Wash. Post's Birnbaum: Jefferson indictment balances out multiple GOP convictions, indictments, investigations
SUMMARY: On Fox News, Jeffrey Birnbaum asserted that the
indictment of Rep. William Jefferson "makes the allegations of corruption
bipartisan." However,
at least nine Republican members of Congress and Bush administration officials
have been indicted or pleaded guilty to criminal charges.
On the June 4 edition of Fox News' Special Report with Brit Hume, Washington Post staff writer Jeffrey Birnbaum asserted that the June 4 bribery indictment of Rep. William Jefferson (D-LA) "makes the allegations of corruption bipartisan." In just the past three years, however, at least nine Republican members of Congress and Bush administration officials -- including the former House majority leader, Tom DeLay (TX) -- have been indicted or pleaded guilty to criminal charges. Birnbaum did not explain how one indicted Democratic congressman who was not in the congressional leadership (and another who is under investigation) is equivalent to the wide swath of Republicans who have been convicted, indicted, or are under investigation.
Birnbaum was responding to a question from Fox News Washington managing editor Brit Hume about whether Jefferson's indictment "hurts the Democrats as a group in Congress." Hume had previously asked Roll Call editor Morton M. Kondracke whether the indictment "change[s] ... the political equation" on the issue of corruption and whether it "deprive[s] the Democrats of [the] issue" and "help[s] the Republicans in their efforts to try to say, 'Look, you know, they're no different than we were?' " Kondracke, however, said he did not think that was the case.
But while Birnbaum mentioned former Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham (R-CA), who pleaded guilty to taking bribes from defense contractor Mitchell Wade, Birnbaum did not mention the other Republican members of Congress and Bush administration officials who have either pleaded guilty, been convicted, or been indicted:
- Former Rep. Bob Ney (OH) pleaded guilty in October 2006 to taking bribes from former lobbyist Jack Abramoff.
- DeLay was indicted in October 2005 for money laundering and conspiracy to launder money. A former DeLay aide, Tony Rudy, pleaded guilty in connection with the Abramoff scandal, while another former aide, Michael Scanlon, pleaded guilty to conspiring with Abramoff to bribe public officials.
- Former White House procurement official David H. Safavian was convicted in June 2006 of lying and obstructing justice in the Abramoff investigation, as Media Matters for America has noted.
- Former vice presidential chief of staff I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby was convicted in March 2006 of obstructing justice and making false statements. On June 5, he was sentenced to 30 months in prison and ordered to pay a $250,000 fine.
- Former Deputy Secretary of the Interior J. Steven Griles pleaded guilty in March 2007 to obstructing justice. As a March 23 Associated Press article reported, Griles "admitt[ed] in a plea agreement that he lied in testimony before the Senate Indian Affairs Committee on Nov. 2, 2005, and during an earlier deposition with the panel's investigators on October 20, 2005."
- Former CIA executive director Kyle "Dusty" Foggo was charged by federal prosecutors in San Diego with improperly trying to steer a $132 million contract to defense contractor Brent Wilkes.
- Former FDA commissioner Lester Crawford pleaded guilty to charges of "conflict of interest and false reporting of information about stocks he owned in food, beverage and medical device companies he was in charge of regulating," according to an October 17, 2006, Associated Press report. "Beginning in 2002," the AP report stated, "Crawford filed seven incorrect financial reports with a government ethics office and Congress, leading to the charges."
- Former Federal Housing Finance Board chairman John T. Korsmo "pleaded guilty to one count of making false statements to the Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee, which oversees the Finance Board, and the Inspector General for the Finance Board," as Media Matters noted.
In addition, several current and former Republican congressmen and senators are reportedly under investigation over corruption allegations. For example:
- Rep. John T. Doolittle (CA) is reportedly under investigation by the FBI in connection to his dealings with Abramoff.
- Rep. Jerry Lewis (CA) is reportedly under investigation in connection with the Cunningham scandal, and will reportedly not seek re-election. According to a January 31 article in The Hill, Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) said in an interview that "he believes Lewis is innocent until proven guilty, and that prevented him from toppling him from the top GOP spot on the [House Appropriations Committee]."
- Rep. Gary Miller (CA) is reportedly under investigation for two land deals and related taxes, although he says FBI agents have not contacted him.
