non-votes, such as my roommate's write-in vote for Marx-Engels, and on top of that there are many third party voters who would just as soon not vote at all if not given a choice to vote their conscience. Finally, not all third party voters would have voted for Kerry had they been forced to pick between him and Bush. After all that, it becomes likely that a significant amount less than the 1.2 million third party votes might have actually gone to Kerry - I would suggest that Kerry had no more than 600k votes to gain from those third party voters.

Of course, that's all with the popular vote, and as we know, it's the electoral college that counts. So, let's look at Ohio since it was one of the closest states. Bush won Ohio by 118,775 votes while a total of 26,952 votes went elsewhere. Keeping the previous things in mind, it can be reasonably argued that Kerry would have likely gained no more than 13,500 of those votes. Even looking in Iowa, where the numbers are closer: Bush won by a mere 10,059 votes and a total of 13,053 votes went elsewhere, but of those votes it is extremely unlikely Kerry would have gotten over 10,000 of them, not to mention that others would have gone to Bush to sustain the lead.

Finally, one could point out the possibility of election fraud in places like Ohio with the electric voting machines and so on. This does not make a difference either because, if the election was won through fraud, it would not matter how many or how few votes went to other candidates.

The point is, third party candidate voters have nothing to do with Bush being in office for a second term. But, you're right that we are all on the same side with regards to Bush and his administration. Democrat, disgruntled Republican, other: we would all like to see Bush and his administration held accountable for their actions.

Elphaba · 11-29-2005, 02:47 PM

The majority of the populace is now disgusted with both parties, which hasn't happened in decades. It is in these times that the potential for a third party increases. I would sincerely like to see that in 2006, because the current system needs a good shaking.

tecoyah · 11-29-2005, 02:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SecretMethod70

On a side note, regarding host's comment on third party voters. I voted third party and live in a state where there was never a question as to who would be the winner.

As did I.....gotta love NY....blue state....red governor

Elphaba · 11-29-2005, 03:03 PM

Abramoff's web seems to grow daily, but the boldness of this one deserves special "honor". It is alleged that he caused the BIA to intervene when one of his tribal clients wanted their money back.

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/112905L.shtml

Quote:

Abramoff Sought Bush Officials' Aid in Indian Tribe Fee Dispute
Bloomberg

Tuesday 29 November 2005

Lobbyist Jack Abramoff sought the help of U.S. Interior Department officials to save the job of an Indian leader under fire for $37 million in fees his tribe paid Abramoff and a partner, according to interviews and e-mails.

The department's Bureau of Indian Affairs last year ruled that Lovelin Poncho should remain head of the Coushatta Tribe of Louisiana. The bureau acted after Poncho sought help from Abramoff, who called then-Deputy Interior Secretary J. Steven Griles and other Interior Department officials, according to a person familiar with the issue.

The ruling thwarted efforts by tribal members who opposed the payments to Abramoff and wanted the bureau's support in ousting Poncho. "Maybe this explains why we hit such a wall in trying to have the BIA cooperate," said lawyer Jimmy Faircloth, who at the time represented a dissident faction within the Coushattas and is now is now the tribe's attorney.

Abramoff is at the center of both a Justice Department-led investigation and a probe by the Senate Indian Affairs Committee into his dealings with Indian tribes and other lobbying clients. The Senate panel is looking into more than $80 million the casino-owning tribes paid Abramoff and partner Michael Scanlon.

Scanlon, 35, pleaded guilty on Nov. 21 to one count of conspiracy and agreed to cooperate with a Justice Department probe of Abramoff's alleged efforts to buy off public officials.

Abramoff and another former business partner were indicted earlier this year for wire fraud in a case involving their purchase of a Florida casino boat company.

Tribal Client

Abramoff, 46, represented the Coushattas from 2001 to 2004, when he worked for Greenberg Traurig LLP, a Miami-based law firm, records filed with the Senate and House show.

