Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
rjpieces
Topic Author
Posts: 6849
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2003 8:58 am

The Jack Abramoff Scandal To Dominate 2006?

Sun Jan 01, 2006 2:47 am

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...le/2005/12/28/AR2005122801588.html

Jack Abramoff liked to slip into dialogue from "The Godfather" as he led his lobbying colleagues in planning their next conquest on Capitol Hill. In a favorite bit, he would mimic an ice-cold Michael Corleone facing down a crooked politician's demand for a cut of Mafia gambling profits: "Senator, you can have my answer now if you like. My offer is this: nothing."

The playacting provided a clue to how Abramoff saw himself -- the power behind the scenes who directed millions of dollars in Indian gambling proceeds to favored lawmakers, the puppet master who pulled the strings of officials in key places, the businessman who was building an international casino empire.

"Everybody lost their minds," recalled a former congressional staffer who lobbied with Abramoff at Preston Gates. "Jack was cutting deals all over town. Staffers lost their loyalty to members -- they were loyal to money."

Alan K. Simpson (R), the former Wyoming senator who was in Washington during the last big congressional scandal -- the Abscam FBI sting in the late 1970s and early 1980s, in which six House members and one senator were convicted -- said the Abramoff case looks bigger. Simpson said he recently rode in a plane with one of Abramoff's attorneys, who told him: "There are going to be guys in your former line of work who are going to be taken down."
"Millions long for immortality who do not know what to do with themselves on a rainy Sunday afternoon"
 
HatTrick
Posts: 105
Joined: Fri Nov 11, 2005 2:18 am

RE: The Jack Abramoff Scandal To Dominate 2006?

Sun Jan 01, 2006 3:01 am

For the fans of the Soap Opera " As the Compassionate Conservative World Turns"; there should be a lot to choose from in '06.
DeLay, Frist, Scooter Libby, the NSA spying, Kenneth Lay and Enron, Katrina/FEMA and of course the aforementioned Abramoff case.

But wait, there's more......
 
srbmod
Posts: 15446
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2001 1:32 pm

RE: The Jack Abramoff Scandal To Dominate 2006?

Sun Jan 01, 2006 5:25 am

This scandal will play a role in at least one state-level race as well. Former Abramoff associate Ralph Reed is running for Lt. Governor here in Georgia, and his only other G.O.P. challenger is hoping that the scandal sinks Reed's campaign (Reed is hoping to use the Lt. Governor's office as a springboard into the Governor's office then into the White House).
 
User avatar
jetjack74
Posts: 6649
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2003 6:35 am

RE: The Jack Abramoff Scandal To Dominate 2006?

Sun Jan 01, 2006 5:50 am

Quoting RJpieces (Thread starter):
The Jack Abramoff Scandal To Dominate 2006?

Just another attempt to impeach Bush. This will be there last chance, so they're going to make this a good one.
Made from jets!
 
AirCop
Posts: 5553
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2005 2:39 am

RE: The Jack Abramoff Scandal To Dominate 2006?

Sun Jan 01, 2006 6:00 am

I expect Mr. Delay to have even more legal problems after this. Rumor has it a number of congressmen (mostly republicans) are on the hot list.
 
b757300
Posts: 3914
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2000 10:27 pm

RE: The Jack Abramoff Scandal To Dominate 2006?

Sun Jan 01, 2006 7:55 am

Quoting AirCop (Reply 4):
I expect Mr. Delay to have even more legal problems after this. Rumor has it a number of congressmen (mostly republicans) are on the hot list.

Abramoff has as many, if not more, ties to Democrat members of Congress as he does to Republicans. The two Democrats I've seen mentioned the most are Rep. Charlie Rangel and Senators Reid, Dorgan, Stabenow, and Levin.

Quoting Jetjack74 (Reply 3):
Just another attempt to impeach Bush. This will be there last chance, so they're going to make this a good one.

Nah, they'll think of some other stupid charge. After all, they've been at it for 5 years now.

Stolen 2000 Election
Bush KNEW! (RE: Sept. 11th)
Bush Lied (About whatever the story of the moment is)
Abu Ghraib
Gitmo
The Bogus CIA-"Leak" story
Diebold stolen 2004 election
Bush rigged the intelligence.
Bush caused the hurricanes because he refused to sign Kyoto.
NSA Wiretaps (Same people concerned with the non-leak of a CIA desk jockey are praising the leaker(s) of the NSA program. Typical Democrat hypocrisy.)

Still to come (again)

Bush Lied
Prisoner Abuse
NSA Wiretaps

[Edited 2005-12-31 23:55:57]
"There is no victory at bargain basement prices."
 
Falcon84
Posts: 13775
Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2004 11:52 am

RE: The Jack Abramoff Scandal To Dominate 2006?

