The Corrupt Bastards Club

[truthmatters]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/11/AR2007111101585.html?hpid=topnews


Wow Alaska is special.

[Nukeman]

Now that you have found *gasp* coruption in a state predominately Reb. lets see if truth really does matter to you and find a balance of a Dem held state doing the same thing. it really shouldn't be that hard I can think of a few instances right off the top of my head but lets see if you can wrap your pointy little head around the concept that politicians as a whole are corrupt or is it just the republicans in your book.....:lame2:

[red states rule]

Now that you have found *gasp* coruption in a state predominately Reb. lets see if truth really does matter to you and find a balance of a Dem held state doing the same thing. it really shouldn't be that hard I can think of a few instances right off the top of my head but lets see if you can wrap your pointy little head around the concept that politicians as a whole are corrupt or is it just the republicans in your book.....:lame2:

Does this count?


Two Convicted for Ohio Vote Fraud, Media Leaves Out They're Democrats
By Warner Todd Huston | November 6, 2007 - 04:02 ET
We have seen over and over again how the MSM (and the AP in particular) can't seem to force themselves to mention the party affiliation of some elected official accused and/or convicted of a crime if that official happens to be a Democrat. Now the MSM has expanded that from elected officials even to party workers. The AP reports a story on two Democrat election officials convicted of recount rigging and neglect of official duties for their actions during the 2004 elections but, for some hard to determine reason, few if any news sources are mentioning that these two are Democrats. Jacqueline Maiden and Kathleen Dreame have pleaded guilty to the charges after an aborted conviction from last January, the original trial having been granted a retrial on grounds not connected with the pair's actions.

Their crime is a bit hard to explain, but what it comes down to is that they committed fraud with the 2004 ballot recount procedures that amounted to their attempt to get out of following the proper procedure to conduct the recount.

Most of the news reports take great pains to say that the convicted operatives' actions "weren't for political purposes," but even if that were true does that make legitimate not mentioning that they are Democrat Party election officials in Cuyahoga County, one of Ohio's most Democratic counties?

Again, we have to ask, what would these news sources do if these two guilty officials were Republican election workers? Who can doubt that the party affiliation would have led the reportage of this crime?

So, no party affiliation for Maiden and Dreame from either UPI, the AP, or the Cleveland Plain Dealer.

The closest we get is an oblique reference to the claim that the pair's actions didn't help John Kerry in 2004.

Special prosecutor Kevin Baxter did not claim the actions affected the outcome of the election. Democratic Sen. John Kerry Kerry gained 17 votes and President Bush lost six in the county recount.

The fact that Kerry gained 17 votes in the recount would not have been mentioned had these two not been Democrat Poll workers, the suspicion being that they fraudulently created Kerry's gain out of thin air. But surmising this point takes some thought and is not obvious on its surface. So, even the recitation of this point does not explain in a straightforward manner that these two women were Democrats.

No, what we have here is another game of hide-the-Democrat from the readers. Another in a long list of stories that will seemingly never end.

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/warner-todd-huston/2007/11/06/2-convicted-vote-fraud-ohio-no-mention-theyre-democrats

[Nukeman]

how about these over just the last 3 months




Democrat corruption over the last three months
Democrats are harping on the corruption of the Republican Party. Please note that Democrat corruption in government is widespread and far reaching. I could have listed many examples of Democrat corruption such as Sandy Berger stealing documents from the National Archives- however- I decided to look at headlines over the last three months. The below are headline from September - just over 3 months of Democrat corruption.

- An independent counsel who investigated possible tax violations by former Housing and Urban Development Secretary Henry Cisneros charged that the Clinton administration thwarted his efforts to get to the truth.

- U.S. Rep. William Jefferson (D-La.) is under criminal investigation by the U.S. Justice Department for possible bribery in exchange for promoting business deals in Africa

- Federal prosecutors alleged in court documents that Ernest Newton, a former state Democrat Connecticut senator worked with a reputed mobster and his associate to try to stop police raids on businesses and advance their business interests

- Clarence Norman Jr., the longtime powerbroker of Brooklyn NY Democrats was found guilty of intentionally soliciting illegal campaign contributions.

- A top aide to Jim Black, the Democratic speaker of the state Legislature of North Carolina, resigned amid reports he had received payments from a company hoping for the lottery contract. The .State Board of Elections is investigating Black's campaign finances. The investigation comes after the group Democracy North Carolina said it found evidence that video-poker operators were funneling money through unsuspecting donors to Black's campaign.

- West Virginia.Logan County Clerk Glen Dale "Hound Dog" Adkins admitted to selling his vote for $500 in the 1996 Democratic Party primary, while Perry French Harvey Jr. pleaded guilty to conspiring to bribe voters in last year's Democratic contest

- Former Democrat Gov. Donald Siegelman of Alabama was charged in a "widespread racketeering conspiracy" that includes accusations he took a bribe from former hospital executive Richard Scrushy for a key state appointment.

- Frank Ballance - a former Democrat Rep. from North Carolina was sentenced to four years in federal prison for conspiring to divert taxpayer money to his law firm and family through a charitable organization he helped start. Ballance, was a state senator before being elected to Congress in 2002, also agreed to repay $61,917 and to forfeit $203,000 in a bank escrow account in the name of the John A. Hyman Memorial Foundation.

- Five Democratic activists in Wisconsin accused of slashing the tires of vans rented by Republicans on Election Day 2004 are currently on trial

- Chuck Chvala, a Former Democrat Wisconsin Senate Majority Leader was sentenced to nine months in jail for felony misconduct in office and illegally funneling campaign contributions. Chvala had reached a plea deal with prosecutors earlier this year, admitting to charges that he directed a state employee to run a political campaign and used an independent expenditure group to funnel campaign contributions to a fellow Democrat.

- Brett Pfeffer, a former legislative director to Rep. William Jefferson, D-La., pleaded guilty to aiding and abetting bribery of a public official and conspiracy.

- Raymond Reggie, a New Orleans political Democratic consultant and fund-raiser who is Senator Kennedy's brother-in-law was sentenced to a year in prison yesterday after pleading guilty to bank fraud charges.

[truthmatters]

I guess this just makes all this corruption just go away in your minds?

[Kathianne]

I guess this just makes all this corruption just go away in your minds?

Not in mine, when I read the following I was appalled:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/11/a_failed_congressional_ploy.html


November 12, 2007
A Failed Congressional Ploy
By Robert Novak

WASHINGTON -- The ploy had been hatched behind closed doors by Democratic leaders of both houses. A pork-laden appropriations bill filled with $1 billion in earmarks would combine with veto-proof spending for veterans. Instead, the two measures were decoupled in a Senate party-line vote last Tuesday.

The Democratic scheme to present President George W. Bush with a bill that he could not veto seemed a clever strategy, but it was based on presumption of Republican ignorance and cowardice. As late as last Monday, savvy GOP Senate staffers predicted Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison's decoupling motion would fail. In fact, she did not lose a Republican senator, as Democrats fell far short of the 60 votes needed to keep the two bills together.

During a confusing week on Capitol Hill, lawmakers engaged in games difficult for insiders to understand and incomprehensible for ordinary voters. As the first Congress controlled by Democrats since 1994 nears the end of its first year, the desire to bring home the bacon trumped concern over the falling dollar, the crisis in Pakistan and the continuing conflict in Iraq.

The reason that not one of 13 appropriations bills had reached the president's desk was Bush's threat to veto at least 10 of them. Doubting their ability to override these vetoes, Democratic leaders conjured up combined packages that Bush would dare not veto. The earmark-heavy appropriations bill for the Labor and Health and Human Services (HHS) departments would be joined with the Defense bill, which funds Iraq, and with Military Construction, which contains money for veterans.

The Defense component was quickly removed after protests by Rep. John Murtha, influential chairman of the House Defense Appropriations subcommittee. But plans for a Labor-HHS merger with Military Construction went forward. A stand-alone bill containing veterans money had passed the House, 409 to 2, on June 15, and a similar measure got Senate approval, 92 to 1, on Sept. 6 -- measures Bush would sign. But Democrats held off final passage so they could meld it with Labor-HHS, which they did in last week's Senate-House conference report.

At the same time, the pork content of Labor-HHS grew. Citizens Against Government Waste found 2,274 earmarks in the bill worth $1 billion. They include $1.5 million for the AFL-CIO Working for America Institute and $2.2 million for the AFL-CIO Appalachian Council. Democratic Sens. Byron Dorgan and Kent Conrad, North Dakota's two professed budget balancers, got $1 million for Bismarck State College. Sen. Arlen Specter, the Senate Labor-HHS Appropriations subcommittee's ranking Republican, procured $882,025 for "abstinence education" in his home state of Pennsylvania.

The conference report's "compromise" Labor-HHS bill at $151 billion was actually more expensive than either the House or Senate version. It contains a $1 million earmark for a Thomas Daschle Center for Public Service and Representative Democracy at South Dakota State University to honor the former Senate majority leader who was defeated for re-election in 2004. Sponsored by Senate President Pro Tem Robert Byrd and Majority Leader Harry Reid, the Daschle Center was one of nine earmarks "airdropped" into the final version by the Senate-House conference without being passed by either the Senate or House. Silently removed from the bill by the conference report was the prohibition, passed by the Senate in a rare defeat for earmarkers, against spending $1 million for the Woodstock "hippies" museum in Bethel, N.Y.

In the past, if a point of order against an appropriations bill was affirmed, the whole bill would die. But a new rule pressed by Democrats this year made it possible to split veterans spending away from Labor-HHS without killing the bill. All 46 Republican senators present voted to sustain the point of order, so that the Senate fell 13 votes short of the 60 votes needed to keep the two bills together.

Consequently, the Senate last Tuesday again had to pass the bloated Labor-HHS bill. It did, but by a 56 to 37 margin, short of a veto-proof majority, as 19 Republican senators changed their affirmative vote from the last time they considered this bill. In an extraordinary outburst against the 19 switchers, Majority Leader Reid called them "sheep and chickens" who had "chosen to defend a failed president." In truth, he had just lost an audacious ploy.

[Nukeman]

I guess this just makes all this corruption just go away in your minds?I beleive that somewhere on this board at one time I was told that you just think faster than the rest of us unfortunately you have yet to prove that.

