can cialis be bought over the countertadalafil instructionscialis effect on womenorder Cialis Soft Tabs 20 mgorder Tadalafilwoman cialiscrushing cialis tabletsorder Cialis 60 Tabsbuy cialis by the pillcialis c10order Cialis 30 pillsbuy generic cialis overnight deliverycialis 10 20 mg pictureorder tadalafilbuy cialis online viagratadalafil fromfemale use of cialistadalafil prescriptioncialis price comparecheap pharmacy viagra cialis levitrabuy Cialis Jelly 10generic cialis canada buy how toorder Cialis 90 Tabscentre de documentation sp cialis stadalafil tablets genericCialis Professional free insurancecialis pay with paypalcialis viagra levitraorder Cialis Jelly USACialis Professional 60 pillsaverage cost cialisCialis Jelly 20 mgtadalafil tablets from indiageneric cialis tadalafilcialis discount canadageneric cialis online without prescriptiontadalafil reviewsbest cialis from indiacialis online pharmacybuy Cialis Professional free shipping Washingtoncialis tadalafil Canadageneric cialis for salecialis generic effectivenesshow to take cialiswhere can i buy cialisbuy Cialis Professionalone day delivery cialiserection pillscheapest generic cialis free overnight shippingcialis 2.5 mgcialis 2.5 prices canadaorder generic cialis USAgeneric cialis namescialis online without prescriptionstreet price of cialiscialis prescription indiaFemale Cialis 20 mgdiscount cialis Canadatadalafil over the counterorder Sublingual Cialis Canadavapor cialiscialis romaniageneric cialis guaranteed lowest pricecialis sale ukgeneric online order tadalafil 20mgTadalafil USAcialis cheap cialis onlinetadalafil generic vs cialiskamagra silagra generic cialisgeneric tadalafil no prescriptionbuy discounted cialis softtabsbuy cialis in colombiabuy Cialis Only 1.99tadalafil dailycialis natural alternativeovernight express delivery generic cialisgeneric cialis pills free trialcialis 20mg pricegeneric cialis pills free samplecheap cialis sitecialis generic Canadawhere to order cialis in mexicocialis tadalafil reviewscialis cost USAlevitra cialis viagra priceCialis pillswhere to buy cialis online15 cialis 20 mgwhatis cialislow cost cialischeap sildenfil with 4 free cialistadalafil 20mg pricedaily cialis prescriptioncialis 50mgorder cialis no prescriptionprescription cialis usacialis brand onlinecialis professional reviewbuy generic cialis softtabs cheapgeneric online cheap tadalafilorder Cialis Jelly Bananaretail prices for cialisfree generic cialiscialis uk order cialis online cialiswhat is tadalafiltadalafil on lineCialis 20cialis professional reviewscialis addictionorder cialis online dream pharmaceuticalcosta rica cialissildenafil or tadalafilwhat is cialis softgeneric cialis sweetcanada buy cialis onlinecialis soft tab Canadaorder Cialis Professional 90 pillscialis soft tabs dosagegeneric cialis Canadacialis cheap overseasis tadalafil available in indiafree sample of cialischeap generic cialis Washingtonorder Cialis 10mg 30 Tabscialis wholesalecialis generic USAfast generic cialismaryland tabs mel cialisorder Cialis Jelly 30cialis without a prescription Canadacheapest generic cialis pills ukfemale cialis does it workorder Sublingual Cialis Washingtonbuy cialis online Canadaorder Cialis pillsgeneric cialis soft from indiabuy cialis cheapest tadalafil tadalafil tablecialis and diazepam overnight delivery possibleCialis 90 pillsbuy generic cialiscialis super active 20mg pills samplesgeneric cialis 20 mggerman remedies cialiscialis ed vs normalcialis lowest pricebuy cheapest cialiscialis 5mg side effectsgenuine cialis no prescriptionorder Cialis Soft Tabs 60 pillscialis weekendcan cialis and viagra be taken togethertadalafil pharmacologytadafil generic cialisbuying generic cialis Canadaorder cialis generictadalafil forumbuy tadalafil no prescriptionorder cialis ukorder Cialis 120order Cialis 1.99 Washingtoncialis tablete srbijabuy cialis online ukcialis pills couponorder cialis and viagracialis for womencialis dosagesbuy generic cialis Washingtonbuy cialis linetadalafil dosagecialis discountviagra generic cialiscialis for order Washingtoncheap impotence drug generic cialis deliveryorder Female Cialis Washingtonbuying cialis onlinereview discount pharmacy cialis not generictadalafil pillsliquid cialis Washingtoncialis cost Washingtonquery lowest cialis price onlinereviews for viagra cialis and levitracialis efeitos colateraiscialis pills for menlowest prices for cialis Washingtoncialis vs over the countercialis shipped overnightcialis prescription cheapcialis genericscialis in chicagocialis lowest price CanadaCialis 20mglevitra viagra or cialisbuy Cialis pills Canadacialis with purple pillCialis Jelly 20generica cialisgeneric name for generic cialis pillscialis does not workgeneric cialis overnight delivery express deliverytadalafil from canadagenerica cialis Canadacheap tadalafil 5mg with amexbuy cialischeap tadalafil 5mg fast deliverybuy cheap generic cialisdiscount generic cialis Canadais generic cialis realprice of cialis 10mgcialis discountedejaculation with cialischeap tadalafil 20 mg onlinebuy Cialis 90 Tabscheap cialis super activeCialis Only 1.99caverta cialis cheappurchase viagra and cialisCialis Jelly 60principal investigator cialistadalafil citrate powderdiscounted cialis 20 mgfree cialis without prescriptioncialis taladafilcialis viagra soft tabspurchase cialis in chinacialis india pharmacycialis viagra levitra trusted pharmacy catalogis cialis expensivebuy Cialis Tabs Canadacialis online no prescriptioncialis professional canadaorder Cialis Super Activecialis cheap USAcialis 20 mg tadalafildaily cialis 5mg pricecialis online pharmacistbuy cialis free shippingcialis daily canadacanada cialis generictadalafil 10 mgtadalafil bestpay with paypal for cialiscialis rebatecialis paypal Washingtoncialis orderorder Cialis Only $1.99buy cheap cialis onlinebuy generic cialis generic cialiscialis 5mg vs 20mgcheap 10 mg tadalafil with amexonline purchase of cialiscialis beogradno prescription cialiscialis expensivecialis pills without a prescriptionbuy cialis online nopwgeneric cialis prescriptionsc-pill buy cialiscialis 20 mg tabletis generic cialis from india safecialis without a prescriptioncialis pill onlinecialis trialtadalafil maximum doseCialis Jelly Strawberryaustralia viagra cialis purchasetadalafil cheapwhat if cialis does not workcialis in costa ricahow cialis worksonline meds cialistadalafil 5mgbuy cialis canadacialis cost at walmartorder Cialis 10mg 60 Tabsnatural forms of cialiscialis viagra USACialis Professional 90 pillscialis online canadiancialis attorney ohiodiscount cialis and viagralow cost cialis Canadaviagra cialis genericcheap viagra cialis indiabuy cialis in south africa onlineis generic tadalafilcialis wholesale online USAbuy Cialis Professional 120 pillscialis jakartacialis 20 mg pricecialis causes lower blood pressurecheap 40mg tadalafil fast deliverycialis canada generictadalafil recreationalbuy cialis softtabs informationcialis $1.00 20mg no prescriptioncialis and us online pharmacygeneric cialis is it safebuy cheap cialis on the netbuy cialis in the ukCialis 5 mgdifference between levitra viagra and cialistadalafil 10mgCialis Jelly Canadageneric cialis in usabuy tadalafil cialis onlinecanadian cialiscialis prescription price and benefitsdifference generic brand cialistadalafil australiadiscount viagra or cialiscialis drug interactiontadalafil or sildenafiltadalafil citrate liquidbuy tadalafil 20 mgcialis online in canadacialis cheapest online pricespharmacy india viagra cialiscialis and viagra purchase onlinecialis 5 mg dailygeneric cialis experiencescialis work for womencialis puerto ricotadalafil fdacialis and tabsviagra cialis online ordersoft tab cialischeapest cialis 20mg offergeneric cialis versus cialiscialis discounts Canadabuy Cialis 20cialis super active 20mg pillscialis soft tab discount generictadalafil tablets 10 mgcheap cialis pillscialas daily costonline cialisgeneric cialis professionalcialis prescription alberta calgary canadadoes generic tadalafil worktadalafil effectscialis for daily usecialis fast shipmentcialis use with alcoholprices cialis Canadacialis does it workcialis online irelandtadalafil naturalgeneric cialis ukcialis no prescription Washingtontadalafil 20mg side effectscialis generic impotence kamagra viagra viagraorder cialis online without prescriptioncialis online pillcanadian generic cialisgeneric cialis ciplacialis no prescription cheapgeneric cialis pro5 mg cialiscialis levia and viagra USAviagra cialis USAcialis 20 mg for salecanadian pharmacy cialis dealscialist ordercialis without precriptiongeneric cialis next day deliverycialis dosage onlinecialis vs viagra pricebuy Tadalafil USAtadalafil 20 mgcialis 20mg on linegeneric tadalafil ukbuy Cialis Professional USAcialis pills onlinebuy cialis online Washingtonwhat are cialis soft tabsbuy tadalafil cialiscialis online paypal paymentcheap lily lcos tadalafilbuy Cialis 20mg 90 Tabsorder Cialis 10mg 120 Tabstadalafil tabletdoes generic cialis workcanadian pharmacy cialis genericprices online cialisgeneric levitra cialisviagra cialisorder Cialis $1.99 Canadageneric cialis cheapestcialis tabletsbuy Cialis Professional 60 pillsbuy Cialis Tabs Washingtonthe buy cialisviagra cialis no prescription requiredhow to use cialiscialis and hip painovernight cialis USACialis Tabs Washingtonhow much does cialis daily costgeneric online order cheap tadalafil 20mgbuy cialis softtabshow much is cialis at walmartgeneric cialis softtabs onlinebuy cialis Canadacialis adprice cialis mexico pharmacyfree cialis canadacialis brandscialis 4 tabletscialis not effectivestreet value of cialiscialis generic versus brand namebuy Cialis Only 1.99 USAonline pharmacy cialiscialis switzerlandbuy cialis online usabuy Female Cialis 20 mg Canadabuy cialis todayFemale Cialis USAtadalafil overnightfake generic cialisorder Cialis Professional 20 pillsovernight shipping of generic cialiscialis paypal Canadacialis tadalafil tabletstadalafil citrate chemonecialis trial packfake cialisbuy cialis fast shippingorder Cialis Super Active 30 pillscompare generic cialis pricestadalafil ohne rezeptbuy cialis tadalafilcialis dosage instructionsgeneric cialis reviewspurchase cialis online without prescriptionCialis 20 Tabspurchase cialis on the webcialis 5mg tabletscialis soft tabs genericorder Cialis 20cheap cialis canadacialis free trial couponcialis superactivecialis price canadadiscount generic cialis indiaorder generic cialis softtabs onlinecialis dubaitadalafil without prescriptionorder Cialis Professional Washingtondiscount cialis 32cheap tadalafil 5mg without a prescriptioncialis marketingcialis is awesomecialis soft tabscialis soft gel pillsorder cialis online canadafree samples of cialis Canadahorse erection pillstadalafil slstadalafil intermediatesCialis Professionalbuy Cialis Jelly Bananacialis generic softhow to write a prescription cialisbuy tadalafil ukcialis price philippineCialis Soft Tabs 20 pillsbuy super cialisgeneric cialis canada pharmacycheap cialis online onlineorder Female Cialis 60 pillscialis online australiaviagra 50 mg best pricecialis best pricecialis montrealcialis dosage and usesovernight delivery cialiscialis female viagracheap cialis USAorder Cialis pills USAcialis 100mg pillstadalafil jellywhere to buy cheap cialischeap tadalafil 10 mg with visaCialis Super Active 30 pillscialis canada prescriptionorder cialis generic Washingtonbuy tadalafil 20mgdiscount viagra and cialiscialis pills taladafilgeneric tadalafil reviewcialis pricing Canadacheap cialis without prescriptioncialis vs viagra Canadaviagra cialis levitra order onlineorder Cialis Professional 20 mgcialis 5mg pricewalgreens cost of cialisdrugs tadalafilbuy Cialis 20mg 120 Tabssildenafil tadalafilcialis generic order online bad experiencemedicament cialisdoes cialis expirecheapest cialis Canadacialis 2.5mgvardenafil tadalafilcheap generic cialis mastercard worldwide deliverycialis buy cheap cialis online indexpurchase cheap cialis onlinetadalafil generic 20mgtadalafil price comparisontadalafil low dosecheap cialis indiageneric cialis vs brand cialistadalafil sampleonline pharmacy generic cialiscialis online purchasebuy cialis mexicotadalafil sublingual tabletsred devil tadalafil generic cialiscialis pills generic uk apcalis onlinehow to take cialis pillsgeneric cialis buycheap 40mg tadalafil overnight deliverycialis non genericcialis sample Canadaviagra medication prescription levitra cialis propcialis generic viagra rss feedcialis procialis soft Canadabuy Cialis Super Active 20mgsafe generic cialisbuy Cialis 120 Tabscialis malaysiatadalafil tabletscialis 20 refilltadalafil indian brandscialis alternativecialis mexicocheap cialis from indiabuy cialis on line ukgeneric cialis india $1.5Female Cialischeapest prices for viagra cialis levitracialis samples Canadacialis sample Washingtoncialis 5mg reviewscialis pro 40 mgcialis sampleFemale Cialis Washingtonviagra cialis levitra candian pharmacy safegeneric cialis softtabs buy onlinenew drug cialis Washingtononline generic cialisdiscount cialis pillcialis prices cvshow long does cialis erection lasthow to buy cialisCialis 1.99cheap cialis generictadalafil kaufenbuy cialis in mexicogeneric cialis pills celiassuper cialiscialis super active vs cialisdosage cialischeap 20 mg tadalafil visacialis generic safetybuy Cialis Professional Canadaever use cialis pillsbuying generic cialisorder Cialis 1.99 Canadabuy generic cialis softtabsdosage cialis 36overnight cialis Canadadaily cialis 5mg genericcanadian generic cialis pillscialis with paypalcialis vs viagraorder quality cialiscialis cheap visaviagra cialis health erection penis mancialis 5 mg onlinegeneric viagra levitra and cialis pillscialis canada no prescriptioncialis levia and viagra Canadabuy generic cialis online Washingtongeneric cialis dailycialis usageerectile dysfunction generic cialis pillscialis and us pharmacySublingual Cialis Washingtoncialis lowest price Washingtoncialis info Washingtontadalafil what is itbuying generic cialis Washingtonbuy cialis doctor onlinelowest price cialischeap tadalafil 40 mg with mastercardtadalafil costdaily dose cialis pricingcialis en francaislow dose cialis dailylevitra viagra v cialisCialis 5 mg 120 Tabscialis super active 20mgcialis soft tabs online purchaseorder Cialis 10 pillscialis 20mg ukcialis everydaycheapest secure delivery cialis ukpill splitting cialiscialis daily use reviewfast shipping cialisbuy cialis in dubai1 cialis generic viagragenerica cialis Washingtoncialis price ukcialis vs viagra USAcialis withCialis 5 mg USAorder generic cialisfemale cialiscialis cheap no prescriptionbuy Female Cialis 90 pillsgeneric cialis viagracheap cialis viagrahow long does cialas 5mg take to workgeneric online cheap tadalafil 20mggeneric cialis soft onlinecialis dosage USAcialis cheap pricesonline medicines rx cialis viagra orderorder cialis online not fakecialis freecialis generic indiacialis online discountcanadian pharmacy for cialiscialis with benazeprilcheap 5 mg tadalafil with amexcialis goldhow cialis tadalafil workscialis buy genericgeneric cialis pills and drug interactionsSublingual Cialisbuy cialis fioricetcialis and online prescriptionexperience with viagra cialis levitraindia generic cialiscialis at orlandobuying cialis online Washingtonorder cialis tampa floridawhich is better cialis or viagracialis discount onlineorder Cialis 60 pillscialis purchase onlinelowest cost for cialis 20mm tabletscialis works better than expectedcipla tadalafil reviewno prescription cialis overnight deliverygeneric online order tadalafilgeneric cialis mexicogeneric cialis softtabs mail ordercheapest cialis venezuelacialis generic canadacialis online canadian pharmacy10 mg cialis3 cialis generic viagracialis soft tabs online pharmacywhy choose levitra over cialisorder cialisbuy cialis nowgeniune cialis no prescriptionlow price cialisbuy Sublingual Cialiscialis softtabs online fast shippingorder cialis without a prescriptiontadalafil oral jellycheap cialis in australiaonline cialis purchasetadalafil professionalsoft tabs cialistadalafil generic indiacialis and levitra viagra generic brandtadalafil cheap no prescriptioncialis dosage 10mgbuy Cialis 5 mg USAdoes cialis work Canadacialis wholesale online Canadaprice cialiscialis 20mg lowest pricegeneric cialis made in indiataking half of a cialislove positions and generic cialis pillsgeneric versions of cialisbuying cialis online USAcialis c20buy Cialis 10cialis price us
Progressive Political News and Information: Nevada Thunder Nevada Thunder » JackGate
 
