CNN states 3/4's of Abramoff money takers were GOP says Hillary took money

[ddeclue]

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/01/05/abramoff.fallout.ap/index.html

"In all, three dozen lawmakers -- three-fourths of them Republicans -- have announced plans this week to return donations, mostly funds that came from Abramoff or Indian tribes he represented. Among the Democrats is Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York."

Any way to verify about Hillary Clinton?


Doug D.

[saracat]

1. Baloney. Reid say NO dems took the money.

And I believe HIM.

[ddeclue]

3. Don't have to jump me.. I'm a Dem...

I do think CNN is usually pretty credible so I was looking for an explanation and it sounds like it wasn't much (2K) and she is giving it back based on the other response to this thread.

Doug D.

[saracat]

14. Not jumping YOU, jumping the media spin. The Dems took NO direct money.

As in the case of Patrick Kennedy who ALWAYS supports the tribes and one was an Abramoff client! I apologize if I sounded like I was jumping you. I am just pissed at how the GOP is trying to spin this as a "bipartisan" scandal!

[SteppingRazor]

5. Reid says no Dem took contributions directly from Abramoff...

And he's right. But Dems DID take contributions from clients of Abramoff who are also involved in the scandal. You can't directly link Demcrats to Abramoff's political contributions, but indirectly, there is grist for the mill. Not necessarily improper, but certainly enough that Republicans will scream and cry over it, desperate as they are to make Dems look as guilty and slimey as they are.

[SteppingRazor]

2. Well, if the lawmakers have announced plans to return funds...

And Clinton is one of those lawmakers, it follows that she herself has admitted involvement. Here's a story from the Seattle P-I: http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/6420AP_Keeping_the_Money.html

That's about as credible a newspaper as you'll find. In it, Clinton says she's returning $2,000 given to her by tribes represented by Abramoff. So, at best, it's a very indirect contribution.


On edit: She's also keeping money donated by lawyers at Abramoff's firm. And, no, I don't think that's improper.

[babylonsister]

4. MSNBC had a scroll going, and Clinton was on the list, as

was Radnofsky and I think one other Dem (name escapes me).
The list was of those who have returned funds.

[snowbear]

6. Listen to the archive of Big Eddie's show if you get a chance..

http://www.bigeddieradio.com/

He does an incredible job of explaining why you shouldn't be worrying about Democrats and "Jackemoff" (that's what Ed calls him) http://eliteleague.co.uk/forum/images/smilies/lol!.gif

Seriously --- if you're worried about Democrats being involved --- don't lose too much sleep.

[snowbear]

9. Oh.. btw... that's todays show (that's still on)

Quit worrying!

[ddeclue]

10. I have XM Radio and get AAR but Eddie is no longer on AAR..

I guess I can stream him but not at work.

Doug D.

[TrueAmerican]

12. Ed Schultz is now on XM Channel 165

from 3 to 6 Eastern Time.

[ddeclue]

15. No kidding! Thanks for the tip! I'll check it out!

Doug D.

[snowbear]

16. He was never on Air America... He's on Jones Radio Network and AFRN

Never been on AAR though...

:shrug:

[ddeclue]

19. Well Channel 167 is called "America Left" or something like that

on XM. It includes mostly AAR but they also played Allen Colmes late night (but now he's moving to Fox radio #168) and it used to play Ed Schultz when I first bought the radio but he went away and they started playing Randi instead. Didn't know he moved to 165.

I do like bot Randi and Ed. Ed is great because he sounds like Rush Limbaugh when you first start listening (in terms of midwest accent and mannerism) but when you listen to what he's ACTUALLY SAYING, Ed turns out to be the Anti-Rush..

Randi is great because she's so tough. I really like how she doesn't take cr*p from anyone, caller, guest, or anyone.

Doug D.

[Orangepeel]

7. she received a contribution from an Indian tribe

just like Patrick Kennedy and Harry Reid and other Democrats. Indian tribes that were scammed by Abramoff also gave money to Clinton and others.