You fail to miss the part where most of us dont bring up this type of corruption and attempt to make a point of this party does this or this party does that. When it comes to politicle corruption there are no party lines. This is something with your speedy intelect fail to comprehend.

To answer your STUPID question no it doesnt make it go away but to attempt to make it seem that the republcans are more corrupt than the dems is just stupid.

Your moniker is Truthmatter yet you only represent one skewed side of any argument. Truth knows no side yet you continue to pick apart the republicans and find fault with every thing they do. yet you conveniently over look any type of problems with the democratic party. If truth really matters to you you would cut out the party line bullshit you spewl all the time and give equal time to all side not just the one you HATE...:slap:

[truthmatters]

This is not picking things apart , this is vurtually the entire Alaskan republican party.

You can then go dig up all the Dem corruption over the last 20 years. That does not mean a god damned thing except YOU are the one picking things apart.

[Immanuel]

I guess this just makes all this corruption just go away in your minds?

Nope, just points out the fact that BOTH sides are corrupt. Which is a point you tend to ignore.

Have you ever thought about taking the plank out of the eye of your own party before pointing out the one in the eye of the Republican party?

Immie

[red states rule]

Here is a gem folks


As New Jersey Democrats Meet, Corruption Arrests Steal Spotlight

By DAVID W. CHEN
Published: September 8, 2007
Correction Appended

ATLANTIC CITY, Sept. 7 — Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton wowed the crowd. So did Gov. Jon S. Corzine. And there to cheer them on, relishing every partisan barb aimed at President Bush’s policies on Iraq, the economy and health care, were about 1,000 of the state’s most ardent Democrats.

But the person who all but upstaged the state Democratic Party’s annual convention here was a Republican who was 117 miles away in Newark: the United States attorney, Christopher J. Christie, whose office announced on Thursday the arrests of 11 current or former public officials — including two Democratic assemblymen — and another man accused of accepting thousands of dollars in bribes.

By Friday afternoon, Governor Corzine, as well as the Senate president, Richard J. Codey; the Assembly speaker, Joseph J. Roberts Jr.; and the state Democratic chairman, Joseph P. Cryan, had called on the two legislators to resign. Several high-ranking Democrats, speaking on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly, said that they expected the two — Assemblyman Mims Hackett Jr., who is also the mayor of Orange, and Assemblyman Alfred E. Steele, a Passaic County undersheriff — to step down within days.

Democrats who had read all 44 pages of the supporting material accompanying the criminal complaints said they were shocked and disgusted by the accusations of cash payouts and expletive-filled boasts about vote-rigging.

“Unfortunately, it’s become the focus of the convention, and it’s a very sad day for the Democratic Party,” said State Senator Stephen M. Sweeney, a Democrat from Gloucester County. “How dare these Democrats cast a cloud over the entire Democratic Party? Is your name worth $5,000? People will talk about the corrupt Democratic Party, and you know what? That’s fair game.”

To the embarrassment and astonishment of Democrats gathered in this resort, this was the second consecutive year that Mr. Christie had managed to hog the stage in absentia.

Last year, just as the convention was getting under way, Mr. Christie’s office subpoenaed the records of a nonprofit community agency in Hudson County that had paid more than $300,000 in rent to United States Senator Robert Menendez, a Democrat, while also getting millions of dollars in federal grants with Mr. Menendez’s help. At the time, Mr. Menendez was locked in a close race with his Republican opponent, State Senator Thomas H. Kean Jr., and Democrats contended that the release of the subpoenas so close to the election was politically motivated.

Could Mr. Christie’s timing be mere coincidence two years in a row?

Yes, said most Democrats interviewed here on Friday. Hardly any Democrat was accusing Mr. Christie of playing politics. Instead, many praised him and the Federal Bureau of Investigation agents who worked on the 18-month investigation.

Mr. Codey may have set the tone in a speech at a breakfast that was talked about all day.

Saying that Democrats should “look at ourselves and ask, ‘Are we doing the right thing?’ ” he went on: “These questions about whether the U.S. attorney is too political, that’s not the question. He didn’t put a gun to anyone’s head and force them to put their hand in the cookie jar. Our criticism should never be directed at law enforcement officers who are doing their jobs.”

And Mr. Roberts said that he was prepared to consider new measures to strengthen ethics legislation that was signed on Tuesday by Mr. Corzine — perhaps not immediately in a special session, as Republicans demanded on Friday, but soon.

for the complete article
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/08/nyregion/08dems.html?n=Top/Reference/Times%20Topics/Organizations/D/Democratic%20Party

[truthmatters]

They are both made up of people and people are corruptable.


The R platform is just easier to buy because they can vote in the interests of whoever can afford to buy them and get relected.

When dems do so they lose their base.

The rebuplican party we have at the momment is all about corporate backing.

[Hagbard Celine]

So I guess the fact that there have been Democrats who have been caught or accused of malfeasance, it excuses the Republicans from Alaska? Is that the gist of the argument here?

[red states rule]

They are both made up of people and people are corruptable.


The R platform is just easier to buy because they can vote in the interests of whoever can afford to buy them and get relected.

When dems do so they lose their base.

The rebuplican party we have at the momment is all about corporate backing.

Oh really?

Clinton Supporter Arrested in N.J. Corruption Sting
By Patrick Healy

Update: Blake Zeff, a spokesman for the Clinton campaign, just e-mailed to say that Mayor Rivera stepped down from Mrs. Clinton’s Mayors Council today.
Among the 11 public officials arrested in an F.B.I. corruption sting in New Jersey today was a leading Democratic supporter of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton’s presidential campaign in that state, Mayor Samuel Rivera of Passaic.
It was the latest legal embarrassment involving an ally of the Clinton campaign, coming only one day after a wealthy Clinton donor, Norman Hsu, missed his court date in a California fraud case and apparently disappeared.
Clinton advisers this spring and summer have been aggressively touting their long list of endorsements from elected officials and prominent Democratic donors, to indicate the breadth of establishment support that Mrs. Clinton enjoys. Yet, in the case of Mr. Hsu and now Mayor Rivera, the criminal allegations indicate a cost that can come with quickly rounding up political support from far and wide.
The Clinton campaign has severed ties with Mr. Hsu; as for Mayor Rivera, he remains a member of Mrs. Clinton’s Mayors Council as of this afternoon, but a campaign spokesman said that the charges were “serious” and will be monitored closely.
According to the criminal complaint filed in Federal District Court, Mayor Rivera allegedly promised to deliver a majority of votes on the Passaic City Council to steer city insurance brokerage business to a dummy company set up by the F.B.I.
Federal agents posing as company executives offered a $50,000 payment to Mr. Rivera in return for the business, according to the complaint; Mr. Rivera allegedly accepted an initial installment of $5,000.
Mr. Rivera, according to a transcript of secretly recorded conversations laid out in the complaint, boasted profanely of essentially controlling the seven-member city council. He said that securing a four-vote majority would be “easy, easy, easy,” and, at another point, said the deal was as good as done.
“I make the [expletive] decision. And the council. And believe me, I’ve got the four [expletive] votes on the Council. So let’s stop [expletive], and let’s get this thing rolling,” Mr. Rivera said, according to the complaint.
Mr. Rivera is one of about 100 members of Mrs. Clinton’s Mayors Council, which, according to a campaign press release in July, “will advise the campaign on policy and outreach.”
When Mr. Zeff was asked this afternoon about Mr. Rivera’s status with the campaign he replied, “These are serious charges and as the process moves forward we will be monitoring them closely.”
The 11 officials, who also included two Democratic state assemblymen, are scheduled to appear in Federal District Court
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/09/06/clinton-supporter-arrested-in-nj-corruption-sting/

[Kathianne]

So I guess the fact that there have been Democrats who have been caught or accused of malfeasance, it excuses the Republicans from Alaska? Is that the gist of the argument here?

Actually the point you and TM seem to be making the only corruption that counts is that by Republicans. On the other hand, TM throws in some nonsense about Democrats that do so 'lose their base.' :laugh2:

[truthmatters]

I hope he goes down hard.

I will vote Hil if I have to but I would prefer someone who is less soaked in the current system.

Do you want to talk about Abramhoff and who he was buying?

[Immanuel]

They are both made up of people and people are corruptable.


The R platform is just easier to buy because they can vote in the interests of whoever can afford to buy them and get relected.

When dems do so they lose their base.

The rebuplican party we have at the momment is all about corporate backing.

You can't be serious!

The Dems loose their base if they vote against them? Please!!

The Dems have their base sown so deeply into their back pockets that it would take decades, if not centuries, to extract them even if the Dems changed immediately.


So I guess the fact that there have been Democrats who have been caught or accused of malfeasance, it excuses the Republicans from Alaska? Is that the gist of the argument here?

It seems to me that the only one who is being one-sided and excusing corruption here is TM.

Immie

[Nukeman]

So I guess the fact that there have been Democrats who have been caught or accused of malfeasance, it excuses the Republicans from Alaska? Is that the gist of the argument here?

Please reread post 7 and tell me where I excused any corrupt behaviour by the republicans. I am just sick of her party line BS...

[red states rule]

I hope he goes down hard.

I will vote Hil if I have to but I would prefer someone who is less soaked in the current system.

Do you want to talk about Abramhoff and who he was buying?

There is a long list of Dems who took his money - including Hillary

[Hagbard Celine]

Actually the point you and TM seem to be making the only corruption that counts is that by Republicans. On the other hand, TM throws in some nonsense about Democrats that do so 'lose their base.' :laugh2:
I've never made that "point." So :slap: on you. I think both sides are the same. The only things that differentiate them are bs wedge issues like abortion and gay rights--things that don't affect any of us. All politicians are lying scumbags. I just think it's funny that when confronted with evidence of criminal activity from your "side," you get all defensive. :coffee:

[Kathianne]

I've never made that "point." So :slap: on you. I think both sides are the same. The only things that differentiate them are bs wedge issues like abortion and gay rights--things that don't affect any of us. All politicians are lying scumbags. I just think it's funny that when confronted with evidence of criminal activity from your "side," you get all defensive. :coffee:

Actually I think the majority in Washington are corrupt, not as much as the legislators in Springfield, IL, but too many. The pork in DC is killing us, making it impossible NOT to raise taxes, but giving all of us, poor and better off, less than we should expect.

