T Nation

Abramoff, a Bi-Partisan Lobbyist?

Abramoff Reports to Prison Tomorrow; Offers Testimony on Democratic Senators
November 14, 2006 4:13 PM

Brian Ross and Rhonda Schwartz Report:

Convicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff is scheduled to report to federal prison tomorrow, over the objections of federal prosecutors who say they still need his help to pursue leads on officials he allegedly bribed.

Sources close to the investigation say Abramoff has provided information on his dealings with and campaign contributions and gifts to “dozens of members of Congress and staff,” including what Abramoff has reportedly described as “six to eight seriously corrupt Democratic senators.”

The sources say Abramoff was about to provide information about Bush administration officials, including Karl Rove, “accepting things of value” from Abramoff.

Abramoff has been meeting almost daily in secret locations around Washington with Justice Department investigators who are examining thousands of e-mails and documents, according to sources close to the investigation. The convicted lobbyist was spotted in downtown Washington, D.C., yesterday, carrying a computer laptop case.

But the prosecutors’ easy access to Abramoff has now ended.

After granting several delays, the federal judge in Florida, who sentenced Abramoff to six years for fraud in a casino boat gambling scheme, has ordered him to report to prison tomorrow.

ABC News has learned that the court has granted a request from prosecutors that Abramoff be incarcerated at the closest prison to Washington, D.C., the Federal Correction Institute in Cumberland, Md., where Abramoff is expected to report tomorrow.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2006/11/abramoff_report.html

no surprise there tbh. Can’t wait to hear who he names though.

The big fish have already been named.

Abramoff is trying to get the Democrats to step up and get him back to his desk at the FBI.

The GOP big fish have already been ratted out and Abramoff is grasping at straws now.

This is really a Republican scandal.

[quote]Marmadogg wrote:
The big fish have already been named.

Abramoff is trying to get the Democrats to step up and get him back to his desk at the FBI.

The GOP big fish have already been ratted out and Abramoff is grasping at straws now.

This is really a Republican scandal.[/quote]

How is it only a Republican scandal? He’s allegedly named Democratic senators. So far Harry Reid’s name is the only one made public, but it’s reported he named 6-8 democratic Senators. And hey, that’s just what’s been leaked out, so far. Members of both parties got some explaining to do.

Don’t we all want corruption ferreted out regardless of which side of the aisle it’s found on? It was a big issue in these recent elections, after all.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2006/11/abramoff_report_1.html

Abramoff Reports to Prison; Officials Focus on Reid, Others
November 15, 2006 1:23 PM

Brian Ross and Rhonda Schwartz Report:

As convicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff reported to federal prison today, a source close to the investigation surrounding his activities told ABC News that Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev.) was one of the members of Congress Abramoff had allegedly implicated in his cooperation with federal prosecutors.

A spokesperson for Reid, elected yesterday as the Senate Majority Leader, said the senator had done nothing illegal or unethical.

“We have no idea what Abramoff is telling prosecutors to save his skin, but I do know that these kind of old allegations are completely ridiculous and untrue,” Sen. Reid’s spokesman Jim Manley told ABC News.

A source close to the investigation says Abramoff told prosecutors that more than $30,000 in campaign contributions to Reid from Abramoff’s clients “were no accident and were in fact requested by Reid.”

Abramoff has reportedly claimed the Nevada senator agreed to help him on matters related to Indian gambling.

The Associated Press reported earlier this year that Reid wrote at least four letters helpful to the tribes that had contributed money to his campaign.

Reid has denied there was any connection between the letters and the contributions and has said he is a longtime opponent of certain kinds of Indian reservation gambling.

The AP reported that Reid acknowledged “routine contacts” with Abramoff’s lobbying partners and intervening to block rival tribal casinos.

The AP also reported that Abramoff’s billing records showed extensive contact with Reid’s office over a three-year period in which Reid collected more than $68,000 from Abramoff’s firm, partners and clients.

Prosecutors have said that Abramoff’s cooperation is essential to the corruption investigation, but, so far, they have brought only one prosecution against a member of Congress connected to Abramoff, Republican Bob Ney of Ohio, who resigned.

The source said prosecutors do not intend to rely solely on Abramoff’s account of events, and his allegations against Reid and others will not necessarily result in criminal charges.

Sources close to the federal investigation say Abramoff has offered testimony about his contacts with “six to eight seriously corrupt Democratic senators” and an ever larger number of Republican members of Congress.

In addition to Reid, the sources say Abramoff has been most closely questioned about his contacts with Sen. Conrad Burns (R-Mont.), who was defeated in last week’s election.