- Rep. Rick Renzi (AZ) is reportedly the subject of a preliminary investigation into whether he pressured several landowners to buy land from a business partner.
- Former Sen. Conrad Burns (MT) is reportedly under investigation in the Abramoff investigation.
- Former Rep. Curt Weldon (PA) is being investigated over allegations that he "used his influence to secure lobbying and consulting contracts for his daughter," according to an October 14, 2006, Associated Press article.
In addition, as The Washington Post reported on March 8, Sen. Pete V. Domenici (R-NM) is the subject of a preliminary Senate ethics investigation into a phone call he made to then-U.S. Attorney David Iglesias before the 2006 elections. According to an April 12 article in the Post, "[B]ecause the House ethics committee keeps its probes secret, it is unclear whether the lower chamber is looking into the similar allegations concerning Rep. Heather Wilson (R-N.M.), a close ally of Domenici." Domenici and Wilson allegedly pressured Iglesias to indict a local Democratic official on corruption charges before the 2006 elections.
By contrast, one Democrat, Rep. Alan Mollohan (WV), is reportedly the subject of an FBI investigation.
From the June 4 edition of Fox News' Special Report with Brit Hume:
HUME: All right, so -- so it's a big case. Long awaited. Came too late, the Republicans had hoped, of course, it would come before the '06 election and would not allow that election to be so much, in their view, about Republican corruption, of which there had been a number of instances.
Does this change the equation -- the political equation on that subject? Does this deprive Democrats of this issue? Does this help the Republicans in their efforts to try to say, "Look, you know, they're no different than we were?" Or not?
KONDRACKE: I don't think so. Look, the Democrats -- when his office was raided, back in the last Congress -- up on Capitol Hill, the Democrats kicked him off the House Ways and Means Committee. They left him on one other committee. And the score --
HUME: But now they're proposing to put him on the Homeland Security Committee.
KONDRACKE: Well, I can't believe that that will ever actually happen. They've been -- Nancy Pelosi had been talking about that for a long time. You're not going to put somebody who's under indictment --
HUME: But she was under a certain amount of pressure from the Congressional Black Caucus to restore him to the Ways and Means Committee.
KONDRACKE: Yeah, but now that he's indicted -- now that he's indicted -- with this indictment, they are not going to do that.
HUME: So, you don't think this will tar the -- this hurts the Democrats as a group in Congress?
BIRNBAUM: I think it makes the allegations of corruption bipartisan, now, clearly. And so, it does help the Republicans and hurt the Democrats, essentially. And I think the Democrats are trying to make sure that they are hurt less than they're about to be by speaking about this. They are trying to -- Nancy Pelosi is trying to get Jefferson off of the Small Business Committee, which he's still on, or move him. But, I think Boehner -- Congressman John Boehner, the majority [sic] leader in the House, is trying to press the political issue by pushing the idea of expelling Jefferson if he is actually found guilty and keeping it in the forefront, in large part for political purposes in the same way that the Democrats did that to the Republicans with Duke Cunningham.
FRED BARNES (Weekly Standard executive editor): It is not going to impress the voters. Nancy Pelosi wants to take this guy with this horrendous indictment off of the Small Business Committee. I mean, that's not going to help much. Look, this is gonna -- this hurts Democrats.
Look, I don't think congressional corruption was going to be a huge issue in the 2008 election, in 2006 it won it. It was -- it killed Republicans, but this will, I think, make Democrats a lot less likely to try to use that issue again.
















Key difference between Democratic and Republican corruption. We encourage them to resign, they cover it up. Not to mention this is an example of 1 vs. 20 or so. To imply that it's a wash is pretty sad.
But - but, but... but he was black!
"Ah HA - you guys have more crooks than we do, so THERE!"
Yeech.
Is it fair to claim that Jeffereson makes up for the whole list that MMFA posted?
No, but one set of crooks pointing to another, more populated set of crooks, is hardly worthy of gold star.
But the point of the articles was about this guy trying to claim that Jeferson balances everything out. DO I personally thing dems can be just as bad? THey definitely have the potential, but the last couple of years leads me to think no (I do acknowledge there are some infractions though).
No, but one set of crooks pointing to another, more populated set of crooks, is hardly worthy of gold star.