Griles, 57, told the Senate panel on Nov. 2 that he had no special relationship with Abramoff. The Bureau of Indian Affairs entered the dispute among factions of the tribe in February 2004, after a showdown between Poncho, 58, and tribal dissidents. Poncho, who had hired Abramoff and Scanlon, said at a tribal council meeting that he was quitting, after facing hostile questions over the lobbying contracts, according to lawyer Faircloth and accounts in Louisiana newspapers.

Opponents of the Abramoff contract, led by council member David Sickey, accepted Poncho's resignation.

A day later, Poncho told a newspaper that he hadn't quit. He then called Abramoff for help in getting the Bureau of Indian Affairs to support him, according to the person familiar with the lobbying effort. Abramoff and his associates called Griles, then the No. 2 Interior official after Secretary Gale Norton, and other department officials, the person said, speaking on condition of anonymity.

The Bureau of Indian Affairs manages and administers the Indian lands held in trust by the U.S. The agency decides which tribes and tribal governments the U.S. will recognize.

E-Mail Traffic

The bureau indicated it still recognized Poncho as chairman, according to Faircloth and e-mail traffic between Abramoff's lobbying associates that was released by the Senate Indian Affairs Committee, which this month completed its hearings on Abramoff.

"BIA sent the letter to Coushatta tonight reaffirming that Poncho is chief," Kevin Ring, a lawyer who worked with Abramoff at the time, wrote to another lawyer, Michael Williams, and two other colleagues on Feb. 13, less than a week after Poncho allegedly resigned.

"Good work, but frankly I'm surprised they did," Williams responded. "Jack owes u big on that."

"Griles did it," Ring responded.

At Poncho's request, the bureau also took over the tribal police force, dismissing Sickey's brother, Kevin, who was police chief, Faircloth said.

Contact with Abramoff

Griles told the Senate panel on Nov. 2 that he had spoken with Abramoff about a dispute involving an Indian tribe and brought it to the attention of the Bureau of Indian Affairs. He told the committee that he "may have asked" the acting assistant secretary of the bureau to call Abramoff, according to a transcript of the hearing. He declined further comment.

Aurene Martin, who was acting assistant secretary at the time, didn't return phone calls seeking comment. Bureau of Indian Affairs spokeswoman Nedra Darling didn't respond to several requests for comment, including phone calls and faxed questions.

The attorney representing the council at the time, Kathryn Van Hoof, didn't return phone calls seeking comment.

Abramoff spokesman Andrew Blum declined to comment.

'Outrageous'

At the Indian Affairs hearing, Griles denied he helped Abramoff's clients. He said Abramoff "claimed to have special access to my office on behalf of his Indian gaming clients. That is outrageous and it is not true. If he got his money in part by misrepresenting his relationship with me, I am extremely pleased that you are investigating this."

Griles told the committee that Abramoff had offered him a job in September 2003. Griles said he declined the offer and reported it to the Interior Department's ethics office. "It raised alarms with me," he said. About five months later, he had the conversation with Abramoff about the Coushatta dispute.

Griles' recollections on another issue were challenged by the e-mails released by the Senate committee and by Michael Rossetti, the former counsel to Norton. Rossetti disputed Griles' testimony that he had never gotten involved in Indian gaming issues.

Dinner Party

Poncho didn't seek re-election in June 2005. The vice chairman, William Worfel, another Abramoff ally, lost the chairmanship to Kevin Sickey, who now controls the council along with his brother, David, and another anti-Abramoff tribal member.

Abramoff may have crossed paths with Griles as early as 2000, when the two men served on the Interior Department's transition team after George W. Bush was elected president.

Griles, who's now a lobbyist in Washington, attended a dinner party in Washington along with Abramoff, Poncho, Van Hoof and Norton on Sept. 24, 2001. The party was organized by Italia Federici, head of the Council of Republicans for Environmental Advocacy, a pro-business group that Norton helped found.

Abramoff raised at least $100,000 for Bush's re-election in 2004.