[Nukeman]

This is not picking things apart , this is vurtually the entire Alaskan republican party.

You can then go dig up all the Dem corruption over the last 20 years. That does not mean a god damned thing except YOU are the one picking things apart.
Hey dip shit reread post 4 and 7, with your superior intelect you will note I only provided the last 3 MONTHS of Dem corruption not 20 years *idiot* You started this thread with the "bad wittle webublicans in Awaska" they are sooo bad look at them and when it is pointed out to you very clearly that corruption HAS NO PARTY LINES you continue to spew your hate of everything republican.....


Get a f***ing clue will you!!!!!!:slap:

[red states rule]

Abramoff Lobbying & Political Contributions to Democrats, per FEC Records


Senator Max Baucus (D-MT) Received At Least – $22,500

* Senator Evan Bayh (D-IN) Received At Least – $6,500

* Senator Joseph Biden (D-DE) Received At Least – $1,250

* Senator Jeff Bingaman (D-NM) Received At Least – $2,000

* Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) Received At Least – $20,250

* Senator Maria Cantwell (D-WA) Received At Least – $21,765

* Senator Tom Carper (D-DE) Received At Least – $7,500

* Senator Hillary Clinton (D-NY) Received At Least – $12,950

* Senator Kent Conrad (D-ND) Received At Least – $8,000

* Senator Jon Corzine (D-NJ) Received At Least – $7,500

* Senator Chris Dodd (D-CT) Received At Least – $14,792

* Senator Byron Dorgan (D-ND) Received At Least – $79,300

* Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) Received At Least – $14,000

* Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) Received At Least – $2,000

* Senator Russ Feingold (D-WI) Received At Least – $1,250

* Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA) Received At Least – $45,750

* Senator Daniel Inouye (D-HI) Received At Least – $9,000

* Senator Jim Jeffords (I-VT) Received At Least – $2,000

* Senator Tim Johnson (D-SD) Received At Least – $14,250

* Senator Ted Kennedy (D-MA) Received At Least – $3,300

* Senator John Kerry (D-MA) Received At Least – $98,550

* Senator Mary Landrieu (D-LA) Received At Least – $28,000 * Senator Pat Leahy (D-VT) Received At Least – $4,000

* Senator Carl Levin (D-MI) Received At Least – $6,000

* Senator Joe Lieberman (D-CT) Received At Least – $29,830

* Senator Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) Received At Least – $14,891

* Senator Barbara Mikulski (D-MD) Received At Least – $10,550

* Senator Patty Murray (D-WA) Received At Least – $78,991

* Senator Bill Nelson (D-FL) Received At Least – $20,168

* Senator Ben Nelson (D-NE) Received At Least – $5,200

* Senator Barack Obama (D-IL) Received At Least – $7,500

* Senator Mark Pryor (D-AR) Received At Least – $2,300

* Senator Jack Reed (D-RI) Received At Least – $3,500

* Senator Harry Reid (D-NV) Received At Least – $68,941

* Senator John Rockefeller (D-WV) Received At Least – $4,000

* Senator Ken Salazar (D-CO) Received At Least – $4,500

* Senator Paul Sarbanes (D-MD) Received At Least – $4,300

* Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) Received At Least – $29,550

* Senator Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) Received At Least – $6,250

* Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR) Received At Least – $6,250 Democratic Senatorial Campaign Cmte $423,480

Democratic Congressional Campaign Cmte $354,700

Democratic National Cmte $65,720

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1551786/posts

[truthmatters]

How many were caught in corruption in return for the donations.

You see these donations were not illegal it was what was done in return for them that was.

Do you really think the R congress of 6 years would not have brought them down if they could have?

[red states rule]

How many were caught in corruption in return for the donations.

You see these donations were not illegal it was what was done in return for them that was.

Do you really think the R congress of 6 years would not have brought them down if they could have?

Howie Dean McGovern said NO Democrats took his money

Libs tried to make people think only Republicans took Abramoff money

Finally, with Hillary as your top candidate, the last thing you should want to do is to talk about politicans taking bribes and illegal campaign contributions

[Kathianne]

How many were caught in corruption in return for the donations.

You see these donations were not illegal it was what was done in return for them that was.

Do you really think the R congress of 6 years would not have brought them down if they could have?

You mean like the administration had justice go after Sandy Berger? No, for both sides they protect one another, sort of a code among thieves.

[truthmatters]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/graphic/2005/12/12/GR2005121200286.html


This should clear it up for you.

[red states rule]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/graphic/2005/12/12/GR2005121200286.html


This should clear it up for you.

Send the link to Howie Dean, he said not a single Dem took Jack's money

[truthmatters]

Who did Abramhoff give to?

This is a list of his clients and him.

Now prove Abramhoff gave the Dems money?

[red states rule]

Who did Abramhoff give to?

This is a list of his clients and him.

Now prove Abramhoff gave the Dems money?

Read post #22

All the Dems are there and the amounts they took

[truthmatters]

That includes more than just what Abramoff gave. Now go find me who Abramoff himself gave to?

[red states rule]

That includes more than just what Abramoff gave. Now go find me who Abramoff himself gave to?

Abramoff Lobbying & Political Contributions to Democrats, per FEC Records

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1551786/posts


It is all there waiting for you to ignore it TM

[retiredman]

were those contributions to democrats made by Abramoff, or made by organizations that Abramoff represented?

[truthmatters]

http://users.bestweb.net/%7Ebgeiger/abramoff.htm

Abramoff gave no money to dems and howie was right.

[manu1959]

Read post #22

All the Dems are there and the amounts they took

this is commical.....i don't think truth even reads the posts....i don't truth thinks faster than the rest of us i think truth gets confused fatser than the rest of us.....

both sides are corrupt.....it is required in order to play the game, keep your seat, obtain campaign funds and secure funds for your jursidiction....

what i always find curious is the amount of time the politicians themsleves spend accusing the other side of things they themselves are guilty of....most spend more time being a critic than actually doing anything....

to say one side is more corrupt than the other is disingenious...corrupt is corrupt....

[red states rule]

were those contributions to democrats made by Abramoff, or made by organizations that Abramoff represented?

Per the FEC, it was Abramoff cash

[truthmatters]

Dean said money from Abramoff and he was right.

BTW how many Dems got indicted for connections to Abramoff?



Partial list:

Individual Campaigns

Organization Amount Party Affiliation Date of Donation Donor

ABRAHAM SENATE 2000 $1,000 Republican 10/9/2000 Jack Abramoff
ABRAHAM SENATE 2000 $1,000 Republican 3/29/2000 Jack Abramoff

ART RHODES FOR CONGRESS $1,000 Republican 5/29/1998 Jack Abramoff

ASHCROFT 2000 $1,000 Republican 6/22/1999 Jack Abramoff
ASHCROFT 2000 $1,000 Republican 6/22/1999 Pamela Abramoff

BARBARA ALBY FOR CONGRESS COMMITTEE $1,000 Republican 5/15/1998 Pamela Abramoff
BARBARA ALBY FOR CONGRESS COMMITTEE $1,000 Republican 5/13/1998 Jack Abramoff

BILL MCCOLLUM FOR US SENATE $1,000 Republican 9/30/2000 Jack Abramoff

BOB NEY FOR CONGRESS $1,000 Republican 3/19/2001 Jack Abramoff
BOB NEY FOR CONGRESS $1,000 Republican 6/30/2000 Jack Abramoff
BOB NEY FOR CONGRESS $1,000 Republican 6/30/2000 Pam Abramoff
BOB NEY FOR CONGRESS $250 Republican 9/28/1996 Jack Abramoff

BOB RILEY FOR CONGRESS $500 Republican 5/17/2000 Jack Abramoff
BOB RILEY FOR CONGRESS $500 Republican 5/17/2000 Jack Abramoff

BOB SMITH FOR U S SENATE ($1,000) Republican 11/9/2002 Jack Abramoff
BOB SMITH FOR U S SENATE ($1,000) Republican 11/9/2002 Pam Abramoff
BOB SMITH FOR U S SENATE $1,000 Republican 6/29/2002 Jack Abramoff
BOB SMITH FOR U S SENATE $1,920 Republican 6/8/2002 Jack Abramoff
BOB SMITH FOR U S SENATE ($920) Republican 6/8/2002 Jack Abramoff
BOB SMITH FOR U S SENATE $920 Republican 5/12/2001 Jack Abramoff
BOB SMITH FOR U S SENATE $1,000 Republican 2/28/2001 Jack Abramoff
BOB SMITH FOR U S SENATE $1,000 Republican 2/28/2001 Jack Abramoff
BOB SMITH FOR U S SENATE $1,000 Republican 2/28/2001 Pam Abramoff
BOB SMITH FOR U S SENATE $1,000 Republican 2/28/2001 Pam Abramoff
BOB SMITH FOR U S SENATE $920 Republican 5/12/2000 Jack Abramoff

BORDONARO FOR CONGRESS $1,000 Republican 2/2/1998 Jack Abramoff
BORDONARO FOR CONGRESS $1,000 Republican 12/24/1997 Jack Abramoff

BUSH FOR PRESIDENT INC. $1,000 Republican 6/30/1999 Jack Abramoff
BUSH FOR PRESIDENT INC. $1,000 Republican 6/30/1999 Pamela Abramoff
BUSH-CHENEY '04 (,) INC $2,000 Republican 6/23/2003 Jack Abramoff
BUSH-CHENEY '04 (,) INC $2,000 Republican 6/20/2003 Pamela Abramoff

CANNON FOR CONGRESS $1,000 Republican 12/2/2003 Jack Abramoff
CANNON FOR CONGRESS $1,000 Republican 3/13/2003 Jack Abramoff