- tommy / Wednesday June 6, 2007 06:29:44 PM EST
So, what you're saying is that even though the criminal behavior of US Troops at My Lai, Abu Ghraib, and Hadditha pales in comparison to the Nazis doesn't get them off the hook, because murder is still murder and War Crimes are still War Crimes?
Tommy, you surprise me. That's quite a departure for you to take such a fair and balanced view on things. I almost sense personal growth on your part. Keep up the good work. I knew ya had it in ya, kiddo.
No, but one set of crooks pointing to another, more populated set of crooks, is hardly worthy of gold star. - Tommy
In fact it is. There have always been bad seeds in every group of powerful people. Comparing one group of powerful people who don't have many bad seeds at all, when one considers that all powerful groups have some bad seeds, to a group virtually overflowing with bad seeds, is appropriate.
But Media Matters didn't say that they deserved a gold star. They said that it was unfair to compare them as equals, which they aren't!
It's your strawman argument that Media Matters was trying to say that a group that has one crook was demanding a gold star, or deserved one. What tehy didn't deserve was being compared the way the report in question did.
As I recall Sue always used the word "strawman' also.
Welcome back Sue.
I bet the Curt Weldon indictment tops Jefferson's 16 counts and I bet some other members of Congress get indicted. According to FEC records, Rep. C. W. "Bill" Young's daughter-in-law, Cynthia Young, was on the payroll of defense contractor, Galaxy Scientific, when she was supposed to be a lobbyist in partnership with Cecelia Grimes, Media PA real estate agent-turned-lobbyist.
There are two types of corruption
One of them is taking money due to greed; that type of corruption knows no party affilication; that type of corruption is human nature.
The other type of corruption is that of subverting the will of the people; in this case the Republican Party holds the crown for that. The Republican Party has created voter purge lists with legitimate voters on the list usually Black or poor. This is called shaving the dice to get the advantage of an outcome.
They have created a national id act the real reason is to fix the voting outcomes in their favor again shaving the dice.
There is Rove who planted a bug in his own office and faked the charge against a Democrat; that's called stacking the deck. It worked.
You have the current plan to plant Bush loyalists in the DOJ for the sole purpose of fixing the elections by creating red herrings againsts Democratic candidates.
Taking money like Jefferson is wrong and human nature. Subverting the democratic process via strategy trickery and intrigues like the Republican Party is beyond human nature it is the root of the Nazi Party. It's about power and winning. The will of the people in not in the vocabulary of the Republican Party. Look at their candidates all white wearing a black suit and red tie. They look like the own an operate the morturary for dead democracies. The dead democracy is money to them.
Birnbaum there is a name for you it's called Benedict Arnold.
That is the wildest rationalization of lawbreaking I have ever heard, oh it's human nature! Rich!
And the bonus never-ending whine about stolen elections is a real peach........wow.
And the bonus never-ending whine about stolen elections is a real peach........wow.
This has been documented and proven repeatedly.
Taking bribes has been around since the beginning of time. What you seem to be upset about is my commenting on how the Republican Party shaves the dice. This hurts you because it is an act that goes against the very foundation of this country; that foundation being the country is for the people and run by the people.
The Republican Party is not for the people. It is a private organization that understands that if they can get as many of their members in office then they have the power. The will of the people is not in the vocabulary of the Republican Party; but the will of corporate interests is.
The game of family values and other moral posturing is a wolf in sheep clothing. They are owned and operated by corporations. You would have to be a fool not to see that.
If taking bribes by a politician is just more of the same, and so obviousluy inconsequential to you - because it's one of your precious Democrats, well so be it.
I could care less which party they belong too, it is irrelevant to me.....a crook is a crook. But Mr. Jefferson would be glad to hear he has your support.
Did I say taking bribes was inconsequential? I never said it was inconsequential. Taking bribes is against the law. Jefferson has to deal with his situation.
My post is was to demonstrate how a crime of bribery which may not hurt all Americans pale compare to the crime of fixing an election which hurts all Americans.
As an American citizen I am allowed to toss in my judgement about what is going on and this current situation about planting party moles in the DOJ concerns me very much. I have read enough to draw the conclusion that Rove, Bush and Gonzales did carry out an act to subvert the will of the People. To me that makes them Benedict Arnold. I do not trust those three and I do not trust the Republican Party to clean house of their filt either.
As for Democrats I'm not siding with them.