“Being defeated may have been one of the best things that ever happened to Burns,” said a source close to the investigation. “There is much more interest in members of Congress who are still in office,” the source said.

Burns, who received more than $150,000 in Abramoff-connected campaign contributions, has strongly denied any wrongdoing and returned the money.

Sen. Reid has been an outspoken critic of the connections between Abramoff and Republican legislators.

In a speech earlier this year, Sen. Reid described it as “a program where the lobbyists paid and the Republican members of Congress played.”

The Justice Department said it would have no comment on the ongoing Abramoff investigation.

[quote]hedo wrote:
http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2006/11/abramoff_report_1.html

Abramoff Reports to Prison; Officials Focus on Reid, Others
November 15, 2006 1:23 PM

Brian Ross and Rhonda Schwartz Report:

As convicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff reported to federal prison today, a source close to the investigation surrounding his activities told ABC News that Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev.) was one of the members of Congress Abramoff had allegedly implicated in his cooperation with federal prosecutors.

A spokesperson for Reid, elected yesterday as the Senate Majority Leader, said the senator had done nothing illegal or unethical.

“We have no idea what Abramoff is telling prosecutors to save his skin, but I do know that these kind of old allegations are completely ridiculous and untrue,” Sen. Reid’s spokesman Jim Manley told ABC News.

A source close to the investigation says Abramoff told prosecutors that more than $30,000 in campaign contributions to Reid from Abramoff’s clients “were no accident and were in fact requested by Reid.”

Abramoff has reportedly claimed the Nevada senator agreed to help him on matters related to Indian gambling.

The Associated Press reported earlier this year that Reid wrote at least four letters helpful to the tribes that had contributed money to his campaign.

Reid has denied there was any connection between the letters and the contributions and has said he is a longtime opponent of certain kinds of Indian reservation gambling.

The AP reported that Reid acknowledged “routine contacts” with Abramoff’s lobbying partners and intervening to block rival tribal casinos.

The AP also reported that Abramoff’s billing records showed extensive contact with Reid’s office over a three-year period in which Reid collected more than $68,000 from Abramoff’s firm, partners and clients.

Prosecutors have said that Abramoff’s cooperation is essential to the corruption investigation, but, so far, they have brought only one prosecution against a member of Congress connected to Abramoff, Republican Bob Ney of Ohio, who resigned.

The source said prosecutors do not intend to rely solely on Abramoff’s account of events, and his allegations against Reid and others will not necessarily result in criminal charges.

Sources close to the federal investigation say Abramoff has offered testimony about his contacts with “six to eight seriously corrupt Democratic senators” and an ever larger number of Republican members of Congress.

In addition to Reid, the sources say Abramoff has been most closely questioned about his contacts with Sen. Conrad Burns (R-Mont.), who was defeated in last week’s election.

“Being defeated may have been one of the best things that ever happened to Burns,” said a source close to the investigation. “There is much more interest in members of Congress who are still in office,” the source said.

Burns, who received more than $150,000 in Abramoff-connected campaign contributions, has strongly denied any wrongdoing and returned the money.

Sen. Reid has been an outspoken critic of the connections between Abramoff and Republican legislators.

In a speech earlier this year, Sen. Reid described it as “a program where the lobbyists paid and the Republican members of Congress played.”

The Justice Department said it would have no comment on the ongoing Abramoff investigation.

[/quote]

Uhmmm…
Reid helped indians in his own state.
Burns helped indians in another state.

Reid recieved money from abramoff clients. (indians in his own state)

Burns recieved money from Abramoff and earmarked money to indians in another state in exchange for that money.

See the difference?

Well, we’ll have to see just what the prosecutors dig up. Going to be interesting to see who all gets layed low.

This scandal is done with, the players have been named. Conservatives have tried and tried to make this a bipartisan scandal, but it is simply not a democrat scandal.

No, it’s not done. Prosecutors and the DOJ are going to be working on those who’ve been implicated. Whatever happened to just wanting corrupt politicans out of office? The article isn’t kind to republicans, or democrats. This isn’t a friggen partisan issue. It appears that members from both parties are going to have some explaining to do.

[quote]100meters wrote:
hedo wrote:
http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2006/11/abramoff_report_1.html

Abramoff Reports to Prison; Officials Focus on Reid, Others
November 15, 2006 1:23 PM

Brian Ross and Rhonda Schwartz Report:

As convicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff reported to federal prison today, a source close to the investigation surrounding his activities told ABC News that Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev.) was one of the members of Congress Abramoff had allegedly implicated in his cooperation with federal prosecutors.

