Only 45 minutes 'til Abramoff appears in court!

[Dr.Phool]

And for whoever says he's only going to implicate one congressman, the article in the post is clearly PLURAL.

Abramoff Expected to Plead Guilty to 3 Felony Charges

By William Branigin and Fred Barbash
Washington Post Staff Writers
Tuesday, January 3, 2006; 10:39 AM

Former high-powered lobbyist Jack Abramoff is expected to plead guilty today to three felony charges in a Washington courtroom, a Justice Department spokesman said.

The plea deal opens the prospect that Abramoff could provide testimony about members of Congress and congressional staffers in a wide-ranging political corruption investigation focused on his lobbying activities.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/03/AR2006010300474.html?referrer=email

[sweetm2475]

1. everyone get your popcorn!!!

:popcorn: :applause: :popcorn: :rofl: :applause: :popcorn: :popcorn:

[Skidmore]

2. Is this being broadcast anywhere that

cube bound people can view it?

[Avalux]

3. Wonder if he'll name any Dems to make it seem bipartisan?

I almost expect it. x(

[sweetm2475]

5. of course he will...

probably the only way they would let him cut a plea.:banghead:

[Spazito]

7. Well, CNN is doing that already, without any details, of course

Their presstituting is getting beyond simply obvious, Kagen is particularly loathsome but, to be fair, Wolfie is probably equally loathsome. I bet Wolfie will be emphasizing the meme that it is equally dems as well as repubs on his loathsome show.

[kentuck]

4. Get it behind them before election...

The sooner the better. They think.

[tridim]

6. All I can think about is Randi Rhodes' description of his lower body

She said he has Al Franken-esque butt and legs. Probably not a good trait to have in prison. :D

[yellowcanine]

8. WTF? No charge of bribing a public official? Seems weird that would not

be one of the charges unless the deal is that he skates on that charge in return for singing about DeLay and Ney.

[Mabus]

12. Have you looked at the indictment?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/documents/abramoff_info_010306.pdf Check out paragraphs (D) and (E).

(D) begins: "to corruptly give, offer and promise things of value, including money, meals, trip and entertainment to public officals and their relatives with the intent to influence, and in return for agreements to perform, official acts benefitting ABRAMOFF, Scanlon, and their clients, in violation of 18 USC..."

edited to correct code.

[yellowcanine]

16. Indictment is one thing, plea deal may be another. Post article does not

mention bribery....

"Abramoff is scheduled to appear at 12:15 p.m. in U.S. District Court in Washington to plead guilty to three counts charging him with conspiracy, honest services fraud and tax evasion, said Bryan Sierra, a spokesman for the Justice Department"

[Mabus]

19. I don't mean to be rude but

what law school or legal experience do you have? I have a J.D. and have done work in federal and state courts.

I'm very optomistic about the indictment and what I read in it. I guess only time will tell.

[yellowcanine]

22. Indictments are sometimes dropped/replaced with lesser charges

as part of a plea deal, are they not? I am not disputing what the original indictment said.

[Mabus]

23. Where are you coming from?

Indictments can and often do contain multiple counts.

The counts/charges within an indictment can be dropped, modified or replaced with other counts/charges including but not limited to lesser included charges or within the indictment itself before the defendant pleads to them.

Can other indictments (which can include multiple counts) can be brought later or in conjunction with another on-going investigation? Of course they can.

The question you original brought up concerned the lack of an indictment that uses a form of the word "bribery". From what I read in the indictment, the case law and the statutes used by federal prosecutors in this instance is in fact a form of bribery. The investigation that Abramoff is indicted under (to the best of my limited knowledge) involves his actions pertaining to certain Indian tribes and his dealings with them. The question/investigation into who Abramoff dealt with in the federal government on behalf of his clients (whose fidicuary duties were violated by Jack). Charges against the officials that Jack dealt with are coming as a result of his current cooperation/plea deal.


Again, I am very optimistic about this and I look foward to the fallout in congress.

[FreedomAngel82]

26. He gave money to Bush too

Is anything going to happen with that?

[Mabus]

28. I don't think so

I don't know what Abramoff has agreed to tell them or what the full scope of this current investigation encompasses. Based upon what I know of this current investigation (Abramoff defrauding tribes) I don't see Bush being directly tied to it. However, you should keep in mind that this bird has just begun to sing and he's not the only one.

I have to say, based on what I know, this particular investigation doesn't appear to lead directly to the WH. But never say never.

[Mabus]

29. P.S. Let's hope that I'm wrong on this one. n/t

[TahitiNut]

13. Brokering a bribe may not be the same as bribing.

It seems to me that whomever paid the bribe and benefited by it would be the party to be prosecuted.

[Sydnie]

15. Does that mean the tribes that he represented?

would they be putting the tibes on trial for that?

edit - typo (new keyboard arrgghh!)