The Justice Department investigation of the lobbyist's activities has already reached into the Bush administration. The White House's former chief procurement officer, David Safavian, who once worked as a lobbyist with Abramoff, was indicted in October for obstruction and making false statements in connection with the investigation.

"It's an ever-widening investigation," said former federal prosecutor Melanie Sloan, now head of the Washington- based watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington. "The more you look at it, the more people are involved."

Elphaba · 12-01-2005, 08:18 PM

Ralph Reed has been mentioned many times in relation to Abramoff in pitting one gambling interest against another. His political aspirations may be under fire as he appears to be under investigation, too. This report from the AP:

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/120105S.shtml

Quote:

Watchdog Groups Push for Investigation of Reed
The Associated Press

Thursday 01 December 2005

Austin - Three Texas watchdog groups asked a Texas county official Thursday to investigate former Christian Coalition founder Ralph Reed, who worked with lobbyist Jack Abramoff to press state officials to shut down two Texas tribal casinos.

Texans for Public Justice, Common Cause of Texas and Public Citizen filed their complaint with Travis County Attorney David Escamilla.

They said Reed, who is running for lieutenant governor in Georgia, failed to register as a Texas lobbyist in 2001 and 2002, when he received a reported $4.2 million from Abramoff and his partner Michael Scanlon to push for the closure of casinos operated by the Tigua tribe of El Paso and the Alabama-Coushatta tribe of Livingston in East Texas.

"If he was crossing the border and crossing the legal line, Texans need to know about it and hold him accountable," said Craig McDonald, director of Texans for Public Justice. "It appears he was part of the scheme to bilk millions of dollars from Indian tribes. We're asking the county attorney to help us sort out and get to the bottom of this."

The groups cited a rule issued by the State Ethics Commission, which is responsible for enforcing state campaign finance laws, that a person who receives more than $1,000 in a calendar quarter as compensation or reimbursement to lobby must register as a lobbyist.

McDonald said failing to register is a Class A misdemeanor punishable by up to a year in jail and a $4,000 fine. The Texas Ethics Commission could also impose a fine up to three times the amount of compensation.

A Reed spokeswoman said Thursday she had not seen the complaint. Escamilla was not immediately available.

The US Senate Indian Affairs Committee has been investigating Abramoff and Scanlon. In e-mails released by the committee Reed, discussed his efforts against the casinos. Investigators have alleged that Abramoff and Scanlon defrauded their tribal clients of some $80 million.

Last week, Scanlon pleaded guilty to conspiring to bribe public officials to assist clients. As part of his plea agreement, he'll pay $19 million to tribes he admitted to defrauding and is cooperating with investigators.

Abramoff and Scanlon were hired by the Louisiana Coushatta tribe in 2001 and worked to prevent the Alabama-Coushatta and another Louisiana tribe from opening competing casinos.

Reed rallied the religious community against the casinos, fed information he said he obtained from Sen. John Cornyn's staff when he was Texas attorney general to Abramoff and Scanlon, and lobbied state lawmakers to kill a bill that would reopen the Tiguas casino, according to his e-mails.

After the Tigua and Alabama-Coushatta's casinos shut down, Abramoff and Scanlon persuaded the Tigua to hire them to lobby Congress to change federal law so they could reopen their casino. They also tried to press the Alabama-Coushatta tribe to hire them.

Elphaba · 12-14-2005, 01:39 PM

Deep Throat said to follow the money. The Washington Post has done just that with Abramoff and shows who gave and who got the money in the following link. There are several Dems on the list for the equal opportunity corruption folks. (Pattie, you've got some 'splanin' to do).

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...121200286.html

PS: Could someone teach me how you do those neat descriptive links vs. the url?

11-08-2005, 02:58 PM	#82 (permalink)
Mojo_PeiPei Kiss of Death Location: Perpetual wind and sorrow	My speculation was in regards to Rekna's regirgitation of the Bush lied line, which are speculation and assumptions. In all criminal cases there is almost always evidence, it isn't always wise to hold a presumption of guilt because of an indictment alone. __________________ To win a war you must serve no master but your ambition.