A spokesperson for Reid, elected yesterday as the Senate Majority Leader, said the senator had done nothing illegal or unethical.

“We have no idea what Abramoff is telling prosecutors to save his skin, but I do know that these kind of old allegations are completely ridiculous and untrue,” Sen. Reid’s spokesman Jim Manley told ABC News.

A source close to the investigation says Abramoff told prosecutors that more than $30,000 in campaign contributions to Reid from Abramoff’s clients “were no accident and were in fact requested by Reid.”

Abramoff has reportedly claimed the Nevada senator agreed to help him on matters related to Indian gambling.

The Associated Press reported earlier this year that Reid wrote at least four letters helpful to the tribes that had contributed money to his campaign.

Reid has denied there was any connection between the letters and the contributions and has said he is a longtime opponent of certain kinds of Indian reservation gambling.

The AP reported that Reid acknowledged “routine contacts” with Abramoff’s lobbying partners and intervening to block rival tribal casinos.

The AP also reported that Abramoff’s billing records showed extensive contact with Reid’s office over a three-year period in which Reid collected more than $68,000 from Abramoff’s firm, partners and clients.

Prosecutors have said that Abramoff’s cooperation is essential to the corruption investigation, but, so far, they have brought only one prosecution against a member of Congress connected to Abramoff, Republican Bob Ney of Ohio, who resigned.

The source said prosecutors do not intend to rely solely on Abramoff’s account of events, and his allegations against Reid and others will not necessarily result in criminal charges.

Sources close to the federal investigation say Abramoff has offered testimony about his contacts with “six to eight seriously corrupt Democratic senators” and an ever larger number of Republican members of Congress.

In addition to Reid, the sources say Abramoff has been most closely questioned about his contacts with Sen. Conrad Burns (R-Mont.), who was defeated in last week’s election.

“Being defeated may have been one of the best things that ever happened to Burns,” said a source close to the investigation. “There is much more interest in members of Congress who are still in office,” the source said.

Burns, who received more than $150,000 in Abramoff-connected campaign contributions, has strongly denied any wrongdoing and returned the money.

Sen. Reid has been an outspoken critic of the connections between Abramoff and Republican legislators.

In a speech earlier this year, Sen. Reid described it as “a program where the lobbyists paid and the Republican members of Congress played.”

The Justice Department said it would have no comment on the ongoing Abramoff investigation.

Uhmmm…
Reid helped indians in his own state.
Burns helped indians in another state.

Reid recieved money from abramoff clients. (indians in his own state)

Burns recieved money from Abramoff and earmarked money to indians in another state in exchange for that money.

See the difference?
[/quote]

Take it up with Brian Ross. He wrote it. I posted it. See the difference.

Interesting opinion. If he was in the GOP you would be screaming like a bitch.

See the difference.

He didn’t just help Indians in his state. He also hindered other tribes from getting casion’s. See the difference. The ones he hindered didn’t contribute. See the difference.

It’s fairly easy to confirm the $68,000 of payments to Ried. Wonder why he didn’t mention that when he spoke out against Republicans who had contact with Abramoff.

Within 2 years Ried resigns over the scandals.

[quote]Petedacook wrote:
This scandal is done with, the players have been named. Conservatives have tried and tried to make this a bipartisan scandal, but it is simply not a democrat scandal. [/quote]

Except for 6 or 8 of them.

ABC is hardly a right wing friendly organization. They are solidly left of center.

Didn’t Reid get funding for a bridge over the Colorado, near 160 acres that he owns? Wouldn’t that drive up his land value? Why would he consider such a thing?

Abramoff will have an ‘accident’ in prison. Or he’ll be so depressed that he’ll hang himself in his room.

Maybe he’ll do a Vince Foster, if he can find a hand gun.

[quote]hedo wrote:
Petedacook wrote:
This scandal is done with, the players have been named. Conservatives have tried and tried to make this a bipartisan scandal, but it is simply not a democrat scandal.

Except for 6 or 8 of them.

ABC is hardly a right wing friendly organization. They are solidly left of center.

[/quote]

Could you provide some proof of this?

[quote]ALDurr wrote:
hedo wrote:
Petedacook wrote:
This scandal is done with, the players have been named. Conservatives have tried and tried to make this a bipartisan scandal, but it is simply not a democrat scandal.

Except for 6 or 8 of them.

ABC is hardly a right wing friendly organization. They are solidly left of center.

Could you provide some proof of this? [/quote]

No both statements are my opinion. Do you have a different one?

The 6-8 Democrats were mentioned in the article I posted above, they haven’t been named yet. I paraphrased the author.