 
Archive for the 'JackGate' Category
VIDEO: Scott McClellend on Countdown with Keith Olbermann

side note: I know I’ve been rough on Scottyboy…but for good reason. He helped create an atmosphere that enabled this administration to sell the war. It doesn’t matter that he was mislead….he was privy to some info and he could have come out earlier. With that being said…….it has been nice to hear confirmations of what we all thought this entire time! It does appear (this interview) that Scotty doesn’t want to put so much blame on dubya…but instead on the culture of Washington. Which I feel is bullshit!! But….a dubya insider with a “tell-all” book is still great to have!! I hope Congress asks Scotty to testify…I think it’s a good idea to get his story on the official record.

Justice Official Bought Vacation Home With Oil Lobbyist

side note: This just sums up the bushie administration! What we have here is a senior Justice Department official who buys a million dollar condo with a ConocoPhillips lobbyist a few months before approving official orders to give the oil company a break….and what was the break you ask? Well…it has to do with cleaning up pollution! Also, there’s a third owner of this million dollar property, in which the Justice Dept official was dating, who is now under investigation b/c of dealings with dirty Jack Abramoff.

By Susan Schmidt and James V. Grimaldi
Washington Post Staff Writers

A senior Justice Department official who recently resigned her post bought a nearly $1 million vacation home with a lobbyist for ConocoPhillips months before approving consent decrees that would give the oil company more time to pay millions of dollars in fines and meet pollution-cleanup rules at some of its refineries.

Sue Ellen Wooldridge, former assistant attorney general in charge of environment and natural resources, bought a $980,000 home on Kiawah Island, S.C., last March with ConocoPhillips lobbyist Don R. Duncan. A third owner of the house is J. Steven Griles, a former deputy interior secretary, who has been informed he is a target in the federal investigation of Jack Abramoff’s lobbying activities.

A spokeswoman for the Justice Department said yesterday that Wooldridge sought and received approval from a career ethics official in her office before buying the vacation property. Wooldridge’s lawyer and officials at ConocoPhillips said that Duncan had no role in negotiating the consent decrees and never lobbied Wooldridge.

Wooldridge, who earlier served in senior positions at the Interior Department, lives with Griles in Virginia. Her investment with Griles and the oil lobbyist took place on March 13, 2006, property records show, during a wide-ranging Justice Department criminal investigation that involves Griles and lobbyists at Interior. The joint purchase and Wooldridge’s role in the consent decrees were reported yesterday by the Associated Press. (more…)

THE HIDDEN POWER

side note: I was looking over the list of people who are scheduled to testify in the Libby case and the name David Addington was listed. Now, I’ve heard that name before and read about him, but never saw anything in great length. I’m always interested in the behind-the-scene type guys…..they usually wield enormous influence. So, I found this piece in the New Yorker and it scared the shit out of me!! The more you learn about the people holding bushie and cheneys’ hands….the more you start to understand how we’ve gotten to this point. This article in a must read for all NT readers, I know it’s long, so print it out and take it with you, do what you need to do to read this…….you will not be disappointed!

by JANE MAYER
The New Yorker
The legal mind behind the White House’s war on terror.

On December 18th, Colin Powell, the former Secretary of State, joined other prominent Washington figures at FedEx Field, the Redskins’ stadium, in a skybox belonging to the team’s owner. During the game, between the Redskins and the Dallas Cowboys, Powell spoke of a recent report in the Times which revealed that President Bush, in his pursuit of terrorists, had secretly authorized the National Security Agency to eavesdrop on American citizens without first obtaining a warrant from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, as required by federal law. This requirement, which was instituted by Congress in 1978, after the Watergate scandal, was designed to protect civil liberties and curb abuses of executive power, such as Nixon’s secret monitoring of political opponents and the F.B.I.’s eavesdropping on Martin Luther King, Jr. Nixon had claimed that as President he had the “inherent authority” to spy on people his Administration deemed enemies, such as the anti-Vietnam War activist Daniel Ellsberg. Both Nixon and the institution of the Presidency had paid a high price for this assumption. But, according to the Times, since 2002 the legal checks that Congress constructed to insure that no President would repeat Nixon’s actions had been secretly ignored.

According to someone who knows Powell, his comment about the article was terse. “It’s Addington,” he said. “He doesn’t care about the Constitution.” Powell was referring to David S. Addington, Vice-President Cheney’s chief of staff and his longtime principal legal adviser. Powell’s office says that he does not recall making the statement. But his former top aide, Lawrence Wilkerson, confirms that he and Powell shared this opinion of Addington.

Most Americans, even those who follow politics closely, have probably never heard of Addington. But current and former Administration officials say that he has played a central role in shaping the Administration’s legal strategy for the war on terror. Known as the New Paradigm, this strategy rests on a reading of the Constitution that few legal scholars share—namely, that the President, as Commander-in-Chief, has the authority to disregard virtually all previously known legal boundaries, if national security demands it. Under this framework, statutes prohibiting torture, secret detention, and warrantless surveillance have been set aside. A former high-ranking Administration lawyer who worked extensively on national-security issues said that the Administration’s legal positions were, to a remarkable degree, “all Addington.” Another lawyer, Richard L. Shiffrin, who until 2003 was the Pentagon’s deputy general counsel for intelligence, said that Addington was “an unopposable force.” (more…)

There’s that picture!

Citizens for Reponsibility and Ethics In Washington (CREW) have released a never-publicized picture of President Bush with jailed Lobbyist Jack Abramoff.

Huffingtonpost.com

According to CREW, “the Bush Administration has gone to great lengths to prevent any access to information documenting a relationship with Jack Abramoff. But that relationship exists. CREW was provided a photo of President Bush and Jack Abramoff taken at a campaign fundraiser in December 2003.”

More information about the White House attempts to cover up records of Abramoff’s visits were uncovered by ABC News last Friday:

The White House and the Secret Service quietly signed an agreement last spring in the midst of the Jack Abramoff lobbying scandal declaring that records identifying visitors to the White House are not open to the public.

The Bush administration didn’t reveal the existence of the memorandum of understanding until last fall. The White House is using it to deal with a legal problem on a separate front, a ruling by a federal judge ordering the production of Secret Service logs identifying visitors to the office of Vice President Dick Cheney.

original article

More than half-billion in Iraq aid stolen

AFP
yahoo.com

More than half a billion dollars earmarked to fight the insurgency in Iraq has been stolen by people running the country’s Ministry of Defense before the 2005 elections, a television network has reported.

Citing Iraqi investigators, CBS News said Sunday the United States and Britain are doing little to help recover the money or catch suspects, most of whom have fled the country.

An investigation conducted by the “60 Minutes” program has also turned up audio recordings of a suspect who seems to be discussing the transfer of 45 million dollars to the account of a top political adviser to the interim defense minister of Iraq, the report said. (more…)

Secret Service to Release Logs on Abramoff Visits

The Associated Press
The Washington Post

Washington – The Secret Service has agreed to turn over White House visitor logs that will show how often convicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff met with Bush administration officials – and with whom he met.

U.S. District Judge John Garrett Penn last Tuesday approved an agreement between the Secret Service and Judicial Watch, a public interest group, that requires the agency to produce records of Abramoff’s visits from Jan. 1, 2001, to the present.

