Pelosi Wants Probe of 'Corrupt Congress'

[UpInArms]

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=512&e=3&u=/ap/20060112/ap_on_go_co/ethics_pelosi

WASHINGTON - House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi on Thursday said Republicans had created "one of the most closed, corrupt congresses in history" and urged the House ethics committee to investigate GOP lawmakers linked to lobbyist Jack Abramoff.

"It's hard for the American people to understand how corrupt it is here," the California Democrat said at a news conference.

In a letter to House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., Pelosi said Democrats expect the ethics committee to look into the "alleged violations of criminal laws and the rules of the House" by former Majority Leader Tom Delay, R-Texas, and three other Republicans with ties to Abramoff — Bob Ney of Ohio and Californians Richard Pombo and John Doolittle.

<snip>

Pelosi didn't comment on the Jefferson case, but stressed that "we have said all along that, Democrat or Republican, anyone who doesn't follow the rules or the law has to be held accountable. That's the difference between us."

...more...

[madmark]

1. The lack of the ethics committee's oversight over any of the Abramoff

activity is damning and an election issue.

[formercia]

2. Democrats in Congress may not have taken money from Abramoff

but they have not neglected to line their reelection coffers none the less. I think the lack of backbone is caused by a reluctance to have daylight on their fundraising activities. Everyone grubs for money in Congress, it's the only way to survive. It has developed into a culture of, if not corruption, then assuredly some questionable methods. Nobody wants to kill the goose that lays the golden eggs.

[jsamuel]

3. I would love it if we could end all corporate money going to politicians

But it is a completely separate issue. Don't get bogged down confusing currently legal vs illegal ways of getting money and what we think are the ways money should be gotten and what money should be illegal.

[DURHAM D]

6. Bingo - get corporations out of the halls of Congress.

On another note - imagine how angry everyone on DU would be if Dems stopped accepting legal campaign contributions. Jeez.

[imported_dem]

5. Don't be so fast.

According to Internal Revenue Service records, and substantiated by the Campaign Finance Analysis Project, forty of the forty-five members of the Democrat Senate Caucus took money from Jack Abramoff, his associates, and their Indian tribe clients.

These recipients include:
Charles Schumer ($29,550),
Harry Reid ($68,941), Patty Murray ($78,991),
Mary Landrieu ($28,000),
John Kerry ($98,550),
Ted Kennedy ($3,300),
Tom Harkin ($45,750),
Dick Durbin ($14,000),
Barbara Boxer ($20,250),
Hillary Clinton ($12,950)
Byron Dorgan ($79,300).

When tallied, Senate Democrats and their national committees accepted $3.1 million from Abramoff, his associates and clients, compared with $4.3 million in contributions to Republicans.

[pdx_prog]

7. What a crock.....

who the fuck have you been listening to?

Contributions were taken from the Indian tribes, but not Abramoff. Abramoff had a hardon for all dems.

[Tamarin]

8. Does it break down more exactly?

How many received money directly from Abramoff?

[jsamuel]

9. "and Indian tribes"

Try ONLY INDIAN TRIBES and NONE FROM ABRAMOFF!

Accepting money from Indian Tribes, Microsoft, or Dell is perfectly legal. Accepting stolen money from Indian Tribes through Abramoff is ILLEGAL! That is what the GOP did, but the Dems didn't do.

[UpInArms]

10. Abramoff gave NO money to any Dem

check the FEC records. Your unnamed source is incorrect.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/chi-0601110156jan11,1,7216807.column?coll=chi-opinionfront-hed&ctrack=1&cset=true

excerpt:

"There are no Democrats who took money from Jack Abramoff," Dean answered. "Not one. Not one single Democrat. ...There is no evidence that Jack Abramoff ever gave any Democrat any money, and we've looked through all those reports to make sure that's true."

He's right, according to the non-partisan Center for Responsive Politics, which keeps track of such things. The center's analysis of FEC records shows that Democrats received about a third of the $4.2 million donated between 1998 and 2005 by Indian tribes that had hired Abramoff to represent them in Washington.

The problem with such analyses is that they tell you how much money someone gave to a political candidate without telling you why the money was given. By all indications, donations from the Indian tribes were no less legitimate than the political donations any individual, organization or industry with an interest in legislation frequently gives to candidates. If anything, the tribes are the true victims in the Abramoff saga. Federal investigators claim Abramoff used racist slurs when he referred to his Indian clients in his e-mails and represented rival tribes competing for the same casino turf, the mother of all conflicts of interest.