11-08-2005, 04:09 PM	#87 (permalink)
Mojo_PeiPei Kiss of Death Location: Perpetual wind and sorrow	In a common criminal case agreed Rekna, not the same for government personnal facing indictment, in that case I would say the tables flip against them. __________________ To win a war you must serve no master but your ambition.

11-19-2005, 03:51 PM	#91 (permalink)
Elphaba Deja Moo Location: Olympic Peninsula, WA	Lebell has chosen to believe that this thread is identical to Host's recent thread concerning actual indictments against Abramoff. This thread has been highjacked in so many directions that I find that hard to believe, but whatever. I am going to reconstruct Host's new, but now locked thread as best as I can. __________________ "You can't ignore politics, no matter how much you'd like to." Molly Ivins - 1944-2007

11-19-2005, 09:18 PM	#97 (permalink)
Elphaba Deja Moo Location: Olympic Peninsula, WA	I insist that Hal judge the actions of Labelle in his treatment of Host on this forum. I find it unjust that Host receives punitive action for what appears to be arbitrary decisions, and yet highly dubious posts by others are ignored or encouraged. Hal, with all due respect, I do not believe that Labelle is able to separate his own political beliefs to fairly moderate this forum. His own topic starter that claimed we owed Bush an apology is another example, if more are needed. I await your opinion, Hal. Respectfully, Pen __________________ "You can't ignore politics, no matter how much you'd like to." Molly Ivins - 1944-2007

11-28-2005, 12:16 AM	#115 (permalink)
SecretMethod70 Human Administrator Location: Chicago	One can only hope that the public begins to demand more accountability...I think the terrible mismanagement of Katrina relief has left a lasting impression on the public and, slowly but surely, sentiments are changing. The question, of course, is whether or not they are changing enough to create enough pressure for some serious consequences for the administration. On a side note, regarding host's comment on third party voters. I voted third party and live in a state where there was never a question as to who would be the winner. My vote for a third party candidate had no impact on the outcome of the election whatsoever and I knew going into the voting booth that voting for a third party candidate stood no chance of impacting the outcome of the election. There were many states like this, and discouraging people in those states from voting for third parties is, IMO, detrimental to the democratic process. Now, if you want to urge people who live in states where there IS a question as to who will win to not vote for a third party candidate, that I can understand. In fact, during this past election, there was a vote exchange website (working on the honor system of course) where people in swing states who would like to support a third party could pair up with people in safe states and exchange votes. Most third party voters recognize that in a close election, and in a swing state, it may not be the best idea to vote for a third party, but that does not apply to many, or even most, voters. Not to mention, this past election was won by 3,012,499 votes and all non-Republicrat votes combined were only 1,224,611. Then take into account that, of the 99,336 "other" votes, many of them were actually non-votes, such as my roommate's write-in vote for Marx-Engels, and on top of that there are many third party voters who would just as soon not vote at all if not given a choice to vote their conscience. Finally, not all third party voters would have voted for Kerry had they been forced to pick between him and Bush. After all that, it becomes likely that a significant amount less than the 1.2 million third party votes might have actually gone to Kerry - I would suggest that Kerry had no more than 600k votes to gain from those third party voters. Of course, that's all with the popular vote, and as we know, it's the electoral college that counts. So, let's look at Ohio since it was one of the closest states. Bush won Ohio by 118,775 votes while a total of 26,952 votes went elsewhere. Keeping the previous things in mind, it can be reasonably argued that Kerry would have likely gained no more than 13,500 of those votes. Even looking in Iowa, where the numbers are closer: Bush won by a mere 10,059 votes and a total of 13,053 votes went elsewhere, but of those votes it is extremely unlikely Kerry would have gotten over 10,000 of them, not to mention that others would have gone to Bush to sustain the lead. Finally, one could point out the possibility of election fraud in places like Ohio with the electric voting machines and so on. This does not make a difference either because, if the election was won through fraud, it would not matter how many or how few votes went to other candidates. The point is, third party candidate voters have nothing to do with Bush being in office for a second term. But, you're right that we are all on the same side with regards to Bush and his administration. Democrat, disgruntled Republican, other: we would all like to see Bush and his administration held accountable for their actions. __________________ Le temps détruit tout "Musicians are the carriers and communicators of spirit in the most immediate sense." - Kurt Elling Last edited by SecretMethod70; 11-29-2005 at 02:56 PM..