Judicial Watch filed suit in February after the Secret Service failed to respond to its request under the federal Freedom of Information Act.

Abramoff, who represented Indian tribes in their dealings with Washington politicians, once was one of the city’s most successful lobbyists.

He pleaded guilty in January in Washington to federal charges stemming from an investigation into his ties with members of Congress and the Bush administration. He also pleaded guilty to fraud charges in Miami concerning a multimillion-dollar purchase of SunCruz Casinos gambling fleet in 2000.

Administration officials have refused to say how many times Abramoff, who raised at least $100,000 for President Bush’s re-election, has been to the White House. Bush has said he doesn’t know Abramoff.

Chris Farrell, Judicial Watch’s director of investigations, said, “The documents will speak loud and clear on what Abramoff was doing in and out of the White House.”

The visitor logs are to be delivered to Judicial Watch by May 10.

Bush’s spokesman has said Abramoff attended “a few staff-level meetings” at the White House, as well as Hanukkah receptions in 2001 and 2002.

The president has said he does not know Abramoff personally. When a photo of Bush with Abramoff surfaced earlier this year, the president said he has his picture taken with “a lot of people.” In the 2001 photo, Bush is shaking hands with a leader of an Indian tribe. Abramoff is in the background.

A few days after Bush made the remarks about the photo, Abramoff expressed surprise in e-mails to a magazine editor about the president’s faulty memory. Abramoff told the Washingtonian magazine that he had met with Bush nearly a dozen times and that Bush knew him well enough to joke with him.

Three former business associates of Abramoff also told The Associated Press that Abramoff often mentioned White House adviser Karl Rove when talking about his influence inside the White House.

Abramoff was a $100,000 fundraiser for Bush and lobbying records obtained by the AP show his lobbying team logged nearly 200 meetings with the administration during its first 10 months in office on behalf of one of his clients, the Northern Mariana Islands.

The contacts between Abramoff’s team and the administration included meetings with Attorney General John Ashcroft and policy advisers to Vice President Dick Cheney, the AP reported last year.

original article

I, DeLay

By Sidney Blumenthal
The Guardian UK

The fall of Tom DeLay, the most powerful Republican leader in the Congress, creates a crisis for his party and the political machine he built.
The resignation of Tom DeLay is the crashing conclusion of his garish career but hardly the end of his legal troubles or the demise of the partisan political machine he constructed. The former majority leader of the House of Representatives has been the Republican strongman in the Congress, known as “The Hammer.” As the party whip, he hung a bullwhip on his wall as a symbol of intimidation. The style of the former exterminator from Sugar Land, Texas was bullying and crude. He called the Environmental Protection Agency “the Gestapo,” ran a smear operation out of his office that would have won the admiration of Senator Joseph McCarthy, and grabbed whatever he wanted as his right of lordship. When a meek restaurateur in a Capitol Hill steakhouse politely asked DeLay to put out his large cigar because of the city’s no smoking law, DeLay bellowed, “I am the government!” And he was not wrong.

DeLay enforced harsh discipline on the Republicans, bondage they savoured as the essence of power. In return, anything a loyal House member wanted, he would provide. “The Hammer” was also known as “The Concierge.” Rules, including the House’s own, meant nothing to him, irritating hindrances to be broken at his will. In order to gain passage of a bill favouring the big drug companies – preventing the Medicare elderly prescription drug program from negotiating lower rates – he extended debate long past the deadline and was accused of offering the bribe of a campaign contribution to a wavering Republican. DeLay stomped on the Ethics committee, stopping it from meeting to investigate this episode until public outcry forced him to back off. He greeted slaps on his wrist as badges of honour.

DeLay walked over bodies in his own party to reach his pinnacle. He led coups against the Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich, tribune of the right, yet too amenable to negotiation with President Clinton as far as DeLay was concerned.

DeLay most notable achievement was coercing the impeachment of President Clinton. Without his arm-twisting, impeachment would have certainly failed. There was a sizeable group of relatively moderate Republicans opposed. They saw no merits in the ridiculous charges and understood impea?hment was being pressed out of crude partisanship. But DeLay threatened their financial supporters (whose business interests would be blackballed from receiving congressional relief), and threatened to bankroll rightwing candidates against the moderates in Republican primaries to bleed them white. So one by one, they caved in. A moderate Republican was a moderate when Tom DeLay told them they could be moderate. Under DeLay’s thumb, the House Judiciary committee voted for impeachment after refusing to establish any constitutional standards for their action. The constitution was swept away in his exercise of power. President Clinton was acquitted by the Senate, but DeLay was unblemished by his abuse. Fear of him was never higher.

Over more than a decade, DeLay forged a political machine that he called the “K Street project,” after the downtown avenue in Washington DC of steel and glass building housing the large law and lobbying firms. DeLay kept a black book in which he noted who gave money to and hired Republicans. When a trade association tried to employ a Democrat, it was issued a warning that it would be punished. From the “K Street project” to the Republicans flowed tens of millions of dollars in campaign contributions. Meanwhile, the contracts from corporations for lobbying and legal work went to these Republican firms. It was a perfectly designed system of legal graft.

When President George W. Bush assumed office, one-party rule commenced. DeLay served as Bush’s “Hammer.” Back in Texas, between the political operations of both of them, the Democrats had been shattered as a party. Now DeLay and Bush worked together nationally to accomplish the same goal. Karl Rove, Bush’s chief political adviser, who had been instrumental in the Texas takeover, was the go-between in the relationship. And the go-between in the Rove-DeLay relationship was a lobbyist named Jack Abramoff.

While exercising absolute power in the House, DeLay was determined to augment it further by thoroughly rigging the outcome of congressional elections in Texas. He created a political action committee, raised millions from his K Street allies, and poured the money into the Texas legislature, which in turn redrew the lines of congressional districts to wipe out the existing Democrats. DeLay’s scheme succeeded in giving him an even bigger Republican margin. But the district attorney of Travis County, Texas investigated and indicted two of his aides and finally DeLay himself for illegally using corporate campaign funds.

As this scandal unfolded, the many-sided corruption of Jack Abramoff came under scrutiny by federal prosecutors. The ring tightened around DeLay, whose dealings with Abramoff were extensive and who called him one of his “closest friends”. DeLay’s former press secretary turned state’s evidence. And his former communications director, an Abramoff business partner, pleaded guilty in a deal with the prosecutors. Last week, DeLay’s former deputy chief of staff, another lobbyist, pled, too, his sentence to be decided on the basis of his cooperation. Thus surrounded, DeLay quit. His worst days lie ahead.

The Republican machine and its “K Street project” hum without its conductor. But the Republicans face the most difficult election cycle since they took control of the Congress in 1994. DeLay’s further tribulations will illustrate the corruption endemic to the operation he built. The Republicans must hang on the hope that the campaign funds they raise through the DeLay devised system will enable them to overcome his corrupt taint.

original article

Abramoff Gets Almost 6 Years in Prison

side note: TOUCHDOWN!! SUPERBOWL!!!

By CURT ANDERSON
Associated Press Writer

Disgraced former lobbyist Jack Abramoff and a business partner were sentenced Wednesday to five years and 10 months in federal prison, the minimum they faced for fraud related to their 2000 purchase of the SunCruz Casinos gambling fleet.

Abramoff and Adam Kidan both pleaded guilty to conspiracy and wire fraud, but they won’t have to report to prison immediately.

The judge postponed their reporting date for at least 90 days so the two can continue cooperating in a Washington corruption investigation and a Florida probe into the killing of former SunCruz owner Konstantinos Boulis. Both deny roles in the killing. Abramoff pleaded guilty in connection with the corruption probe but has yet to be sentenced.

In court Wednesday, Abramoff said the fraud case was “incredibly painful” for himself, his family and his friends.

“In the past two years I have started the process of becoming a new man,” he said.

Under their plea agreement, both men had faced a sentence of between five years, 10 months, and seven years, three months in federal prison. U.S. District Judge Paul C. Huck also ordered them Wednesday to pay restitution of more than $21 million.

Abramoff and Kidan admitted concocting a fake $23 million wire transfer to make it appear they had made a large cash contribution to the $147.5 million purchase of SunCruz Casinos. Based on that fake transfer, lenders provided the pair with $60 million in financing.

The same week Abramoff pleaded guilty to the SunCruz fraud, he entered guilty pleas to three federal charges as part of a wide-ranging corruption probe that could involve up to 20 members of Congress and aides, including former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-Texas.

In addition to assisting in that investigation, Abramoff, 47, and Kidan, 41, are expected to give statements in the investigation into the Feb. 6, 2001, slaying of Boulis, who was gunned down at the wheel of his car amid a power struggle over the gambling fleet. Three men face murder charges, including one who worked for Kidan as a consultant at SunCruz and who allegedly has ties to New York’s Gambino crime family.

Both Abramoff and Kidan have repeatedly denied any role in or knowledge of the Boulis murder. But prosecutors say Kidan has not been ruled out as a suspect and defense attorneys say Abramoff could provide critical inside information about the dispute with Boulis, who also founded the Miami Subs restaurant chain.

Ultimately, cooperation in those investigations could reduce Abramoff’s and Kidan’s sentences.

Abramoff, who was wearing a tan baseball-style cap, didn’t speak to reporters as he and his lawyers left court after the sentencing.

Before the hearing, more than 260 people — including rabbis, military officers and even a professional hockey referee — wrote letters on the men’s behalf asking the judge for leniency.

The letters, obtained by The Associated Press, put a new spin on the foibles and crimes of a man who became the face of Washington’s latest corruption scandal.

“Jack is a good person, who in his quest to be successful, lost sight of the rules,” National Hockey League referee Dave Jackson wrote, describing the time Abramoff brought 14 youngsters to his dressing room before a game.

Kidan, in his own letter to the judge, said he knew the SunCruz deal was wrong but said he “was very caught up in the fast paced world of my partner and the high profile that came along with it.” He added, “I am not the horrible person that the media has written about.”

original article

Restoring the Public Trust

side note: this is a MUST read! Bill Moyers has a way of explaining what is going on in our world, which is filled with corruption and scandals. if it’s too long…print it out and take your time reading it, you will not be disappointed!

By Bill Moyers
TomPaine.com

Bill Moyers is President of the Schumann Center for Media and Democracy. This is the prepared text of his remarks on an eight-day speaking trip in California on the issue of money and politics.

I will leave to Jon Stewart the rich threads of humor to pluck from the hunting incident in Texas. All of us are relieved that the Vice President’s friend has survived. I can accept Dick Cheney’s word that the accident was one of the worst moments of his life. What intrigues me as a journalist now is the rare glimpse we have serendipitously been offered into the tightly knit world of the elites who govern today.

The Vice President was hunting on a 50-thousand acre ranch owned by a lobbyist friend who is the heiress to a family fortune of land, cattle, banking and oil (ah, yes, the quickest and surest way to the American dream remains to choose your parents well.)

The circumstances of the hunt and the identity of the hunters provoked a lament from The Economist. The most influential pro-business magazine in the world is concerned that hunting in America is becoming a matter of class: the rich are doing more, the working stiffs, less. The annual loss of 1.5 millions of acres of wildlife habitat and 1 million acres of farm and ranchland to development and sprawl has come “at the expense of ‘The Deer Hunter’ crowd in the small towns of the north-east, the rednecks of the south and the cowboys of the west.” Their places, says The Economist, are being taken by the affluent who pay plenty for such conveniences as being driven to where the covey cooperatively awaits. The magazine (hardly a Marxist rag, remember) describes Mr. Cheney’s own expedition as “a lot closer to ‘Gosford Park’ than ‘The Deer Hunter’ – a group of fat old toffs waiting for wildlife to be flushed towards them at huge expense.”

At the heart of this story is a metaphor of power. The Vice President turned his host, the lobbyist who is also the ranch owner, into his de facto news manager. She would disclose the shooting only when Cheney was ready and only on his terms. Sure enough, nothing was made public for almost 20 hours until she finally leaked the Authorized Version to the local newspaper. Ms. Armstrong suggested the blame lay with the victim, who, she indicated, had failed to inform the Vice President of his whereabouts and walked into a hail of friendly fire. Three days later Cheney revised the story and apologized. Don’t you wonder what went back and forth with the White House that long night of trying to agree on the official line?