[Warpy]

8. Once again, NO Democrats took money directly from Abramoff

His clients DID contribute to quite a few Democrats' campaigns, though.

This is legal.

What isn't legal are all the trips, the lavish dinners, and all the other nifty gifts bestowed on favorite GOPers.

What also isn't clear is how many of the campaign contributions by clients resulted in quid pro quo votes by the Congresscritters in question. They may have a case with Reid, but no others that I can see.

A list of who got what and from whom is at http://www.capitaleye.org/abramoff_recips.asp

I'm afraid it's a bit misleading, but the info's there.

[onenote]

I must not be reading the linked chart correctly - I see Dems getting $$

Can someone help out? While the numbers pale in comparison to what was being given to the repubs, it appears that quite a few Dems got contributions directly from Abramoff as well as any number of Democratic campaign committees. For example, it looks like the DSCC got over $120,000 from the Abramoff's personally (not from the tribes) and the DCCC got 16K. Some of the individuals include Barney Frank ($11K) and Debbie Stabenow($5K). Now some of these contributions may have been made in previous cycles, but I'm still not sure why this doesn't undercut the argument that no Dems got money directly from Abramoff. Help?

onenote

[Justitia]

26. NO Dem rec'd ANYTHING from Abramoff, you're reading it wrong

Display: Detail by Donor
Select Donor: JackAss & wife

It will display about 110 donations - 100% REPUBLICAN

Not a single dime to any Dem in any cycle.

edit: I see where you made your mistake.
Click on any of those names you listed and it will show you exactly who the donors are.
It will list the donor tribes names, who I assume were also victims of Abramoff.

[onenote]

27. thanks for clearing it up

I was assuming (my bad) that "individual" donations were from Abramoff and "PAC" donations were from the tribes. I see now that the contributions from the tribes are classified as PAC contributions in some instances and as individual contributions in other instances. The chart could be clearer, since its impossible to tell whether a particular donation is from a PAC or an individual.

Thanks

onenote

[snowbear]

11. Who the hell voted this thread up?

Wow.. this place is getting.....

[ddeclue]

13. Wasn't me...I started it...

:)

[sendero]

17. The local Fox affiliate...

.... claimed that about a third of the donations were to Dems.

How hard can this be? The facts are the facts. Would the local news make this stuff up out of whole cloth, just plain lie?

If no Dems took the cash, why isn't someone from the party demanding to be allowed to set the record straight?

[TheDebbieDee]

18. Rep. Charles Rangel of NY has been the gutsiest so far.....

I saw the story on MSNBC last night. Rep. Rangel insists that the donations he got didn't influence his voting in the least.

He KNOWS he didn't do anything wrong - he's keeping the donations he got directly from some Abramoff client.

[Vinca]

20. Just because someone got a donation from Abramoff -

Democratic or Republican - it doesn't mean they're dirty. It's whether or not they did something in exchange for it. I think they're more focused on the hundred thousand dollar trips and sky box seats.

[Donkeykick]

21. I don't think...

that Hillary has much to worry about from what I have heard so far.;-)

[JohnnyRingo]

22. Democrats and Abramoff took money from the casinos.

Abramoff spent his money to bribe Republicans to vote in favor of the casinos.
The Democrats spent theirs on their campaigns.

Abramoff would NEVER give money to a Democrat, he's not known for being non-partisan.

[Jayhawk Lib]

23. Have no fear

All the Dems are clean.

[global1]

24. It's Interesting To Note That Fox News Said That Repugs Got....

their $ directly from Abramoff and the Dems took in donations from the Indian tribes. Some woman they interviewed explained this and said it was a Repug scandal. I was flabbergasted that this sounded fair & balanced. Did anybody else catch that.

[ddeclue]

25. Sometimes FakeNews actually screws up and reports actual news..

Saw it during Katrina when they had this guy reporting on scene in New Orleans and the desk jockeys were trying to spin it as not so bad and the actual guy in the field was flipping out and basically telling them to shove it and wanting to know why the gov't (Bush) wasn't doing anything. I guess reality got to him..


Doug D.