Sun Jan 01, 2006 11:08 am

Quoting Jetjack74 (Reply 3):



Quoting B757300 (Reply 5):

I can see we'll have a banner 2006 watching the Bush/GOP neo-apologists trying desperately to make us believe Bush is a fine fellow, near God-like in his morals, and that his party never has done anything wrong.

It's all a lie, but their squirming is great entertainment. This Abramoff thing-in an election year, no less, could spell a dark season for the GOP, and I for one couldn't be happier about that.
Work Right, Fly Hard
 
Guest

RE: The Jack Abramoff Scandal To Dominate 2006?

Sun Jan 01, 2006 12:07 pm

Quoting B757300 (Reply 5):
Stolen 2000 Election

I think we're past it. If you look at what a failure this administration is, in a way, the Dems actually won in 2000!

Quoting B757300 (Reply 5):
Bush KNEW! (RE: Sept. 11th)

He knew a attack was imminent, and if you think otherwise, your head needs to be promptly removed from W's rectum. He's the president for God's sake. He or anyone else couldn't have stopped it. This (and you'll notice an on going theme here) is one of many things that the Repubs like to say the Dems believe, but in actuality, very few do.

Quoting B757300 (Reply 5):
Bush Lied (About whatever the story of the moment is)

Well, he either lied (about Iraq) or he's incompetent. You decide.

Quoting B757300 (Reply 5):
Abu Ghraib

Bush prolly had nothing to do with that, but the consequences should have gone a lot more higher up than they did.

Quoting B757300 (Reply 5):
Gitmo

See above ^

Quoting B757300 (Reply 5):
The Bogus CIA-"Leak" story

The very real CIA leak story. Unless you are in complete denial, it did happen. Some more senior officials in the administration are responsible. This reeks of Rove, and you know it. Cheney had something to do with it too. Like it or not, a crime was committed.

Quoting B757300 (Reply 5):
Diebold stolen 2004 election

Shady and uncomforting, but no, sorry. This is another thing you want to think Dems are saying.

Quoting B757300 (Reply 5):
Bush rigged the intelligence.

See response to "Bush lied".

Quoting B757300 (Reply 5):
Bush caused the hurricanes because he refused to sign Kyoto.

That's just ridiculous.

Quoting B757300 (Reply 5):
NSA Wiretaps

He clearly broke the law here.

Quoting B757300 (Reply 5):
Bush Lied
Prisoner Abuse
NSA Wiretaps

Well, where does the buck stop then?

B
 
User avatar
jetjack74
Posts: 6649
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2003 6:35 am

RE: The Jack Abramoff Scandal To Dominate 2006?

Sun Jan 01, 2006 12:32 pm

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 6):
It's all a lie, but their squirming is great entertainment. This Abramoff thing-in an election year, no less, could spell a dark season for the GOP, and I for one couldn't be happier about that.

Or it'll backfire on them, just like the Monica-gate, Travel-gate, and Investi-gate did for the Republicans.

Quoting NonRevKing (Reply 7):
I think we're past it. If you look at what a failure this administration is, in a way, the Dems actually won in 2000!

As you so plainly show, most are past it except for the hangers-on like yourself.

Quoting NonRevKing (Reply 7):
He knew a attack was imminent, and if you think otherwise, your head needs to be promptly removed from W's rectum.

He knew an attack was imminent, like Clinton knew one was imminent in 1993.

Quoting NonRevKing (Reply 7):
Well, he either lied (about Iraq) or he's incompetent. You decide.

And you think we didn't have inaccurate intel in WW2, Korea, Vietnam?

Quoting NonRevKing (Reply 7):
Bush prolly had nothing to do with that, but the consequences should have gone a lot more higher up than they did

Which there was fall-out for.

Quoting NonRevKing (Reply 7):
The very real CIA leak story. Unless you are in complete denial, it did happen. Some more senior officials in the administration are responsible. This reeks of Rove, and you know it. Cheney had something to do with it too. Like it or not, a crime was committed.

There were no charges for the original intent of the investigation(the alleged outing), ther were only charges filed for a lessor charge of Obstruction of Justise.

Quoting NonRevKing (Reply 7):
That's just ridiculous.

Well, there are the kook far- left, which is the base of the Democrat party who actually believe the theory, not to mention the leader of the Nation of Islam.

Quoting NonRevKing (Reply 7):
He clearly broke the law here.

He did? Ok, show us the law he broke and detail this theory of yours?
Made from jets!
 
greasespot
Posts: 2968
Joined: Sat Apr 24, 2004 10:48 am

RE: The Jack Abramoff Scandal To Dominate 2006?