11-08-2005, 03:43 PM	#83 (permalink)
Rekna Junkie	We know that the whitehouse knew the Nigir documents were fake before they presented them. We also know that they knew the claim that Saddam was aiding AQ was more than likely false (from their own internal reports). Both of those were presented as strong cases to go to war. Now what else do we know, we know the all the other claims proved to be unfounded it is safe to say there is evidence to suggest that information may have been miss represented. There is at least enough to warrent an investigation. Unfortunatly with the republican controlled house and senate this motion is being stonewalled.

11-08-2005, 04:05 PM	#86 (permalink)
Rekna Junkie	i think it should also be mentioned that the level of evidence needed to convict your normal person off the street vrs someone with lots of money or power is vastly different. I think we should all acknowledge that a person with lots of money/power is much more likely to be aquited given the same evidence than a normal every day person.

11-08-2005, 04:11 PM	#88 (permalink)
Rekna Junkie	perhaps, i guess it would depend on the circumstances, who is the judge, the ruling party, and the public outcry.

11-27-2005, 03:05 PM	#102 (permalink)
ajpresto Tilted	I love how now all the Republicans are like, "He doesn't represent me." Hmm... why'd you vote for him in the last election? It frustrates me that people thought that there was any good in the man.

11-27-2005, 04:44 PM	#104 (permalink)
ajpresto Tilted	I can follow you to a point but I don't think that I can draw the logical conclusion that Abramoff, etc, allowed 9/11 to happen. I'm a very, very liberal person. To a fault, even. I still am not 100% convinced that al Queda had anything to do with the attack on the WTC. I haven't seen conclusive evidence of all of the strings being tied up. However, I have seen a good bit of information, thanks to the 9/11 commission report, etc. Anyway, I don't think that 9/11 could have been prevented by Abramoff, etc.

11-27-2005, 05:10 PM	#106 (permalink)
ajpresto Tilted	I don't think that this falls into the realm of paranoia.. yet.

11-27-2005, 05:56 PM	#112 (permalink)
Elphaba Deja Moo Location: Olympic Peninsula, WA	Host, we could start an entirely new thread on the current mea culpa of some members of the msp. And probably should. You or me?

11-28-2005, 12:02 AM	#114 (permalink)
Elphaba Deja Moo Location: Olympic Peninsula, WA	Today, I compared with a friend the current standing of the US in regards to the 14 principles of fascism. It's been well over a year since the last time we did that. Sadly, there are only a few people here that have the slightest understanding of the term, and it has already been shown that raising any comparison of the kind is heresy on this forum. (Which is one of the 14 principles). You are threadjacking your own topic and the US media is worthy of a new one under CURRENT circumstances. Allow me, sir.

11-29-2005, 02:47 PM	#116 (permalink)
Elphaba Deja Moo Location: Olympic Peninsula, WA	The majority of the populace is now disgusted with both parties, which hasn't happened in decades. It is in these times that the potential for a third party increases. I would sincerely like to see that in 2006, because the current system needs a good shaking.

12-14-2005, 01:39 PM	#120 (permalink)
Elphaba Deja Moo Location: Olympic Peninsula, WA	Deep Throat said to follow the money. The Washington Post has done just that with Abramoff and shows who gave and who got the money in the following link. There are several Dems on the list for the equal opportunity corruption folks. (Pattie, you've got some 'splanin' to do). http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...121200286.html PS: Could someone teach me how you do those neat descriptive links vs. the url?