Posted on 04/13/2005 1:07:24 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
Will Jack Abramoff be Tom DeLay's Monica Lewinsky?
No, not that way. Get your mind out of the gutter.
But remember two things.
First, Bill Clinton skirted serious trouble (regarding womanizing in his instance) until Lewinsky produced the stained blue dress. Then all his finger-wagging protestations (not to mention perjured deposition) were for naught. The DNA was damning.
Second, even after the dress, Clinton hung on despite Republican efforts to dethrone him.
That's the good news, bad news as we contemplate what it could mean to DeLay if a lobbyist starts singing for the feds.
Jack Abramoff is the once-high-flying lawyer-lobbyist at the heart of much of the recent disclosures about the House majority leader's own high flying on foreign trips.
Abramoff also is the focus of federal and congressional investigations into influence-peddling in relation to his big-bucks representational dealings (alongside a former DeLay aide) with Indian tribal casinos.
DeLay, R-Sugar Land, has denied any knowledge of the real source of funds that paid for foreign travel by himself and associates.
But DeLay defenders, both in Washington and Texas, are reading closely and with some trepidation the latest issue of Newsweek, which raises the question of whether Abramoff, if he faces indictment, might deal with prosecutors.
According to the Newsweek report (by Michael Isikoff, a leader in Lewinski reportage), Abramoff has been less than happy with denials from DeLay and associates.
"Those S.O.B.s," Abramoff is quoted as telling "a luncheon companion." "DeLay knew everything. He knew all the details."
An Abramoff spokesman Tuesday e-mailed the Chronicle a statement saying Abramoff "strongly denies" the comments. He would, wouldn't he, until a deal, if one is to be made with the feds, is reached.
Mindful, perhaps, of Lewinsky's dress, Newsweek asks the key question about what Abramoff could offer: "Does he really have the goods ... ?"
"The goods" could be any number of things. "The goods," most likely, would not be simply Abramoff's testimony. The feds almost certainly would be looking for paper. Without paper, Abramoff would be no better a witness than some of the tainted folks in the Michael Jackson case whom the entertainer's defense has shredded on cross examination (at least according to reports by trial mavens on The Coast).
"The goods" will probably have to be more even than a transparent reference to "you know who" in an e-mail between Abramoff and one of the tribes, as cited by The New York Times. The paper said a tribal official had identified the hinted-at person as DeLay.
Newsweek quotes Abramoff's lawyer, Abbe Lowell, as saying there had been "no negotiations" with the Justice Department, but that does not negate reports that Abramoff could, at some point, be open to a deal.
He's dead meat, as of now, and might not be averse to taking DeLay with him.
Could DeLay, following the Clinton model, hang on? It would be harder. For all the Republicans' high dudgeon about Clinton, it was largely a question of really bad personal judgment. If Abramoff can implicate DeLay, it would be about a question of public policy.
But as things stand now, don't put a lot of money on DeLay being seen off soon.
So while waiting for the Abramoff investigation, as well as other inquiries that touch on DeLay, to unfold, another eye has to be kept on any Republican defections from the majority leader — on either end of Pennsylvania Avenue. So far, the troops have remained in tight formation.
Would DeLay prefer that Rep. Chris Shays, R-Conn., shut up? Almost certainly. But Shays reflects such an infinitesimal (as well as predictable) slice of the Republican caucus in the House, that his disowning of DeLay barely registers on the political seismic scale.
Shays' comment over the weekend, in a town meeting in his up-market district, that DeLay is "an absolute embarrassment" to him is true. But Shays' comments were designed to protect himself from the wrath of moderate constituents.
More worrying for DeLay will have been the call of Sen. Rick Santorum, R-Pa., for the majority leader to "lay out what he did and why he did it" regarding foreign travel on a lobbyist's dime. But Santorum, too, was doing a little posturing, ahead of a re-election campaign next year in which he will be one of the most targeted Republicans incumbents.
The biggest test for DeLay is continued support from the White House. So far, so good for DeLay — unless you're willing to parse the continuing statements from spokesman Scott McClellan more finely than I am.
If Bush decides to back off from DeLay, we'll know it when we hear it (or, more likely, when we do not hear it).
Hines is a Houston Chronicle columnist based in Washington, D.C. (cragg.hines@chron.com)
IMHO this in the end is more than about DeLay...the MSM is desperately trying to see if they still have "it" ...the ability to shout a politician out of office....."they" need to know this before "they" spend any more serious bucks on a Hillary campaign..if they can't hound DeLay out, IMHO they won't waste the cash to try to run the Hildebeast.....
