Is Harry Reid part of the Abramoff Scandal?

[Pryderi]

Is this crap true?

"But it turns out that the most prominent player in Abramoff's web of influence was reportedly none other than the Senate's top Democrat, Harry Reid.

In a little-noticed story in November, The Associated Press revealed that Reid had accepted tens of thousands of dollars from an Abramoff client, the Coushatta Indian tribe, after interceding with Secretary of the Interior Gail Norton over a casino dispute with a rival tribe.

Reid "sent a letter to Norton on March 5, 2002," reported the AP. "The next day, the Coushattas issued a $5,000 check to Reid's tax-exempt political group, the Searchlight Leadership Fund. A second tribe represented by Abramoff sent an additional $5,000 to Reid's group. Reid ultimately received more than $66,000 in Abramoff-related donations between 2001 and 2004."

"The Abramoff investigation threatens to ensnare at least a half dozen members of Congress of both parties and Bush administration officials. Abramoff, who has admitted to conspiring to defraud his Indian tribe clients, has pleaded guilty to corruption-related charges and is cooperating with prosecutors.

http://washingtontimes.com/national/20060115-115033-1547r.htm

[Mass]

1. Reid never got a cent from Abramoff.

No Democrats ever got a cent from Abramoff.

The Senator from Nevada got funds from native American tribes. These tribes are victims of Abramoff, not complices.

[Horse with no Name]

2. What a crock of shit

"In a little-noticed story in November, The Associated Press revealed that Reid had accepted tens of thousands of dollars from an Abramoff client, the Coushatta Indian tribe, after interceding with Secretary of the Interior Gail Norton over a casino dispute with a rival tribe."

The reason it was little noticed is because it was debunked almost immediately. I guess they are trying a second run to see if they can sell this load of horseshit at a discount.

[tridim]

3. All you need to know about the players in the Abramoff scandal

[Botany]

4. Washington Times .... consider the source.

Reid did not get one dime from Abramoff.

<Relationship to the Unification Church

The Times is the flagship publication of News World Communications, Inc. (NWC). NWC was founded by the Rev. Moon, and some of its officials are members of the Unification Church he leads, a fact that has drawn some criticism and controversy. NWC published Insight Magazine and The World & I until they were closed in 2004, and continues to publish the The Washington Times National Weekly Edition (a tabloid compilation, designed for subscribers outside the metropolitan area, of the previous week's published Washington Times stories). NWC also owns UPI>

From winkipedia

[CottonBear]

5. The Moonie Times is lying. NO Democrats got one cent from Abramoff.

The Abramoff scandal is a REPUBLICAN SCANDAL.

[AtomicKitten]

6. he got money from the tribes in his state

people he has worked for, appropriate and legal political contributions

[Justitia]

7. Absolute crap, but it's the MOONIE TIMES - whadya expect? -eom

[mzmolly]

8. Washington Times? And ya had to ask? No, it's not true - it's SPIN.

;)

Note one of the logos on the homepage:


:eyes:

Here is an easy to follow diagram courtesy of DU-er RPGamerd00d:

[kentuck]

9. If he is, it will definitely come out....

you can bet on that .

[gratuitous]

10. Nice try, Washington Times

But Harry Reid has a long-standing relationship with Native American tribes, many of which have donated to him for years. The fact that the Coushatta tribe gave money to Reid even after it had hired Mr. Abramoff doesn't indicate anything. Unless, of course, you're willing to assert that this one degree of separation is adequate to prove a direct relationship. In which case, what is the culpability of vice president Cheney for the indictment of his chief of staff Scooter Libby? And what is the culpability of president Bush for the indictment of his hireling David Savafian?

Just trying to be fair and balanced here. What about it, Moonie Times?

[Solo_in_MD]

11. While you must consider the source (Wash TImes)

I am not as fervent as other posters that all Dems are clean. They are still pols and therefore have a genetic tendency to sleaze and corruption.

I tend to think that one or two Dems will be found out, but that the number of Repukes will vastly outnumber them.

[fujiyama]

23. While there are dirty politicians of both parties

this Abramoff thing is absolutely a republican scandal.

Read up about Abramoff's ties to Norquist and the K Street project. The whole thing was started with the intention of making sure Dems would get NO money whatsoever.

The man was a freakin 'pioneer' for the Bush campaign. He donated over 100k to his reelection.

Are these the words of an 'equal opportunity dispenser' as Bush would like to call it:

"It is not our job to seek peaceful co-existence with the Left," he once said. "Our job is to remove them from power permanently."

http://www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml?i=20060123&s=editorial012306

http://www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml?i=20051003&s=foer100305

The man was a partisan hack, who like DeLay ultimately got sloppy.

[Village Idiot]

12. Why in the world would you post something from the Moonie Times?

[Warpy]

13. Although a case for a quid pro quo can be made for one tribe

Harry Reid took NO money from Abramoff, received no illegal gifts of corporate jet rides, vacations, or lavish dinners in top restaurants from either Abramoff or his clients.

You see, this is the problem the GOP is having, a complete inability to discern between barely legal campaign contributions from Indian tribes and illegal gifts from a lobbyist, Abramoff.