I don't belong to any party. I just want the people to realize this country could be their's and ran in their benefit but it's a hard task because the word is always dominated by Democrats or Republicans.
And when both parties say "We the People" it don't sound real to me. Look at how we were blown off when we told both Parties this Iraq war is baloney.
No, actually you said it was "human nature". Sorry, it's not the human nature that I, or other law-abiding citizens, were raised with. Jefferson made a choice to break the law, there is no human nature involved.
It is human nature. All over the world you see people lying cheating and stealing. At no time in human history have you ever seen the human race have a period of time when there is no lying cheating and stealing within the members of the human race.
Because this has been so obvious a variety of explanations were created. Some explained it away by calling it sin. Some explained it away by calling it karma. Some give is a Marxist angle by stating it as a result of a system of have and have nots.
But whatever comfort story you want to buy into it the fact remains that lying cheating and stealing has been with us since the begginning of time.
Tommy,
If you want to hang on to the usual and boring conservative ideology and philosophy about human nature you are free to do so. But whatever you believe in don't necessarily make it so.
As for what I think sorry it's esoteric I've learned a long time ago to keep one's thoughts to oneself. But that doesn't mean I won't go out and try to get the people to realize this country is their's. It doesn't belong to private parties.
What I noticed was the failure of Tommy to ever acknowledge that a culture of corruption in the Republican Party is not equivalent to one Democratic Congressman who appears to be corrupt.
This is typical Tommy.
If we assume that he's guilty (not a wild thought), it's not the same as all the Republicans who have been found guilty added to all those who we can also assume are guilty in a similar way.
There's a big pile of scoundrels on the right, and one on the left.
It doesn't even out given the numbers. Tommy knows this, but won't admit it, so he picks out small bits of your comments to harangue you. It makes him look petty, and it makes you look correct!
If the Dems fire the US attorney who investigated Jefferson then you can say he has our support.
What IS wrong with us lefties. The fact that Bush lost the popular vote and subsequent vote counting showed that if all valid votes were counted he lost Florida too shouldnt bother us. The GOP stole that election fair and square tommy thinks we ought to get over it. I think I should steal tommys car then drive it around his nieghborhood for a few years and every time he says anything about it I could just tell him to stop whining and get over it.
What a novel approach! That would certainly be treating the filibuster with his own medication!
Of course, if the cops said the car belonged to you now, then Tommy would have no case. Kind of like Democrats and Florida. The courts ruled, we don't elect people by popular vote so that standard is invalid. You know it.
This is quite a stretch even for the GOP talking pointers.
Tommy is this to be another, I'm going to misunderstand with the ferocity of a babger in his den, kind of thing?
You can always tell when Tommy knows he's wrong by how long he drags the discussion and how far off-topic he's willing to go to make a fallacious point.
It's actually textbook troll tactics. But since Tommy is a regular here, he can't really be called a "troll", per se.
A troll is really more what can alternatively be called a "seagull poster." It's someone who flies in, makes a lot of noise, craps on everything, and flies back out, never to be heard from again.
To Tommy's credit, he's no seagull. But that's about the nicest thing I can say about him.
He makes an effort. I can in clear conscience agree with him at times. Not sure how often, but I'm not unprepared for it to happen.
Off topic here. Just checked in at firedoglake. They have a thread concerning a sexist coment by Mr. Scarbrough, about Fred Thompson's wife. I'd expect this site to be on this.
Why? This site is here to expose "conservative" misinformation. If the righties want to go after Scarborough, they should go right ahead.
You forgot some.
Brian Doyle was a deputy press secretary for Homeland Security, who had sexually explicit conversations with an undercover police officer posing as a 14-year-old girl online.
Claude Allen was arrested for crimes committed while he had been Bush's domestic policy advisor.
Will Heaton was Chief of Staff to Bob Ney. Mark Zachares was an aide to Rep. Young. Roger Stillwell was in the Department of Interior. All were caught up with Abramoff.
Neil Volz pleaded guilty to illegally lobbying within one year of his congressional employment with Ney.
While it does not quite fit the definition of Bush administration and congressional officials, there is also the case of state and national Republican Party officials, Tobin and McGee, who conspired to interfere with the New Hampshire election.
JScott: That's not the complete mission statement. It was aconservative talking head, He was being quite audibly sexist.