...that Newsweek story from the current issue, for what it's worth. From The Forward:
"Lobbyist Denies Newsweek Story on DeLay
By E.J. Kessler
April 12, 2005
Embattled Washington lobbyist Jack Abramoff is denying Newsweek's story that he told a lunch companion that House Majority Leader Tom DeLay knew about the financing for several trips abroad that have raised ethical questions.... `Those S.O.B.s,' Newsweek quotes Abramoff as saying about DeLay and his staffers. `DeLay knew everything. He knew all the details.' Newsweek sourced the remark to an unnamed companion with whom Abramoff lunched last week.
Abramoff, however, is denying the story. `Mr. Abramoff strongly denies making the comments attributed to him in the April 18 issue of Newsweek,' Abramoff spokesman Andrew Blum wrote in an e-mail to the Forward. `He is furious that in the media's latest attempt to create a story where none exists, it now seeks to pit him against those that he has known and supported for years. Even Mr. Abramoff's unidentified lunch companion referred to in the Newsweek article has flatly denied ever stating that Mr. Abramoff said these things....'"
Posted at 10:07 PM
From National Review's The Corner
Qwinn
I often wish we could return to the freedoms we had in years past. When I was a kid, nothing was thought unusual when I rowed my boat to the pier in the Village and walked into a store to redeem coke bottles for pennies- while wearing my Mom's Colt Woodsman on my belt. ( rattlesnakes, you know, on the beach )
If I tried that now, there'd be a SWAT team called on me. And the Villagers & tourists would have an attack of the vapors.
We really have let a lot of our freedoms slip away.
Rush can, at least, afford the best lawyers & accountants to fight for him-- I'll spare you the details, but when we were involved in a running battle with the IRS a few years ago, it wasn't the hired guns, but my wife who got it settled. Combination of intelligence and charisma worked when reams of arguments on paper didn't.
I didn't hear all of Rush's show yesterday, but enough to get the drift, and I don't blame him for being fed up, personally and professionaly.
One reason I am no longer in business is the endless, never fully resolved battles with bureaucrats, regulators, and lawyers. You just get fed up after a while.
And on the political scene, when I vote for someone, I do expect them to stand for me in battle- not run away or be silent. The runaway Judiciary ( Supreme Court's juvenille Death Penalty case, Terri, etc. ) and uncontroled illegal aliens are going to be the death of this country if we aren't careful.
I want representatives who stand for something besides their own miserable careers.
That's it in a nutshell- they are still a dangerous and deceitful beast. The rise of talk radio & the internet slipped by them, and it has scared them badly. But they still have power.
Greg Hines was jealous of Monica. He's the biggest (literally) lefty writer for the lib-rag Chronicle. I never have to read him because I know what he will say.
Indeed!
As Lyndon Johnson said, "I don't care if it's true or not, I just want to hear him deny it."
"The runaway Judiciary ( Supreme Court's juvenille Death Penalty case, Terri, etc. ) and uncontroled illegal aliens are going to be the death of this country if we aren't careful."
Right. And if Rush is serious about replacing the beltway GOP with ordinary people, he best be clear of all the legal and beaurocratic fallout that could hit him here in the US. In other words, be in exhile, but still fight. Doing one [savaging the GOP leadership] or the other [going into exhile] on its own leads to sheer frustration. Both together is a better contingency.
And he'll need to either lavish the local regime with gifts, or buy a tiny nation. Owning a nation can make a little money for him, hopefully through loyal, dedicated US patriots he can delegate out assignments to, preferably vets who could double as emergency body guards. But the gifts are a simpler way to go. FReegards....
Thanks for the quote!
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1382670/posts?page=18#18
The Press Shows Its Bias
TownHall.com ^ | 13 April 2005 | Linda Chavez
...He might be guilty of keeping bad company -- lobbyist Jack Abramoff, currently under criminal investigation for some of his activities on behalf of Indian gaming interests, was on the Russia trip and may have ginned up the contributions that paid for it -- but at the time DeLay took the trip, he had no way of knowing how unsavory his companions were...
William Wallace could definitely clear the air. FReegards =]
This rag is the NYTimes of the South!
I canceled years ago.
Why Houston with it's 4 million metro population can't get a second daily is dumbfounding!
We have Internet, talk radio and cable.
Newspapers are on the way out.
NY state is trying to rip him off for millions in taxes, even though he lives in Florida and commutes to NY.
So true, but men like to have some reading material when visiting "The Library".
Hines has been whooped with the ugly stick and it apparently affects his opinions and physical beauty(my own childish retaliation against this left-wing commie).
My post is as reasonable as his/The Comical's assertions and daily grinding of Tom Delay.....
I feel better now....
Might I suggest, The Weekly Standard, National Review or The American Spectator as reading material?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.