NY Times failed to note that Abramoff raised $100,000 for Bush campaign
SUMMARY: The New York Times reported that President Bush and other Republican lawmakers were moving to return or donate to charity campaign contributions by lobbyist Jack Abramoff in the wake of his plea agreement. However, the Times omitted any reference to the more than $100,000 Abramoff reportedly raised in his capacity as a Bush-Cheney campaign "Pioneer," which the Republican National Committee, apparently speaking for the Bush campaign, said the campaign has no plans to donate or return.
A January 5 New York Times article reported that President Bush and other Republican lawmakers were moving to donate to charity or return campaign contributions by Washington lobbyist Jack Abramoff in the wake of Abramoff's plea agreement, the carrying out of which, the lobbyist said, could implicate as many as 60 lawmakers and staff, according to The Wall Street Journal. However, the Times article omitted any reference to the more than $100,000 Abramoff reportedly raised in his capacity as a Bush-Cheney '04 campaign "Pioneer," which the Republican National Committee (RNC), apparently speaking for the Bush campaign, reportedly said the campaign has no plans to donate or return. White House press secretary Scott McClellan said that the RNC will donate to the American Heart Association the $6,000 contributed directly by Abramoff, his wife, Pam, and a single Abramoff client; McClellan directed questions about the $100,000 bundled contributions to the RNC. In contrast to the Times article, reports in The Washington Post and Newsweek.com mentioned Abramoff's Pioneer status in the campaign and Bush's refusal to relinquish the funds Abramoff raised.
Anne E. Kornblut and Abby Goodnough wrote in the Times:
President Bush and senior Republican lawmakers moved on Wednesday to dump thousands of dollars in campaign donations from Jack Abramoff, the former lobbyist, hastily distancing themselves as he pleaded guilty to two more criminal counts under his agreement with prosecutors.
Mr. Bush will donate $6,000, the amount he received from Mr. Abramoff, Mr. Abramoff's wife and a lobbying client in his re-election campaign in 2004, to the American Heart Association, a spokesman said.
However, The Washington Post reported that the Bush-Cheney campaign has no plans to similarly discharge the bundled contributions raised by Abramoff, the sum total of which is reportedly well over $100,000, and quoted RNC spokeswoman Tracey Schmitt as saying, "At this point, there is nothing to indicate that contributions from those individual donors represents anything other than enthusiastic support for the [Bush-Cheney] re-election campaign."
As the Post reported on May 16, 2004, Abramoff was one of 64 lobbyists in a group of more than 300 Pioneers and Rangers who bundled individual contributions for Bush's 2004 presidential campaign. To earn Pioneer status, individuals raised $100,000 or more for the campaign.
Bush's campaign first organized a bundling system in 1998 as a way of formalizing a process whereby individuals could take credit for raising sums of money far beyond the then-$1,000 individual contribution limits set by campaign finance law. Individuals could raise additional contributions from friends and associates and bundle those contributions together and forward them to the campaign. The system expanded significantly in 2004, with the implementation of a four-digit ID code for each prospective Pioneer or Ranger. Individuals were credited only for checks carrying their individual ID numbers.
Abramoff told The New York Times in July 2003 -- more than a year before the election -- that he had already raised at least $120,000 for Bush. Though his final bundled total has not been released by the Bush-Cheney campaign, his status as Pioneer would indicate that it was less than $200,000, the threshold for Ranger status.
From the January 5 Washington Post article:
Abramoff raised more than $100,000 for the Bush-Cheney reelection campaign, making him an honorary Bush "Pioneer." But the campaign is giving up only $6,000, which came directly from Abramoff, his wife and one of the Indian tribes the lobbyist represented. The money will be donated to the American Heart Association.
The gesture was criticized by the watchdog group Public Citizen, which called for an accounting of all the money that Abramoff had raised for the campaign.
"President Bush needs to ... reveal just how much money Abramoff raised for him and who that money came from," said Frank Clemente, director of Public Citizen's Congress Watch.
But McClellan contested any suggestion that Abramoff's fundraising had won him any special favors or access.
"If someone thinks that money is coming in with strings attached, it doesn't get in the door," he said.
