One interesting side angle to the Abramoff affair is how sensitive congressional Republicans have become. At least this week, they don’t want to see, talk to, acknowledge, or even pretend to know some of the same high-profile lobbyists who were helping write their legislation in 2005.<\/p>\n
And what does this mean for Tom DeLay? Nothing good. If the caucus is on edge about connections to corruption, DeLay’s “comeback” has gone from long-shot to don’t-even-ask.<\/p>\n
Rep. Chris Shays<\/a> (R-Conn.), for example, said yesterday, “Jack Abramoff’s guilty plea and his close association with Tom DeLay underscore the need for a new majority leader in the Republican Party.” Moreover, Rep. Jim Leach<\/a> (R-Iowa) said it would be “insane” not to pick new permanent leadership — that does not include DeLay.<\/p>\n Of course, Shays and Leach are among the more reasonable members of the party. Are there any real Republicans, which the caucus takes seriously, rejecting DeLay publicly? Well, there is Newt Gingrich<\/a>.<\/p>\n [F]ormer House speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) called on House Republicans to elect a new majority leader to permanently replace Rep. Tom DeLay (R-Tex.), Abramoff’s most powerful ally in Washington, who faces a trial on unrelated criminal charges of violating Texas campaign laws.<\/p>\n “Unequivocally, the House Republicans need to select a new majority leader in late January or early February,” said Gingrich, who cited revelations in The Washington Post that a public advocacy group organized by DeLay associates had been largely financed by Russian energy interests.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n