Dunno, I'd think it was over looked rather than rave about insults against GOP folks being ignored. If it is the later, I can think of several poster's who if cognisant, will never fail to mention it, in the future.
You can always tell when Tommy knows he's wrong by how long he drags the discussion and how far off-topic he's willing to go to make a fallacious point.
It's actually textbook troll tactics. But since Tommy is a regular here, he can't really be called a "troll", per se.
Really? In the words of the late, great, James Brown, "WATCH ME!!"
A troll is really more what can alternatively be called a "seagull poster." It's someone who flies in, makes a lot of noise, craps on everything, and flies back out, never to be heard from again.
Like the Rose Garden pigeon at Bush's most recent attempt at faking a Press Conference?
Think I've got some vinyl with your name on it. Soon as the amp gets repaired it'll get some play.
A seagull huh, I'd considerred them a form of drive by, or like a martial art's practice dummy, a mook. The words just stand there. Often offering a choice as to how thin you want to slice them. Which on the whole is not how I like to interact.
I posted the other day(or yesterday, I believe) that I'd tuned in to Rush Limbaugh and heard him crying about the Dems rallying around Jefferson, while making a big deal out of Libby's sentencing, which the Oxymoron considered no big deal (Libby's crimes, not the sentencing)
As of now, I haven't heard one person defending Jefferson, aside from noting that his trial isn't over.I have heard conservatives explaining away and denying Libby in the face of facts.
I think that's more important than a count of how many criminals each party has, how they deal with them.As a third party voter for most of my life who was driven to check a lot of (D)s by the current Republicans, I hope the American public can hold the Dems to a little higher standard than Republican voters have demanded of their chosen ones.
The Republican Party, long the party of 'follow the rules and you won't get hurt', and conservatives, long the political group of 'let's not have political activism', are arguing against an indictment by a grand jury, a prosecution by a cleaner than Mr Clean prosecutor, a conviction by a jury of his peers, and a sentencing by a judge who asserts that it was all very convincing and no appeal will be sustained!
Hypocrites all. There's no other way to describe people who would argue against a fair trial and verdict here. It's got to be embarrassing to some Republicans to have them claim that there was no crime. If there was no crime, why was he prosecuted, and why did the grand jury indict him, and why did the jury convict him? Are they all in on the conspiracy against Bush?
This reminds me, just to let everyone know. I'm planning to pitch a script to HBO and Showtime. Its called Republi-OZ.
Act 1, Scene 1
A worried looking prison warden walks into solitary. A crowd surrounds a body on the floor.
"What happend here?" He says
A frightened looking by-stander, "I saw it sir, Scooter shanked Abramoff."
Mark Foley leaps out of the crowd hitting the man, he screams, "Traitor, un-American! Who's the intern, b@#ch, who's the intern!"
In the first season Dick Cheny makes a special quest appearance, as a vice president who gets in trouble after offering a fellow prisoner 30 shares of Haliburton in exchange for a pack of smokes.
Second season, President Bush makes a guest appearance as a man who after arguing with his father, for hanging out with the wrong sort of people, suffers an emotional crisis. In the end he finds comfort after he converts to Islam.
I like it. Maybe it would replace The Red Green Show in my heart. Another wonderful Canadian import.
Framing An Issue At Its Worse
The Republican media have a flawed trait. They tend to check all their boxes when they are in the usual 3/1 ratio, and in doing so, they create a false sense of what is right or wrong, supportive or non-supportive, and in this case, won or lost. I am sorry the Democrats don't come near the kind of corruption we witnessed from the Republicans.
I n an unintended way, this may even highlight their corruption more. Just by putting both sides together, as in a matching process, you can clearly see just how much the right had their hand in the cookie jar.
Joseph
I did not happen to read in this diatribe about all the things that have happened since ms pilosi took over promising an honest congress. Such as her exempting an agricultrial area from a minimum wage hike. This area just happens to be where her restaurant company gets products from. Or from harry reid's questionable las vegas land deals. How does one get a payment of over a million dollars for the sale of property that they have not owned for several years?
And William Jefferson, Democrat, Louisiana and his troubles with cold hard cash in his freezer and something about bribery.....
All the congressional comments from the Democrats about that case involved being shocked that the FBI would execute a search warrant to recover fruits of a criminal enterprise. Any reasonable thinking person would be more concerned about the charges instead of the police doing their job. But hey, its only the Democrats. What else is new