From a January 4 Newsweek.com commentary by Richard Wolffe and Holly Bailey:
Yet the Bush-Cheney campaign is returning only a fraction of the campaign contributions it received with Abramoff connections. During the 2004 campaign, Abramoff was a top fund-raiser for the Bush re-election effort, raising more than $100,000 for the campaign. While exact figures on how much he raised for the campaign aren't known, Abramoff told The New York Times in July 2003 -- months before active fund-raising began -- that he had already raised $120,000 for the Bush-Cheney campaign. "And I haven't even started making phone calls," the lobbyist told the Times. An Orthodox Jew, Abramoff was considered an important intermediary between Jewish groups and the Bush campaign, which worked heavily to make inroads with the voting bloc. When fund-raising began for Bush's re-election effort, Rabbi Daniel Lapin, a prominent Seattle radio host and activist, urged friends and colleagues to steer campaign checks to Bush via Abramoff.
For now, the Bush-Cheney campaign has no plans to donate or return funds raised by Abramoff from other individuals. "At this point, there is nothing to indicate that contributions from those individual donors represents anything other than enthusiastic support for the [Bush-Cheney] re-election campaign," RNC spokeswoman Tracey Schmitt said.
The Times article does not mention any of the Democrats (by name) who received Abramoff-related money (i.e., Harry Reid), but solely mentions Republicans.
And this is an example of "conservative misinformation"?? Uh ... yeah. Sure. *eyes roll*
well it's easy enough to find. Just look at the amounts given to Republicans not to mention the number of Repubs that received donations.
[link to www.msnbc.msn.com]
Hypocrites. Of course they ignore the Dem's feeding at the trough on this. I posted the all the Dem's that were feeding but mmfa pulled it. The truth hurts. As for Bush keeping funds, well he isn't the only one:
"All but three of the 24 politicians giving up the funds are Republicans. The three Democrats -- Sens. Max Baucus (Mont.), Richard J. Durbin (Ill.) and Byron L. Dorgan (N.D.) -- have pledged to shed a total of $97,000 in contributions. A spokesman for Senate Minority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) said Reid has no intention of shedding the $47,000 he has received from Abramoff's lobbying team and tribal clients." NewsBusters.org
______________________________________________
Yes the Sen Minority leader is us to his knee boots in money from ol' Jack. Let's see how long it takes the thought police to pull the truth this time.
abrahamoff is a gop superstar lobbyist. he was a bush 100000 dollar "pioneer". just as ken lay was a personal friend of the bush family, which w tried to pretend otherwise. you can keep printing all the names you want of democrats who got money from his "clients". they did not get money directly from abrahamoff nor are any of them accused of anything illegal, unlike republicans. your failure to acknowledge the difference is just evidence that you are nothing but a kool-aid drinker. [and my guess would be you are one of the old favorites under a new name, running your string for a few days until you have no credibility left, as usual]
Did Abramoff bribe Reid? No.
Abramoff's Indian clients were interested in obtaining favorable legislation related to one political issue -- casinos. Reid represents what state? Nevada. You know, the state that has legal gambling.
Look at Reid's top contributors: [link to www.opensecrets.org] I see MGM Mirage, Mandalay Resort Group, Harra's Entertainment, Station Casinos, Park Place Entertainment -- all gambling interests.
Reid has to represent his constituents first, and gambling is their lifeblood. He'd be stupid to let a few thousand dollars from Abramoff influence any of his votes on that issue.
The campaign contributions themselves mean little -- it's about the bribery, influence peddling, golf trips, slush funds and wives getting paychecks from shadowy charities. Those are going to bring a lot of powerful people down, and in Abramoff's case, and those perks were primarily reserved for Republicans.
How do you know Sen. Reid was not influenced by this money? You said yourself he has been very involved in Indian affairs. He could have easily been swayed. Let me guess...only the right is influenced by money?
It's not a crime to accept contributions from lobbyists I agree, but it is a bribe if there is evidence of an agreement to perform an official act in exchange for the trip to St. Andrews. This remains to be seen. Either way the politicians involved will be tarred and feathered. Whether they took the trip to Scotland knowingly like Nay or on the sly like Reid.
Wasnt influenced by Martian mind control? That doesnt cut it. IF the charge is made that it was influence peddling he making the charge has to cough up the evidence. Got evidence? Thats what I thought apparantly they DID have evidence against those GOP congressmen named ( I am reading about emails that state quid pro quo directly, its too early to be sure)
Contratulations, you've found the grain of rice in a bowl of maggots.