As to the Left leaning news organizations the book “Bias” by Bernard Goldberg presented substantial amounts of evidence to support that opinion as well as first hand accounts.

[quote]hedo wrote:
ALDurr wrote:
hedo wrote:
Petedacook wrote:
This scandal is done with, the players have been named. Conservatives have tried and tried to make this a bipartisan scandal, but it is simply not a democrat scandal.

Except for 6 or 8 of them.

ABC is hardly a right wing friendly organization. They are solidly left of center.

Could you provide some proof of this?

No both statements are my opinion. Do you have a different one?

The 6-8 Democrats were mentioned in the article I posted above, they haven’t been named yet. I paraphrased the author.

As to the Left leaning news organizations the book “Bias” by Bernard Goldberg presented substantial amounts of evidence to support that opinion as well as first hand accounts.
[/quote]

I was checking to see that it was, indeed, your opinion. There seems to be a trend on here lately that people state their opinions as fact and then get bent out of shape when it is questioned. Nice to see that you haven’t fallen into it.

I don’t believe that ABC is left-leaning as it is opportunist leaning. However, this can be said about most media. Where ever the money flows is where most media outlets follow.

[quote]hedo wrote:
ALDurr wrote:
hedo wrote:
Petedacook wrote:
This scandal is done with, the players have been named. Conservatives have tried and tried to make this a bipartisan scandal, but it is simply not a democrat scandal.

Except for 6 or 8 of them.

ABC is hardly a right wing friendly organization. They are solidly left of center.

Could you provide some proof of this?

No both statements are my opinion. Do you have a different one?

The 6-8 Democrats were mentioned in the article I posted above, they haven’t been named yet. I paraphrased the author.

As to the Left leaning news organizations the book “Bias” by Bernard Goldberg presented substantial amounts of evidence to support that opinion as well as first hand accounts.
[/quote]

Crying about the referees is pathetic.

Play better and it makes the referees a non-issue.

[quote]ALDurr wrote:
hedo wrote:
ALDurr wrote:
hedo wrote:
Petedacook wrote:
This scandal is done with, the players have been named. Conservatives have tried and tried to make this a bipartisan scandal, but it is simply not a democrat scandal.

Except for 6 or 8 of them.

ABC is hardly a right wing friendly organization. They are solidly left of center.

Could you provide some proof of this?

No both statements are my opinion. Do you have a different one?

The 6-8 Democrats were mentioned in the article I posted above, they haven’t been named yet. I paraphrased the author.

As to the Left leaning news organizations the book “Bias” by Bernard Goldberg presented substantial amounts of evidence to support that opinion as well as first hand accounts.

I was checking to see that it was, indeed, your opinion. There seems to be a trend on here lately that people state their opinions as fact and then get bent out of shape when it is questioned. Nice to see that you haven’t fallen into it.

I don’t believe that ABC is left-leaning as it is opportunist leaning. However, this can be said about most media. Where ever the money flows is where most media outlets follow.[/quote]

Al I couldn’t agree more. Arguing about an opinion is fun. Even an expert’s opinion is just that…an opinion.

A Gentlemen like yourself get’s it. Sadly a lot of guys don’t.

[quote]hedo wrote:
ALDurr wrote:
hedo wrote:
ALDurr wrote:
hedo wrote:
Petedacook wrote:
This scandal is done with, the players have been named. Conservatives have tried and tried to make this a bipartisan scandal, but it is simply not a democrat scandal.

Except for 6 or 8 of them.

ABC is hardly a right wing friendly organization. They are solidly left of center.

Could you provide some proof of this?

No both statements are my opinion. Do you have a different one?

The 6-8 Democrats were mentioned in the article I posted above, they haven’t been named yet. I paraphrased the author.

As to the Left leaning news organizations the book “Bias” by Bernard Goldberg presented substantial amounts of evidence to support that opinion as well as first hand accounts.

I was checking to see that it was, indeed, your opinion. There seems to be a trend on here lately that people state their opinions as fact and then get bent out of shape when it is questioned. Nice to see that you haven’t fallen into it.

I don’t believe that ABC is left-leaning as it is opportunist leaning. However, this can be said about most media. Where ever the money flows is where most media outlets follow.

Al I couldn’t agree more. Arguing about an opinion is fun. Even an expert’s opinion is just that…an opinion.

A Gentlemen like yourself get’s it. Sadly a lot of guys don’t.

[/quote]

Hedo, I am only a dick to people when they are a dick to me, or come out with ridiculous and outrageous assertions. You and I may not agree on things on many occasions, but you have always kept it in the context of the discussions and never made it personal. Therefore, I will always give you the benefit of the doubt before we get into it.