Nevertheless, the stink of scandal is so fierce in Washington these days that numerous Democratic as well as Republican senators and representatives have been giving money to charity equal to the amount they received from tribes linked to Abramoff in order to avoid even the appearance of wrongdoing.

As a result, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.), for example, gave up a measly $2,000 donation she received from a tribe and the Bush-Cheney campaign gave up a $6,000 donation. But as Democrats are quick to point out, the Bush campaign kept the $100,000 that Abramoff directly raised, which earned Abramoff the coveted "Pioneer" status among Bush campaign donors.

...more...

[imported_dem]

11. This is going to get a lot deeper on both sides of the isle

A Justice Department investigation into influence-peddling on Capitol Hill is focusing on a "first tier" of lawmakers and staffers, both Republicans and Democrats, say sources close to the probe that has netted guilty pleas from lobbyist Jack Abramoff.
Law-enforcement authorities and others said the investigation's opening phase is scrutinizing Sens. Conrad Burns, Montana Republican; Byron L. Dorgan, North Dakota Democrat; and Minority Leader Harry Reid, Nevada Democrat, along with Reps. J.D. Hayworth, Arizona Republican, and Bob Ney, Ohio Republican.


http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20060110-115655-1555r.htm



If anyone thinks that Democrats are just squeeky clean, well, you better think again. Both sides will take whatever they can from whomever they can.

[UpInArms]

13. I am not saying Dems are "squeaky" clean - merely stating the fact

that Abramoff made zero contributions to any Dem - ever.

I realize that you are new to DU, and that there are many many many things you are personally not aware of - let's start with the first point here - your source - Reverend Sun Myung Moon's newspaper - the Washington Times. Begun in 1982, never made a profit, a pure rightwing garbage sack not fit for any reference other than to know what Rev Moon wants. Please don't source to it unless it is the only (and I mean only source you can find - but if it is the only source you can find, that in and of itself is a statement. The statement that it then makes is it is probably the mouthpiece of the propaganda that you are waving. Second, go and look at something reputable - try www.opensecrets.org - it is a vast database that will show who's giving and who's getting.

Hang around, you might learn things.

:hi:

[jsamuel]

14. again BULLSHIT, notice that you are quoting the Wash Times...

Very conservative newspaper for one...

Second that is an unnamed source with no information. The only evidence so far has implicated DeLay, Ney, Burns, Reed (the R one), and other republicans...

Did you even read post #9?

Nice try though...

[UpInArms]

17. here - I've made it very easy for you

just click this Jack Abramoff Lobbying and Political Contributions, 1999 - 2006*

Find me ONE Dem on that list.

[AuntiBush]

21. Maybe It Might Help if You Knew Who Owned the Wash. Times...

:hi: & Welcome to DU! ;)

It's always very helpful to know your sources. So, who owns the Washington Times, one might ask?

Reverend Moon, of the "Moonies."

Check it out:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_Times
http://www.realjournalism.net/times.htm
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/longterm/cult/unification/profit.htm
http://www.freedomofmind.com/resourcecenter/groups/m/moonies/wash_times_20.htm

Sure hope this helps imported_dem. I learned the hard way, too.

[RazzleDazzle]

28. Nope, no Abramoff money to Dems. None.

Chicago Trib doubts Dean's statements about donations...agrees he's right
(txpt excerpt at post #5)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2363626
Link: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/chi-0601110156jan11,1,5293591,print.column?coll=chi-news-col

I just got back from the Harry Reid Press Conference in Phoenix.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2360524


C&L Vid Clip: Howard Dean smacks down Leslie the Wolf on CNN
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2356921&mesg_id=2356921

List of Abramoff contributions to PACs
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x83797
Link: http://www.fec.gov/

There are ZERO Democrats who took Abramoff money.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x5702459
Link: http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/12/28/1655/0100
Reply #15: Bloomberg.com -"Abramoff gave nothing to democrats"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=5727260&mesg_id=5727402
Link: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000103&sid=aBTFEkGJUbSI&refer=us

[Judi Lynn]

33. CNN's Henry falsely claimed Sen. Dorgan took money from Mr. and Mrs. Abram

Wed, Jan 4, 2006 2:34pm EST

CNN's Henry falsely claimed Sen. Dorgan took money from Mr. and Mrs. Abramoff then returned it

Summary: Ed Henry falsely claimed that Sen. Byron Dorgan accepted and "had to give back" campaign contributions from Jack Abramoff and his wife; in fact, there is no record Dorgan ever received contributions from either of them.