Sun Jan 01, 2006 2:40 pm

Quoting Jetjack74 (Reply 8):
And you think we didn't have inaccurate intel in WW2, Korea, Vietnam?

Yeah, they did but the difference is this war was actually started with the inaccurate intelegence. Big difference

GS
Sometimes all you can do is look them in the eye and ask " how much did your mom drink when she was pregnant with you?"
 
User avatar
jetjack74
Posts: 6649
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2003 6:35 am

RE: The Jack Abramoff Scandal To Dominate 2006?

Sun Jan 01, 2006 3:03 pm

Quoting Greasespot (Reply 9):
Yeah, they did but the difference is this war was actually started with the inaccurate intelegence. Big difference

WW2 was started by an evil force. The War on Terror was started by and evil force. Iraq was just another battlefield, and Saddam was just another terrorist. Big difference? None at all. Welcome to the hundred years war.
Made from jets!
 
greasespot
Posts: 2968
Joined: Sat Apr 24, 2004 10:48 am

RE: The Jack Abramoff Scandal To Dominate 2006?

Sun Jan 01, 2006 3:08 pm

Quoting Jetjack74 (Reply 10):
The War on Terror was started by and evil force. Iraq was just another battlefield

Yeah GWB?

Sorry i am a canadian i am supposed to say things like that...  wink 

Besides the quotient of socialists posting right now have fallen below an acceptable level (based on who is activly posting) so i have to hold up that side


GS
Sometimes all you can do is look them in the eye and ask " how much did your mom drink when she was pregnant with you?"
 
User avatar
jetjack74
Posts: 6649
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2003 6:35 am

RE: The Jack Abramoff Scandal To Dominate 2006?

Sun Jan 01, 2006 3:11 pm

Quoting Greasespot (Reply 11):

I figured that,
Made from jets!
 
greasespot
Posts: 2968
Joined: Sat Apr 24, 2004 10:48 am

RE: The Jack Abramoff Scandal To Dominate 2006?

Sun Jan 01, 2006 3:15 pm

But it was such an obvious thing to post.....I mean if i said anything about flip flopping you are gonna say someting about Kerry......After being in here for a while i think it is hard wired into us....

GS  Wow!
Sometimes all you can do is look them in the eye and ask " how much did your mom drink when she was pregnant with you?"
 
ANCFlyer
Posts: 21391
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2004 3:51 pm

RE: The Jack Abramoff Scandal To Dominate 2006?

Sun Jan 01, 2006 3:17 pm

Perhaps we can DDDRRRAAAGGG this thread back on topic?!?!

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 6):
This Abramoff thing-in an election year, no less, could spell a dark season for the GOP, and I for one couldn't be happier about that

Abramoff - in his plea deal - will (or has) likely open a can of worms that won't soon or easily be sealed. Not only will it spell trouble for the GOP to be sure, but the Democrats might have some 'splainin' to do as well.

It will definitely be a highlight of the 2006 news season.
FOR THOSE THAT FOUGHT FOR IT, FREEDOM HAS A FLAVOR THE PROTECTED WILL NEVER KNOW OR UNDERSTAND
 
greasespot
Posts: 2968
Joined: Sat Apr 24, 2004 10:48 am

RE: The Jack Abramoff Scandal To Dominate 2006?

Sun Jan 01, 2006 3:23 pm

Ok back to topic...

Actually if he has the goods on any democrat it will be far worse for them as they are the ones hammering the corrupt republcans(their words not mine).....Kind of a living in glass houses and playing with rocks.



GS
Sometimes all you can do is look them in the eye and ask " how much did your mom drink when she was pregnant with you?"
 
ANCFlyer
Posts: 21391
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2004 3:51 pm

RE: The Jack Abramoff Scandal To Dominate 2006?

Sun Jan 01, 2006 3:55 pm

Quoting Greasespot (Reply 15):
Kind of a living in glass houses and playing with rocks.

Welcome to Washington DC . . . .

Ottawa as well I suspect . . . .

http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/12/31/abramoff.plea.ap/index.html
""Abramoff's cooperation would be a boon to an ongoing Justice Department investigation of congressional corruption, possibly helping prosecutors build criminal cases against up to 20 lawmakers of both parties and their staff members.""
FOR THOSE THAT FOUGHT FOR IT, FREEDOM HAS A FLAVOR THE PROTECTED WILL NEVER KNOW OR UNDERSTAND
 
We're Nuts
Posts: 4723
Joined: Sun Jun 04, 2000 6:12 am

RE: The Jack Abramoff Scandal To Dominate 2006?

Sun Jan 01, 2006 3:58 pm

Quoting NonRevKing (Reply 7):

Your best response to the One-Hit-Wonder is no response at all.
Dear moderators: No.
 
ltbewr
Posts: 15663
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2004 1:24 pm

RE: The Jack Abramoff Scandal To Dominate 2006?