We do know someone from the hunting party was in touch with Karl Rove at the White House. For certain Rove’s the kind of fellow you want on the other end of the line when great concoctions are being hatched, especially if you wish the victim to hang for the crime committed against him.

Watching these people work is a study of the inner circle at the top of American politics. The journalist Sidney Blumenthal, writing on Salon.com, reminds us of the relationship between the Armstrong dynasty and the Bush family and its retainers. Armstrong’s father invested in Rove’s political consulting firm that managed George W. Bush’s election as governor of Texas and as president. Her mother, Anne Armstrong, is a longtime Republican activist and donor. Ronald Reagan appointed her to the Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board after her tenure as Ambassador to the United Kingdom under President Ford, whose chief of staff was a young Dick Cheney. Anne Armstrong served on the board of directors of Halliburton that hired Cheney to run the company. Her daughter, Katherine Armstrong, host of the hunting party, was once a lobbyist for the powerful Houston law firm founded by the family of James A. Baker III, who was chief of staff to Reagan, Secretary of State under the first George Bush, and the man designated by the Bush family to make sure the younger Bush was named President in 2000 despite having lost the popular vote. According to Blumenthal, one of her more recent lobbying jobs was with a large construction firm with contracts in Iraq.

It is a Dick Cheney world out there – a world where politicians and lobbyists hunt together, dine together, drink together, play together, pray together and prey together, all the while carving up the world according to their own interests.

II

Two years ago, in a report entitled Democracy in an Age of Rising Inequality, the American Political Science Association concluded that progress toward realizing American deals of democracy “may have stalled, and even, in some areas, reversed.” Privileged Americans “roar with a clarity and consistency that public officials readily hear and routinely follow” while citizens “with lower or moderate incomes are speaking with a whisper.”

The following year, on the eve of President George W. Bush’s second inauguration, the editors of The Economist, reporting on inequality in America, concluded that the United States “risks calcifying into a European-style, class-based society.”

As great wealth has accumulated at the top, the rest of society has not been benefiting proportionally. In 1960 the gap between the top 20% and the bottom 20% was thirty fold. Now it is seventy-five fold. Thirty years ago the average annual compensation of the top 100 chief executives in the country was 30 times the pay of the average worker. Today it is 1000 times the pay of the average worker. A recent article in The Financial Times reports on a study by the American economist Robert J. Gordon, who finds “little long-term change in workers’ share of US income over the past half century.” Middle-ranking Americans are being squeezed, he says, because the top ten percent of earners have captured almost half the total income gains in the past four decades and the top one percent have gained the most of all – “more in fact, than all the bottom 50 percent.”

No wonder working men and women and their families are strained to cope with the rising cost of health care, pharmaceutical drugs, housing, higher education, and public transportation – all of which have risen faster in price than typical family incomes. The recent book, Economic Apartheid in America: A Primer on Economic Inequality and Insecurity, describes how “thirty zip codes in America have become fabulously wealthy” while “whole urban and rural communities are languishing in unemployment, crumbling infrastructure, growing insecurity, and fear.”

This is a profound transformation in a country whose DNA contains the inherent promise of an equal opportunity at “Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness” and whose collective memory resonates with the hallowed idea – hallowed by blood – of “government of the people, by the people, and for the people.” The great progressive struggles in our history have been waged to make sure ordinary citizens, and not just the rich, share in the benefits of a free society. Yet today the public may support such broad social goals as affordable medical coverage for all, decent wages for working people, safe working conditions, a secure retirement, and clean air and water, but there is no government “of, by, and for the people” to deliver on those aspirations. Instead, our elections are bought out from under us and our public officials do the bidding of mercenaries. Money is choking democracy to death. So powerfully has wealth shaped our political agenda that we cannot say America is working for all of America.

In the words of Louis Brandeis, one of the greatest of our Supreme Court justices: “You can have wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, or democracy, but you cannot have both.”

III

Some simple facts:

The cost of running for public office is skyrocketing. In 1996, $1.6 billion was spent on the Congressional and Presidential elections. Eight years later, that total had more than doubled, to $3.9 billion.

Thanks to our system of privately financed campaigns, millions of regular Americans are being priced out of any meaningful participation in democracy. Less than one half of one percent of all Americans made a political contribution of $200 or more to a federal candidate in 2004. When the average cost of running and winning a seat in the House of Representatives has topped one million dollars, we can no longer refer to that August chamber as “The People’s House.” If you were thinking of running for Congress, do you have any idea where you would get the money to be a viable candidate?

At the same time that the cost of getting elected is exploding beyond the reach of ordinary people, the business of gaining access to and influence with our elected Representatives has become a growth industry. Six years ago, in his first campaign for President, George W. Bush promised he would “restore honor and integrity” to the government. Repeatedly, during his first campaign for President, he would raise his right hand and, as if taking an oath, tell voters that he would change how things were done in the nation’s capitol. “It’s time to clean up the toxic environment in Washington, DC,” he would say. His administration would ask “not only what is legal but what is right, not what the lawyers allow but what the public deserves.”

Hardly.

Since Bush was elected the number of lobbyists registered to do business in Washington has more than doubled. That’s 16,342 lobbyists in 2000 to 34,785 last year. Sixty-five lobbyists for every member of Congress.

The amount that lobbyists charge their new clients has increased by nearly one hundred percent in that same period, according to The Washington Post, going up to anything from $20,000 to $40,000 a month. Starting salaries have risen to nearly $300,000 a year for the best-connected people, those leaving Congress or the administration.

The total spent per month by special interests wining, dining, and seducing federal officials is now nearly $200 million. Per month

But numbers don’t tell the whole story. There has been a qualitative change as well. With pro-corporate business officials running both the executive and legislative branches, lobbying that was once reactive has gone on the offense, seeking huge windfalls from public policy and public monies.

One example cited by The Washington Post: Hewlett-Packard, the California computer maker. The company nearly doubled its budget for contract lobbyists in 2004 and took on an elite lobbying firm as its Washington arm. Its goal was to pass Republican-backed legislation that would enable the company to bring back to the United States, at a dramatically lowered tax rate, as much as $14.5 billion in profit from foreign subsidiaries. The extra lobbying paid off. The legislation passed and Hewlett Packard can now reduce its share of the social contract. The company’s director of government affairs was quite candid: “We’re trying to take advantage of the fact that Republicans control the House, the Senate, and the White House.” Whatever the company paid for the lobbying, the investment returned enormous dividends.

I want to point out here that I believe in equal opportunity muckraking. When I left Washington for journalism I did not leave behind my conviction that government should see to it that we have a more level playing field with one set of rules for everyone, but I did leave behind my partisan affections. Anyone who saw the documentary my team and I produced a few years ago on the illegal fund raising for Bill Clinton’s re-election, knows I am no fan of the democratic money machine that helped tear the party away from whatever roots it once had in the daily lives and struggles of working people, turning it into a junior partner of the Chamber of Commerce. I mean people like California’s Congressman Tony Coelho, who in the 1980s realized that Congressional Democrats could milk the business community for money if they promised to “pay for play.” I mean people like Terry McAuliffe, the former Democratic National Committee Chairman who gave Bill Clinton the idea of renting the Lincoln bedroom out to donors, and who did such a good job raising big money for the Democrats that by the end of his reign, Democrats had fewer small donors than the Republicans and more fat cats writing them million-dollar checks.

But let’s be realistic here. When the notorious Willie Sutton was asked why he robbed banks, he answered, “Because there is where the money is.” If I seem to be singling out the Republicans, it’s for one reason: that’s where the power is. They own the government lock, stock, and barrel. Once they gained control of the House of Representatives in 1994, their self-proclaimed revolution has gone into overdrive with their taking of the White House in 2000 and the Senate in 2002. Their revolution soon became a cash cow and Washington a one party state ruled by money.

Look back at the bulk of legislation passed by Congress in the past decade: an energy bill which gave oil companies huge tax breaks at the same time that Exxon Mobil just posted $36.13 billion in profits in 2005 and our gasoline and home heating bills are at an all-time high; a bankruptcy “reform” bill written by credit card companies to make it harder for poor debtors to escape the burdens of divorce or medical catastrophe; the deregulation of the banking, securities and insurance sectors which led to rampant corporate malfeasance and greed and the destruction of the retirement plans of millions of small investors; the deregulation of the telecommunications sector which led to cable industry price gouging and an undermining of news coverage; protection for rampant overpricing of pharmaceutical drugs; and the blocking of even the mildest attempt to prevent American corporations from dodging an estimated $50 billion in annual taxes by opening a PO Box in an off-shore tax haven like Bermuda or the Cayman islands.

In every case the pursuit of this legislation was driven by big money. Our public representatives, the holders of our trust, need huge sums to finance their campaigns, especially to pay for television advertising, and men and women who have mastered the money game have taken advantage of that weakness in our democracy to systematically sell it off to the highest bidders.

Let’s start with the “K Street Project.” K Street is the Wall Street of lobbying, the address of many of Washington’s biggest lobbying firms. The K Street Project was the brainchild of Tom DeLay and Grover Norquist, the right wing strategist who famously said that his goal is to shrink government so that it can be “drowned in a bathtub.” This, of course, would render it impotent to defend ordinary people against the large economic forces – the so-called free market – that Norquist and his pals believe should be running America.

Tom DeLay, meanwhile, was a small businessman from Sugar Land, Texas, who ran a pest extermination business before he entered politics. He hated the government regulators who dared to tell him that some of the pesticides he used were dangerous – as, in fact, they were. He got himself elected to the Texas legislature at a time the Republicans were becoming the majority in the once-solid Democratic south, and his reputation for joining in the wild parties around the state capital in Austin earned him the nickname “Hot Tub Tom.” But early in his political career, and with exquisite timing and the help of some videos from the right wing political evangelist, James Dobson, Tom DeLay found Jesus and became a full-fledged born again Christian. He would later humbly acknowledge that God had chosen him to restore America to its biblical worldview. “God,” said Tom DeLay, “has been walking me through an incredible journey…God is using me, all the time, everywhere…God is training me. God is working with me….”

Yes, indeed: God does work in mysterious ways.

In addition to finding Jesus, Tom DeLay also discovered a secular ally to serve his ambitions. He found out the power of money to power his career. “Money is not the root of all evil in politics,” DeLay once said. “In fact, money is the lifeblood of politics.” By raising more than two million dollars from lobbyists and business groups and distributing the money to dozens of Republican candidates in 1994, the year of the Republican breakthrough in the House, DeLay bought the loyalty of many freshmen legislators and got himself elected Majority Whip, the number three man in Newt Gingrich’s “Gang of Seven” who ran the House.

Here’s how they ran it: On the day before the Republicans formally took control of Congress on January 3, 1995, DeLay met in his office with a coterie of lobbyists from some of the biggest companies in America. The journalists Michael Weisskopf and David Maraniss report that “the session inaugurated an unambiguous collaboration of political and commercial interests, certainly not uncommon in Washington but remarkable this time for the ease and eagerness with which these allies combined.”

DeLay virtually invited them to write the Republican agenda. What they wanted first was “Project Relief” – a wide-ranging moratorium on regulations that had originally been put into place for the health and safety of the public. For starters, they wanted “relief” from labor standards that protected workers from the physical injuries of repetitive work. They wanted “relief’ from tougher rules on meat inspection. And they wanted “relief” from effective monitoring of hazardous air pollutants. Scores of companies were soon gorging on Tom DeLay’s generosity, adding one juicy and expensive tid-bit after another to the bill. According to Weisskopf and Maraniss, on the eve of the debate 20 major corporate groups advised lawmakers that “this was a key vote, one that would be considered in future campaign contributions.” On the day of the vote lobbyists on Capitol Hill were still writing amendments on their laptops and forwarding them to House leaders.

The Speaker of the House, Newt Gingrich, famously told the lobbyists: “If you are going to play in our revolution, you have to live by our rules.” Tom DeLay became his enforcer.

The rules were simple and blunt. Contribute to Republicans only. Hire Republicans only. When the electronics industry ignored the warning and chose a Democratic Member of Congress to run its trade association, DeLay played so rough – pulling from the calendar a bill that the industry had worked on two years, aimed at bringing most of the world in alignment with US copyright law – that even the House Ethics Committee, the watchdog that seldom barks and rarely bites, stirred itself to rebuke him – privately, of course.