CANTOR FOR CONGRESS $2,000 Republican 3/19/2003 Jack Abramoff
CANTOR FOR CONGRESS $2,000 Republican 3/19/2003 Jack Abramoff
CANTOR FOR CONGRESS $2,000 Republican 2/18/2003 Pamela Abramoff
CANTOR FOR CONGRESS $2,000 Republican 2/18/2003 Pamela Abramoff
CANTOR FOR CONGRESS $1,000 Republican 7/29/2002 Jack Abramoff
CANTOR FOR CONGRESS $1,000 Republican 7/29/2002 Pamela Abramoff
CANTOR FOR CONGRESS $1,000 Republican 5/8/2001 Jack Abramoff
CANTOR FOR CONGRESS $1,000 Republican 5/17/2000 Mrs. Jack Abramoff
CANTOR FOR CONGRESS $1,000 Republican 5/17/2000 Pamela Abramoff

CAROLYN GRANT FOR CONGRESS $1,000 Republican 6/26/2002 Jack Abramoff

CHAMBLISS FOR SENATE $1,000 Republican 11/2/2002 Jack Abramoff

CHARLES TAYLOR FOR CONGRESS COMMITTEE $2,000 Republican 4/11/2003 Jack Abramoff
CHARLES TAYLOR FOR CONGRESS COMMITTEE $250 Republican 9/27/1999 Jack Abramoff

CHRISTOPHER COX CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE $250 Republican 9/27/1996 Jack Abramoff

CITIZENS FOR ARLEN SPECTER $2,000 Republican 3/29/2003 Jack Abramoff
CITIZENS FOR ARLEN SPECTER $2,000 Republican 3/29/2003 Pamela Abramoff

CITIZENS FOR BUNNING $1,000 Republican 11/3/2003 Jack Abramoff

CITIZENS FOR COCHRAN $1,000 Republican 12/4/2001 Jack Abramoff

CLAUDE HUTCHISON FOR CONGRESS COMMITTEE $1,000 Republican 9/15/2000 Jack Abramoff

COMMITTEE TO RE-ELECT CONGRESSMAN DANA ROHRABACHER $1,000 Republican 3/13/2003 Jack Abramoff
COMMITTEE TO RE-ELECT CONGRESSMAN DANA ROHRABACHER $1,000 Republican 4/11/2000 Jack Abramoff
COMMITTEE TO RE-ELECT CONGRESSMAN DANA ROHRABACHER $1,000 Republican 4/11/2000 Jack Abramoff
COMMITTEE TO RE-ELECT CONGRESSMAN DANA ROHRABACHER $1,000 Republican 2/25/2000 Jack Abramoff
COMMITTEE TO RE-ELECT CONGRESSMAN DANA ROHRABACHER $1,000 Republican 11/1/1999 Jack Abramoff
COMMITTEE TO RE-ELECT CONGRESSMAN DANA ROHRABACHER $1,000 Republican 5/24/1999 Jack Abramoff
COMMITTEE TO RE-ELECT CONGRESSMAN DANA ROHRABACHER $1,000 Republican 2/15/1999 Jack Abramoff
COMMITTEE TO RE-ELECT CONGRESSMAN DANA ROHRABACHER $1,000 Republican 10/20/1997 Jack Abramoff
COMMITTEE TO RE-ELECT CONGRESSMAN DANA ROHRABACHER $1,000 Republican 9/20/1996 Jack Abramoff
COMMITTEE TO RE-ELECT CONGRESSMAN DANA ROHRABACHER $500 Republican 3/26/1996 Jack Abramoff

COMMITTEE TO RE-ELECT RON PAUL $250 Republican 9/30/1996 Jack Abramoff

CONNIE MORELLA FOR CONGRESS COMMITTEE $1,000 Republican 10/18/2002 Jack Abramoff
CONNIE MORELLA FOR CONGRESS COMMITTEE $500 Republican 10/18/2002 Pamela Abramoff
CONNIE MORELLA FOR CONGRESS COMMITTEE $500 Republican 1/31/2002 Pamela Abramoff

CRANE FOR CONGRESS COMMITTEE $1,000 Republican 2/19/1998 Jack Abramoff
CRANE FOR CONGRESS COMMITTEE $1,000 Republican 9/24/1996 Jack Abramoff

CREMEANS FOR CONGRESS $250 Republican 9/30/1996 Jack Abramoff

CUBIN FOR CONGRESS INC $250 Republican 9/30/1996 Jack Abramoff

DAN BURTON FOR CONGRESS COMMITTEE $1,000 Republican 9/30/2002 Pamela Abramoff
DAN BURTON FOR CONGRESS COMMITTEE $1,000 Republican 5/6/2002 Jack Abramoff
DAN BURTON FOR CONGRESS COMMITTEE $1,000 Republican 11/14/2001 Jack Abramoff
DAN BURTON FOR CONGRESS COMMITTEE $1,000 Republican 5/2/2000 Jack Abramoff
DAN BURTON FOR CONGRESS COMMITTEE $1,000 Republican 6/22/1999 Jack Abramoff
DAN BURTON FOR CONGRESS COMMITTEE $1,000 Republican 6/24/1997 Jack Abramoff
DAN BURTON FOR CONGRESS COMMITTEE $1,000 Republican 9/20/1996 Jack Abramoff

[red states rule]

Dean said money from Abramoff and he was right.

BTW how many Dems got indicted for connections to Abramoff?

Dems took his money, and Dean was proved to be lying

[truthmatters]

The dems were NEVER given his money so you are wrong.

Now HOW MANY DEMS GOT INDICTED FOR WRONGDOING IN THE SCANDAL?



How many Alaskian Rs are going down?

[manu1959]

The dems were NEVER given his money so you are wrong.

Now HOW MANY DEMS GOT INDICTED FOR WRONGDOING IN THE SCANDAL?

so their on FEC records they filed are wrong.....who forged them?

[red states rule]

so their on FEC records they filed are wrong.....who forged them?

Karl Rove?

[JohnDoe]

this is commical.....i don't think truth even reads the posts....i don't truth thinks faster than the rest of us i think truth gets confused fatser than the rest of us.....

both sides are corrupt.....it is required in order to play the game, keep your seat, obtain campaign funds and secure funds for your jursidiction....

what i always find curious is the amount of time the politicians themsleves spend accusing the other side of things they themselves are guilty of....most spend more time being a critic than actually doing anything....

to say one side is more corrupt than the other is disingenious...corrupt is corrupt....I believe they are elected by their state citizens to look out for their own state, that includes bringing home some of the bacon.

What I don't believe is, that they are elected to do this at all costs, including via ILLEGAL means.
fyi
As much at all the repubs complained about Massachusetts, (the big dig, etc), Massachusetts DID NOT bring home the Bacon porportionate to what the tax payers of massachusets paid to the Feds, in federal income tax....where as many states like Alaska(stephens) and west virginia(byrd), took the massachusett's tax payers money and used it for themselves... Mass citizens only got back in pork about 77 cents on the dollar of what they give to the federal general revenue fund, whereas Alaska got from the feds $1.37 for every dollar their citizens gave in federal income tax....

jd

[truthmatters]

Abramoff gave money.

His lobby clients gave money.

they are two different sources.

[red states rule]

Abramoff gave money.

His lobby clients gave money.

they are two different sources.

Very Clintonesk excuse

[truthmatters]

Its just the truth of what he said.

You just cant handle the truth.

[red states rule]

Its just the truth of what he said.

You just cant handle the truth.

Your truth is blown out of thr water by FEC records

[JohnDoe]

so their on FEC records they filed are wrong.....who forged them?not a dime of Abramoff's illegal money went to any dem.

The Dems DID get money from some of the Lobbies that were associated with Abramoff with whom they had always gotten money from, even before Abramoff's association with them, but they got nothing from him and his illegal doings, nothing.

Here is who have been CONVICTED for the involvement in his ILLEGAL doings,
and with a republican Justice dept, NOT ONE DEMOCRAT was convicted or even charged with corruption....all associated to his corruption were Republicans.


People convicted in Abramoff probe (as of June 9, 2007)
Lawmakers, lobbyists, Bush administration officials, congressional staffers and businessmen caught up in the Jack Abramoff public corruption probe:[45]

Italia Federici, co-founder of the Council of Republicans for Environmental Advocacy, pleaded guilty to tax evasion and obstruction of a Senate investigation into Abramoff's relationship with officials at the Department of Interior.

Former Rep. Bob Ney, R-Ohio, sentenced in January to 2 1/2 years in prison, acknowledged taking bribes from Abramoff. Ney was in the traveling party on an Abramoff-sponsored golfing trip to Scotland at the heart of the case against former White House official David Safavian.

Former Deputy Interior Secretary Steven Griles, the highest-ranking Bush administration official convicted in the scandal, pleaded guilty to obstructing justice. He admitted lying to a Senate committee about his relationship with Abramoff, who repeatedly sought Griles' intervention at Interior on behalf of Indian tribal clients.

Abramoff is serving six years in prison on a criminal case out of Florida, where he pleaded guilty in January 2006 to charges of conspiracy, honest services fraud and tax evasion. He has not yet been sentenced on charges of mail fraud, conspiracy and tax evasion stemming from the influence-peddling scandal in Washington. Abramoff is cooperating in a bribery investigation involving lawmakers, their aides and members of the Bush administration.

Tony Rudy, lobbyist and one-time aide to former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-Texas, pleaded guilty in March 2006 to conspiring with Abramoff. He is cooperating with investigators.

Former White House official David Safavian, the Bush administration's former top procurement official, was sentenced to 18 months in prison in October 2006 after he was found guilty of covering up his dealings with Abramoff. Safavian is appealing his conviction.

Michael Scanlon, a former Abramoff business partner and DeLay aide, pleaded guilty in November 2005 to conspiring to bribe public officials in connection with his lobbying work on behalf of Indian tribes and casino issues. He is cooperating with investigators.

William Heaton, former chief of staff for Ney, pleaded guilty to a federal conspiracy charge involving a golf trip to Scotland, expensive meals, and tickets to sporting events between 2002 and 2004 as payoffs for helping Abramoff's clients.

Neil Volz, a former chief of staff to Ney who left government to work for Abramoff, pleaded guilty in May 2006 to conspiring to corrupt Ney and others with trips and other aid.

Mark Zachares, former aide to Rep. Don Young, R-Alaska, pleaded guilty to conspiracy. He acknowledged accepting tens of thousands of dollars worth of gifts and a golf trip to Scotland from Abramoff's team in exchange for official acts on the lobbyist's behalf.