Mon Jan 02, 2006 1:13 am

I don't know if it will 'dominate' as other issues including the war on terror and Iraq, but it will be the 'beltway' scandal of our generation.
There will be a bunch of Congressmembers and their staffs and even some Senators - both Republicians and Democrats - who will be facing criminal charges and be forced out of office (or withdraw some Congressmembers from running this fall). More importantly and lasting will be laws that will be developed and passed to try to close up the loopholes that Abramhoff and others have used from the last round of reforms from the 1970's era.
Most importantly are laws that force openess and regulation of the whole lobbying system in our Federal government. We need to keep out ex-Congressmembers and Senators or their top staffers from the lobbing firms for a number of years. We need to make sure lobbyist from all views have access to our leaders, not just those with money to pay for that attention with corrupting influences.
 
cedarjet
Posts: 8927
Joined: Mon May 24, 1999 1:12 am

RE: The Jack Abramoff Scandal To Dominate 2006?

Mon Jan 02, 2006 2:06 am

Quoting B757300 (Reply 5):
Stolen 2000 Election
Bush KNEW! (RE: Sept. 11th)
Bush Lied (About whatever the story of the moment is)
Abu Ghraib
Gitmo
The Bogus CIA-"Leak" story
Diebold stolen 2004 election
Bush rigged the intelligence.
Bush caused the hurricanes because he refused to sign Kyoto.
NSA Wiretaps (Same people concerned with the non-leak of a CIA desk jockey are praising the leaker(s) of the NSA program. Typical Democrat hypocrisy.)

Dude, other than a couple here you've just made up (ie Bush caused hurricanes, stolen 2004 election), these are very real situations that have brought disgrace and ridicule upon the USA. For you to make light of them and pretend that Abu Ghraib or Bush ignoring pre-9/11 intelligence is a trumped up Democratic device to impeach Bush on false pretences a la Monicagate is very very sad - that you can't see these for what they really are just adds to the shame.

Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 14):
Abramoff...will definitely be a highlight of the 2006 news season.

Man I hope so - in the sense that a senator or whatever he is getting caught with his hand in the till is fairly low grade news, which I like. I have a bad feeling that we'll be looking back on Abramoff with nostalgia, the way we spent the end of 2001 looking back on the Gary Condit "scandal" with nostalgia. And all those fucking sharks - remember them?

So here's to a year where Abramoff is the most exciting news we get all year. Eh?
fly Saha Air 707s daily from Tehran's downtown Mehrabad to Mashhad, Kish Island and Ahwaz
 
Guest

RE: The Jack Abramoff Scandal To Dominate 2006?

Mon Jan 02, 2006 3:52 am

Quoting Jetjack74 (Reply 8):
As you so plainly show, most are past it except for the hangers-on like yourself.

Um, no, I'm past it. Perhaps it's true what the Brits say...Americans really don't understand irony. Go back and read what I said again...go slow this time...

Quoting Jetjack74 (Reply 8):
He knew an attack was imminent, like Clinton knew one was imminent in 1993.

Has nothing to do with what I said, but it's good to know you read your neo con playbook.

Quoting Jetjack74 (Reply 8):
And you think we didn't have inaccurate intel in WW2, Korea, Vietnam?

We also didn't have the technology we do now. You can't use that as an excuse.

Quoting Jetjack74 (Reply 8):
Which there was fall-out for.

Not enuff, IMHO.

Quoting Jetjack74 (Reply 8):
There were no charges for the original intent of the investigation(the alleged outing), ther were only charges filed for a lessor charge of Obstruction of Justise.

Give it time.  Wink

Quoting Jetjack74 (Reply 8):
He did? Ok, show us the law he broke and detail this theory of yours?

The 4th amendment of the constitution.

Quoting Jetjack74 (Reply 10):
The War on Terror was started by and evil force. Iraq was just another battlefield, and Saddam was just another terrorist.

They still make people like you? (I'm not going to get into this discussion for the millionth time on here...the facts are out.)

Quoting We're Nuts (Reply 17):
Your best response to the One-Hit-Wonder is no response at all.

Good point.

Anyway, I'm off to the liberal wonder land known as Europe, but Falcon and the boys I'm sure will keep injecting the truth into this forum and fighting the good fight.

Hope everyone has a wonderful 2006! Big grin

B
 
User avatar
jetjack74
Posts: 6649
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2003 6:35 am

RE: The Jack Abramoff Scandal To Dominate 2006?

Mon Jan 02, 2006 4:54 am

Quoting NonRevKing (Reply 20):
Has nothing to do with what I said, but it's good to know you read your neo con playbook.