DeLay wasn’t fazed. Not only did he continue to make sure the lobbying jobs went to Republicans, he also saw to it that his own people got a lion’s share of the best jobs. At least 29 of his former employees landed major lobbying positions – the most of any Congressional office. The journalist John Judis found that together ex-DeLay people represent around 350 firms, including thirteen of the biggest trade associations, most of the energy companies, the giants in finance and technology, the airlines, auto makers, tobacco companies, and the largest health care and pharmaceutical companies. When tobacco companies wanted to block the FDA from regulating cigarettes, they hired DeLay’s man. When the pharmaceutical companies – Big Pharma – wanted to make sure companies wouldn’t be forced to negotiate cheaper prices for drugs, they hired six of Tom DeLay’s team, including his former chief of staff. The machine became a blitzkrieg, oiled by campaign contributions that poured in like a gusher.

Watching as DeLay, with the approval of the House leadership, become the virtual dictator of Capitol Hill, , I was reminded of the card shark in Texas who said to his prey, “Now play the cards fair, Reuben, I know what I dealt you.” Tom DeLay and his cronies were stacking the deck.

They centralized in their own hands the power to write legislation. Drastic revisions to major bills were often written at night, with lobbyists hovering over them, then rushed through as “emergency’ measures,” giving members as little as half an hour to consider what they may be voting on.

The Democratic minority was locked out of conference committees where the House and Senate are supposed to iron out their differences with both parties in the loop. The Republican bosses even took upon themselves the power to rewrite a bill in secrecy and move it directly to a vote without any other hearings or public review.

Sometimes this meant overruling what the majority of House members really wanted. Consider what happened with the bill to provide Medicare prescription drug coverage, as analyzed by Robert Kuttner in The American Prospect. As the measure was coming to a vote, a majority of the full House was sympathetic to allowing cheaper imports from Canada and to giving the government the power to negotiate wholesale drug prices for Medicare beneficiaries. But DeLay and his cronies were working in behalf of the big pharmaceutical companies and would have none of it. So they made sure there would be no amendments on the floor. They held off the final roll call a full three hours – well after midnight – in order to strong-arm members who wanted to vote against the bill.

It was not a pretty sight out there on the floor of the House. At one point DeLay marched over to one reluctant Republican – Representative Nick Smith – who opposed the Medicare bill – and attempted to change his mind. Smith, who was serving his final term in office, later alleged that he was offered a bribe – $100,000 for his son’s campaign to succeed him. When he subsequently retracted his accusation, the House Ethics Committee looked into the charges and countercharges and wound up admonishing both Smith and DeLay, who admitted that he had offered to endorse Smith’s son in exchange for Smith’s support but that no money or bribe were involved. Timothy Noah of slate.com has mused about what DeLay’s endorsement would nonetheless have meant in later campaign contributions if Smith had gone along. While the report of the ethics committee never did find out the true story, Noah asks: “Who did whisper ‘$100,000′ in Smith’s ear? The report is full of plausible suspects, including DeLay himself, but it lacks any evidence on this crucial finding. You get the feeling the authors would prefer to forget this mystery ever existed.”

There are no victimless crimes in politics. The price of corruption is passed on to you. What came of all these shenanigans was a bill that gave industry what it wanted and gave taxpayers the shaft. The bill covers only a small share of drug expenses. It has a major gap in coverage – the so-called ‘donut hole.’ It explicitly forbids beneficiaries from purchasing private coverage to fill in the gap and explicitly forbids the federal government from bargaining for lower drug prices. More than one consumer organization has estimated that most seniors could end up paying even more for prescription drugs than before the bill passed.

Furthermore, despite these large flaws the cost of the bill is horrendous – between five hundred billion and one trillion dollars in its first ten years. The chief actuary for Medicare calculated a realistic estimate of what the bill would cost, but he later testified before Congress that he was forbidden from releasing the information by his boss, Thomas Scully, the head of the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services, who was then negotiating for a lucrative job with the health care industry. Sure enough, hardly had the prescription drug bill become law than Scully went to work for the largest private equity investor in health care and at a powerful law firm focusing on health care and regulatory matters.

One is reminded of Senator Boies Penrose. Back in the first Gilded Age Penrose was a United States senator from Pennsylvania who had been put and kept in office by the railroad tycoons and oil barons. He assured the moguls: “I believe in the division of labor. You send us to Congress; we pass laws under which you make money…and out of your profits you further contribute to our campaign funds to send us back again to pass more laws to enable you to make more money.”

Gilded Ages – then and now – have one thing in common: Audacious and shameless people for whom the very idea of the public trust is a cynical joke.

Tom DeLay was elected to Congress by the ordinary people of Sugar Land, Texas. They had the right to expect him to represent them. This expectation is the very soul of democracy. We can’t all govern – not even tiny, homogenous Switzerland practices pure democracy. So we Americans came to believe our best chance of responsible government lies in obtaining the considered judgments of those we elect to represent us. Having cast our ballots in the sanctity of the voting booth with its assurance of political equality, we go about our daily lives expecting the people we put in office to weigh the competing interests and decide to the best of their ability what is right.

Instead, they have given the American people reason to believe the conservative journalist P.J. O’Rourke was right when he described Congress as “a parliament of whores.”

A recent CBS news/New York Times poll found that 70% of Americans believe lobbyists bribing members of Congress is the way things work. Fifty seven percent thinks at least half of the members of Congress accept bribes or gifts that affect their votes. A Fox News poll reported that sixty five percent believe most elected officials in Washington make policy decisions or take actions on the basis of campaign contributions. Findings like these underscore the fact that ordinary people believe their bonds with democracy are not only stretched but sundered.

You see the breach clearly with Tom DeLay. As he became the king of campaign fundraising, the Associated Press writes, “He began to live a lifestyle his constituents back in Sugar Land would have a hard time ever imagining.” Big corporation such as R.J. Reynolds, Phillip Morris, Reliant, El Paso and Dynegy provided private jets to take him to places of luxury most Americans have never seen – places with “dazzling views, warm golden sunsets, golf, goose-down comforters, marble bathrooms and balconies overlooking the ocean.” The AP reports that various organizations – campaign committees, political action committees, even a children’s charity established by DeLay – paid over $1 million on hotels, restaurants, golf resorts and corporate jets in DeLay’s behalf: at least 48 visits to golf clubs and resorts (the Ritz Carlton in Jamaica, the Prince Hotel in Hawaii, the Michelangelo in new York, the Phoenician in Scottsdale, the El Conquistador in Puerto Rico, where villas average $1,300 a night); 100 flights aboard corporate jets arranged by lobbyists; and 500 meals at fancy restaurants, some averaging $200 for a dinner for two. There was even a $2,896 shopping spree at a boutique on Florida’s Amelia Island offering “gourmet cookware, sabbatier cutlery and gadgets for your every need.”

DeLay was a man on the move and on the take. But he needed help to sustain the cash flow. He found it in a fellow right wing ideologue named Jack Abramoff. Abramoff personifies the Republican money machine of which DeLay with the blessing of the House leadership was the major domo. It was Abramoff who helped DeLay raise those millions of dollars from campaign donors that bought the support of other politicians and became the base for an empire of corruption. DeLay praised Abramoff as “one of my closest friends.” Abramoff, in turn, told a convention of college Republicans, “Thank God Tom DeLay is majority leader of the house. Tom DeLay is who all of us want to be when we grow up.”

Just last month Jack Abramoff pleaded guilty to fraud, tax evasion, and conspiracy to bribe public officials, a spectacular fall for a man whose rise to power began 25 years ago with his election as Chairman of the College Republicans. Despite its innocuous name, the organization became a political attack machine for the Far Right and a launching pad for younger conservatives on the make. “Our job,” Abramoff, then 22 years old, wrote after his first visit to the Reagan White House, “is to remove liberals from power permanently [from] student newspaper and radio stations, student governments, and academia.” Karl Rove had once held the same job as chairman. So did Grover Norquist, who ran Abramoff’s campaign. A youthful $200-a-month intern named Ralph Reed was at their side. These were the rising young stars of the conservative movement who came to town to lead a revolution and stayed to run a racket.

They reeked piety. Like DeLay, who had proclaimed himself God’s messenger, Ralph Reed found Jesus, was born again, and wound up running Pat Robertson’s Christian Coalition, landing on the cover of Time as “the Right Hand of God.” Reportedly after seeing “Fiddler on the Roof” Abramoff became an Orthodox religious Jew who finagled fake awards as “Scholar of Biblical and American History,” “Distinguished Bible Scholar” (from an apparently non-existent organization), the “Biblical Mercantile Award” allegedly from the Cascadian Business Institute through which money was funded for DeLay’s famous visit to a plush Scottish golf club, and the national order of merit from the USA Foundation, whose chairman was…Jack Abramoff.

It is impossible to treat all the schemes and scams this crowd concocted to subvert democracy in the name of God and greed. But thanks to some superb reporting from, The Associated Press, and Knight-Ridder, among others, we can touch on a few.

Abramoff made his name, so to speak, representing Indian tribes with gambling interests. As his partner he hired a DeLay crony named Michael Scanlon. Together they would bilk half a dozen Indian tribes who hired them to protect their tribal gambling interests from competition. What they had to offer, of course, was their well-known connections to the Republican power structure, including members of Congress, friends at the White House (Abramoff’s personal assistant became Karl Rove’s personal assistant), Christian Right activists like Ralph Reed, and right wing ideologues like Grover Norquist (according to The Texas Observer, two lobbying clients of Abramoff paid $25,000 to Norquist’s organization – Americans for Tax Reform – for a lunch date and meeting with President Bush in May 2001.)

Abramoff and Scanlon came up with one scheme they called “Gimme Five,” Abramoff would refer tribes to Scanlon for grassroots public relations work, and Scanlon would then kick back about 50 percent to Abramoff, all without the tribes’ knowledge. Before it was over the tribes had paid them $82 million dollars, much of it going directly into Abramoff’s and Scanlon’s pockets. And that doesn’t count the thousands more that Abramoff directed the tribes to pay out in campaign contributions.

Some of the money found its way into an outfit called the Council of Republicans for Environment Advocacy (CREA), founded by Gale Norton before she became Interior Secretary, the cabinet position most responsible for Indian gaming rights (as well as oil and gas issues, public lands and parks, and something else we’ll get to in a moment) .

Some of the money went to so-called charities set up by Abramoff and DeLay that filtered money for lavish trips for members of Congress and their staff, as well as salaries for Congressional family members and DeLay’s pet projects.

And some of the money found its way to the righteous folks of the Christian Right. One who had his hand out was Ralph Reed, the religious right’s poster boy against gambling. “We believe gambling is a cancer on the American body politic,” Reed had said. “It is stealing food from the mouths of children… (and) turning wives into widows.” When he resigned from the Christian Coalition (just as it was coming under federal investigation and slipping into financial arrears), Reed sought a cut of the lucre flowing to Abramoff and Scanlon. He sent Abramoff an email: “Now that I am leaving electoral politics, I need to start humping in corporate accounts… I’m counting of you to help me with some contacts.”

Abramoff came through. According to Susan Schmidt and R. Jeffrey Smith, he and Scanlon paid Reed some $4 million to whip up Christian opposition to gambling initiatives that could cut into the profits of Jack Abramoff’s clients. Reed called in some of the brightest stars in the Christian firmament – Pat Robertson, Jerry Fawell, James Dobson, Phyllis Schlafly – to participate in what became a ruse in Abramoff’s behalf: They would oppose gambling on religious and moral grounds in strategic places (Texas, Louisiana, Alabama) at decisive moments when competitive challenges threatened Abramoff’s . Bogus Christian fronts were part of the strategy. Baptist preachers in Texas rallied to Reed’s appeals. Unsuspecting folks in Louisiana heard the voice of God on radio – with Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson doing the honors – thundering against a riverboat gambling scheme, which one of Abramoff’s clients feared would undermine its advantage. Reed even got James Dobson, whose nationwide radio “ministry” reaches millions of people, to deluge phone lines at the Interior Department and White House with calls from indignant Christians.

In 1999 Abramoff arranged for the Mississippi Choctaws, who were trying to stave off competition from other tribes, to contribute over $1 million to Norquist’s Americans for Tax Reform, which then passed the money along to the Alabama Christian Coalition and to another anti-gambling group Reed had duped into aiding the cause. It is unclear how much these Christian soldiers, “marching as to war,” knew about the true purpose of their crusade, but Ralph Reed knew all along that his money was coming from Abramoff. The emails between the two men read like Elmer Gantry.