Roger Stillwell, a former Interior Department official, was sentenced to two years on probation in January after pleading guilty to a misdemeanor charge for not reporting hundreds of dollars worth of sports and concert tickets he received from Abramoff.

Former Abramoff business partner Adam Kidan, sentenced in Florida in March 2006 to nearly six years in prison for conspiracy and fraud in the 2000 purchase of the Fort Lauderdale-based SunCruz Casinos gambling fleet.


Now I am IN NO WAY saying that there are not some Democrats out there that are the scum of the earth and corrupt as the best of them! Just that Abramoff and his ILLEGAL DOINGS involved all republicans.

jd

[red states rule]

not a dime of Abramoff's illegal money went to any dem.

The Dems DID get money from some of the Lobbies that were associated with Abramoff with whom they had always gotten money from, even before Abramoff's association with them, but they got nothing from him and his illegal doings, nothing.

Here is who have been CONVICTED for the involvement in his ILLEGAL doings,
and with a republican Justice dept, NOT ONE DEMOCRAT was convicted or even charged with corruption....all associated to his corruption were Republicans.



Now I am IN NO WAY saying that there are not some Deocrats out there that are the scum of the earth and corrupt as the best of them! Just that Abramoff and his ILLEGAL DOINGS involved all republicans.

jd

JD, I did not realize you had more info then the FEC. Did the Dems lie when they filed their reports?

[truthmatters]

The list of republicans is also going to be long in this alaskian scandal.

[Immanuel]

JD, I did not realize you had more info then the FEC. Did the Dems lie when they filed their reports?

I'm just curious because I don't give a crap about the Abramoff corruption BS. They are all corrupt and I don't care what side of the aisle they sit on.

But, JD used a link to prove her point. I don't know if it is accurate or not and I don't care, but can you provide a link or quote to prove she's wrong? She and TM contested your post as being inaccurate. Do you know of any Dems who have been taken down in this particular scandal?

I don't... but that doesn't mean they are the saints TM and JD like to make them out to be either.

Immie

[JohnDoe]

JD, I did not realize you had more info then the FEC. Did the Dems lie when they filed their reports? Rsr, IF you really want to know the truth, here is an article that explains it. And if you look at the convictions that came from this Scandal, while we had a Republican run Justice dept, who were probably most anxcious to convict any democrat that they could in connection with this scandal.

No Democrat received Abramoff illegal monies, they did recive money from some of the lobbies that Abramoff was also associated with, but NONE of that money was gotten illegally or used illegally, and even with that, the money from all of his dealings, illegal and legal, the money he payed out, was 11:1 going to republicans verses Democrats.

You are not denying that only Republicans were convicted with their involvement with him and NO Democrats were even charged with their association to the lobby firms are you?

This was a republican culture of corruption. NOT by any means was it involved with Democrats....that is just plain facts....and History, as I have shown.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200702260005

And as I have said before, I am in no way saying there are no corrupt Democratic people out there, just that with Abramoff and his misdoings, there were NOT.

jd

p.s. I hate arguing with you :(

[avatar4321]

you started a club? how quaint...:)

[truthmatters]

I'm just curious because I don't give a crap about the Abramoff corruption BS. They are all corrupt and I don't care what side of the aisle they sit on.

But, JD used a link to prove her point. I don't know if it is accurate or not and I don't care, but can you provide a link or quote to prove she's wrong? She and TM contested your post as being inaccurate. Do you know of any Dems who have been taken down in this particular scandal?

I don't... but that doesn't mean they are the saints TM and JD like to make them out to be either.

Immie

Immie I have repetedly said that they are all just people and all people are corruptable. As I have stated before (even in this thread) the Republicans are easier to buy because they can do these things and get relected by their constituients because their policies are more in line with the corps.

The corporations are the ones buying these guys and they perfer Rs. Its just the fact of the situation. When Dems get bought its obvious to their constituents.

[avatar4321]

Immie I have repetedly said that they are all just people and all people are corruptable. As I have stated before (even in this thread) the Republicans are easier to buy because they can do these things and get relected by their constituients because their policies are more in line with the corps.

The corporations are the ones buying these guys and they perfer Rs. Its just the fact of the situation. When Dems get bought its obvious to their constituents.

The only difference between Democrats and Republicans is Republicans actually have values to corrupt. Democrats dont have values so according to you they cant be corrupted. They can kill people and you guys dont care. Don't believe me ask Senator Kennedy

[Immanuel]

Immie I have repetedly said that they are all just people and all people are corruptable. As I have stated before (even in this thread) the Republicans are easier to buy because they can do these things and get relected by their constituients because their policies are more in line with the corps.

The corporations are the ones buying these guys and they perfer Rs. Its just the fact of the situation. When Dems get bought its obvious to their constituents.

TM,

If you had even once posted an article about corrupt Democrats I might take this seriously. Did you even see my post in reply? You should take the plank out of your own parties eye before you attempt to do so with the Republicans.

And no, their constituents are for the most part completely oblivious to Democratic corruption.

Immie

[truthmatters]

The only difference between Democrats and Republicans is Republicans actually have values to corrupt. Democrats dont have values so according to you they cant be corrupted. They can kill people and you guys dont care. Don't believe me ask Senator Kennedy

Where did I say that Dems could not be corrupted?

You see this is why argueing with you is like spanking a child.

It just does no one any good.

[avatar4321]

Where did I say that Dems could not be corrupted?

You see this is why argueing with you is like spanking a child.

It just does no one any good.

obviously, youve never had a kid.

[manu1959]

not a dime of Abramoff's illegal money went to any dem.....

The Dems DID get money from some of the Lobbies that were associated with Abramoff.....

Now I am IN NO WAY saying that there are not some Democrats out there that are the scum of the earth and corrupt as the best of them!

Just that Abramoff and his ILLEGAL DOINGS involved all republicans.

jd

i edited out some bits but left the spin in place.....

classic....we took money from a crook .... but our money wans't the "illegal" money....:laugh2:

[truthmatters]

obviously, youve never had a kid.

I have a 19 year old son.

If you had to spank a child to get them to listen to you then you are a limited parent.

[truthmatters]

i edited out some bits but left the spin in place.....

classic....we took money from a crook .... but our money wans't the "illegal" money....:laugh2:


The Indian tribes who were Abramoffs clients were and are NOT today crooks.
The democrats were given money by them.

Abramoff IS a crook and he gave NO money to dems , he only gave to Rs.

These are facts.

[avatar4321]

Where did I say that Dems could not be corrupted?

You see this is why argueing with you is like spanking a child.

It just does no one any good.

I decided this deserved a better response.

Have you ever criticized a Democrat for corruption? Ive never seen you do it on this board. None of us have problems criticizing other Republicans for bad behavior. Why don't you ever attack Democrat corruption? There is alot more of it among the leadership then Republican.

[avatar4321]

I have a 19 year old son.

If you had to spank a child to get them to listen to you then you are a limited parent.

Trying to change the subject?

No one said anything about needing to spank a child. You made a statement that its not effective. That is blatantly false. Whether its needed or warranted is a completely different subject. Quite irrelevant to your attacks on Republicans to the exclusions of Democrats.

[Immanuel]

I decided this deserved a better response.

Question put to TM: Have you ever criticized a Democrat for corruption?

Answer: No, not on any board I have participated with her on.

Immie

[JohnDoe]

i edited out some bits but left the spin in place.....

classic....we took money from a crook .... but our money wans't the "illegal" money....:laugh2:Say what you want and twist as you wish. It is apparent that you and the others on this board, refuse to talk the truth and always under any condition, refuse to accept or complain or acknowledge when corruptions occurs on the republican side of the aisle, WITHOUT having to say, "mommy, mommy, that's not fair, the democrats have done it toooo one time or another in their lives, so mommy, mommy please make it go away...."

....please.

Abramoff and this case in Alaska are republican corruption scandals, they are not Democratic ones. Be a MAN instead of a kid and accept responsibility, where it is due.

What is so hard about that?

When you post a corruption thread involving Democrats.... I will GLADLY accept and speak out that the Democrats involved were corrupt pieces of shit.

WHAT makes this difficult for you all to do? Why do you feel compelled to defend these PARTICULAR corrupt republicans that have been CONVICTED OF THEIR CRIMES, in the case with Abramoff and still try to point fingures at Democrats when no Democrat was convicted or even charged with a crime in the Abramoff case?

Were you fed lies that you can't let go of, like the Democrats were corrupt also with Abramoff when they were not, and having to face the truth about that totally blows your mind?

What is it?

What is your argument? Who are you taking such pride in defending here?


AND YES, there is corruption abound out there on both sides of the aisle, but that has nothing to do with this thread with the Alaskan scandal or Abramoff that was brought up in this thread and all the republicans that were charged and convicted for actual crimes involved with Abramoff?

As far a TM only bringing up the major republican scandals and not bringing up the Democratic scandals of past or present, to me that is expected... though it would be nice to see it changed.

Not one of the republicans on this board have brought up any corruption cases about Republicans have they? Did they bring up what is going on there recently in Alaska? HELL NO, they haven't...at least for the most part. so WHY do you all expect TM to do this with Democrats?

Everytime you or others from both sides of the aisle starts defending or pointing fingers towards the other side of the aisle when their side is at FAULT, it gives PERMISSION for their own side being corrupt and the corruption will continue to go on, because of this acceptance by ones own side of this corruption imo.

I don't agree with TM that Republicans are more susceptible to corruption because of their business connections or whatever, I personally believe that there have been many more republicans the past 6 years caught being corrupt because the Republicans were the ones in power....and could do something for those trying to bribe them or corrupt them and when Democrats hold the reigns completely, it is the Democrats that have more corruption cases than the republicans.

Now if that upsets you or makes me out to be some EVIL LIBERAL to say this then fine I suppose I will have to live with your shit for it. :(

jd

[JohnDoe]

Answer: No, not on any board I have participated with her on.

Immie
ummm, I think you are wrong there immie, I can remember her bringing up a couple... of course this is only a couple out of the many she has brought up about republicans...but I believe she brought up the Jefferson case on her own, and one other, think it was a local case, not federal, if memory serves.

btw, have you posted any threads about republican scandals on this site or the other 3 we have participated in? I don't think so.