There's playbook, and it has everything to do with what you said. The lib left blames Bush for 9/11 laspes when it took about 5 months to get his cabinet appointment confirmed. The chances that administration could've picked up on that was almost impossible as there were no specific threats. The same can be said for the for the Clinton Adminstration when they came into office. I don't blame the Clinton Administration for the 1993 WTC attacks. That more fell on the shoulders of the previous administration. If the Bush Administration truly knew something like 9/11 was coming, they would've done something about it.

Quoting NonRevKing (Reply 20):
We also didn't have the technology we do now. You can't use that as an excuse

We also didn't have any access into Iraq since Saddam expelled all UN inspectors out in 1998. Iraq was virtually inaccessible. There was no clear intel coming or out of Iraq. Nobody knew what was going on in there. But evidence was showing that Saddam was up to no good. Bush felt that he no choice but to go in. His CIA director told him, infact assured him it was a slam-dunk.

Quoting NonRevKing (Reply 20):
The 4th amendment of the constitution.

Does the 4th amendment cover phone calls coming from overseas by suspected terrorists? No.

Quoting NonRevKing (Reply 20):
Give it time.

Take all the time you need.

Quoting NonRevKing (Reply 20):
Go back and read what I said again...go slow this time...

I did what you said, and irony is not the word that discribes failure. It's democrat/liberal wrangling and politicising with bears equal contribution, and responsiblility
Made from jets!
 
DrDeke
Posts: 807
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2005 7:13 am

RE: The Jack Abramoff Scandal To Dominate 2006?

Wed Jan 04, 2006 2:22 am

Quoting Jetjack74 (Reply 21):
Does the 4th amendment cover phone calls coming from overseas by suspected terrorists? No.

It certainly covers any type of spying/surveillance that is not authorized by law. If you recall, our nation is supposed to be ruled by law, not individual fiat.

-DrDeke
If you don't want it known, don't say it on a phone.
 
dan-air
Posts: 600
Joined: Tue Sep 07, 1999 6:13 am

RE: The Jack Abramoff Scandal To Dominate 2006?

Wed Jan 04, 2006 3:27 am

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 6):
It's all a lie, but their squirming is great entertainment. This Abramoff thing-in an election year, no less, could spell a dark season for the GOP, and I for one couldn't be happier about that.

He-he-he! Pass the popcorn!
 
Mikey711MN
Posts: 1255
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2003 4:19 am

RE: The Jack Abramoff Scandal To Dominate 2006?

Wed Jan 04, 2006 3:51 am

Quoting Dan-Air (Reply 23):
He-he-he! Pass the popcorn!

Thanks!

Lobbyist admits kickbacks, influence peddling

*chomp chomp crunch crunch*
I plan on living forever. So far, so good...
 
dan-air
Posts: 600
Joined: Tue Sep 07, 1999 6:13 am

RE: The Jack Abramoff Scandal To Dominate 2006?

Wed Jan 04, 2006 4:20 am

Quoting Mikey711MN (Reply 24):
Lobbyist admits kickbacks, influence peddling

*chomp chomp crunch crunch*

Funny, I don't see the names Dorgan, Stabenow or Levin mentioned in that article. The influence peddling seems to center around Tom DeLay and his former aide, Scanlon.

Gotta hand it the Grand Old Corruption party! It's All Play for Pay Every Day!

 rotfl 
 
User avatar
jetjack74
Posts: 6649
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2003 6:35 am

RE: The Jack Abramoff Scandal To Dominate 2006?

Wed Jan 04, 2006 8:50 am

Quoting DrDeke (Reply 22):
It certainly covers any type of spying/surveillance that is not authorized by law. If you recall, our nation is supposed to be ruled by law, not individual fiat.

Like I said, phone calls coming into the US can be monitored. Intercepting a phonecall before it reaches the shores of the US is not illegal spying or survellence. They're not subject to the 4th amendment rights of protection. We monitor mail coming from overseas, don't we? This is the same thing. If the NSA suspects illegal shipments via FedEx, they have every right to intercept it. The 4th amendment doesn't garuantee the rights of would-be terrorists like these less-then-excrements who were picked up in Buffalo.
Made from jets!
 
AeroWesty
Posts: 19551
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 7:37 am

RE: The Jack Abramoff Scandal To Dominate 2006?

Wed Jan 04, 2006 8:56 am

Coming out of the courthouse in his mobster hat and the lapel of his Chesterfield flapping in the wind gave an obvious sign that Abramoff's going to play dirty. Expect a lot of names to be revealed.

Interesting now that the bagman has given over his numbers book, Hastert is donating 70G's to "charity" that he'd received from Abramoff & Co.