It gets worse.

Some of Abramoff’s money from lobbying went to start a non-profit organization called the US Family Network. Nice name, yes? An uplifting all-American name, like so many others that fly the conservative banner in Washington. Tom DeLay wrote a fundraising letter in which he described the US Family Network as “a powerful nationwide organization dedicated to restoring our government to citizen control.” Fund raising appeals warned that the American family “is being attacked from all sides: crime, drugs, pornography…and gambling.” So help me, I’m not making this up. You can read R. Jeffrey’s Smith mind-boggling account of it on the Washington Post website, where he writes that the organization did no discernable grassroots organizing and its money came from business groups with no demonstrated interest in the “moral fitness” agenda that was the network’s professed aim.

Let’s call it what it was: a scam – one more cog in the money-laundering machine controlled by DeLay and Abramoff. A former top assistant founded the organization. It bought a townhouse just three blocks from DeLay’s Congressional quarters and provided him with fancy free office space where he would go to raise money. DeLay’s wife also got a sizeable salary. But that’s the least of it.

Working with Abramoff through a now defunct law firm in London and an obscure off-shore company in the Bahamas, Russian oil and gas executives were using the US Family Network to funnel money to influence the majority leader of the House of Representatives – yes, that chamber of American government once known as “The People’s House.”

Our witness for this is the Christian pastor who served as the titular president of the US Family Network, the Reverend Christopher Geeslin. He told The Washington Post that the founder of the organization, the former DeLay aide, told him that a million dollars was passed through from sources in Russia who wanted DeLay’s support for legislation enabling the International Monetary fund to bail out the faltering Russian economy without demanding the country raise taxes on its energy industry. As Molly Ivins pointed out in a recent column, right on cue DeLay found his way onto Fox News Sunday to argue the Russian position. That same titular head of the US Family Network, the Christian pastor, said DeLay’s former chief of staff also told him, “This is the way things work in Washington.”

This is the way things work in Washington.

Twenty five years ago Grover Norquist had said that “What Republicans need is 50 Jack Abramoffs in Washington. Then this will be a different town.”

Well, they got what they needed, and the arc of the conservative takeover of government has now been completed. As Abramoff had once said his goal was to banish liberals from college campuses, and later that “All of my political work is driven by philosophical interests, not by the desire to gain wealth,” now his intentions, as he admitted to Michael Crowley of The New York Times, were “to push the Republicans on K Street to be more helpful to the conservative movement.” Money, politics, and ideology became one and the same in a juggernaut of power that crushed everything in sight, including core conservative principles.

Here we come to the heart of darkness.

One of Abramoff’s first big lobbying clients was the Northern Marianas Islands in the Pacific. After World War II the Marianas became a trusteeship of the United Nations, administered by the US Government under the stewardship of the Interior Department. We should all remember that thousands of Marines died there, fighting for our way of life and our freedoms. Today, these islands are a haven for tourists – first-class hotels, beautiful beaches, championship golf course. But there is a dark side. The islands were exempted from US labor and immigration laws, and over the years tens of thousands of people, primarily Chinese, mostly women, were brought there as garment workers. These so-called “guest workers” found themselves living in crowded barracks in miserable conditions. The main island, Saipan, became known as America’s biggest sweatshop.

In 1998 a government report found workers there living in substandard conditions, suffering severe malnutrition and health problems and subjected to unprovoked acts of violence. Many had signed “shadow contracts” which required them to pay up to $7000 just to get the job. They also had to renounce their claim to basic human rights, including political and religious activities, socializing and marrying. If they protested, they could be summarily deported. As Greg McDonald wrote in The Houston Chronicle, the garments produced on Saipan were manufactured for American companies from tariff-free Asian cloth and shipped duty- and quota-free – to the United States. Some of the biggest names in the retail clothing industry – Levi Strauss, The Gap, J. Crew, Eddie Bauer, Reebok, Polo, Tommy Helfiger, Nordstrom’s, Lord and Taylor, Jones New York, and Liz Claiborne – had been able to slap a “made in the USA” label on the clothes and import them to America, while paying the workers practically nothing.

When these scandalous conditions began to attract attention, the sweatshop moguls fought all efforts at reform. Knowing that Jack Abramoff was close to Tom DeLay, they hired him to lobby for the islands. Conservative members of Congress lined up as Abramoff’s team arranged for them to visit the islands on carefully guided junkets. Conservative intellectuals and journalists, for hire at rates considerably above what the women on the islands were making, also signed up for expense-free trips to the Marianas. They flew first-class, dined at posh restaurants, slept in comfort at the beachfront hotel, and returned to write and speak of the islands as “a true free market success story” and “a laboratory of liberty.”

Abramoff took Tom DeLay and his wife there, too. DeLay practically swooned. He said the Marianas “represented what is best about America.” He called them “my Galapagos” – “a perfect petri dish of capitalism.”

These fellow travelers – conservative members of Congress, their staffs and their lapdogs in the rightwing press and think tanks – became a solid phalanx against any and all attempts to provide the workers on the islands with a living wage and decent living conditions. For instance, when a liberal California Democrat, George Miller, and a conservative Alaskan Senator, Frank Murkowski, indignant at the “appalling conditions,” wanted to enact a bill to raise minimum wages on the islands and at least prevent summary deportation of the workers, DeLay and Abramoff stopped them cold. As Representative Miller told it, “They killed my reform bill year after year. And even when an immigration reform bill by Senator Frank Murkowski, a Republican, was approved by the full Senate, they blocked it repeatedly in the House.”

After the 2000 election, when the spoils of victory were being divided up, Abramoff got himself named to the Bush transition team for the Interior Department. He wanted to make sure the right people wound up overseeing his clients, the Marianas. He enlisted Reed, who said he would raise the matter with Rove, to stop at least one appointment to Interior that might prove troublesome. Small wonder that about this time Reed wrote an email to Enron’s top lobbyist touting his pal Abramoff as “arguably the most influential and effective GOP lobbyist in congress. I share several clients with him and have yet to see him lose a battle. He also is very close to DeLay and could help enormously on that front. Raised $ for bush…he [sic] assistant is Susan Ralston [who would become Rove's assistant.]”

For his services to the Marianas Jack Abramoff was paid nearly $10 million dollars, including the fees he charged for booking his guests on the golf courses and providing them copies of Newt Gingrich’s book. One of the sweatshop moguls with whom Abramoff was particularly close contributed half a million dollars to – you guessed it – the US Family Network that laundered money from Russian oligarchs to Tom DeLay.

To this day, workers on the Marianas are still denied the federal minimum wage while working long hours for subsistence income in their little “petri dish of capitalism” – “America at its best.”

Both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue were now in sync. George W. Bush had created his own version of the K Street Project. Remember how he emerged from the crowded field of Republican candidates in early 1999 and literally blew several of them out of the water? He did so by drowning his opponents with money. In just his first six months of fundraising, Bush collected some $36 million – nine times more than his nearest opponent, John McCain. The money came from the titans of America business and lobbying who understood their contributions would be rewarded. You’ve heard of the Pioneers and Rangers – people who raised at least $100,000 and $200,000 for Bush. Among them were people like Tom DeLay’s brother, also a lobbyist; the CEO of Enron, Kenneth (”Kenny Boy”) Lay; and hundreds of executives from the country’s banks, investment houses, oil and gas companies, electric utilities, and other companies.

While Tom DeLay kept a ledger on K Street, ranking lobbyists as friendly and unfriendly, the Bush campaign gave every one of his Pioneers and Rangers a tracking number, making sure to know who was bringing in the bucks and where they were coming from. In May of 1999 the trade association for the electric utility industry sent a letter to potential contributors on Bush campaign stationery. He told his colleagues that Bush’s campaign managers “have stressed the importance of having our industry incorporate the tracking number in your fundraising efforts…it does ensure that our industry is credited and that your progress is listed…”

The bounty was waiting. A score of Pioneers and Rangers were paid off with ambassadorships. At least 37 were named to post-election transition teams, where they had a major say in selecting political appointees at key regulatory positions across the government. Remember the California energy crisis, when Enron traders boasted of gouging grandmothers to drive up the prices for energy? Well, Enron’s Kenneth Lay had been Bush’s biggest campaign funder over the years and what he asked now as a pay-off was appointment to the Energy Department transition team. This is how Enron’s boss got to name two of the five members of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, who looked the other way while Enron rigged California’s energy prices and looted billions right out from the pockets and pocketbooks of California’s citizens.

There are, as I said, no victimless crimes in politics. The cost of corruption is passed on to you. When the government of the United States falls under the thumb of the powerful and privileged, regular folks get squashed.

This week I visited for the first time the Museum of the Presidio in San Francisco. From there American troops shipped out to combat in the Pacific. Many never came back. On the walls of one corridor are photographs of some of those troops, a long way from home. Looking at them, I wondered: Is this what those Marines died for on the Marianas – for sweatshops, the plunder of our public trust, the corruption of democracy? Government of the Abramoffs, by the DeLays, and for the people who bribe them?

I don’t think so.

But this crowd in charge has a vision sharply at odds with the American people. They would arrange Washington and the world for the convenience of themselves and the transnational corporations that pay for their elections. In the words of Al Meyeroff, the Los Angeles attorney who led a successful class action suit for the workers on Saipan, the people who now control the US Government today want “a society run by the powerful, oblivious to the weak, free of any oversight, enjoying a cozy relationship with government, and thriving on crony capitalism.”

America as their petri dish – the Marianas, many times over.

This is an old story and a continuing struggle. A century ago Theodore Roosevelt said the central fact of his time was that corporations had become so dominant they would chew up democracy and spit it out. His cousin Franklin Roosevelt warned that a government of money was as much to be feared as a government by mob. One was a progressive Republican, the other a liberal Democrat. Their sentiments were echoed by an icon of the conservative movement, Barry Goldwater, in 1987:

The fact that liberty depended on honest elections was of the utmost importance to the patriots who founded our nation and wrote the Constitution. They knew that corruption destroyed the prime requisite of Constitutional liberty, an independent legislature free from any influence other than that of the people…representative government assumes that elections will be controlled by the citizenry at large, not by those who give the most money. Electors must believe their vote counts. Elected officials must owe their allegiance to the people, not to their own wealth or to the wealth of interest groups who speak only for the selfish fringes of the whole community.

IV

I have painted a bleak picture of democracy today. I believe it is a true picture. But it is not a hopeless picture. Something can be done about it. Organized people have always had to take on organized money. If they had not, blacks would still be three-fifths of a person, women wouldn’t have the vote, workers couldn’t organize, and children would still be working in the mines. Our democracy today is more real and more inclusive than existed in the days of the Founders because time and again, the people have organized themselves to insist that America become “a more perfect union.”

It is time to fight again. These people in Washington have no right to be doing what they are doing. It’s not their government, it’s your government. They work for you. They’re public employees – and if they let us down and sell us out, they should be fired. That goes for the lowliest bureaucrat in town to the senior leaders of Congress on up to the President of the United States.

They would have you believe this is just “a lobbying scandal.” They would have you think that if they pass a few nominal reforms, put a little more distance between the politician and the lobbyist, you will think everything is okay and they can go back to business as usual.

They’re trying it now. Just look at Congressman John Boehner, elected to replace Tom DeLay as House Majority Leader. Today he speaks the language of reform, but ten years ago Boehner was handing out checks from the tobacco executives on the floor of the House. He’s been a full player in the K Street Project and DeLay’s money machine, holding weekly meetings with some of the most powerful lobbyists in the Speaker’s suite at the Capitol. He has thought nothing of hopping on corporate jets or cruising Caribbean during winter breaks with high-powered lobbyists. Moreover, the man Boehner beat to succeed DeLay – Congressman Roy Blunt – has been elected to DeLay’s first job as Majority Whip despite being deeply compromised by millions upon millions of dollars raised from the same interests that bought off DeLay.

And what now of DeLay? He’s under indictment for money laundering inTexas and had to resign as Majority Leader. But the other day the party bosses in Congress gave him a seat on the powerful House Appropriations Committee where big contributors get their rewards. And – are you ready for this? – they put him on the subcommittee overseeing the Justice Department which is investigating the Abramoff scandal, including Abramoff’s connections to DeLay.