So what makes you any different than tm, when it comes to this? Just curious....???

jd

[stephanie]

I say we KICK out all the corrupted bastards from BOTH PARTIES...and start over...These people make me sick...

[Kathianne]

Say what you want and twist as you wish. It is apparent that you and the others on this board, refuse to talk the truth and always under any condition, refuse to accept or complain or acknowledge when corruptions occurs on the republican side of the aisle, WITHOUT having to say, "mommy, mommy, that's not fair, the democrats have done it toooo one time or another in their lives, so mommy, mommy please make it go away...."

....please.

Abramoff and this case in Alaska are republican corruption scandals, they are not Democratic ones. Be a MAN instead of a kid and accept responsibility, where it is due.

What is so hard about that?

When you post a corruption thread involving Democrats.... I will GLADLY accept and speak out that the Democrats involved were corrupt pieces of shit.

WHAT makes this difficult for you all to do? Why do you feel compelled to defend these PARTICULAR corrupt republicans that have been CONVICTED OF THEIR CRIMES, in the case with Abramoff and still try to point fingures at Democrats when no Democrat was convicted or even charged with a crime in the Abramoff case?

Were you fed lies that you can't let go of, like the Democrats were corrupt also with Abramoff when they were not, and having to face the truth about that totally blows your mind?

What is it?

What is your argument? Who are you taking such pride in defending here?


AND YES, there is corruption abound out there on both sides of the aisle, but that has nothing to do with this thread with the Alaskan scandal or Abramoff that was brought up in this thread and all the republicans that were charged and convicted for actual crimes involved with Abramoff?

As far a TM only bringing up the major republican scandals and not bringing up the Democratic scandals of past or present, to me that is expected... though it would be nice to see it changed.

Not one of the republicans on this board have brought up any corruption cases about Republicans have they? Did they bring up what is going on there recently in Alaska? HELL NO, they haven't...at least for the most part. so WHY do you all expect TM to do this with Democrats?

Everytime you or others from both sides of the aisle starts defending or pointing fingers towards the other side of the aisle when their side is at FAULT, it gives PERMISSION for their own side being corrupt and the corruption will continue to go on, because of this acceptance by ones own side of this corruption imo.

I don't agree with TM that Republicans are more susceptible to corruption because of their business connections or whatever, I personally believe that there have been many more republicans the past 6 years caught being corrupt because the Republicans were the ones in power....and could do something for those trying to bribe them or corrupt them and when Democrats hold the reigns completely, it is the Democrats that have more corruption cases than the republicans.

Now if that upsets you or makes me out to be some EVIL LIBERAL to say this then fine I suppose I will have to live with your shit for it. :(

jd

Well I'd just say that you are ignoring that it was the right that knocked off both Gingrich and Lott. It was the right that convinced Nixon he had to resign or face certain impeachment AND conviction, (meaning Republicans voting in favor of). When have the Democrats done such?

[JohnDoe]

Well I'd just say that you are ignoring that it was the right that knocked off both Gingrich and Lott. It was the right that convinced Nixon he had to resign or face certain impeachment AND conviction, (meaning Republicans voting in favor of). When have the Democrats done such?

It was the Democrats that JOINED with republicans to impeach president Clinton in the house. It was the Democrats that removed Jefferson from his committee head.

[JohnDoe]

I do have to correct something that I have said though, I think I remember Stephanie bringing up an article about Senator Stephens and what was going on with him, a little while back.

[truthmatters]

Answer: No, not on any board I have participated with her on.

Immie


Immie, Care is has it right.

Do you remember when we first met you accused me of calling everyone names? I then told you I had not and you went back and checked. You came back and and retracted your statement(which showed me your good character). I have posted them first my self and called for them to have the harshest of punishment. There are just more republicans in this current party who are corrupt at this momment in history. In the past it was the Democrats who were the whores.

[Kathianne]

It was the Democrats that JOINED with republicans to impeach president Clinton in the house. It was the Democrats that removed Jefferson from his committee head.

and it was the Republicans in the Senate that decided that Monica did not rate conviction or any kind of hearings at all. Get over it.

[JohnDoe]

and it was the Republicans in the Senate that decided that Monica did not rate conviction or any kind of hearings at all. Get over it.Get over what, kathianne?

[Kathianne]

Get over what, kathianne?

that they decided it would be more than difficult to defend tens of thousands of dollars found in a freezer. Not that it bothered Jefferson or some other Democrats. Sheesh.

[red states rule]

I'm just curious because I don't give a crap about the Abramoff corruption BS. They are all corrupt and I don't care what side of the aisle they sit on.

But, JD used a link to prove her point. I don't know if it is accurate or not and I don't care, but can you provide a link or quote to prove she's wrong? She and TM contested your post as being inaccurate. Do you know of any Dems who have been taken down in this particular scandal?

I don't... but that doesn't mean they are the saints TM and JD like to make them out to be either.

Immie

Read post #22

The link is there as well

[Immanuel]

Immie, Care is has it right.

Do you remember when we first met you accused me of calling everyone names? I then told you I had not and you went back and checked. You came back and and retracted your statement(which showed me your good character). I have posted them first my self and called for them to have the harshest of punishment. There are just more republicans in this current party who are corrupt at this momment in history. In the past it was the Democrats who were the whores.

No, I do not remember that having anything to do with politicians. I remember a "conversation" (okay, conversation is mild... it was a fight) we had about abortion and that you claimed all of us "anti-choicers" hated woman or something like that. Then I started calling you "Pro-abortion" and said you wanted to kill babies, which really ticked you off. Or maybe it was the other way around and I started it. I'm sure we could fight over that if it was worth it. :D But, I do not remember you ever putting down a member of the Democratic Party.

That doesn't mean that I am right, but I don't remember it and even if you have, it seems like it is time for you to be reminded that our government is corrupt. That means both Republican and Democratic. You tend to focus only on Republicans. I and most other conservative posters on here have agreed that the Republicans are corrupt. What would you have us do? Cry about it? Vote Democrat? I don't think I am going to do that... no, I know I am not going to do that. I can't trust either party. I don't trust them.

I'm sick of the whole doggone thing. I don't like Bush. I don't like Hillary Clinton. I can't trust a single one of the Republicans that are running for President this time around because they all seem to say one thing and mean another and I suppose I view their undying support of the Republican Party to be unbecoming a human being.

I can't think of a single Democrat that I can agree with on most issue, and there are even a few that I would like to trust, but since we don't agree on some important issues to me, I won't vote for them either, not to mention the fact, that I wouldn't be able to trust them if I did vote for them. I suppose I could also say that I view there undying support for the Democratic Party to be unbecoming a human being as well. :laugh2:

Immie

[red states rule]

What is new here?

A liberal giving a pass to other liberals. It is very clear to me the ONLY thing most liberals care about is their power

So when one is caught with their hand in the cookie jar, they circle the wagons and put out the usual talking points. (everyone does it, it is a political attack, it has nothing to do with his.her job. ect)

[Immanuel]

Read post #22

The link is there as well

Sorry, RSR, but you must misunderstand me.

That link you posted is not what I was looking for. Having come from another message board, it is nothing more than hearsay. The person who posted that has no more information than you or I and none of that is particularly damning to anyone.

What I am looking for is something to contradict the statements by TM and JD that Abramoff only gave money to Republicans or that no Democrats were accused of taking bribes. I have not found such a thing and was hoping you had different information.

Immie

[red states rule]

Sorry, RSR, but you must misunderstand me.

That link you posted is not what I was looking for. Having come from another message board, it is nothing more than hearsay. The person who posted that has no more information than you or I and none of that is particularly damning to anyone.

What I am looking for is something to contradict the statements by TM and JD that Abramoff only gave money to Republicans or that no Democrats were accused of taking bribes. I have not found such a thing and was hoping you had different information.

Immie

If you look at the link, the numbers are based on FEC records

Much like when I post how much in income taxes the rich pay - the numbers come from the IRS

[truthmatters]

He cant Immie because what I and Care said is the flat truth.

I dont think this poerson means to tell mistruths but just cant seem to peek above his partisanship long enough to be fair.

Good moring BTW my dear old friend.

[red states rule]

He cant Immie because what I and Care said is the flat truth.

I dont think this poerson means to tell mistruths but just cant seem to peek above his partisanship long enough to be fair.

Good moring BTW my dear old friend.

So the FEC is wrong and you are right?

YOU whining about someone elses partisanship is like Al Capone whining about others engaged in bootlegging

[truthmatters]

No me and the FEC are right its you who cant see the facts.

[red states rule]

No me and the FEC are right its you who cant see the facts.

The FEC reports clearly shows Dems took alot of money from Jack

[Immanuel]

So the FEC is wrong and you are right?

YOU whining about someone elses partisanship is like Al Capone whining about others engaged in bootlegging

Whining?

Who's whining? I asked you a question. Also, your link doesn't prove a thing. I never said a thing about partisanship. I asked for proof which you have avoided presenting. Your link doesn't state where the money came from and there have been "claims", nothing more than claims that the money to the Democrats came from the tribes.

I'm not even sure what difference that makes. I sounds almost like money laundering to me.

The claims by TM and JD seem to be reasonable and somewhat backed up. So, if you are trying the Democrats on this, you need to refute those claims, which you have not done. If I were the jury, you'd be losing the case at the moment. That is all I am saying.

And as for your BS statement about me whining about partisanship compared to Al Capone whining about bootlegging, there are few if any on this board that are less partisan at the moment than I, definitely not you. I can't stand either party.

Immie

[red states rule]

Whining?

Who's whining? I asked you a question. Also, your link doesn't prove a thing. I never said a thing about partisanship. I asked for proof which you have avoided presenting. Your link doesn't state where the money came from and there have been "claims", nothing more than claims that the money to the Democrats came from the tribes.

I'm not even sure what difference that makes. I sounds almost like money laundering to me.

The claims by TM and JD seem to be reasonable and somewhat backed up. So, if you are trying the Democrats on this, you need to refute those claims, which you have not done. If I were the jury, you'd be losing the case at the moment. That is all I am saying.


And as for your BS statement about me whining about partisanship compared to Al Capone whining about bootlegging, there are few if any on this board that are less partisan at the moment than I, definitely not you. I can't stand either party.

Immie

I was not replying to you. You asked a simple question and I answered it in another post

TM is the one who is whining,a nd the comment was a reply to her post

[truthmatters]

Abramoff Lobbying & Political Contributions to Democrats, per FEC Records


Senator Max Baucus (D-MT) Received At Least – $22,500

* Senator Evan Bayh (D-IN) Received At Least – $6,500

* Senator Joseph Biden (D-DE) Received At Least – $1,250

* Senator Jeff Bingaman (D-NM) Received At Least – $2,000

* Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) Received At Least – $20,250

* Senator Maria Cantwell (D-WA) Received At Least – $21,765

* Senator Tom Carper (D-DE) Received At Least – $7,500

* Senator Hillary Clinton (D-NY) Received At Least – $12,950

* Senator Kent Conrad (D-ND) Received At Least – $8,000

* Senator Jon Corzine (D-NJ) Received At Least – $7,500

* Senator Chris Dodd (D-CT) Received At Least – $14,792

* Senator Byron Dorgan (D-ND) Received At Least – $79,300

* Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) Received At Least – $14,000

* Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) Received At Least – $2,000

* Senator Russ Feingold (D-WI) Received At Least – $1,250

* Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA) Received At Least – $45,750

* Senator Daniel Inouye (D-HI) Received At Least – $9,000

* Senator Jim Jeffords (I-VT) Received At Least – $2,000

* Senator Tim Johnson (D-SD) Received At Least – $14,250

* Senator Ted Kennedy (D-MA) Received At Least – $3,300

* Senator John Kerry (D-MA) Received At Least – $98,550

* Senator Mary Landrieu (D-LA) Received At Least – $28,000 * Senator Pat Leahy (D-VT) Received At Least – $4,000

* Senator Carl Levin (D-MI) Received At Least – $6,000

* Senator Joe Lieberman (D-CT) Received At Least – $29,830

* Senator Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) Received At Least – $14,891

* Senator Barbara Mikulski (D-MD) Received At Least – $10,550

* Senator Patty Murray (D-WA) Received At Least – $78,991

* Senator Bill Nelson (D-FL) Received At Least – $20,168

* Senator Ben Nelson (D-NE) Received At Least – $5,200

* Senator Barack Obama (D-IL) Received At Least – $7,500

* Senator Mark Pryor (D-AR) Received At Least – $2,300

* Senator Jack Reed (D-RI) Received At Least – $3,500

* Senator Harry Reid (D-NV) Received At Least – $68,941

* Senator John Rockefeller (D-WV) Received At Least – $4,000

* Senator Ken Salazar (D-CO) Received At Least – $4,500

* Senator Paul Sarbanes (D-MD) Received At Least – $4,300

* Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) Received At Least – $29,550

* Senator Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) Received At Least – $6,250

* Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR) Received At Least – $6,250 Democratic Senatorial Campaign Cmte $423,480

Democratic Congressional Campaign Cmte $354,700

Democratic National Cmte $65,720

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1551786/posts





Why is it you are completetly incapable of seeing the differance between lobbying money which was legal and Abramhoffs money?

You see he had money and he gave it only to republicans. His clients then gave to who they wanted to give. Abramoff got them to give Much more to republicans but could not order them to give NONE to dems.

You refuse these facts and this is how you get a reputation for not being able to understand whats really happening.






Pete Kott, the former Republican speaker of the Alaska House of Representatives, "I had to cheat, steal, beg, borrow and lie" . "Exxon's happy. BP's happy. I'll sell my soul to the devil."

[red states rule]

Why is it you are completetly incapable of seeing the differance between lobbying money which was legal and Abramhoffs money?

You see he had money and he gave it only to republicans. His clients then gave to who they wanted to give. Abramoff got them to give Much more to republicans but could not order them to give NONE to dems.

You refuse these facts and this is how you get a reputation for not being able to understand whats really happening.

40 0f 45 Democratic Senators Took Abramoff Money!

Democrats at all levels have attacked Republicans for ties to indicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff and his Indian tribal clients. They do this despite the fact that 40 of the 45 members of the Senate Democrat Caucus have taken money from Abramoff, his associates, and Indian tribe clients.

Senator Byron Dorgan, the Vice Chairman Of The Senate Panel Currently Investigating Lobbyist Jack Abramoff, received at least $79,300 from Abramoff and his associates and clients.

Dorgan even held a fundraiser in an Abramoff Skybox:


The Choctaw tribe, an Abramoff client that was a primary focus of the Senate hearings, sponsored a fundraiser on March 28, 2001, for Dorgan's political group, the Great Plains Leadership Fund. The event treated Dorgan and his donors to a bird's-eye view of a professional hockey game from a skybox Abramoff leased in Washington's MCI Center, while lobbyists got the chance to bend his ear.
Dorgan says he will not step down from the investigating committee

That oh, so popular, MCI Skybox...

Tom Harkin paid the tribe for use of its Skybox and he failed to account properly for two fundraisers he held in lobbyist Jack Abramoff's skybox at WashingtonÂ’s MCI Center in 2002 and 2003.

Washington State Senator Patty Murray received $14,980 from 2002 to 2004 from the Saginaw Chippewa Indian Tribe in Michigan(?)

Harry Reid has declined to comment on whether he attended any functions there. But, between 2001 and 2004 Reid received $61,000 from donors with links to Abramoff, Reid's office confirmed.

http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2006/01/40-0f-45-democratic-senators-took.html

[Immanuel]

I was not replying to you. You asked a simple question and I answered it in another post

TM is the one who is whining,a nd the comment was a reply to her post

Ah, my apologies!

I thought you were quoting me. I didn't read who you were quoting.

But, still, I think you are losing this case and I'm secretly pulling for you. :poke:

Immie

[red states rule]

Ah, my apologies!

I thought you were quoting me. I didn't read who you were quoting.

But, still, I think you are losing this case and I'm secretly pulling for you. :poke:

Immie

Forget about it - we all make mistakes

I am not losing. Dems clearly took Jacks money, but libs like TM will always issue a pass to her own

[truthmatters]

40 0f 45 Democratic Senators Took Abramoff Money!

Democrats at all levels have attacked Republicans for ties to indicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff and his Indian tribal clients. They do this despite the fact that 40 of the 45 members of the Senate Democrat Caucus have taken money from Abramoff, his associates, and Indian tribe clients.

Senator Byron Dorgan, the Vice Chairman Of The Senate Panel Currently Investigating Lobbyist Jack Abramoff, received at least $79,300 from Abramoff and his associates and clients.

Dorgan even held a fundraiser in an Abramoff Skybox:


The Choctaw tribe, an Abramoff client that was a primary focus of the Senate hearings, sponsored a fundraiser on March 28, 2001, for Dorgan's political group, the Great Plains Leadership Fund. The event treated Dorgan and his donors to a bird's-eye view of a professional hockey game from a skybox Abramoff leased in Washington's MCI Center, while lobbyists got the chance to bend his ear.
Dorgan says he will not step down from the investigating committee

That oh, so popular, MCI Skybox...

Tom Harkin paid the tribe for use of its Skybox and he failed to account properly for two fundraisers he held in lobbyist Jack Abramoff's skybox at WashingtonÂ’s MCI Center in 2002 and 2003.

Washington State Senator Patty Murray received $14,980 from 2002 to 2004 from the Saginaw Chippewa Indian Tribe in Michigan(?)

Harry Reid has declined to comment on whether he attended any functions there. But, between 2001 and 2004 Reid received $61,000 from donors with links to Abramoff, Reid's office confirmed.

http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2006/01/40-0f-45-democratic-senators-took.html



Why do you keep refusing to understand the obvious?

[Immanuel]

Why is it you are completetly incapable of seeing the differance between lobbying money which was legal and Abramhoffs money?

You see he had money and he gave it only to republicans. His clients then gave to who they wanted to give. Abramoff got them to give Much more to republicans but could not order them to give NONE to dems.

You refuse these facts and this is how you get a reputation for not being able to understand whats really happening.

Pete Kott, the former Republican speaker of the Alaska House of Representatives, "I had to cheat, steal, beg, borrow and lie" . "Exxon's happy. BP's happy. I'll sell my soul to the devil."



Is giving money only to Republicans a crime?

What Democrat got that law passed?

Immie

[Immanuel]

Forget about it - we all make mistakes

I am not losing. Dems clearly took Jacks money, but libs like TM will always issue a pass to her own

Okay, but as I said earlier, I have not been following this... so what if they took Jack's money?

Immie

[red states rule]

Why do you keep refusing to understand the obvious?

Your excuse reminds of Clinton asking what the meaning of is is

[truthmatters]

No its not a crime but it was what Dean said.


He just wants to twist what was said into making it look like Dean lied.

The Dems took NO money from Abramoff and the money they got from Abramoffs clients was untainted. The reason is none of it was tainted was It was NOT directed from Abramoff in return for favors. Abramoff did not want favors for dems.

[Kathianne]

I understand the 'line' that TM has drawn. However, the 'facts' are that whatever the source of money, to either party members or even press members, it was wrong. How do we know? Both parties have members that scrambled to return the funds:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/16/AR2005121601732.html

[truthmatters]

Your excuse reminds of Clinton asking what the meaning of is is


You are being completely dishonest.

[Immanuel]

No its not a crime but it was what Dean said.


He just wants to twist what was said into making it look like Dean lied.

The Dems took NO money from Abramoff and the money they got from Abramoffs clients was untainted. The reason is none of it was tainted was It was NOT directed from Abramoff in return for favors. Abramoff did not want favors for dems.

Okay, same question to you that I posted to RSR. Can you prove that Abramoff didn't want favors from Democrats? That comment almost seems unbelievable to me. He was a lobbyist. I'm sure he would have taken favors from anyone granting them.

Immie

[truthmatters]

I understand the 'line' that TM has drawn. However, the 'facts' are that whatever the source of money, to either party members or even press members, it was wrong. How do we know? Both parties have members that scrambled to return the funds:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/16/AR2005121601732.html

The investigation showed that NONE of the money given to the Democrats by the tirbes was tainted.

