Abramoff strikes a deal

January 3, 2006

Over night, the Houston Chronicle and Bloomberg News reported that Jack Abramoff’s plea bargain deal is this close to being complete. This morning, CNN and the NYT are reporting it’s a done deal.

Details are still a little sketchy, but Abramoff will reportedly plead guilty to charges of fraud, public corruption, and tax evasion, accept a reduced sentence, and spill the beans on enough members of Congress to make the NRCC staff cry. As Bloomberg reported:

To get a reduced prison sentence, Abramoff would have to implicate lawmakers in a related probe of his lobbying activities, said Melanie Sloan, a former federal prosecutor and head of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington.

“I believe he has to be giving up members of Congress,” Sloan said. “Otherwise, Abramoff is as high as you go.”

And the race among Republican lawmakers to secure the very best defense attorneys is on….

And the bribing of Abramoff by said GOP lawmakers to finger someone else. Low bidder(s) get the slammer.

  • Love, love, love the CNN breaking headline…….

    Lobbyist Jack Abramoff, a close associate of former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, to plead guilty to corruption, other charges, source tells CNN.

  • Yes, and what is MSNBC saying?

    “The continuing saga of Abramoff’s legal problems has caused anxiety at high levels in Washington, in both the Republican and Democratic parties. ”

    and also,

    “Prosecutors investigated whether Abramoff defrauded his Indian tribal clients of millions of dollars and used improper influence on members of Congress. The prosecutors are looking at building criminal cases against up to 20 lawmakers of both parties and their staff members.”

    Even when there is overwhelming republican wrongdoing the SCLM bends over backwards to taint the democrats. There is no mention of the number of R’s & D’s so it pretty much tries to make it a bipartisan scandal. I just don’t get it.
    If this was a democrat scandal would the republicans be mentioned?

  • The Washington Post’s “Abramoff Galaxy” http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/custom/2005/12/28/CU2005122801183.html has a graphic of the folks involved. One section is “nonprofits” and one is “family charities”.

    These, with Frist’s AIDs charity that seems to be a Republican slush fund, make me wonder what charities Cheney contributes his Halliburton income to. I’ve tried to find it on the internet, but can’t.

    Does anyone know which charities Cheney contributes his Halliburton funds to? And are they legitimate charities or part of a Republican shell game?

  • Why do we have so much confidence that the prosecutors want to implicate Republican members of Congress?

    The Justice Department is controlled by Republicans, with the most reliable of partisan hacks as Attorney General. The AG is willing to trash the Constitution. Why does anyone suppose that he would be motivated to even passively allow a major corruption probe of his own party in Congress? How do we know that Abramoff has not been given a sweetheart deal with a wink and a nod? Maybe, he’s agreed to testify against members of Congress, but plans (with prosecutorial connivance) to shade his testimony ever so subtly, to allow Members to escape successful prosecution. Maybe, only a few minor Members will be sacrificed, with a Democrat or two thrown into the mix to innoculate the Republican Party.

    I am sorry to be so “paranoid”, but I really am afraid that the Republicans will eviscerate both the criminal law and whatever remains of ethical standards in Congress.

  • I’m with you, Bruce. I don’t have too much confidence either– after 5 years of total GOP domination we’re supposed to suddenly trust that the government that is responsible for prosecuting (mostly) Republicans is going to be fair and impartial?

    Yeah, right.

  • There’s been some talk on dKos that this could be worse for DeLay than Ronnie Earle. DOn’t get that one–I thought this indictment would be like a huge late Christmas gift for Earle.

  • Bruce, remember that most of our government is made up of career people, and most of them have a strong sense of duty to their country. Sure, almost all of the top is made of political appointees, but the rank-and-file is going to be around long after any one or two presidents are gone.

    Heck, I work with people who have been around since Nixon, and that is well before I was even born. They aren’t beholden to any one president or party, no matter their personal party affiliation. They swear an oath to the Constitution, not to the president.

    That’s precisely why something may actually come of this. If you have been reading the news carefully, you will see numerous times over the past few years where even political appointees have stood up to protest. Look at ex-Secretary of the Army Thomas White. Despite being a Bush appointee, he stood up to Rumsfeld in front of Congress (and lost his job because of it).

    Have some faith in Humanity. Some people can and do act in a principled manner.

  • I have more faith in political expediency than humanity (sorry CT!).

    It’s in the interest of the powerful to keep the public docile. Given the growing unrest evident in the poll data, it would be politically expedient to sacrifice a few individuals to the proles (even some of stature) to make the people quiet down again. Nothing will really change with respect to how things in DC are done, of course, because the system in place offers too much temptation.

    Of course, the sacrificial lambs won’t necessarily appreciate this, though in some cases they are encouraged to cooperate through bribes and promises. I predict that Libby, Delay, Abramoff, et al will get token sentences and be on the talking head circuit before we’ve even realized they’ve gone anywhere.

  • I think Graner and the guys from Cumberland, MD are responsible. Maybe a slap at Gen. Karpinski–and done!

  • “Some people can and do act in a principled manner.”

    As the DOJ will learn to its sorrow, in the NSA leak case.

  • I’m shocked … SHOCKED, that the conservative blogs are so-far silent on this issue. Nothing at all from the Instapundit, Powerline tripartite, or Ms. Malkin. When will they be blaming out-of-control Democrats and an activist judiciary for the Abramhoff indictment?

    • Comments are closed.