Business as usual. The usual rot. The power of arrogance.

You may say, see? These forces can’t be defeated. They’re too rich, they’re too powerful, and they’re too entrenched.

But look at what has happened in Connecticut, one of the most corrupt states in the union. Rocked by multiple scandals that brought down a state treasurer, a state senator, and the governor himself with convictions of bribery, tax evasion, and worse, the people finally had enough. Although many of the parties had to be forced, kicking and screaming to do it, last December the legislature passed clean money reform and the new governor signed it into law. The bill bans campaign contributions from lobbyists and state contractors and makes Connecticut the very first state in the nation where the legislature and governor approved full public funding for their own races.

Connecticut isn’t the only place where the link between public officials and private campaign contributions has been broken. Both Arizona and Maine offer full public financing of statewide and legislative races. New Jersey, New Mexico, North Carolina, and Vermont have clean money systems for some races. The cities of Portland, Oregon and Albuquerque, New Mexico recently approved full public financing for citywide races.

In these places, candidates for public office – executive, legislative, and in some cases judicial – have the option of running on a limited and equal grant of full public funding, provided they take little or no private contributions. To qualify they have to pass a threshold by raising a large number of small contributions from voters in their district. The system allows candidates to run competitive campaigns for office even if they do not have ties to well-heeled donors or big money lobbyists, a near impossibility when public elections are privately funded.

In places where clean elections are law, we see more competition for legislative seats and a more diverse group of people running for office. In David Sirota’s words, they “are encouraged to run on their ideas, their convictions and their integrity instead of on how effectively they can shake down the big money.” And there are policy results as well. In Arizona, one of the first acts of Governor Janet Napolitano, elected under the state’s public financing program, was to institute reforms establishing low-cost prescription drug subsidies for seniors. Compare that to the Medicare debacle going on at the national level. In Maine, where clean elections has been in place since 2000, there have also been advances in providing low cost pharmaceutical drugs for residents, and in making sure that every state resident has medical coverage.

Why? Because the politicians can do what’s right, not what they’re paid to do by big donors. They, not the lobbyists, write the legislation. As one blogger put it this past weekend, instead of dialing for dollars, they might have time even to read bills like ‘The Patriot Act’ and find the small print establishing a secret police.

California may soon follow Connecticut. Calling for the political equivalent of electroshock therapy, the Los Angeles Times recently urged Californians: “Forget half-measures. The cure is voluntary public financing of election campaigns.” Already the Clean Money and Fair Elections Bill has passed the state assembly and is headed for the senate. Check it out at www.caclean.org.

Think about this: Californians could buy back their elected representatives at a cost of about $5 or $6 per California resident. Nationally we could buy back our Congress and the White House with full public financing for about $10 per taxpayer per year. You can check this out on the website Public Campaign. [www.publicampaign.org]

Public funding won’t solve all the problems. There’s no way to legislate truly immoral people from abusing our trust. But it would go a long way to breaking the link between big donors and public officials and to restoring democracy to the people. Until we offer qualified candidates a different source of funding for their campaigns – “clean,” disinterested, accountable public money – the selling of America will go on. From scandal to scandal.

The people out across the country on the front lines of this fight have brought the message down to earth, in plain language and clear metaphors. If a player sliding into home plate reached into his pocket and handed the umpire $1000 before he made the call, what would we call that? A bribe. And if a lawyer handed a judge $1000 before he issued a ruling, what do we call that? A bribe. But when a lobbyist or CEO sidles up to a member of Congress at a fundraiser or in a skybox and hands him a check for $1000, what do we call that? A campaign contribution.

Representative Barney Frank likes to say of Congress: “We are the only people in the world required by law to take large amounts of money from strangers and then act as if it has no effect on our behavior.”

What law is he talking about? The unwritten law that says your Congressman has to raise $2000 per day from the day he or she is sworn in to the next election days – weekdays, Saturdays, Sundays, Christmas Eve and the Fourth of July. As long as elected officials need that constant stream of cash, someone will run our country but it won’t be you.

Even some business lobbyists are having second thoughts. One of them, Stanton Anderson, was recently quoted in Business Week: “As a conservative, I’ve always opposed government involvement. But it seems to me the real answer is federal financing of Congressional elections.”

Mr. Anderson understand this isn’t about a “few bad apples.” This is about the system. We can change the system. But we have to believe democracy is worth fighting for.

Listen to what Theodore Roosevelt said one hundred years ago when he took on the political bosses and big money of his time for committing “treason to the people.”

We are standing for the great fundamental rights upon which all successful free government must be based. We are standing for elementary decency in politics. We are fighting for honesty against naked robbery. It is not a partisan issue; it is more than a political issue; it is a great moral issue. If we condone political theft, if we do not resent the kinds of wrong and injustice that injuriously affect the whole nation, not merely our democratic form of government but our civilization itself cannot endure.

We need that fighting spirit today – the tough, outraged and resilient spirit that knows we have been delivered a great and precious legacy, you and I – “government of, by and for the people” – and, by God we’re going to pass it on.

Bill Moyers’ long-time editorial colleague, Rebecca Wharton; assistant, Karen Kimball; and Public Campaign’s Micah Sifry and Nancy Waltzman for their contributions to this speech. Bill Moyers is the president of The Schumann Center for Media and Democracy.

original article

Abramoff says Bush met, even joked, with him, Statement follows White House claim that president does not know lobbyist

side note: look who’s trying to bullshit the american public once again.

Gerald Herbert
AP file
Reuters

WASHINGTON – Jack Abramoff said in correspondence made public Thursday that President Bush met him “almost a dozen” times, disputing White House claims Bush did not know the former lobbyist at the center of a corruption scandal.

“The guy saw me in almost a dozen settings, and joked with me about a bunch of things, including details of my kids. Perhaps he has forgotten everything, who knows,” Abramoff wrote in an e-mail to Kim Eisler, national editor for the Washingtonian magazine.

Abramoff added that Bush also once invited him to his Texas ranch.

White House Can’t Sweep Aside Abramoff

By JEANNE CUMMINGS
THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

WASHINGTON — The scandal surrounding disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff has shaken up Capitol Hill. But it still poses significant problems for the Bush White House.

A court hearing scheduled later this month may bring fresh attention to the case of former White House aide David Safavian, who is charged with lying in connection with a golf trip Mr. Abramoff arranged. Justice Department officials haven’t closed their review of actions by former Interior Department official J. Steven Griles, who disputes claims that he favored Abramoff clients, such as Native American tribes involved in casinos. Calls for the White House to release photos of Mr. Abramoff with the president — and details of his contacts with presidential aides including Karl Rove — haven’t abated.

“Their refusal to release information is inexcusable,” says Tom Fitton, president of conservative legal organization Judicial Watch. As a result, the scandal “is now in the White House.”

The president has said his connections to Mr. Abramoff didn’t amount to much. “Having my picture taken with someone doesn’t mean that I’m a friend with them or know them very well,” Mr. Bush said at a recent news conference, calling Mr. Abramoff one of “thousands” of White House visitors with whom he might have been photographed.

Mr. Rove has known Mr. Abramoff for about two decades, according to White House spokesman Scott McClellan. Both are former top officials of the College Republicans, many of whose alumni have gone on to national prominence within the party.

Mr. Abramoff was an early backer of the president, having been listed as a co-chairman pledged to raise $25,000 for Mr. Bush at a 1999 Washington reception. He gave money to the president’s recount committee in 2000 and was in the elite tier of fund-raisers for the president’s 2004 re-election committee. An Abramoff aide, Susan Ralston, later went to work as Mr. Rove’s executive assistant at the White House.

Mr. Abramoff bragged of his “contact” with Mr. Rove when Tyco International Ltd. sought action on tax legislation in 2002, according to Senate testimony by Tim Flanigan, a former Tyco official. “At some point after he joined the engagement team, Mr. Abramoff told me that he intended to contact Mr. Rove directly or indirectly to communicate Tyco’s position” on the tax issue, said Mr. Flanigan, who also once worked as Mr. Bush’s deputy White House counsel.

A White House spokesman says Mr. Rove doesn’t remember talking to Mr. Abramoff about Tyco. A spokesman for Mr. Abramoff declined to comment on whether he lobbied Mr. Rove on the issue. A Tyco spokeswoman says the company doesn’t know what Mr. Abramoff did on its behalf. A tax provision Tyco opposed eventually was defeated.

Messrs. Abramoff and Rove shared a connection to Mr. Safavian. Mr. Safavian lobbied alongside Mr. Abramoff before applying for a job with the General Services Administration. On his GSA job application, Mr. Safavian listed Mr. Rove as a reference who could confirm he brought a group of Arab-Americans to a Bush 2000 outreach program in Austin, Texas.

Prosecutors have accused Mr. Safavian of giving Mr. Abramoff inside information from the GSA at a time when the lobbyist was seeking government leases for a client. They have also accused him of misleading ethics officers and investigators by saying Mr. Abramoff wasn’t doing business with the GSA when the two men went to Scotland on a 2002 golfing trip.

Barbara Van Gelder, Mr. Safavian’s attorney, dismisses the inside information that prosecutors have seized upon as irrelevant. And she says that Mr. Safavian’s statement that Mr. Abramoff wasn’t doing business with the GSA at the time of the Scotland golfing trip was accurate, because the lobbyist’s clients hadn’t formally applied for leases or been awarded any. “Seeking” business with government is different, she explains, from having business with government.

She says the charges against Mr. Safavian are an attempt to pressure him to testify against others. “This case is about the government squeezing David Safavian,” Ms. Van Gelder says.

What information Mr. Safavian might have to implicate others isn’t clear. But Mr. Abramoff has already sent tremors across Capitol Hill by agreeing to cooperate with prosecutors.

Lawmakers have scrambled to offer proposals for overhauling rules governing lawmakers’ dealing with lobbyists. “I support your efforts … to strengthen the ethical standards of Washington,” Mr. Bush declared in last week’s State of the Union address. The White House has tried to move beyond ethics controversies after the indictment late last year of former vice-presidential aide Lewis “Scooter” Libby in connection with the Central Intelligence Agency leak case. Mr. Rove hasn’t yet been cleared in the investigation by special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald.

Mr. Griles is waging a vigorous effort to avoid being charged in the Abramoff investigation. He has offered to meet with prosecutors, though so far they have declined. In emails that surfaced in a Senate inquiry, Mr. Abramoff referred to Mr. Griles as his “man” in the department that oversees Native American issues. Another Interior Department official last year told the Indian Affairs Committee that Mr. Griles showed unusual interest in such issues while serving as the department’s chief of staff.

Barry M. Hartman, Mr. Griles’s attorney, has written the Senate committee, dismissing the idea that Mr. Griles was close to Mr. Abramoff as a lobbyist’s boast to his clients. Mr. Hartman said his own review had uncovered only a handful of telephone calls and email contacts between the two men — none of which resulted in official Interior Department measures that would have benefited Mr. Abramoff’s clients. Mr. Hartman also cited a 2003 email by Mr. Abramoff in which he lamented that Mr. Griles “can’t (or at least won’t) discuss any of my clients with me.”

original article

Indicted Lobbyist Jack Abramoff Set Up A Meeting With Bush For Five Clients In 2001…

The Huffington Post

From The Americans For Tax Reform
On May 9, 2001, five of lobbyist Jack Abramoff’s clients met with the President at the White House. Grover Norquist, the President of Americans for Tax Reform, had invited them to a White House reception on behalf his organization.

Telling his clients they had to be event “sponsors” to attend, Mr. Abramoff convinced at least two clients to write $25,000 checks to Americans For Tax Reform (ATR). Four other of Abramoff’s tribal clients also attended.

According to a Texas Observer article, Mr. Abramoff’s client, Chairman of the Coushatta Tribe Lovelin Poncho came to the event after his tribe paid ATR $25,000.

Though they did not attend the event, the Choctaw Indians donated $25,000 to be a “sponsor” of the meeting, according to a June 8, 2005 Associated Press report. The same article reports another Abramoff client, the Chitimacha Tribe of Louisiana, also attended.

Ben Fitial, then-Speaker of the House for the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI) showed up, too. A brochure later distributed by the Americans For Tax Reform features a picture of him shaking hands at the meeting with President Bush. Recently, Abramoff’s ties the Northern Mariana Islands have come under scrutiny: Several Congressmen have called for an investigation into whether he inappropriately influenced then-Attorney General John Ashcroft to get the US Attorney for the islands fired.