That is a fact.

[truthmatters]

Okay, same question to you that I posted to RSR. Can you prove that Abramoff didn't want favors from Democrats? That comment almost seems unbelievable to me. He was a lobbyist. I'm sure he would have taken favors from anyone granting them.

Immie

I cant prove what he thought but the facts sure seem to say he did not want favors for the Dems because NONE were done.

[Immanuel]

I cant prove what he thought but the facts sure seem to say he did not want favors for the Dems because NONE were done.

Okay, I asked RSR for a :link: now I am asking you for a :link:

Immie

[truthmatters]

http://users.bestweb.net/%7Ebgeiger/abramoff.htm


I gave this already in this thread but here you go.


Immie no democrats were indicted for anything after the investigation. That is proof.

[Kathianne]

The investigation showed that NONE of the money given to the Democrats by the tirbes was tainted.

That is a fact.

So why in the world would they return the money?

[Immanuel]

http://users.bestweb.net/%7Ebgeiger/abramoff.htm


I gave this already in this thread but here you go.


Immie no democrats were indicted for anything after the investigation. That is proof.

TM,

That doesn't prove anything. It totally ignores the contributions to Democrats whether those were from the tribes or not. It also doesn't indicate what favors may or may not have been granted by anyone.

And who is Bob Geiger(D)?

The lack of indictments does not indicate innocence. It could simply mean they did a damned good job of covering their tracks. When I was a kid, I did some pretty stupid things like driving under the influence of alcohol. I was never indicted for it, but I was guilty as hell.

Immie

[Immanuel]

So why in the world would they return the money?

And if there was guilt associated with the money, wasn't it just a tad bit late?

Immie

[Kathianne]

And if there was guilt associated with the money, wasn't it just a tad bit late?

Immie
As you said, while accusations flew back in 2005, not many were convicted. Scandal? Certainly. Too many really do 'cover themselves' then again, Congress never seems in a hurry to actually remove members, nor Justice to pursue. As I've written countless times, regardless of partisan rhetoric, they cover for each other.

[jimnyc]

http://www.capitaleye.org/abramoff_recips.asp

[JohnDoe]

Taking money from the lobbies that Abramoff stole money from is not a crime. Taking monies from any lobby is not a crime.

These 10-20 people that were charged and convicted for crimes involved with Abramoff had nothing at all to do with taking legal money from lobbyists....and to imply such is disingenuous to SAY THE LEAST, imo.

[red states rule]

Taking money from the lobbies that Abramoff stole money from is not a crime. Taking monies from any lobby is not a crime.

These 10-20 people that were charged and convicted for crimes involved with Abramoff had nothing at all to do with taking legal money from lobbyists....and to imply such is disingenuous to SAY THE LEAST, imo.

JD, Howie Dean and many in the liberal media said NO DEMOCRATS took Jacks Abramoff money

That is a lie and has been proven to be so

[truthmatters]

TM,

That doesn't prove anything. It totally ignores the contributions to Democrats whether those were from the tribes or not. It also doesn't indicate what favors may or may not have been granted by anyone.

And who is Bob Geiger(D)?

The lack of indictments does not indicate innocence. It could simply mean they did a damned good job of covering their tracks. When I was a kid, I did some pretty stupid things like driving under the influence of alcohol. I was never indicted for it, but I was guilty as hell.

Immie

Tell me about him Immie.

[truthmatters]

JD, Howie Dean and many in the liberal media said NO DEMOCRATS took Jacks Abramoff money

That is a lie and has been proven to be so

It was NOT Abramoff's money they were given.

He does not OWN the people who hired him.

[Immanuel]

Tell me about him Immie.

He is your source. I asked you who he was.

Immie

[red states rule]

He is your source. I asked you who he was.

Immie

If you want TM source you need to see Helen Wait

So if you want to read her source go to Helen Wait

[truthmatters]

http://www.capitaleye.org/abramoff_recips.asp


Here is a detailed look at Abramoff's lobbying, and political contributions from Abramoff, the tribes that hired him, and SunCruz Casinos, since 1999.

1/12/06 UPDATE: In our efforts to refine this list, we have further researched lobbying data and removed contributions from Indian tribes made before Mr. Abramoff's registration as a lobbyist for the contributor. Contributions made during the 2004 cycle but received after Abramoff ended his affiliation with a contributor remain on the list. Also, this list now includes contributions made by Michael Scanlon, an Abramoff associate who has also pleaded guilty to federal crimes.


This is what that chart is.

[truthmatters]

TM,

That doesn't prove anything. It totally ignores the contributions to Democrats whether those were from the tribes or not. It also doesn't indicate what favors may or may not have been granted by anyone.

And who is Bob Geiger(D)?

The lack of indictments does not indicate innocence. It could simply mean they did a damned good job of covering their tracks. When I was a kid, I did some pretty stupid things like driving under the influence of alcohol. I was never indicted for it, but I was guilty as hell.

Immie




Here are the personal donations made by Jack Abramoff and his wife, Pamela, since 1977. Data is effective January 2, 2006 and sources are Federal Election Commission filings, via Political Money Line and Newsmeat.
He sites his sources, where does it say hes a democrat?

[Immanuel]

Here are the personal donations made by Jack Abramoff and his wife, Pamela, since 1977. Data is effective January 2, 2006 and sources are Federal Election Commission filings, via Political Money Line and Newsmeat.
He sites his sources, where does it say hes a democrat?

I was asking if he was and who he was? That is typically what a question mark means... isn't it?

You sourced him. You should know something about him.

Immie

[truthmatters]

I linked to his list after finding it in a search. I saw it was sourced and so I provided it.

[Immanuel]

I linked to his list after finding it in a search. I saw it was sourced and so I provided it.

That is fine. We all do that... however, you stated that what he says is true. If you don't know anything about him then how do you know that he is right in what he says? You don't know him from Adam. Who is he and are his reports accurate?

I'm not asking you to dig into his background. I am just pointing out to you that we can't tell from this site whether or not he is accurate or honest for that matter.

I can source things like the Quran too. That doesn't make it correct.

Immie

[JohnDoe]

As you said, while accusations flew back in 2005, not many were convicted. Scandal? Certainly. Too many really do 'cover themselves' then again, Congress never seems in a hurry to actually remove members, nor Justice to pursue. As I've written countless times, regardless of partisan rhetoric, they cover for each other.

I beg to differ with you on this Kathianne, plenty of people, were charged and convicted, for their illegal involvement with Jack Abramoff.... this was posted earlier in this thread, perhaps you didn't see it?

FYI


People convicted in Abramoff probe (as of June 9, 2007)
Lawmakers, lobbyists, Bush administration officials, congressional staffers and businessmen caught up in the Jack Abramoff public corruption probe:[45]

Italia Federici, co-founder of the Council of Republicans for Environmental Advocacy, pleaded guilty to tax evasion and obstruction of a Senate investigation into Abramoff's relationship with officials at the Department of Interior.

Former Rep. Bob Ney, R-Ohio, sentenced in January to 2 1/2 years in prison, acknowledged taking bribes from Abramoff. Ney was in the traveling party on an Abramoff-sponsored golfing trip to Scotland at the heart of the case against former White House official David Safavian.

Former Deputy Interior Secretary Steven Griles, the highest-ranking Bush administration official convicted in the scandal, pleaded guilty to obstructing justice. He admitted lying to a Senate committee about his relationship with Abramoff, who repeatedly sought Griles' intervention at Interior on behalf of Indian tribal clients.

Abramoff is serving six years in prison on a criminal case out of Florida, where he pleaded guilty in January 2006 to charges of conspiracy, honest services fraud and tax evasion. He has not yet been sentenced on charges of mail fraud, conspiracy and tax evasion stemming from the influence-peddling scandal in Washington. Abramoff is cooperating in a bribery investigation involving lawmakers, their aides and members of the Bush administration.

Tony Rudy, lobbyist and one-time aide to former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-Texas, pleaded guilty in March 2006 to conspiring with Abramoff. He is cooperating with investigators.

Former White House official David Safavian, the Bush administration's former top procurement official, was sentenced to 18 months in prison in October 2006 after he was found guilty of covering up his dealings with Abramoff. Safavian is appealing his conviction.

Michael Scanlon, a former Abramoff business partner and DeLay aide, pleaded guilty in November 2005 to conspiring to bribe public officials in connection with his lobbying work on behalf of Indian tribes and casino issues. He is cooperating with investigators.

William Heaton, former chief of staff for Ney, pleaded guilty to a federal conspiracy charge involving a golf trip to Scotland, expensive meals, and tickets to sporting events between 2002 and 2004 as payoffs for helping Abramoff's clients.

Neil Volz, a former chief of staff to Ney who left government to work for Abramoff, pleaded guilty in May 2006 to conspiring to corrupt Ney and others with trips and other aid.

Mark Zachares, former aide to Rep. Don Young, R-Alaska, pleaded guilty to conspiracy. He acknowledged accepting tens of thousands of dollars worth of gifts and a golf trip to Scotland from Abramoff's team in exchange for official acts on the lobbyist's behalf.

Roger Stillwell, a former Interior Department official, was sentenced to two years on probation in January after pleading guilty to a misdemeanor charge for not reporting hundreds of dollars worth of sports and concert tickets he received from Abramoff.

Former Abramoff business partner Adam Kidan, sentenced in Florida in March 2006 to nearly six years in prison for conspiracy and fraud in the 2000 purchase of the Fort Lauderdale-based SunCruz Casinos gambling fleet.

[JohnDoe]

That is fine. We all do that... however, you stated that what he says is true. If you don't know anything about him then how do you know that he is right in what he says? You don't know him from Adam. Who is he and are his reports accurate?

I'm not asking you to dig into his background. I am just pointing out to you that we can't tell from this site whether or not he is accurate or honest for that matter.

I can source things like the Quran too. That doesn't make it correct.

Immie
maybe you should tell TM what sources YOU think are acceptable?

[Kathianne]

I beg to differ with you on this Kathianne, plenty of people, were charged and convicted, for their illegal involvement with Jack Abramoff.... this was posted earlier in this thread, perhaps you didn't see it?

FYI

'Not many' in contrast to accusations was what I meant.