This will entangle more than Watergate did. All we need is a catchy phrase for it now.
International Homo of Mystery
 
whitehatter
Posts: 5180
Joined: Sat Jun 12, 2004 6:52 am

RE: The Jack Abramoff Scandal To Dominate 2006?

Wed Jan 04, 2006 9:30 am

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 27):
This will entangle more than Watergate did. All we need is a catchy phrase for it now.

Try 'sleaze'

It's the word that ensured the Conservatives are out of government for a generation in Britain, as the stories of dirty money and influence peddling started to surface.
Lead me not into temptation, I can find my own way there...
 
DrDeke
Posts: 807
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2005 7:13 am

RE: The Jack Abramoff Scandal To Dominate 2006?

Wed Jan 04, 2006 9:52 am

Quoting Jetjack74 (Reply 26):
We monitor mail coming from overseas, don't we? This is the same thing.

No, what Bush did is not at all the same thing. What Bush did appears to have been illegal:

The law states that a person is guilty of an offense if he intentionally engages in electronic surveillance under color of law except as authorized by statute, and Bush ordered people to engage in electronic surveillance under color of law in a manner NOT authorized by any statute. To do so is a crime; it is against the law.

-DrDeke
If you don't want it known, don't say it on a phone.
 
tbar220
Posts: 6706
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2000 12:08 pm

RE: The Jack Abramoff Scandal To Dominate 2006?

Wed Jan 04, 2006 10:56 am

I'm glad this is done, Abramoff probably did the first thing right for a long time. I'm ashamed to say he's Jewish, and then we wonder why stereotypes of Jews controlling the economy and country continue to spread. Jewish or not, it seems that with power and money far too often comes corruption.

Also, whether you like it or not, the fact is that the majority of lawmakers involved with Abramoff are Republican. There are some Democrats as well, but mostly Republicans, and I don't think this can be or should be ignored. Especially with the scandals involving Delay, Frist, Libby, Rove, Cheney, etc. etc.

I think its time that real Republicans and real conservatives take their party back from these extremist idealogues and bloated corrupt lawmakers. Its about time that real Republicans and real conservatives have somebody who represents what they voted them in for, not some trumped up religious ideals and bloated checkbooks.
NO URLS in signature
 
tbar220
Posts: 6706
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2000 12:08 pm

RE: The Jack Abramoff Scandal To Dominate 2006?

Wed Jan 04, 2006 3:44 pm

There are eighteen Republican representatives and three Democrat representatives involved in this.

And people still say they're both equally corrupt...

[edit] Sorry, source http://www.thinkprogress.org/abramoff

[Edited 2006-01-04 07:44:57]
NO URLS in signature
 
tbar220
Posts: 6706
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2000 12:08 pm

RE: The Jack Abramoff Scandal To Dominate 2006?

Wed Jan 04, 2006 3:59 pm

Furthermore, Republicans were the only ones to directly get money from Abramoff himself... Democrats got it indirectly through his Indian Casino interests.

Source: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5081543
NO URLS in signature
 
Pyrex
Posts: 4821
Joined: Thu Aug 25, 2005 7:24 am

RE: The Jack Abramoff Scandal To Dominate 2006?

Wed Jan 04, 2006 9:55 pm

Quoting Jetjack74 (Reply 10):
Iraq was just another battlefield, and Saddam was just another terrorist

There you go again trying to claim Saddam had anything to do with 9/11... sad, really.
Read this very carefully, I shall write this only once!
 
L-188
Posts: 29881
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 1999 11:27 am

RE: The Jack Abramoff Scandal To Dominate 2006?

Thu Jan 05, 2006 3:04 am

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 27):
Coming out of the courthouse in his mobster hat and the lapel of his Chesterfield flapping in the wind gave an obvious sign that Abramoff's going to play dirty

Kind of reminded me of Boris Badinoff from the Rocky and Bullwinkle Show.
OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
 
beefstew25
Posts: 596
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2005 11:40 am

RE: The Jack Abramoff Scandal To Dominate 2006?

Thu Jan 05, 2006 3:21 am

I think being partisan on this is a stretch. All of those Washington scumbags take money, regardless of party affiliation.

Makes you wonder what goes on that is never publisized.
MLB
 
tbar220
Posts: 6706
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2000 12:08 pm

RE: The Jack Abramoff Scandal To Dominate 2006?

Thu Jan 05, 2006 3:37 am

Quoting Beefstew25 (Reply 35):
I think being partisan on this is a stretch. All of those Washington scumbags take money, regardless of party affiliation.

Sure they all take money, but do they all take dirty money? Why is it such a stretch to say "Republicans are most involved in this scandal." This isn't being partisan, this is just fact. Look at the sources I posted above, if you want more I can provide more.