Too bad for you that only two Democrats received ANY remotely Abramoff-related money. And in both cases, it was above-board, legal, by-the-book campaign contributions.
Republicans, on the other hand, were the ones feeding at the trough. Taking kickbacks, hush and slush money, trips to resorts, sports tickets... the list goes on.
I love this "Democrats did it too" dittohead line. It smacks of the "but...but Bill Clinton!" canards we've heard for years, just dressed up for a different scandal.
To quote a poster on a different board:The Republican steals a car and hit-and-runs a pedestrian. The SPIN? "Democrats drive cars, too."
Bravo. *golf clap*
What a shame the Bush-ites were far more concerned with the "BIN" (Bush ID Number - I'm not making this up - that's what they called it) on contribution checks than they were with finding Osama Bin Forgotten...
Gee - remember him? The last time President Bush mentioned Osama was during the debates with Kerry when Bush tried to defend himself and lied about it in the process...
The most interesting part of this story (aside from the entertainment value of watching GOPers scream 'but Clinton go a blow job!' again) is how many wives of Republican congressmen received gifts, jobs, or cash as a ploy to cover or mask the bribery. Nepotism is just another political strategy.
It is a very real question I would ask those like left and hog. You seem to post so many "facts" that have already been proven to be false. You seem to post on most of the articles in this site, but either can't or won't retain the information in them. Why is this? The quotes are given,the places you can go to verify the facts are clear, and yet you pretend they are not there. In the case of this article, it has already been stated many places on MMFA the difference between the "donations" given by Abramoff to Republicans and the donations given by some of his clients to Democrats. Is it really that hard to see the difference?
If a public servant took lobby money with the understanding a vote would occur for said money, they are as guilty as the next. ALL who are found guilty of this should be convicted and tossed on their backsides out of congress. Period.
by shouting "They're all corrupt!" "Why should we pay taxes when they're all corrupt!" "Drown government in the bathtub!"
Yeah, there's corruption, and it'll keep growing as long as the "government is the problem" ideologues keep dumping their poison into the system. When you put people like that in charge, they're not going to try to disprove their own ideology. They're just going to try to enrich themselves while tearing the whole system down. Bad government is a self-fulfilling prophesy.
My understanding is that money raised by Abramoff or passed thru the Native American tribes went to the GOP by a margin of 3 to 1. Abramoff raised money seems to have exclusively gone GOP types like De Lay, Hastert, and Nye - though it's possible a few DEMS got stung.
The personal donations from Abramoff, out of his own pocket, went exclusively Republican. As lots of big time lobbyists do though, he spread the wealth when it came out of his companies coffers. Money went to Dems and Repubs.
You are correct more money did go to Rep. causes although I'm not sure what the breakdown is.
I posted this info on another thread but it really fits here too:
"Republicans, nervous about the bad noise to come, have attempted to paint this as an equal-opportunity crime. To wit, the Democrats are into Abramoff as deeply as the GOP. The facts, however, do not bear this out. According to campaign donation information gathered by the non-partisan Center for Responsive Politics, the following officeholders and candidates have received political donations from Abramoff since 2000:
Tom DeLay (R-Texas). John Ashcroft (R-Mo.). Frank A. LoBiondo (R-NJ). Eric Cantor (R-Va.). Arlen Specter (R-Pa.). John Ensign (R-Nev.). Johnny Isakson (R-Ga.). Charles H. Taylor (R-NC). Chris Cannon (R-Utah). Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa). Mark Foley (R-Fla.). Richard Pombo (R-Calif.). Christopher S. "Kit" Bond (R-Mo.). Curt Weldon (R-Pa.). Dana Rohrabacher (R-Calif.). Doug Ose (R-Calif.). Ernest J. Istook (R-Okla.). George R. Nethercutt Jr. (R-Wash.). Jim Bunning (R-Ky.). Richard C. Shelby (R-Ala.). Tom Feeney (R-Fla.). Dan Burton (R-Ind.). Eric Cantor (R-Va.). Suzanne Terrell (R-La.). Rob Simmons (R-Conn.). Charles W. "Chip" Pickering Jr. (R-Miss.). Connie Morella (R-Md.). Gordon H. Smith (R-Ore.). James M. Inhofe (R-Okla.). James M. Talent (R-Mo.). John T. Doolittle (R-Calif.). John Thune (R-SD). Tim Hutchinson (R-Ark.). Bob Smith (R-Fla.). Bob Ney (R-Ohio). CL. "Butch" Otter (R-Idaho). Carolyn W. Grant (R-NC). Denny Rehberg (R-Mont.). Elizabeth Dole (R-NC). Heather Wilson (R-NM). J. Randy Forbes (R-Va.). Jack Kingston (R-Ga.). James V. Hansen (R-Utah). John Cornyn (R-Texas). Kimo Kaloi (R-Hawaii). Marilyn Musgrave (R-Colo.). Mike Ferguson (R-NJ). Mike Simpson (R-Idaho). Ralph Regula (R-Ohio). Ric Keller (R-Fla.). Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.). Ted Stevens (R-Alaska). Thad Cochran (R-Miss.). Dave Camp (R-Mich.). Phil Gingrey (R-Ga.). Tom Young (R-Ala.). Bill Janklow (R-SD). Craig Thomas (R-Wyo.). Spencer Abraham (R-Mich.). William L. Gormley (R-NJ). Bill McCollum (R-Fla.). Bill Redmond (R-NM). Bob Riley (R-Ala.). Claude B. Hutchison Jr. (R-Calif.). Denny Rehberg (R-Mont.). Francis E. Flotron (R-Mo.). George Allen (R-Va.). Mike Enzi (R-Wyo.). Walter B. Jones Jr. (R-NC). Paul Ryan (R-Wis.). Bob Smith (R-Fla.). Joe Pitts (R-PA). Charles H. Taylor (R-NC). Bob Ehrlich (R-Md.). Charles R. Gerow (R-Pa.). Ed Royce (R-Calif.). Elia Vincent Pirozzi (R-Calif.). Jerry Weller (R-Ill.). Mark Emerson (R-Utah). Tom Davis (R-Va.). Van Hilleary (R-Tenn.).
Also:
Americans for a Republican Majority, Leadership PAC of Tom DeLay (R-Texas). Republican Majority Fund, Leadership PAC of Don Nickles (R-Okla.). Keep Our Majority PAC, Leadership PAC of Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.). Leadership PAC, Leadership PAC of Michael G. Oxley (R-Ohio). Rely on Your Beliefs, Leadership PAC of Roy Blunt (R-Mo.). Friends of the Big Sky, Leadership PAC of Conrad Burns (R-Mont.). Senate Victory Fund, Leadership PAC of Thad Cochran (R-Miss.). American Liberty PAC, Leadership PAC of Bob Ney (R-Ohio). Battle Born PAC, Leadership PAC of John Ensign (R-Nev.). Fund for a Free Market America, Leadership PAC of Phil Crane (R-Ill.). Team PAC, Leadership PAC of J.D. Hayworth (R-Ariz.). The Republican Party of New Jersey.
Also:
George W. Bush (R).
Notice anything similar? Each and every name listed, each and every PAC, has an (R) after it. The Center for Responsive Politics does not have one Democrat - not one - listed as having received a donation from Jack Abramoff. The amounts given to the Republicans listed above amounts to hundreds of thousands of dollars.
In extremis, Republicans have taken to bandying about the name of Byron Dorgan, Democratic Senator from North Dakota, as evidence that this Abramoff thing is a two-party scandal. Dorgan received $67,000 from Native American tribes represented by Abramoff - not from Abramoff himself - and has since returned the money. Furthermore, he got the money before the tribes had any dealings with Abramoff. In short, Dorgan's so-called involvement in the matter is a red herring."
Incoming By William Rivers Pitt t r u t h o u t | Perspective
Thursday 05 January 2006
[link to www.truthout.org]
Who cares if they are Democrat or Republican? Why argue who took how much money or which side took more? Both sides are guilty. This is not just a "Republican Scandal." Clean house (houses) and send all the guilty parties to jail. This quid pro quo crap just disgusts me. How frickin' greedy do politicians have to be?
This IS pretty much a GOP scandal
I know it was posted after you on this thread, but it has been posted before. The only people this man gave money (and trips,and jobs) to were Republicans. SOME of his clients gave money to Democrats, but they also began giving more towards Repblicans AFTER they hired Abramoff. See a pattern? It also amazes me how many Republicans were defending this man a few months ago and now most Republicans are saying they don't know him. Bush is saying he may have met him and yet the paper trail shows connections between the 2 goes back to Bush's governership in Texas. The water boils, the fish begin to jump.