Dean comments on AAR about Reid, Dorgan, Abramoff....my transcription.

[madfloridian]

I see the right wing is very busy, and some of you are falling for it. I thought Howard Dean did a very good job on AAR's Politically Correct today. I transcribed just that portion referring to Reid, Dorgan, and the Abramoff stuff.

Dean: "They (Republicans) are not doing anything about the K-Street project, which is where all the corruption came from in the first place. The idea was to run all the Democrats out of business, and allow people with a lot of money to have Republican access...(a little hard to catch because of some mumbling. ) That is really just blatant corruption. "

Host: But Governor, 82% said this is business as usual no matter who's in power. How do you change that perception?.

Dean: Well, we actually tell them the truth. Part of the problem is that the RNC is much better at propaganda than we are, and another problem frankly is the media is lazy as all get out. I can't tell you how many times I've seen the media write the Democrats were involved in taking Abramoff's money. That is simply a lie. Nor did he direct any money to any Democrats. Do you believe the mainstream newspapers that print that crap. It is astonishing to me that reporters won't get off their butts and look at the truth.

Host: I watched you with Wolf Blitzer, I don't know if you ever saw the footage of it.

Dean: I never did.

Host: He was remote. You told him flat out that he was wrong. Then there was a pause for a long period of time for television, he was frozen there. Unable to respond.

Dean: (intelligible) This is a Republican finance scandal, David. And I know everybody oh a pox on everybody's houses. I know Americans don't like politicians, but the truth is in this case this is a Republican scandal. Not one Democrat is implicated in it, not one.

Host: Well, I watched Tim Russert trying to do this again just a week ago. He said it was 3 million dollars in the Abramoff "related" money that went to Republicans and 1.5 million that went to Democrats. How is he slicing that up, how is he making that contention?

Dean: Because Abramoff has "some" clients who independently gave money to people like Reid and Dorgan because they're in their district. People give money to politicians for a variety of reasons. One, they're directed to for quid pro quo which is what Abramoff has pleaded guilty to. That's corrupt.

The other is they support who they like. Just like you and I would give a hundred dollars or a thousand dollars if we could afford it to a candidate whom we like. So the Indian tribes who gave money to Reid or Dorgan are giving to them because they like what they do.

Now it has nothing to do with Abramoff. As I've said before there's not any evidence whatsoever that Jack Abramoff directed a dime to any Democrat. We checked through every FEC report he did not give a dime to any Democrat. Gave thousands of dollars to Republicans. This is a Republican finance scandal.

And the media is lazy.

And on Fox today, he was right when he said if it was ever discovered that Democrats had taken part in quid pro quo...that they should be in trouble. They are spinning, and Howard Dean was right to say that. The right wing blogs are very very good at what they do. We need to not help them out.

[Adelante]

1. Very good summary he gave

Concise and pointed. :thumbsup:

[madfloridian]

10. Yes, it was.

I see we have a Drudge thingy this morning.

[lyonn]

2. OK, let's inlist Dean to run again for Pres.

It appears he has learned how to deal with the media. The guy was and is inspirational and knows how to run things. Now, Gore has impressed me lately, there is no doubt where he stands and he speaks for me also.

[JNelson6563]

3. Nice re-cap MF

I haven't been around the last couple of days, has there been an outbreak of reich-wing bait-swallowing?

Julie

[madfloridian]

5. A lot of posts asking if Reid is involved...the right wing tells them so.

I think some are sincere and honestly confused. I think some are trying to muddy the waters here.

[madfloridian]

4. And from the Fox transcript, there is more. RNC is spinning this.

"Wallace:Governor, it is certainly true that Republicans got twice as much money from Abramoff-related contributions than Democrats did, but Democrats aren't clean in this area either, are they?

DEAN: Yeah, they are pretty clean, Chris, and I'll tell you why. First of all, every dime of Jack Abramoff's money went to Republicans. Not one dime went to any Democrat or any Democratic organization — his personal money.

Secondly, he did direct contributions to mostly Republicans, but a few Democrats. But the Democrats, A, didn't know that he directed that — his clients to give them money and, B, they never produced anything for Abramoff.

The problem the Republicans have with this is that they actually did things. Senator Burns did a number of things for Jack Abramoff in exchange for a contribution. And the proximity of those contributions to the actual act of doing something for the lobbyist — that's what's illegal, and that's what's going to get them in trouble.

There's not one shred of evidence that any Democrat, A, knew that he was getting a contribution from Jack Abramoff and, B, did anything in exchange for it. And that's why this is a Republican finance scandal and not some sort of bipartisan scandal."

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,183120,00.html

[Stevepol]

6. Wallace claimed, "We've got proof" that Abram directed money to Dems.

I'll bet that's a lie. Does anybody know anything about that? From what I've read, Abramoff, if he gave any directions about money headed for Dems, directed the parties he was working for to send "less" to the Dems than before.

What "evidence" is this that Wallace is claiming they have? He put some quotes up on the screen toward the end, when Dean was running out of time and so that Dean wouldn't have time to think it through and probably rebut it. Dean was a little flustered by this, as he well might have been. It's the usual tactic on the Faux News of bringing in stuff like that to confuse the issue at the very end.

And what is the group he calls a non-partisan group, "The Center for Responsive Politics"? I don't watch Fox News but it's been my observation that they almost never quote from honest or neutral sources. Is this group just another of the Conservative groups cobbled together to get across some half-truth or lie in order to ""disprove" something the Dems are saying? Or is it a real and neutral political org devoted to "truth"?

[madfloridian]

7. If they want to go the "clients related" route, let them.

I think that may be a little risky for them. They can not let go of the angle that Democrats are guilty, too, and they are spinning. If they go this route, Hastert and many others will be involved much more than any Democrats.

The WP printed an article in Nov, I think about the ones who wrote letters in behalf of tribes. But I would think each instance would be different. Reid was mentioned as writing one, but then a whole of Republicans were as well.

I think there is a lot of proving to do, and they have not done it. They are mostly spouting rhetoric.

[madfloridian]

8. I forgot the key issue; apparently no Democrats being investigated.

That would be the key right there.

[madfloridian]

9. Kick because of new posts attacking Dean.

Let's see if we can get this clearer.