CNN congressional correspondent Ed Henry claimed that Sen. Byron Dorgan (D-ND) accepted and "had to give back" campaign contributions from former Washington lobbyist Jack Abramoff and his wife, Pam. In fact, there is no record Dorgan ever received contributions from either Jack Abramoff or his wife.

On the January 3 edition of CNN's The Situation Room, Henry stated, "I mentioned some Democrats -- Byron Dorgan, Democrat from North Dakota -- he's also had to give back a lot of money he received from Abramoff and Abramoff's wife." However, a search of the Center for Responsive Politics' database (here, here and here) did not turn up any data showing that Dorgan ever received contributions from either Abramoff or his wife. On December 13, Dorgan announced he was returning all campaign contributions he received from Abramoff's former partners and Indian tribe clients, which he contends were legal.
(snip/...)

http://mediamatters.org/items/200601040004

[rodeodance]

26. listen to cable TV and you would not know this. sad sad. sad!

[Bandit]

12. Isn't it strange that all those Democrats are asking for investigation

and not a single Republican is...Funny how that works don't you think...

[Village Idiot]

15. DUPE - Apologies

[Village Idiot]

16. You may want to check your facts again...

and not use the Moonie Times for your source...

[WhereThereIsFire]

18. And look at the PALTRY little amounts!

Most of these funds were channeled through sources that didn't fully disclose where they were coming from ... and in the grand scheme of things ... don't tell me anyone believes Ted Kennedy does "favors" for $3,300 or Hillary for $12,950 --- that is political pocket change. John Kerry was running a political campaign ... who knows who was accepting this type of funding for him. I don't see any figures here that are alarming on the Democratic side. But, it is a a far different story when you get over to the cheneygangey!

[meganmonkey]

19. His 'clients' have nothing to do with it

Those Dems legally received funds from the Indian Tribes - the same Indian tribes that Abramoff screwed over.

The Dems received NO money from Abramoff. NONE.

Give it up.

[ninkasi]

20. A little advice...

It's the DEMOCRATIC Senate Caucus. It's not the Democrat Senate Caucus, or the Democrat Party, regardless of morons like Tom Delay who insist on using a noun instead of an adjective. The improper use of democrat instead of democratic is something we at DU have gotten tired of. I am a Democrat...I belong to the Democratic Party.

[AuntiBush]

22. Democrats Did Not Take Any Money from Abramhoff, Sorry.

From the Washington Monthly: http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2006_01/007972.php

Google it: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=democrats+did+not+%28receive%2C+take%29+money+from+Abramhoff&btnG=Google+Search

[rodeodance]

27. by lumping these 3 sources together--this article intends to confuse you.

According to Internal Revenue Service records, and substantiated by the Campaign Finance Analysis Project, forty of the forty-five members of the Democrat Senate Caucus took money from Jack Abramoff, his associates, and their Indian tribe clients.

[LostinVA]

30. Wrongo, but you know that already -- what a good try, though

[Exiled in America]

32. Bullshit.

[Oceansaway]

4. thanks...n/t

[katty]

23. We know it's corrupt--decaying from within-bushco wants it

this way. If you consistently abuse, lie and demoralize Congress, the American people and the World-eventually they give up...that's EXACTLY what this insane administration is counting on. Just keep wearing everyone down...

[The Onyx Key]

24. A corrupt Congress??? Stop the presses!! When the hell

AREN'T they corrupt?

"'we have said all along that, Democrat or Republican, anyone who doesn't follow the rules or the law has to be held accountable.'"
If that's the case, it'll be nice to live in a world w/o politicians...

[rodeodance]

25. the House "ethics' committee has been dead in the water.

[radfringe]

29. for what it's worth - my 2-cents

The House can make all the rules or rule changes they want - but if they don't follow the rules, or change the rules in mid-stream, or refuse to enforce the rules - it means squat.

I don't expect any meaningful "rules" or "procedures" or "guidelines" to come out of this Congress regarding campaign donations or other financial dealings.

We have a Congress that is corrupt and broken. Doesn't matter to me if they are Repubs or Dems - if they are dirty then they need to thrown in the trash. These people are suppose to be representing US - THE AMERICAN PEOPLE - and when you have trash representing US - THE AMERICAN PEOPLE you end up with more trash.

If we really want changes - we have to clean the House and Senate.
It's time to take out the trash - people.

We may end up substituting one bag of trash for another - but it's a chance we have to take - because this bag of trash stinks

[Exiled in America]

31. She can START with HERSELF.

Since she KNEW about the bush wiretaping and didn't do anything about it for a year.