Yes, they may manage to tar Reid with manufactured scandal before this is all over, but remember, NO DEMOCRAT received money from Abramoff. NO DEMOCRAT received a single illegal gift form Abramoff. The "K Street Project," aimed at purging Democrats both from lobbying firms and from the recipients of their largesse made damned sure NO DEMOCRAT will be forced out by a legitimate scandal.

There is a great difference between barely legal campaign contributions and the kind of crap Abramoff was pulling. The GOP is working overtime to blur that distinction. Don't fall for it. This is THEIR scandal, not ours.

[MODemocrat]

14. Washington Times?

If they can't find any good news to write about Der BUSH, you can bet they will try to pull a rabbit out of their proverbial hat about a Democrat. They're unbelievable.:+ :boring: :+

[rman]

15. repub logic: i steal money from your neighbor,

your neighbor *gives* money to you, therefor you are as guilty as i am.

The headlines will read "Pryderi received rman money"

It gives a whole new meaning to the concept of "guilt by association" (which is disingenuous anyway).

[Pryderi]

16. "They're all corrupt! It doesn't matter who I vote for"

The average voter is going to give up and just vote the same way they always do. That's what I'm afraid of.

[SteppingRazor]

17. Yes, Reid got money from Indian tribes...

Along with many other politicians. But, note that the tribes sent him money AFTER he wrote a letter, not before. Thus, it's tribes giving money to the person who is best representing them, not paying money and then getting results. A thin, but important, distinction.

Also, Reid took no money from Abramoff, just from tribes.

Also, the Times is completely wrong about Reid being "the most prominent player" -- Republican officials took thousands upon thousands more dollars from Abramoff clients than Reid did, as reported in Time Magazine and elsewhere.

This "Abramoff-related donations" phrase sounds a lot like "weapons of mass destruction-related program acitvities," doesn't it? Twist the language any way you can to justify your own actions or sling mud at those of another.

Harry Reid did nothing wrong. One cannot say the same for those who accepted money directly from Abramoff, or engaged in quid-pro-quo bribery by Abramoff's clients.

Also, it's worth noting that tribes gave far less to Democrats after Abramoff took over their lobbying than before.

This is, quite simply, not a Democratic scandal. It is wholly a Republican one. The hog is in the tunnel, like the man said.

[rodeodance]

27. 'from a client'----is NOT from Abramoff. Repugs want to confuse us and

many are confused.

[Arkansas Granny]

18. Harry Reid was asked about this on the News Hour with Jim Lehrer.

This was his response:

SEN. HARRY REID: Jim, the Republican spinmeisters in this town are really quite good. This is a Republican scandal. Jack Abramoff I've never met, I've never have seen him. As far as I know, I've never been in the same building that he has been in. He gave about a quarter of a million dollars to Republicans, not a single penny to Democrats.

snip

Jim, I have 22 tribal organizations in the state of Nevada. I have fought for Native Americans. If there is a group of people in America that needs help, they do. And I will continue to fight for Native Americans in Nevada and around the country.

snip

And they gave me that money, and I'm proud of it, and I'm going to continue to fight for Native Americans and the Republicans can spin this any way they want.

Link here: http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/congress/jan-june06/reid_1-18.html

[Pryderi]

19. Time magazine implied Reid took bribes

Reid himself took campaign money from Indian tribal clients of Abramoff just days before signing a letter to Interior Secretary Gale Norton urging blockage of a casino those same clients viewed as a competitor, a move which undercut the letter Reid sent to President Bush last week arguing that Abramoff "may have had undue and improper influence within your Administration."

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1151901,00.html

I hope this is bullshit.

[fujiyama]

24. Even if it's real

this doesn't show anything illegal in particular. This doesn't mean what he did was right, but it's absolutely insignificant compared to what the others did.

Basically, he received money from a group, and did their bidding, something that happens all too often by every politician that needs money to survive in politics. The problem here is Abramoff and this is like playing six degrees of seperation.

Ultimately the media will definetely spin this the other way. This whole 'bipartisan' scandal is a nice way to keep the pukes in power. Time is a huge offender in this regard.

And please, never use the Washington Times as a source. It's Moonie nonsense.

[ProSense]

25. Tribes and Abramoff are not one in the same. Abramoff is the crook. n/t

[LittleClarkie]

20. No. Not one Democrat accepted money from Abramoff himself

Accepting money from Indian tribes and the like is NOT illegal. And some of these relationships have been going on for years, since before Abramoff took on the tribes as clients.

They are trying to confuse the issue.

[Pryderi]

21. I agree, but did you see #19

[Neil Lisst]

22. You're quoting the Washington Times?! Get real.

How can you not know the diffence between getting money from Abramoff and getting money from Indian tribes?

It's only been covered about a 1000 times in virtually every story or statement on the topic the last month.

[Vinca]

26. The people writing these articles always fail to mention that

Harry's constituents include native Americans and the gambling industry. It doesn't matter how much money anyone gets from tribes or even Abramoff himself UNLESS THEY DID SOMETHING FOR IT. BUYING AND SELLING GOVERNMENT IS THE POINT.