Yet another Abramoff client, Raul Garza of the Kickapoo tribe, also attended. Last week, Time Magazine reported the existence of a photograph of Abramoff, Garza and the President from the ATR event. The White House has denied that Abramoff attended the event at all.

Finally, accounts suggest that a final Abramoff client, the Saginaw Tribe of Michigan might have been there. A May 2005 Newsweek article reported that Abramoff arranged for the tribe to meet with Bush and Rove after a $25,000 donation to ATR.

original article

A tip for the cowardly press corps

Scott “Stonewall” McClellan arrogantly insists on “specific” questions about Abramoff’s ties to the White House. OK, here’s one: Did Bush meet with the lobbyist on May 9, 2001?

By Joe Conason
Salon.com

Opinion One of the president’s top fundraisers pleads guilty to felony fraud in a major Washington bribery scandal — a scandal in which he plays the central role as a super-lobbyist handing out checks and favors to members of Congress. The crooked fundraiser is a close friend and associate of the president’s top political advisor and deputy chief of staff, whom he has known for more than two decades. His former assistant now works in the White House as personal assistant to the deputy chief of staff. The fundraiser was awarded a place on the president’s Department of the Interior transition team, and constantly exploited his White House connections to impress his clients.

The fundraiser described above is of course Jack Abramoff, whose connections to the Bush White House, the president and Karl Rove may yet prove to be a crucial aspect of the lobbying scandal. To date, however, members of the Washington press corps — from the New York Times bureau to the host of “Hardball”! — have displayed scant interest in discovering how extensive those connections actually were.

And so far, press secretary Scott McClellan has easily turned aside the occasional desultory questions about Abramoff’s access to the president and the White House without providing any real answers.

By now it is clear that he doesn’t intend to provide full and candid answers, despite his promises to “look into” the questions. He has revealed only that Abramoff attended two White House Chanukah parties sometime in the distant past and met with “staff” on several occasions. Beyond that he has refused to provide details, photographs or any other information.

On Tuesday, when reporters inquired again about “staff-level meetings” with Abramoff, the press secretary bristled. With his harsh retort to NBC correspondent David Gregory, which can be viewed at Crooks and Liars, McClellan tried to shut down further questioning on the subject.

The first question on the topic, asked by another reporter, was whether McClellan had “an update for us on any records of phone calls or e-mails between staff members and Mr. Abramoff, or photos of the president with him?”

“No,” replied the press secretary. “As I indicated yesterday, we’re not going to engage in some sort of fishing expedition. I know there are some that want to play partisan politics, and do so.”

In the brief exchange that followed, McClellan told members of the White House press that they would be getting no further information about Abramoff from him, unless they could give him a compelling reason for their questions.

Declining to say whether the White House figures who met with Abramoff were “senior staff,” or what they discussed with the lobbyist in those meetings, McClellan concluded with a slight smirk: “And if you have anything specific, I’ll be glad to take a look into it.”

“He’s pled guilty to some serious charges,” ventured the questioner. “And so are you insinuating something?” barked McClellan. “We’re just trying to find out the facts.” “Well, if you’ve got something to bring to my attention, do so, and then I’ll be glad to look into it.” At that point, the exasperated Gregory broke in. “Scott, that’s not a fair burden to place on us. This is a guy who is a tainted lobbyist, and he has connections — we want to know — with whom in the White House. You shouldn’t demand that we give you something specific to go check it out. I mean, this guy is radioactive in Washington. And he knows guys like Karl Rove. So did he meet with him or not … Don’t put it on us to bring something specific. It’s a specific question about a specific individual. Can you tell us if he met with Karl Rove?” Again McClellan claimed, “We don’t discuss staff-level meetings.” “Of course you do,” Gregory interrupted, “whenever you want to discuss staff-level meetings. And if Karl Rove, who has ties to Ralph Reed, which he does, we want to know if he has ties to Jack Abramoff, and if they met.”

Finally, McClellan accused Gregory of “insinuating” that Abramoff had pursued “pending business,” meaning issues of concern to his clients, with members of the White House staff. “There’s been no suggestion of anything like that out of this White House,” said McClellan.. “I’m just asking,” Gregory replied, “I’m not suggesting.” “No, you’re insinuating,” scolded McClellan. “Go ahead. This is a gentleman who is being held to account for the wrongdoing he was involved in. He is someone who, through himself and his clients, contributed to both Democrats and Republicans. And it was outrageous what he was involved in doing and he needs to be held to account, and he is being held to account by the Department of Justice.” Nobody else spoke up, as they surely would if they cared about the question, and on the issue of Abramoff’s dealings with the White House, McClellan has escaped accountability.

Now under different circumstances — for example, if the president were named Bill Clinton — this sort of scandal stonewalling would only fan the firestorm of demands for information and charges of coverup. There is no doubt that McClellan could find out exactly when Abramoff had visited the White House over the past five years and whom he saw. The process of compiling that information should take less than a single day.

Doesn’t everyone still remember the logs kept by the Secret Service, which identify every White House visitor on every date? The press rightly demanded access to those records during the Monica Lewinsky investigation. Why not now?

Actually, it would be surprising if McClellan and Rove had not requisitioned all those records already for their own purposes. The Bush operation is competent in nothing if not politics and communications — indeed it seems competent at very few other functions of governing — and no competent political operation would have failed to examine its own vulnerability on this issue long ago.

McClellan, however, is still claiming not to know whether the disgraced lobbyist ever met with Bush. Two weeks ago, he claimed that the president “does not know [Abramoff], nor does the president recall ever meeting him.”

The president may not recall meeting with Abramoff, but others say they remember a meeting with him in the White House that the lobbyist arranged and attended. It was a very specific meeting, as McClellan might say, on a specific date.

On May 9, 2001, as Lou Dubose reported last June in the Texas Observer, Abramoff ushered the chiefs of the Coushatta and Choctaw tribal councils into a 15-minute Oval Office meeting with Bush. They also had lunch in the White House. For this swift brush with the president, the tribal chiefs paid dearly, including $25,000 to Abramoff himself, an additional $25,000 to Americans for Tax Reform (the outfit led by Republican eminence Grover Norquist, a longtime associate of Abramoff’s and Rove’s) and millions more in contributions to political causes and “charities” overseen by Abramoff.

According to Dubose, the Coushatta chief, a man named Lovelin Poncho, had initially denied visiting the White House with Abramoff. But under pressure from tribal opponents, he admitted the meeting last summer. Dubose has interviewed others present at the meeting who confirmed that Abramoff was there. In his Texas Observer article, Dubose reproduces several documents confirming the meeting and Norquist’s role.

Some brave soul in the White House press corps should ask Scott McClellan a “specific” question about that meeting on May 9, 2001, and suggest that he check the Secret Service’s White House logs for the names of Abramoff and the tribal council chiefs. Someone should start asking the members of the Coushatta and Choctaw tribal councils about that date as well. The president meets with many people and cannot be expected to remember everyone — even if they raised hundreds of thousands of dollars for him, perhaps. But the tribal chiefs are likely to remember the day they met George W. Bush in the White House, who brought them there — and how much they had to pay for the privilege.

original article

Bush and Abramoff—Say Cheese?

Washingtonian Magazine

White House press secretary Scott McClellan admits that the White House has been on a search mission for any photos showing President Bush with toxic lobbyist Jack Abramoff, who is cooperating with the Justice Department on its investigation of a wide-ranging lobbying scandal.

At a press conference, McClellan said if there were pictures, which officials hadn’t found, they might have been taken at a Christmas-party line, where the President poses with hundreds of people. “The President does not know him, nor does the President recall ever meeting him,” McClellan said.

The comment about searching raised images in the press room of a “White House plumbers” operation looking for incriminating photos.

If the White House can’t find the photos, prosecutors already know where to look. The Washingtonian has seen five photos of the President with Abramoff or his family. One photo shows the President and Abramoff shaking hands at a meeting in the Old Executive Office Building, where a bearded-Abramoff introduced Bush to several of the lobbyist’s native-American clients.

Abramoff was named a “pioneer” in the Bush presidential campaign, collecting more than $100,000, in $2,000 maximum increments, for his campaign in 2004. Bush has returned $6,000 of Abramoff’s contributions, the part that would represent the legal limit for Abramoff; his wife, Pam; and a client.

Sources say the photographs are being kept safe. Abramoff would tell prosecutors, if asked, that not only did he know the President, but the President knew the names of Abramoff’s children and asked about them during their meetings. At one such photo session, Bush discussed the fact that both he and Abramoff were fathers of twins.

original article

The K Street Prescription

side note: krugman asks what i think is the most important question so far about the abramoff scandal in his last paragraph. where is the media? if, according to the righties, they are so liberal and biased…lets see it!!

By PAUL KRUGMAN
The New York Times

The new prescription drug benefit is off to a catastrophic start. Tens of thousands of older Americans have arrived at pharmacies to discover that their old drug benefits have been canceled, but that they aren’t on the list for the new program. More than two dozen states have taken emergency action.

At first, federal officials were oblivious. “This is going very well,” a Medicare spokesman declared a few days into the disaster. Then officials started making excuses. Some conservatives even insist that the debacle vindicates their ideology: see, government can’t do anything right.

But government works when it’s run by people who take public policy seriously. As Jonathan Cohn points out in The New Republic, when Medicare began 40 years ago, things went remarkably smoothly from the start. But this time the people putting together a new federal program had one foot out the revolving door: this was a drug bill written by and for lobbyists.

Consider the career trajectories of the two men who played the most important role in putting together the Medicare legislation.

Thomas Scully was a hospital industry lobbyist before President Bush appointed him to run Medicare. In that job, Mr. Scully famously threatened to fire his chief actuary if he told Congress the truth about cost projections for the Medicare drug program.

Mr. Scully had good reasons not to let anything stand in the way of the drug bill. He had received a special ethics waiver from his superiors allowing him to negotiate for future jobs with lobbying and investment firms – firms that had a strong financial stake in the form of the bill – while still in public office. He left public service, if that’s what it was, almost as soon as the bill was passed, and is once again a lobbyist, now for drug companies.

Meanwhile, Representative Billy Tauzin, the bill’s point man on Capitol Hill, quickly left Congress once the bill was passed to become president of Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, the powerful drug industry lobby.

Surely both men’s decisions while in office were influenced by the desire to please their potential future employers. And that undue influence explains why the drug legislation is such a mess.

The most important problem with the drug bill is that it doesn’t offer direct coverage from Medicare. Instead, people must sign up with private plans offered by insurance companies.

This has three bad effects. First, the elderly face wildly confusing choices. Second, costs are high, because the bill creates an extra, unnecessary layer of bureaucracy. Finally, the fragmentation into private plans prevents Medicare from using bulk purchasing to reduce drug prices.

It’s all bad, from the public’s point of view. But it’s good for insurance companies, which get extra business even though they serve no useful function, and it’s even better for drug companies, which are able to charge premium prices. So whose interests do you think Mr. Scully and Mr. Tauzin represented?

Which brings us to the larger question of cronyism and corruption.

Thanks to Jack Abramoff, the K Street project orchestrated by Tom DeLay is finally getting some serious attention in the news media. Mr. DeLay and his allies have sought, with great success, to ensure that lobbying firms hire only Republicans. But most reports on the project still miss the main point by emphasizing the effect on campaign contributions.

The more important effect of the K Street project is that it allows the party machine to offer lavish personal rewards to the faithful. For a congressman, toeing the line on legislation brought free meals in Jack Abramoff’s restaurant, invitations to his sky box, golf trips to Scotland, cushy jobs for family members and a lavish salary after leaving office. The same kinds of rewards are there for loyal members of the administration, especially given the Bush administration’s practice of appointing lobbyists to key positions.

I don’t want to overstate Mr. Abramoff’s role: although he was an important player in this system, he wasn’t the only one. In particular, he doesn’t seem to have been involved in the Medicare drug deal. It’s interesting, though, that Scott McClellan has announced that the White House, contrary to earlier promises, won’t provide any specific information about contacts between Mr. Abramoff and staff members.

So I have a question for my colleagues in the news media: Why isn’t the decision by the White House to stonewall on the largest corruption scandal since Warren Harding considered major news?

The New York Times Company

?>