[TahitiNut]

17. The Tribal Council 'plants' who were elected with Abramoff/Scanlon ...

... support and assistance may (and should) be indicted. Let's not forget that Abramoff tampered with tribal elections, placing seven of eight of their cronies on at least one tribal council. Once placed, these insider "Judas goats" shoveled out the tribal treasuries with abandon, enriching themselves and others at the cost of the tribes. I'd be happy to see them meet with traditional 'justice' live and in color.

[Sydnie]

20. thanks for the reminder

I did forget that he rigged the tribal elections. How sad that the tribes, as a whole, will have to pay for all of this. :(

[Mabus]

21. Application of § 1346 to Private Sector "Honest Services" Fraud.

Below is a portion of U.S. v. Devegter a 1999 case. I've highlighted some "fun" stuff.

A. Application of § 1346 to Private Sector "Honest Services" Fraud.

The federal wire fraud statute prohibits the use of the interstate wires to carry out a fraudulent scheme. The statute provides that "hoever, having devised or intending to devise any scheme or artifice to defraud . . . transmits or causes to be transmitted by means of wire . . . communication in interstate or foreign commerce, . . . for the purpose of executing such scheme or artifice," commits a federal offense. 18 U.S.C. § 1343. In addition, "the term `scheme or artifice to defraud' includes a scheme or artifice to deprive another of the intangible right of honest services." 18 U.S.C. § 1346.

The § 1346 honest services fraud provision was enacted by Congress in 1988 after the Supreme Court's decision in McNally v. United States , 483 U.S. 350 , 107 S. Ct. 2875 (1987). In McNally , the Supreme Court held that the scope of § 1343 1 encompassed only schemes to defraud another of money or other property rights, but not schemes to defraud another of intangible rights. See id. at 360. "Congress passed <§ 1346> to overrule McNally and reinstate prior law," which had extended wire fraud liability to schemes to defraud another of intangible rights, including an intangible right of honest services. United States v. Lopez-Lukis , 102 F.3d 1164, 1168-69 (11th Cir. 1997). Pre- McNally case law had recognized three kinds of intangible rights the defrauding of which would create wire fraud liability. First, defendants were convicted of defrauding persons of nonmonetary, intangible interests. See McNally , 483 U.S. at 363 -64 & n.4 (Stevens, J., dissenting); United States v. Condolon , 600 F.2d 7, 8-9 (4th Cir. 1979) (scheme to defraud women of time, effort, and expectations with seduction scam using bogus talent agency). Second, government officials were convicted for depriving their constituents of honest governmental services. See McNally , 483 U.S. at 362 -63 & nn.1-2 (Stevens, J., dissenting); Lopez-Lukis , 102 F.3d at 1168- 69 (citing cases). Third, "(i)n the private sector, purchasing agents, brokers, union leaders, and others with clear fiduciary duties to their employers or unions found guilty of defrauding their employers or unions by accepting kickbacks or selling confidential information." McNally , 483 U.S. at 363 & n.3 (Stevens, J., dissenting); United States v. Ballard , 663 F.2d 534 (5th Cir. Unit B Dec. 1981), modified in part on other grounds , 680 F.2d 352 (1982). 2 Therefore, this Court has noted that although the paradigm case of honest services fraud is the bribery of a public official, § 1346 is not limited to such conduct but extends to the defrauding of some private sector duties of loyalty. See Lopez-Lukis , 102 F.3d at 1165 n.1. This case involves the alleged commission of honest services fraud by private sector defendants, not a defrauding of the public of the honest governmental services of a public official. 3

source: http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=11th&navby=case&no=998142opn

As I understand it, Abramoff is under indictment because of an investigation concerning the tribes he worked for and the services he rendered for them. An investigation into who recieved the bribes is another case and indictments may spring from the plea Abramoff has entered into.

[Straight Shooter]

9. Is there any Pepto-Bismol left on the shelves in Washington, D.C.?

I bet more than a few Congress critters are doing their best to keep from riding the porcelain bus. (Or "barking at the ants" as one DU'er put it.)

[peekaloo]

11. Buy stock in Depends parent company.

:-)

[EFerrari]

24. In Calgon! Lol! n/t

[madokie]

10. Theres nothing good in this info

This needed to have been drug out in the courts. He's falling on his sword only to be pardoned by the chimp down the road, at the end of all the appeals process. Should work out to about the same time that bush* walks out the door, so they hope.

[Sydnie]

14. What appeals process?

Appeals don't come into play if you confess and plead guilty, do they? What is there to appeal when you make a deal?

[madokie]

18. OOPS

:blush:

[Mabus]

27. There can be appeals even though a plea agreement has been signed

Part of the process is the signing of a plea agreement. The plea agreement often (and should) contains a waiver of appeal by the defendant. There are circumstances under which a defendant can appeal the plea agreement. For example, if the judge imposes a sentence outside the recommended guidelines (mostly upward - defendant given more time) then defendant may file an appeal.

[FreedomAngel82]

25. I got my popcorn!

:popcorn: