TPM Reader EC makes a good point ...
Dear JoshSince Reid received $5000 from Abramoff, there seems to be a tendency for som (you know who) to say "both sides are guilty", using that "transgression" to tar all with the same brush. Some on our side, sensing the foolishness of this may be inclined to say "Let's hang them all, if Reid took the money he must be a crook, too."
Reid's motiviations are totally "innocent", however. Representing Nevada, he could not politically support the opening of new casinos and was, indeed, probably required as a condition of reelection to do everything he could to prevent such an result. Abramoff probably had a computer program automatically dispensing contributions to those who opposed the new Indian casino permits, which Reid independantly had great incentive to do.
Stick up for Harry.
EC
Republicans can slink away from the K Street Project they've been bragging about and growing fat off for ten years. We'll delve deeper into it.
--Josh Marshall
It's not as outlandish or as hilarious as many of tales of Duke Cunningham's boffo corruption. But this article from Copley News Service describes what was likely one of the key necessary conditions of the Duke story: congressional 'earmarks', the practice which allows a member of Congress to stipulate that a given executive department fund a particular project or even give the business to a specific firm.
While the practice existed prior to the Republican takeover of Congress, the number of earmarks has more than tripled over the last decade of Republican control. And it's obvious why the ease of inserting earmarks is an open invitation to corruption.
The key is to understand the role earmarks have played in the political economy of the Republican majority. In anything remotely like fiscal policy, the GOP leadership has never been remotely conservative. The aim has been to harness the resources of the state to undergird Republican control -- in this case, by making more and more federal money available as patronage funds that leadership-compliant members of congress can use to reward donors and key constituencies. It's the Medicare Prescription Drug Bill fiasco writ small. And you can't understand the bigger story of what's happening to federal government today without appreciating this point.
--Josh Marshall
Sen. Burns (R-MT) accused of being on the take, pleads he's just a coward.
From The Missoulian ...
U.S. Sen. Conrad Burns, R-Mont., changed his stance on a 2001 bill after receiving a $5,000 donation from a lobbyist's client who opposed the legislation, records show.The client hired Jack Abramoff as a lobbyist to defeat the kind of bill Burns voted against. Prior to receiving the payment, Burns did not oppose an identical bill that unanimously passed the Senate in 2000, Senate documents show.
Burns, who is up for re-election next year, told the Missoulian State Bureau on Friday that the campaign contribution had nothing to do with his vote, but said it happened so long ago, he couldn't remember why he opposed the 2001 measure. Burns said he may have initially not opposed the legislation's unanimous passage because it was politically more expedient not to stand in the way of a popular bill.
“Any time you put a hold on a bill, you expend political capital,” Burns said.
Actually, it gets better.
The story turns on legislation which would have cracked down on the sweat shop owners Abramoff represented in the Marianas Islands.
In 2000, records show, the U.S. Senate took up a bill that would have broadened federal oversight of immigration and labor rules on the islands. The bill came before the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, on which Burns served. The bill passed out of committee, records show.However, because of the way the vote was recorded, it's impossible to tell how any individual senators, including Burns, voted.
On the floor, the bill faced no resistance, passing by unanimous consent. The Senate did not actually vote on the bill. Rather, senators agreed to pass it unanimously without taking a vote. Any one senator, including Burns, could have opposed the unanimous passage.
Burns said Friday that because there was not an actual vote on the bill, it's impossible to say that he definitely supported the measure.
“Not always can it be assumed that a piece of legislation that passes on unanimous consent can you definitely say, ‘That's a yes vote,' ” said Burns.
Toward the end of the piece there's this great Burns' moment. Asked why he called for the roll call vote that tanked the legislation ...
“I haven't a clue why,” he said. “You're talking four or five years ago.”
Certainly more to come from this joker.
--Josh Marshall
A week ago we mentioned that the FBI was starting to back off their blanket exoneration of the Italian government for any role in the Niger forgeries affair. Now Saturday's LA Times reports that the Bureau has decided to 'reopen' the inquiry into the forged documents.
That sounds like a good idea since there are so many signs that the original investigation was all but non-existent.
I've been behind in getting to my 4th installment of reporting on the Niger story. But I'll be getting to that in the next few days. And that will include what we learned that confirmed the role of officers of Italian intelligence (SISMI) in disseminating the forgeries.
--Josh Marshall
Ahhh, this is good stuff.
Israelis to Bush administration 'transformation of the Middle East' wingnuts: Please chill!
Just out from JTA ...
Israel told the United States it fears the outcome of regime change in Syria.At a strategic-dialogue meeting this week among senior officials, Israel laid out for the United States three scenarios if Bashar Assad is toppled: chaos, an Islamist regime or another strongman from Assad’s minority Alawite sect. Israel fears all those options, saying Assad provides a measure of stability.
U.S. officials told their Israeli counterparts that toppling Assad could be “transformative” and dismissed concerns about an Islamist regime taking his place. Israel and the United States favor pressure on Syria to force it to stop hosting Palestinian terrorist groups and supporting Hezbollah, a Lebanese terrorist organization.
I guess since we've never overthrown a secular Arab strongman only to have the whole thing blow up in our face, it's just hard to know whether the Israelis' concerns might be well grounded.
--Josh Marshall
I just wanted to let everyone know that a very interesting debate has broken out over at TPMCafe about Wal Mart, or more specifically whether the thicket of progressive campaigns against or about Wal Mart add up. Click here, start from the top and work your way down.
--Josh Marshall
This article in tomorrow's Times is about the increasing and seemingly overwhelming pressure on Jack Abramoff to crack, flip and cooperate with federal investigators building corruption cases against members of Congress and, likely, executive branch officials.
There's so much coming down right now on so many fronts in these various corruption cases that it makes me wish we already had our new site -- TPMmuckraker.com -- up and ready to go. One of the things about running a site like TPM -- and I'm sure this would be the same for other politically-oriented blogs with similarly-sized audiences -- is that the site becomes a sort of collection point for a great mass of information.
Some of that is stuff I get from conventional reporting, just working the phone. Other stuff is unique to running a blog -- links to articles in regional press outlets with information running below the radar of the national press, hot tips from readers, documents (public and non-public) which shed new light on the stories of the day, all sorts of stuff -- some of the most important of which is simply ready access to the insights of different readers, insights that can break open new veins of information lying hidden in plain sight in reams of text.
What you want to do is churn through all that information, chop it up, look at it, analyze it, organize and explain the key points and then put it back before your readers. The problem is there's too much for one person to do. Not seeking sympathy, mind you. Far from it. I enjoy what I do. And I make a decent living at it, which is about all you can ask. But with more people the site could do a lot more. And that's basically what we're going to do with this new site. In doing so, hopefully, we'll be able to bring you a lot more timely and complete coverage of what's happening with our politics today.
Anyway, I wish we had it up already. But we'll get it to you as soon as we can, consistent with making it a site and a product that is as good as we can make it.
Before leaving this thought, let me mention one point about these seemingly disparate scandal stories and criminal investigations: don't discount the possibility that a number of them may end up connecting up and being intertwined when charges get filed and trials begin.
Take the Tobin (phone-jamming) trial getting ready to start next Tuesday in Concord, New Hampshire. (I'm going to try to get up there to cover the trial in person next week, though some mundane logistics may prevent me from doing so.) Federal investigators are looking at the possibility that the funds for the phone-jamming may have come from money from clients of Jack Abramoff who were instructed to make key contributions to the New Hampshire Republican party in the final days of the 2002 campaign. The Cunningham case also seems likely to spread beyond the unfortunate Dukester.
There's more here than meets the eye.
--Josh Marshall
Let's sigh and pretend we're surprised ...
Justice Department lawyers concluded that the landmark Texas congressional redistricting plan spearheaded by Rep. Tom DeLay (R) violated the Voting Rights Act, according to a previously undisclosed memo obtained by The Washington Post. But senior officials overruled them and approved the plan.
Read the rest in tomorrow's Post.
--Josh Marshall
Yet more fun facts about those international men of bamboozlement at The Lincoln Group. You'll want to see this one.
--Josh Marshall
You'll notice that below I linked to an AP story about Geoffrey Fieger having his offices raided in Michigan. I noted that he's apparently a Democratic candidate for AG in Michigan. (You'll probably better remember Fieger as Jack Kevorkian's attorney.)
I've been trying to bend over backwards to highlight or link examples of alleged Democratic corruption, since I've been hitting so hard on so many instances of GOP shenanigans.
But TPM Reader JW from Michigan writes in this: "I assume that I don't need to tell you this, but ... Fieger has merely formed an exploratory committee to evaluate the possibility of a run for Attorney General. The Democratic Party certainly hasn't embraced him (and I don't expect it to)."
This is what it comes down to I guess. We have to find registered Democrats who are considering running for statewide office to get anyone to line up against the other party, most of whose leaders are under one sort of investigation or another, if not already getting finger-printed and booked.
Really, let it all come out. Let's see more WSJ editorials about the dog catcher from Alameda who ran a protection racket for ice cream trucks on his beat. The truth about the DC Republican party today is too obvious to cover up or ignore, even if we have a lot of reporters who are afraid to look at the elephant in the room.
--Josh Marshall
Feds search the offices of Geoffrey Fieger, celeb attorney for Jack Kevorkian and now Democratic candidate for Michigan AG.
--Josh Marshall
I had missed the piece on the 'planted stories' story written by Jonathan Landay of Knight-Ridder, which is unfortunate since he significantly advanced the story.
A few points stood out for me, particularly those relating to potential disinformation blowback ...
Under military rules, information operations are restricted to influencing the attitudes and behavior of foreign governments and people. One form of information operations - psychological warfare - can use doctored or false information to deceive or damage the enemy or to bolster support for American efforts.Many military officials, however, said they were concerned that the payments to Iraqi journalists and other covert information operations in Iraq had become so extensive that they were corroding the effort to build democracy and undermining U.S. credibility in Iraq. They also worry that information in the Iraqi press that's been planted or paid for by the U.S. military could "blow back" to the American public.
...
Moreover, the defense and military officials said, the U.S. public is at risk of being influenced by the information operations because what's planted in the Iraqi media can be picked up by international news organizations and Internet bloggers.
...
In addition to the Army's secret payments to Iraqi newspaper, radio and television journalists for positive stories, U.S. psychological-warfare officers have been involved in writing news releases and drafting media strategies for top commanders, two defense officials said.
On at least one occasion, psychological warfare specialists have taken a group of international journalists on a tour of Iraq's border with Syria, a route used by Islamic terrorists and arms smugglers, one of the officials said.
Usually, these duties are the responsibility of military public-affairs officers.
In Iraq, public affairs staff at the American-run multinational headquarters in Baghdad have been combined with information operations experts in an organization known as the Information Operations Task Force.
The unit's public affairs officers are subservient to the information operations experts, military and defense officials said.
The result is a "fuzzing up" of what's supposed to be a strict division between public affairs, which provides factual information about U.S. military operations, and information operations, which can use propaganda and doctored or false information to influence enemy actions, perceptions and behavior.
Information operations are intended to "influence foreign adversary audiences using psychological operations capabilities," according to a Sept. 27, 2004, memo sent to top American commanders by the former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, retired Air Force Gen. Richard B. Myers.
Myers warned that putting public affairs and information operations in the same office had "the potential to compromise the commander's credibility with the media and the public."
There's a lot of good stuff in this piece. And in excerpting portions of it, there's hard to find stuff I don't want to highlight. But there's also seem interesting information about the origins of what happened ...
The payments to Iraqi journalists originally were intended to nurture a fledgling domestic press corps by rewarding Iraqi journalists who put their lives and the safety of their families at risk by attending U.S. military briefings in the high security Green Zone in Baghdad, where American officials live and work."These guys had to take extraordinary risk to cover our stories," said a U.S. military officer in the United States who's familiar with the program.
The effort, however, "has gotten out of hand," said an American military official in Baghdad.
...
"The Iraqis learned that if they reported stuff we liked, they'd get paid, and our guys learned that if they paid the Iraqis, they'd report stuff we liked," the former senior defense official said.
I've excerpted a lot; but there's a good bit more. Go give it a look.
--Josh Marshall
Okay, this is a bit funny -- at least if you're me. Below I posted a link to this company called ADCS. That's Cunningham co-conspirator #1 Brent Wilkes' company.
As we noted below, ADCS's headquarters is for sale. And I have the feeling Wilkes himself may soon to be announcing that he's retiring in order to be able to spend more time in prison.
Now, if you look at the ADCS website, you'll see it's quite snazzy and nicely designed. Only, where are the links? If memory serves when I first looked at this site last summer it was, well ... a normal website, a front end to various info about the company. But as nearly as I can tell there are no links to anything. The whole site is one big 'no comment'.
--Josh Marshall
Seems like Brent Wilkes' (aka Co-conspirator #1) company ADCS, Inc. invested too heavily in Duke Cunningham. Now that Duke's been de-listed, ADCS is on the rocks. According to the local paper, the North County Times, company headquarters -- built in 2003 for $12 million -- is up on the auction block.
If only he'd been the first co-conspirator to cut a deal ...
--Josh Marshall
Another comment on the Duke Cunningham investigation.
I mentioned recently that this story likely led into the Department of Defense. So let me say a bit more about that.
In recent days we've being seeing a lot of stories about various top-secret or 'black' programs being run out of the Pentagon. The reports about fake stories being planted in the Iraqi press are just a single example. I'm told that this matter of top secret Pentagon spending -- stuff free of almost all oversight -- may connect up with the Duke investigation and may reach up higher than we might imagine in the Pentagon.
Not in obvious ways, mind you. I'm not saying higher-ups were on the take. But I've seen hints and evidence from various directions that there may have been some active ignoring of these various scams that Duke and his pals were up to in exchange for help on these other fronts.
--Josh Marshall
After I saw this Sacramento Bee article about Rep. Doolittle (R-CA) and his increasing entanglement in the Abramoff investigation, I went back to our trove of unpublished Team Abramoff emails to see how often Doolittle showed up on the skybox freebie gravy train.
His office did show up, but actually not that often -- certainly not as often as I would have expected, given how tight he apparently was with the Abramoff clique.
Perhaps there was a leadership office or committee he was associated with back in 2000 and that obscures him in the references. But I doubt it. And he's nowhere close to fellow Rep. Richard Pombo (R-CA) as an Abramoff freebie-meister, for instance.
But what really surprised me was this. As I looked through the emails last night, a name that came up again and again was a staffer in the office of Sen. Lincoln Chafee (R) of Rhode Island. That's odd since Abramoff tended to buy into members of the House rather than the Senate, though not exclusively. And Chafee just doesn't strike me as a very choice target for Jack.
Who knew?
--Josh Marshall
Connecticut adopts a comprehensive public-financing-based campaign reform bill. This is a big development. Find out more here.
--Josh Marshall
As some of you know, our old pal Jim Tobin is set to go on trial for the New Hampshire phone-jamming scam next Tuesday in Concord. And we hear that in a rather uncomfortable development for the GOP, the state's witness list includes the name Terry Nelson. If you don't remember that name, refer back to the DeLay case in Texas.
--Josh Marshall
Arch-phase-out-man Santorum trying to run on record of preserving Social Security? Next to campaign as senate's prime champion of free love?
--Josh Marshall
Ahhh, the seamless global web of mumbojumbo.
As we know now from the LATimes and the NYTimes, the Pentagon is paying an outfit called the Lincoln Group to plant phony stories in the Iraqi press about just how well things are going in Iraq.
Actually, maybe that's a sign of progress since that's how we seem to be running this place too.
In any case, one graf from today's NYT piece is too choice not to reprint ...
Even as the State Department and the United States Agency for International Development pay contractors millions of dollars to help train journalists and promote a professional and independent Iraqi media, the Pentagon is paying millions more to the Lincoln Group for work that appears to violate fundamental principles of Western journalism.
I guess if I had a goatee and a black turtle neck I'd call this the internal contradictions of Bush bamboozlement. And perhaps I should.
But while the DOD is hiring the Lincoln Group, the Lincoln is subcontracting the work to BKSH, the PR firm run by Republican uber-operative and spinmeister Charlie Black.
Actually, if you're looking for phony stories about how well things are going in Iraq, I guess a Republican talking head like Charlie Black might be a pretty good bet. So this might be an example of shrewd government contracting.
And if you wonder what Charlie Black knows about bamboozling Iraqis, don't worry because he must have picked something up when he was working for Ahmed Chalabi before the war.
(ed.note: thanks to TPM Reader LR.)
--Josh Marshall
Planting phony stories in Iraqi papers or just make-work for GOP operatives? Maybe it's both.
Late Update: Even more good stuff on the Lincoln Group here.
--Josh Marshall
Reader comment ...
You've sort of hinted at this, but what's truly amazing about the attempts to paint this corruption as equally applicable to both parties is this: The essence of the K Street strategy pioneered by DeLay and Norquist and run today by Blount and Santorum is to deny Democratic politicians the chance to be dealmakers and players on the Hill - or to put it another way, to deny them access to the sort of "honest graft," policy horsetrading, and borderline bribery that brings in campaign donations and keeps a political party flush and strong. That's why they try to pass everything on narrow party-line votes; why they muck up legislation so that even centrist Dems can't stomach voting for it; why they pressure trade associations not to hire Democrats. They can argue either that the sort of influence peddling that has nabbed Ney, the Duke, and others is rare and they shouldn't be tarred with it, or they can argue that it's so common it's unremarkable and not worthy of notice. That's their choice. But they themselves have made clear that they want to own the racket outright. They have done everything they can to make sure that Democrats don't have the opportunity to sell policymaking to the highest bidder. That's the essence of the machine. Having largely succeeded, they then go whine to the papers when the more envelope-pushing activities trigger an investigation, and say they're not the only ones who do it? Unbelievable.
Yep. If only we had a group of professional information-gatherers and disseminators in the capital whose job it was to follow this stuff and report to the public.
--Josh Marshall
Roll Call (sub.req.): "House Democrats are calling for a bipartisan Congressional investigation into former Rep. Duke Cunningham’s (R-Calif.) handling of classified information while serving on the Appropriations and Intelligence committees."
--Josh Marshall
It turns out Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham (R-CA) wasn't the only one on that trip to Saudi Arabia. Yesterday we noted that last December, Cunningham made the second of two trips to Saudi Arabia funded by San Diego real estate developer Ziyad Abduljawad, a naturalized US citizen.
On this second trip, Duke made a pit stop in Athens to pick up Tommy Kontogiannis.
On Monday Duke pled guilty to accepting bribes from Kontogiannis (aka "co-conspirator #3") in exchange for unspecified official acts.
But it turns out that Cunningham wasn't the only member of Congress on the trip. Fellow Rep. Ken Calvert (R-CA) was also along for the ride.
Contacted late this afternoon, Rep. Calvert told TPM that the duo picked up Kontogiannis in Athens and later dropped him off in New York after their trip to Saudi Arabia.
Calvert said he'd never heard of Kontogiannis before the trip or since.
According to Calvert, the three spent their time in Saudi Arabia meeting with government ministers and exploring ways the Saudis could be more helpful in prosecuting the war on terrorism.
--Josh Marshall
Hardball goes limp. Matthews from last night ...
MATTHEWS: Welcome back to HARDBALL. That was Congressman Duke Cunningham, ex-Congressman Duke Cunningham of California, announcing his resignation yesterday after pleading guilty to fraud, conspiracy to commit bribery and tax evasion.Here to talk about it now and a slew of other scandals sweeping the city are "Newsweek`s" Howard Fineman and Tony Blankley of "The Washington Times."
Tony, I think it`s fair to say -- we`ll start with you, since you`re an editorial page editor, who`s free to express opinion -- that stinky-poo corruption, the stealing the money, just stealing the money for greed reasons -- is fairly nonpartisan.
TONY BLANKLEY, THE WASHINGTON TIMES: Yes, both sides have done it. It doesn`t relate to anything other than the individual and his fall from ethical standards.
MATTHEWS: Are you proud of the president for coming out and trashing this guy? "The idea of a U.S. congressman taking money is outrageous and Congressman Cunningham is going to realize that he has broken the law and is going to pay a serious price, which he should." Pretty tough language for a president about a colleague.
That was a pretty tough question for former GOP operative and current Washington Times editorial page editor Tony Blankley, wasn't it? Imagine putting Blankley on the spot like that pressing him to admit that public corruption is equally divided between the parties in today's Washington. Who can brave these hardballs?
--Josh Marshall
Roll Call (sub.req.): Pelosi endorses Murtha's call for withdrawal from Iraq.
--Josh Marshall
A few more points to mull about the Duke saga.
First, remember that "co-conspirator #1" in the charges against Duke is Brent Wilkes, a defense contractor who owns ADCS Inc.
In addition to various other bribes he gave Duke, Wilkes also rented a corporate jet which appears to have existed more or less entirely to ferry around members of Congress. Mainly Duke. But also Rep. Tom DeLay and Acting Majority Leader Roy Blunt. Wilkes is also an '04 Bush Pioneer.
Also, it's pretty stunning to see members of Congress admit to good-old-fashioned bribes. Not campaign contributions or overseas junkets, but old-tried-and-true lump sum cash payments.
But bribes are a means to an end. So pay attention to the context. This is a defense contracting scandal. Defense contracting scandals get you into the Department of Defense, particularly in a case like this in which the contracts are top-secret military spending programs over which there is little or no oversight.
--Josh Marshall
Another part of the Duke Cunningham story that has me wondering.
In the charges filed against Duke Cunningham 
yesterday, "co-conspirator #3" is Thomas Kontogiannis. As you may remember from last summer, Kongtogiannis is the already-once-convicted-of-bribery fat cat who was in the mix buying Duke homes and swapping boats and all the rest of it. Page 5, item "d" says that Duke "used his public office and took other official action in a manner that would benefit" Kontogiannis. And that he did so because of all the money he gave Duke.
Okay, so clear enough. Kontogiannis was another guy who owned a piece of Duke and Duke pulled government strings for him.
So what was Duke doing for Kontogiannis?
Back on Oct. 19th 2000 Duke wrote a letter to a New York DA then investigating Kontogiannis, trying to get the guy to back off. But I think this is prior to the time frame in question.
What I keep coming back to is this passage from a September 24th article in the San Diego Union-Tribune ...
In a previously undisclosed link between Cunningham and Kontogiannis, the developer accompanied the congressman to Saudi Arabia last year. A Saudi-American businessman flew Cunningham to Saudi Arabia twice last year aboard a private jet. On the second trip, the jet stopped in Athens to pick up Kontogiannis, a native of Greece with businesses interests in several countries.Ziyad Abduljawad, founder and chairman of San Diego-based PLC Land Co., paid for Cunningham's two trips to Saudi Arabia, each at a cost of more than $10,000. Cunningham has described Abduljawad as an acquaintance who shares his interest in improving U.S.-Saudi relations.
Kontogiannis "went as a friend of Duke's," said Harmony Allen, Cunningham's chief of staff. "That's the extent of it. Duke asked him to go as a friend. I'm not sure if (Kontogiannis) had a special interest (in visiting) Saudi Arabia or not."
It was unclear who paid for Kontogiannis' trip.
Remember, Duke just pled guilty to accepting numerous bribes from Kontogiannis in exchanging for putting the power of his office at Kontogiannis's disposal.
What was Duke doing stopping in Athens to pick up Kontogiannis to take to Saudi on his trip to improve relations between the US and Saudi Arabia?
Sure, Duke's history. But this case goes beyond Duke Cunningham. There's more here.
--Josh Marshall
"What the Republicans need is 50 Jack Abramoffs. Then this becomes a different town," Grover Norquist, 1995.
(ed.note: cite National Journal, July 29, 1995. Tip from TPM Reader DG.)
--Josh Marshall
Republicans must be purer than Caesar's wife?
From tomorrow's Times ...
Though some Republican officials said Democrats in Congress were equally guilty of questionable behavior, including lobbyist-paid trips and underreporting of campaign contributions, they acknowledged that Republicans, because they control the White House and Congress, are being held to a higher standard by many voters. They also expressed shock and embarrassment at the extent of Mr. Cunningham's wrongdoing, which the president described on Tuesday as "outrageous."
That's a new one.
Being held to a higher standard because they control the White House and Congress. Isn't it just that by every conceivable measure they have more people being investigated and on the way to the slammer? Does the Times buy into this mumbojumbo?
As I wrote earlier, one might argue that the reason for the imbalance -- with virtually all the corruption cases focusing on Republicans -- is that they have the White House and Congress. They have all the power and access; so they're the only ones in a position to sell it. I think that's a pretty generous read of the situation for the GOP; but one could so argue.
But this isn't a matter of holding anyone to a higher standard, something the Times must know. It's simply that the vast majority of the public corruption in Washington is being done by Republicans. Full stop. End of story.
--Josh Marshall
We're getting various reports in of a courageous 'nice try' by Chris Matthews tonight on Hardball. Chris verifies that DC corruption is a bipartisan issue. We'll let you know when we see the transcript. And we hear that's nothing compared to this afternoon's Abrams Report on MSNBC. Apparently that transcript has the motherlode.
--Josh Marshall
Even Rush goes after the ghost of Congresses past. Goes after Bob Torricelli.
Yes, I agree! The Torch should resign! What is he still doing in Congress?!?!?!
(ed.note: Thanks to eagle-eyed TPMer TF for braving the hot winds of Rushdom.)
--Josh Marshall
TPM Reader JM from Florida strikes early in the TPM 'Nice Try' Brigade contest bagging a choice nice try from WaPo blogger Chris Cillizza of the new WaPo blog "The Fix".
On "The Fix" today Cillizza posted a "political scandal scorecard" and in the House of Reps he listed ...
Tom DeLay (R-TX)
Rep. John Doolittle (R-CA)
Rep. Bob Ney (R-OH)
Rep. Bill Jefferson (D-LA)
Rep. Duke Cunningham (R-CA)
Former Rep. Frank Ballance (D-NC)
Now, who, you might be asking, is Rep. Frank Ballance? Well, without him included the list might have seemed awfully weighted toward Republicans.
Cillizza's list was supposed to be about scandals in the "past year" and limited to those "members of Congress and governors currently in office."
Cillizza seemed to see there might be some problem with Ballance since he resigned from Congress a year and a half ago. And under Ballance's name he explained ...
Yes, we said we're limiting this list to current members, but this is a fairly recent case so we're making a small exception to the rule. Ballance left office in 2004 and pleaded guilty to charges of mishandling money controlled by his charitable foundation.
In the story Cillizza links to, we see that Ballance was elected in 2002 and resigned from Congress in the summer of 2004. In November 2004 he pled guilty to one charge of conspiracy to commit mail fraud and money laundering.
But it gets better. From what I can gather from the article, Ballance's crimes weren't even committed when he was serving in Congress.
Quoting from the Post's article from November 10th, 2004 ...
The indictment alleged that Ballance channeled $2.3 million in state money from 1994 to 2003 to a nonprofit foundation he operated to help poor people fight drug and alcohol abuse. According to the indictment, more than $100,000 from the John A. Hyman Memorial Youth Foundation went to Ballance's law firm; his church; his mother, Alice Eason Ballance; his daughter, Valerie Ballance; and his son, Garey Ballance.
Remember, Ballance entered Congress in 2003. So what this sounds like is that over the decade before he entered Congress Ballance diverted a hundred grand from his non-profit to various parties tied to him or family. So Ballance gets on the list for something he resigned from for in the 2004 and did before he even got to Congress. Pretty hard to distinguish those facts from DeLay, Doolittle, Jefferson, Ney and Cunningham -- each of whom is either under indictment or the target of an on-going criminal investigation, isn't it.
On this one you can see that Cillizza was really striving for Ballance and, well ... he achieved it.
Late Update: Former Connecticut Gov. John Rowland resigned from office around the same time Rep. Ballance bailed out of the House. No exception for him on Cillizza's list of scandal governors.
--Josh Marshall
Would you like to join our 'Nice Try' brigade?
Let me explain.
There is one Democratic member of Congress who is currently the target of a Justice Department investigation, Rep. William Jefferson of New Orleans. There are also various Democrats who received money from Jack Abramoff or his many clients.
But let's get real. The Abramoff story is overwhelmingly a Republican scandal. Abramoff's whole racket was as a paymaster and slush-funder for the DC GOP machine.
Then there are the half-a-dozen Republican members of Congress being investigated for criminal infractions arising out of the Abramoff investigation. Then there are all their staffers.
Then there is Abramoff-Norquist associate David Safavian, chief of procurement at OMB who was arrested and indicted for deceiving investigators in the Abramoff case.
Then there are the GOP capos who skimmed money off the Abramoff geyser or laundered money for him, folks like Grover Norquist and Ralph Reed.
The Duke Cunningham scandal is a Republican scandal, which we'll soon see spreads into the Rumsfeld Defense Department.
The Abramoff scandal tracks into the Interior Department and the GSA.
Then there's Tom DeLay, remember him, former House Majority Leader, now under indictment in Texas. Set aside that he's also implicated in the Abramoff scandal and quite probably the Duke Cunningham scandal as well.
And then in the other body you've got Sen. Bill Frist who is at the center of a criminal investigation into his stock sales. Frist is actually sort of unique in that it's possible he may not be guilty.
Two Republican members of Congress are under indictment.
Prosecutors have already accused two of taking bribes.
These few examples only scratch the surface. And I've left aside the Fitzgerald investigation because it doesn't turn on money but pure old-fashioned abuse of power.
Yet, Republican media types have been leaning hard yesterday and today on reporters to push the bipartisan corruption line, even though the simple facts of the case simply give no basis for it whatsoever.
It's actually close to laughable.
The simple truth is that Democrats in Washington today just aren't in a position to be corrupt on any serious scale for a simple reason: public corruption is almost always about selling power. Got no power and you've just got nothing to sell. Any idiot can understand that.
The level of public corruption coming to the surface in Washington today is not unprecedented. But there's a pretty good argument that you have to go back more than a hundred years to find anything comparable. And it's almost entirely limited to one party, the Republican party, because it all grows out of the same political machine.
But Republicans are pushing their line. And lots of reporters, not wanting trouble, are doing their best to comply.
Like I said, it's almost laughable.
So let's laugh at them.
Find us the best quotes you can of reporters, pundits, commentators and whoever else trying to minimize the undeniable partisan dimension to the multiple and overlapping scandals breaking out all over Washington, DC. We'll post the top ten. Send them to the regular comments email with the headline "Nice Try Brigade".
--Josh Marshall
TPM Reader PH is worried ...
So, the President is going to announce the beginning of a pull out from Iraq. Where does that leave the so-called flypaper strategy? President Bush has repeatedly justified the Iraq war by claiming: "We're taking the fight to the terrorists abroad so we do not have to face them here at home" and "We either deal with terrorism and this extremism abroad, or we deal with it when it comes to us."If we are getting out of Iraq, does that mean that he believes that the terrorists there have been eliminated? Or, has he decided to bring the fight back home to the United States? Or, is he hoping that the new Iraqi government and army will defend the United States from terrorism?
Good question, though Cheney et al. have wriggled out of more extreme inconsistencies and fooleries to be sure. Also that guy Bush they have working for them.
--Josh Marshall
We'll be discussing more on this later. But on the Duke Cunningham matter, who helped him? Who cooperated? We know that the charges Duke pled guilty to yesterday listed four coconspirators. Those are the guys who paid him off. But who cooperated on the inside? At the Defense Department? Remember, this was all about securing Defense and intelligence I hear there's more here than just Duke.
More soon.
--Josh Marshall
Brainstorming possible NRCC slogans.
Fully 99% of caucus faces no government accusations of accepting bribes!
You mean former Rep. Duke Cunningham!
It's like the Journal says today, what about Speaker Jim Wright!?!?
--Josh Marshall
TPM Reader TC checks in ...
A reasonable person could read this Jeffrey Birnbaum article in the Washington Post and mistake it for an RNC press release. Among the article's assertions:Corruption affects both parties, not just Republicans
Occasional prosecutions actually illustrate how clean Congress is on the whole
The public distrusts both parties, not just Republicans (this point is made twice in the article)
The public distrusts incumbents in general, not just Republicans
Voters don't care about party affiliations of officials charged with corruption, especially in cases they've heard of (I'm not kidding)
Voters have a general, theoretical dislike of "too much money in politics" rather than a specific dislike of specific (mainly Republican) corrupt politicians"Happens all the time," "nothing new," and "goes in cycles" are both trotted out as well William Jefferson, William Jefferson, William Jefferson.
Even the headline reads like it was carefully focus-grouped by Frank Luntz: "A Growing Wariness About Money in Politics"
It's sad to watch Birnbaum squirm and dance his way around the central fact that almost all the corruption coming to light now springs from the machinations of Republican politicians, lobbyists, and donors. I hope you find time to comment on this article.
Birnbaum does make some decent points in the article. But I think TC's got this one right.
--Josh Marshall
In the charges released yesterday against Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham (R-CA) by the United States Attorney in San Diego, the man identified in the 'information' as "Co-conspirator #2" is none other than Mr. Mitchell Wade, formerly CEO and founder of MZM, Inc., the man whose sweetheart purchase of Cunningham's house was the thread that started Duke's skein of corruption unravelling.
Now, Mitchell Wade has since left MZM to spend more time with his lawyers. But before his high-flying life as a corrupt defense contractor came to a grinding halt last summer he was into more than Duke Cunningham. Wade's MZM was in deep with Rep. Katherine Harris (R-FL). So deep in fact that, in a story we broke here at TPM back on June 21st, Harris once had a one day haul of $28,000. Fourteen checks for $2,000 a pop, each from a different MZM employee, each received on March 23rd, 2004. (MZM employees later claimed these contributions were coerced.)
A week later Wade's wife chipped in two more checks for $2,000 each. But I digress. Set aside Katherine Harris for a second and let's get to Rep. Virgil Goode (R-VA).
Rep. Goode and Mitchell Wade talk business.
Back in June we reported that that Goode had snagged $48,551 in campaign contributions from MZM employees the 2004 election cycle. And scarcely six months into the 2006 cycle he'd already gotten $34,625. In fact, at the time, he was the only member of Congress MZM employees had given any money to.
Then a few days later, Jeff Birnbaum wrote a piece on Mitchell Wade and MZM in which he noted ...
MZM also has ties to a Republican congressman from Virginia, Virgil Goode.In the 2004 election cycle, Goode's largest contributor was MZM; its political action committee and its employees, including Wade, gave a total of $48,551, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.
Goode was the principal sponsor of a provision in 2003 defense legislation that called for the creation of a military center in his district, known as the Foreign Supplier Assessment Center, which MZM was hired to run, said a senior defense official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the issue's sensitivity.
The official added that the center, which is meant to check on the ownership of foreign companies that contract with the Defense Department, will do useful work, but was not a Pentagon priority and was not requested by the Defense Department. It was mandated by Goode on MZM's behalf, the official said.
The Center opened in October 2004. The photo above is Rep. Goode and Mitchell Wade conversing at the opening. And below is Goode and Wade (Wade is the tall guy with the appropriately nefarious glint in his eye) at the ribbon cutting ceremony.
Mitchell Wade eyes Rep. Goode at ribbon cutting ceremony.
Now, let me make one thing emphatically clear. Goode got what is for a backbench congressman a ton of money from MZM (and its employees). He clearly played a role in getting them set up with this Center in his district which the Pentagon was in no particular hurry to build. But there's no evidence, to the best of my knowledge, that Goode was personally enriched in any by Wade. Personally enriched, that is, as opposed to getting lots of money in campaign contributions.
Still, Mitch Wade has a pretty clear MO. He's also pretty clearly looking down the barrel of some serious indictments. So it seems worth looking to see whether any other members of Congress fell victim, shall we say, to Wade's innovative ways of doing business.
--Josh Marshall
CrooksandLiars.com has the video of Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham's brief speech after entering his guilty plea.
--Josh Marshall
As you'll see in Duke's statements, he's agreed to cooperate in the US Attorney's on-going investigation. And a logical place to start would be with the various coconspirators listed in the charges against him. Remember, one of those was Mitchell Wade. And Duke wasn't the only one getting lots of contributions from Wade.
Katherine Harris was on the gravy train.
Virgil Goode was on line too.
--Josh Marshall
More on Duke.
Here are the charges, the 'information'. And here's Duke's plea agreement.
Give them a look and let us know the 'best' bad act you can find.
And if you're nostalgic for the old days of sleuthing before all Duke's shenanigans were revealed, click here for a listing of all TPM Duke coverage back to the very first back on June 12th.
--Josh Marshall
I'm sure this will show up in other publications. But for the moment, I was just looking through the list of Duke Cunningham's offenses in the article (sub.req.) on the Roll Call website. And it's breath-taking.
The stuff we knew about, the boats and house purchases, were really only the tip of the iceberg.
In pure dollar terms the house scams may have been the biggest. But on many occasions Duke and the defense contractors who owned him didn't even cover with the flimsy real estate covers.
So for instance, here are some of the examples ...
On May 1, 2000, he took $100,000 in two separate checks from “Co-conspirator No. 1” depositing $70,000 into his personal bank account in San Diego and $30,000 into his account with the Congressional Federal Credit Union;...
On Feb. 27, 2002, the co-conspirator believed to be Kontogiannis paid $10,000 to Cunningham, who deposited the money into his credit union account;
...
On Jan. 13, 2003, Wade paid $33,000 to Cunningham in two separate checks, money that went into his California accounts;
As I said, in dollar terms these weren't the biggest offenses. In audacity terms, they rate fairly high.
--Josh Marshall
Statement of Rep. Randy Cunningham (R-CA) ...
I am resigning from the House of Representatives because I’ve compromised the trust of my constituents.When I announced several months ago that I would not seek re-election, I publicly declared my innocence because I was not strong enough to face the truth. So, I misled my family, staff, friends, colleagues, the public -- even myself. For all of this, I am deeply sorry.
The truth is -- I broke the law, concealed my conduct, and disgraced my high office. I know that I will forfeit my freedom, my reputation, my worldly possessions, and most importantly, the trust of my friends and family.
Some time ago, I asked my lawyers to inform the U.S. Attorney Carol Lam that I would like to plead guilty and begin serving a prison term. Today is the culmination of that process. I will continue to cooperate with the government’s ongoing investigation to the best of my ability.
In my life, I have known great joy and great sorrow. And now I know great shame. I learned in Viet Nam that the true measure of a man is how he responds to adversity. I cannot undo what I have done. But I can atone. I am now almost 65 years old and, as I enter the twilight of my life, I intend to use the remaining time that God grants me to make amends.
The first step in that journey is to admit fault and apologize. The next step is to face the consequences of my actions like a man. Today, I have taken the first step and, with God’s grace, I will soon take the second.
Thank you.
--Josh Marshall
Won't have Duke to kick around any more. Cunningham resigns from Congress.
--Josh Marshall
Interesting. The current AP story on Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham contains no mention of his party affiliation.
TPM Reader RF pointed this out.
Late Update: The piece now seems to be updated with the reference.
--Josh Marshall
Make that much more than tax code violations ...
Cunningham pleaded guilty to one count of income tax evasion and four counts of conspiracy: mail fraud, wire fraud, bribery of public official and accepting bribes. U.S. District Larry A. Burns scheduled Cunningham's sentencing for Feb. 27.A somber-looking Cunningham stood with his hands clasped in front of him, answering the judge's questions with a muted "Yes, your honor," or, at times, "Yes, sir."
"Between the year 2000 and June of 2005 in our district, you conspired to accept bribes in exchange for performance of official duties. Did you do that?" Judge Burns asked Cunningham.
"Yes, your honor," Cunningham replied.
"Did you take both cash payments and payments in kind?"
"Yes, your honor," the congressman said.
"Did you follow up by trying to influence the Defense Department?"
"Yes, your honor."
Duke, reportedly, will speak to the press at 2:30 PM EST, 11:30 AM on the west coast. Does he resign?
--Josh Marshall
So Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham has now admitted to taking bribes to help defense contractors secure contracts. And he's still on the Appropriations Committee's defense subcommittee.
From the latest AP story ...
Cunningham answered "yes, Your Honor" when asked by U.S. District Judge Larry Burns if he had accepted bribes from someone in exchange for his performance of official duties.
--Josh Marshall
A bit more than tax code violations ...
Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham pleaded guilty Monday morning to conspiring to take bribes in exchange for using his influence to help a defense contractor get business.He also pleaded guilty to one count of income tax evasion.
U.S. District Larry A. Burns scheduled Cunninghman's sentencing for Feb. 27.
The rest here from the Union-Tribune.
--Josh Marshall
Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham to plead guilty to tax code violations, says the AP. The local paper, the Union-Tribune, says that he'll plead guilty to "criminal charges." "It's over. I can't fight anymore," Cunningham tells supporters.
I guess tax code violations can mean many things. But there were several instances of seemingly clear-cut influence-peddling and/or bribery in the Duke cas. It will be interesting to see how those are disposed of in this plea agreement.
And where does this leave Duke's fat cats Mitchell Wade and Brent Wilkes.
--Josh Marshall
Off the AP wire ...
A military vehicle carrying three congressmen overturned on the way to the Baghdad airport, injuring two of them, the U.S. Embassy said Sunday.Rep. Tim Murphy, R-Pa., was airlifted to a military hospital in Germany for an MRI on his neck, and Rep. Ike Skelton, D-Mo., was sent to a Baghdad hospital for evaluation, said Rep. Jim Marshall, D-Ga., who was also in the vehicle but was not hurt when it overturned Saturday.
Murphy is ''bumped and bruised, but in good spirits,'' his chief of staff, Susan Mosychuck, said Sunday. He will return home from Germany as soon as he is cleared by doctors, she said.
Skelton spokeswoman Lara Battles said she believed Skelton was also doing well. She declined to comment further.
--Josh Marshall
You know that when the casino boat line SunCruz was owned by Jack Abramoff and Adam Kidan, the company paid the men who blew away SunCruz founder Gus Boulis.
Now it turns out they also had the company pay the National Republican Congressional Committee (the House GOP election committee) $10,000 on behalf of Rep. Bob Ney (R-OH). That was in exchange for Ney's putting anti-Boulis remarks in the congressional record that helped Abramoff and Kidan pressure Boulis to sell them SunCruz.
The guy who helped arrange Ney's anti-Boulis-trash-talking and the later pay-off was none other than Mike Scanlon, who later did public relations work for SunCruz, in addition to going into the Indian gaming bilking biz with SunCruz owner Abramoff.
Scanlon is the guy who just agreed to testify against, well ... everybody in the Abramoff cases.
Complicated? Hey, don't blame us! We didn't tell them to go out and live an Elmore Leonard novel.
--Josh Marshall