Its basically like this, many more Republicans are involved in this rather than Democrats. Doesn't make it right that Democrats were involved in this, but it doesn't deny the fact that the Republicans are in this a lot deeper.
NO URLS in signature
 
cairo
Posts: 889
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 2:41 pm

RE: The Jack Abramoff Scandal To Dominate 2006?

Thu Jan 05, 2006 7:09 am

As long as they say this is OK because it is somehow part of the 'global war on terror', and as long as they mention September 11th, I will overlook anything a politician has done.

Hopefully this will add more strength to John McCain's continuing struggle for campaign finance reform and the elimination of lobbyists on Capitol Hill.

Where is my lobbyist?

Cairo
 
Mikey711MN
Posts: 1255
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2003 4:19 am

RE: The Jack Abramoff Scandal To Dominate 2006?

Thu Jan 05, 2006 7:34 am

I plan on living forever. So far, so good...
 
Arrow
Posts: 2325
Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2002 7:44 am

RE: The Jack Abramoff Scandal To Dominate 2006?

Thu Jan 05, 2006 7:48 am

Quoting NonRevKing (Reply 20):
Quoting Jetjack74 (Reply 8):And you think we didn't have inaccurate intel in WW2, Korea, Vietnam?

We also didn't have the technology we do now. You can't use that as an excuse.

WW2 intel was pretty good, in fact you can make a very strong case that the folks at Bletchley Park deserve as much credit for winning the war as the troops who won the battles. The capture of the German enigma machines and the computer they invented to de-code it was brilliant-- the story has never been adequately told. It was single-handedly responsible for the Royal Navy winning the Battle of the Atlantic against the U-boats.

Sorry, off topic but I couldn't resist.
Never let the facts get in the way of a good story.
 
Logan22L
Posts: 4464
Joined: Fri Jul 16, 2004 5:59 am

RE: The Jack Abramoff Scandal To Dominate 2006?

Thu Jan 05, 2006 7:57 am

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 27):
All we need is a catchy phrase for it now.

How about "Libturdslayergate?"
"The deeper you go, the higher you fly. The higher you fly, the deeper you go."
 
rjpieces
Topic Author
Posts: 6849
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2003 8:58 am

RE: The Jack Abramoff Scandal To Dominate 2006?

Thu Jan 05, 2006 2:05 pm

Quoting Cairo (Reply 37):
Hopefully this will add more strength to John McCain's continuing struggle for campaign finance reform and the elimination of lobbyists on Capitol Hill.

There will always be lobbyists as long as there is Capitol Hill..

Quoting Cairo (Reply 37):
Where is my lobbyist?

Put your money where your mouth is. Heck, even if you don't want to do that, hop down on a flight to DC and meet with your Congressman.

I'm 19 years old, and I've lobbied both my Senators and my Congressman.
"Millions long for immortality who do not know what to do with themselves on a rainy Sunday afternoon"
 
User avatar
jetjack74
Posts: 6649
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2003 6:35 am

RE: The Jack Abramoff Scandal To Dominate 2006?

Thu Jan 05, 2006 5:50 pm

Quoting Pyrex (Reply 33):
There you go again trying to claim Saddam had anything to do with 9/11... sad, really.

And where did I say that?
Made from jets!
 
Pyrex
Posts: 4821
Joined: Thu Aug 25, 2005 7:24 am

RE: The Jack Abramoff Scandal To Dominate 2006?

Thu Jan 05, 2006 8:24 pm

Quoting Arrow (Reply 39):
It was single-handedly responsible for the Royal Navy winning the Battle of the Atlantic against the U-boats.

Not exactly single-handedly. There is that small part of basing ASW aircraft in a neutral country with islands in the middle of the Atlantic, technically making that country not neutral.

Again, off-topic.

Quoting Jetjack74 (Reply 42):
And where did I say that?

Just like Bush and pals you never said directly, only implying it really strongly so you could deny it later when people realize how obvious of a lie it is.

Quoting Jetjack74 (Reply 10):
The War on Terror was started by and evil force. Iraq was just another battlefield, and Saddam was just another terrorist.

Now tell me the objective of that passage wasn't to associate Saddam Hussein with Bin Laden, the guy that originated the "War on Terror" by commiting 9/11...
Read this very carefully, I shall write this only once!
 
jaysit
Posts: 10185
Joined: Thu Jun 01, 2000 11:50 pm

RE: The Jack Abramoff Scandal To Dominate 2006?

Thu Jan 05, 2006 11:13 pm

Quoting Beefstew25 (Reply 35):
I think being partisan on this is a stretch. All of those Washington scumbags take money, regardless of party affiliation.

Makes you wonder what goes on that is never publisized.

The difference here is the "K Street Project" started by Delay in 1994, when the Republicans took over the House from the Democrats. Under the K Street project, Delay demanded that trade associations, lobbying associations, etc., only hire Republican lobbyists if they wanted a favorable result from their lobbying efforts. Most organizations did. Abramoff was the poster boy for the K STreet Project. The DOJ has, apparently, dug up e:mails and memos in which Abramoff and Scanlon discuss the former approaching a few Dems to make his efforts look less partisan. Unfortunately, Abramoff is a very partisan lobbyist, and never really practiced Scanlon's suggestions.

The level of corruption in Washington since 1994 makes the corruption of some of the DNC party bigwigs (Slimy Coelho comes to mind) in the mid-80s look like chump change today. Today we have ALL the leaders of the GOP, whether in the House, the Senate, the White House staff under indictment or investigation. Even the most partisan Republicans here in DC (except for the usual suspects on A.net high on Bush-juice) recognize the problems that this creates in an election year. Now whether or not the cowardly and craven Dems realize this is a different matter.
Atheism is Myth Understood.
 
ltbewr
Posts: 15663
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2004 1:24 pm

RE: The Jack Abramoff Scandal To Dominate 2006?

Fri Jan 06, 2006 12:08 am

Another part of this scandal (reported in the Washington Post this past Saturday) is that DeLay and his key staffers were getting money to influence legisgation that benefited Russian business interest. This despite Russia is clearly moving away from Demoracacy, it's business leaders are a bunch of criminal thugs, and Putin is becoming a dictator.
There is also the phony pro-family organization that was used over 5 years as a front and conduit for money for politicans, and only a trickle for pro-family lobbying.
While there are some Democrats involved in this scandal, clearly the dominate amount of monies went to Republican leadership and Congressmembers on the Indian Affairs Committee. Worse, these politicans had to know that such amounts of money and the trips to Scotland to golf or to the South Pacific had to seen as excessive and would get them in trouble.
Perhaps we need some kind effort by voters to make sure someone doesn't stay in the Congress or Senate too long as the longer they are there, the more distant (with some exceptions) they get from their constitutants and into the 'Beltway' mentality. We also need to focus in the whole lobbying system in DC and elsewhere, with more public disclosure of the money and other influences, requiring that ex-politicans be kept away from lobbying for longer periods of time after they leave office, that all politicans must see representatives of non-profit lobbying groups that don't donate money to get the non-corporate side of issues. This is especially true for labor laws, enviromental policies, business regulation, health care and many other areas.
As to a catchy nickname for these scandals, for a while they were referred to as 'Wampumgate'. Wampum was a term for money used in trade with certain indian tribes, but has become a somewhat un-PC term. Perhaps we should just call it "Lobbygate".
 
ConcordeBoy
Posts: 16852
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2001 8:04 am

RE: The Jack Abramoff Scandal To Dominate 2006?

Fri Jan 06, 2006 4:34 am

I didnt really bother to read most of the responses in this thread, so forgive me if what I have to say has already been expressed....

....but this is yet another media-driven story, as opposed to consumer-interest driven; among the lines of the Scooter Libby saga.

As politically/conceptually important as these procedings may or may not be; I dare say that less than 0.00001% of the American public (who don't work in media/politics) gives a flying flip about any of these people, or heck, even know who they are!
Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre c'est impossible sans Concorde!
 
RAMPRAT980
Posts: 584
Joined: Sun Mar 13, 2005 1:06 am

RE: The Jack Abramoff Scandal To Dominate 2006?

Fri Jan 06, 2006 4:56 am

Would it be a problem? Yes. But then again Abramoff could get a Mark Rich pardon.
With gun control there can be no democracy.. With gun control there can be no Freedom
 
tbar220
Posts: 6706
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2000 12:08 pm

RE: The Jack Abramoff Scandal To Dominate 2006?

Fri Jan 06, 2006 4:57 am

Quoting ConcordeBoy (Reply 46):
....but this is yet another media-driven story, as opposed to consumer-interest driven; among the lines of the Scooter Libby saga.

But isn't that the job of the media? Isn't the media supposed to be a government watchdog? If the government acts and behaves outside its boundaries and outside the laws, who is there to watch them and act on that? The media's job is to partly be the "whistleblower" on government misdeeds. In that sense, the media has failed its job miserably in the last five years (i.e. WMD's in Iraq).
NO URLS in signature
 
ConcordeBoy
Posts: 16852
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2001 8:04 am

RE: The Jack Abramoff Scandal To Dominate 2006?

Fri Jan 06, 2006 5:17 am

Quoting Tbar220 (Reply 48):
But isn't that the job of the media?

Idealistically, yes.

Realistically, of course not.
Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre c'est impossible sans Concorde!

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: scbriml and 37 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos