Jim Guy Tucker can help them out with the government.

Vince Foster and Jim McDougal could help, but somehow they ended up dead with little explanation.

Bloomberg could spell some trouble for those folks. They are a financial news network, so I would expect they may just know how to look for connections and patterns.

On a roll.

Ain't mentioned the torch or all the underlings that took the fall for the politicos.

Let'r rip.

fire up th' burners and let er rip

December 2, 2005


Lobbyist's Role in Hiring Aides Is Investigated

By ANNE E. KORNBLUT

WASHINGTON, Dec. 1 - With a federal corruption case intensifying, prosecutors investigating Jack Abramoff, the Republican lobbyist, are examining whether he brokered lucrative jobs for Congressional aides at powerful lobbying firms in exchange for legislative favors, people involved in the case have said.

The attention paid to how the aides obtained jobs occurs as Mr. Abramoff is under mounting pressure to cooperate with prosecutors as they consider a case against lawmakers. Participants in the case, who insisted on anonymity because the investigation is secret, said he could try to reach a deal in the next six weeks.

Many forces are bearing down on Mr. Abramoff. Last week, his closest business partner, Michael Scanlon, pleaded guilty to conspiracy in exchange for cooperating in the inquiry, being run by an interagency group, into whether money and gifts were used in an influence-peddling scandal that involved lawmakers.

Despite charging Indian tribes that were clients tens of millions of dollars in lobbying fees, Mr. Abramoff has told friends that he is running out of money. In a new approach that could contribute to the pressures, prosecutors are sifting through evidence related to the hiring of several former Congressional aides by a lobbying firm, Greenberg Traurig, where Mr. Abramoff worked from 2000 to last year, according to people who know about the inquiry. That course could impel a new set of Mr. Abramoff's former associates to cooperate to avoid prosecution.
Investigators are said to be especially interested in how Tony C. Rudy, a former deputy chief of staff to Representative Tom DeLay of Texas, and Neil G. Volz, a former chief of staff to Representative BobNey of Ohio, obtained lobbying positions with big firms on K Street.

The hiring pattern is "very much a part of" what prosecutors are focusing on, a person involved in the case said. Another participant confirmed that investigators were trying to determine whether aides conducted "job negotiations with Jack Abramoff" while they were in a position to help him on Capitol Hill.

Prosecutors are trying to establish that "it's not just a ticket to a ballgame, it's major jobs" that exchanged hands, the participant in the case said. Also under examination are payments to lobbyists and lawmakers' wives, including Mr. Rudy's wife, Lisa Rudy, whose firm, Liberty Consulting, worked in consultation with Mr. Abramoff, people involved in case said.

What began as an inquiry into Mr. Scanlon and Mr. Abramoff's lobbying has widened to a corruption investigation centering mainly on Republican lawmakers who came to power as part of the conservative revolution of the 1990's. At least six members of Congress are in the scope of the inquiry, with an additional 12 or so former aides being examined to determine whether they gave Mr. Abramoff legislative help in exchange for campaign donations, lavish trips and gifts.

It may be difficult for prosecutors to translate certain elements of the case into indictments. Bribery, corruption and conspiracy cases are notoriously difficult to prove. But the potential dimensions are enormous, and the investigation, at a time of turmoil for the Bush administration, threatens to add a new knot of problems for the party heading into the elections next year.

Several people involved in the case, insisting on anonymity because of the plea negotiations, said they anticipated that Mr. Abramoff would try to reach an agreement with the prosecutors in a rapidly closing window of time before he is scheduled to stand trial in a separate federal case in Florida.

Mr. Abramoff and another business partner, Adam Kidan, were indicted in August on charges of wire fraud and conspiracy for reportedly defrauding their lenders as they sought to buy a company in Miami, SunCruz Casinos, that operated a fleet of gambling boats.

That trial is to begin on Jan. 9.

A lawyer for Mr. Abramoff in the case, Neal R. Sonnett, declined to comment on whether his client is conferring with prosecutors, indicating that he is moving ahead as though there will be no plea agreement.

"I'm preparing for trial," Mr. Sonnett said.

After more than a year of slow progress in what initially appeared to be a case of lobbying excess, the larger scope of the inquiry started to come into view toward the end of September with the arrest of David H. Safavian, chief procurement official in the administration.

Mr. Safavian is accused of lying to investigators and of obstruction of justice. He is pleading not guilty, his lawyer has said. Prosecutors contend that Mr. Safavian did not disclose to investigators business that Mr. Abramoff had before his agency at the time of a golfing trip to Scotland arranged by the lobbyist.

The focus also expanded from Mr. Abramoff's work for Indian tribes with the end of hearings by the Senate Indian Affairs Committee. The hearings set out to examine whether the tribes, which paid $82 million to Mr. Abramoff and Mr. Scanlon, had been defrauded. The panel, headed by Senator John McCain, Republican of Arizona, avoided looking at the ties between the lobbyists and specific lawmakers, leaving that to the inquiry's interagency group.

The Senate hearings uncovered many patterns of Mr. Abramoff's activities, including his offering favors to officials while making deals on government work. In one case, a former senior Interior Department official, J. Steven Griles, testified that Mr. Abramoff had offered him a position at Greenberg Traurig while Mr. Griles was in a position to affect decisions involving Mr. Abramoff's Indian clients. Mr. Griles said he reported the offer to his department's ethics division and rejected it.

Prosecutors are trying to determine whether Mr. Abramoff made similar overtures to other well positioned government workers, especially former aides to Republican leaders in of the House and Senate. Such gestures could be considered as bribery or a conflict of interest, especially if the interests of the two parties were entangled.

Of particular interest, according to several people involved in the case, are how Mr. Rudy, who left Mr. DeLay's office in 2001 to join Greenberg Traurig, and Mr. Volz, who left Mr. Ney's office in 2002 for that firm, obtained their positions. Investigators believe Mr. Abramoff may have solicited help from both men and their supervisors on Capitol Hill while helping arrange for high-paying positions, people familiar with case said.

Mr. Rudy now works for the Alexander Strategy Group, a lobbying firm run by Ed Buckham, another former senior aide to Mr. DeLay. Alexander Strategy is also under scrutiny for its ties to Mr. Abramoff and for putting Mr. DeLay's wife, Christine, on its payroll for several years.
As investigators try to unravel the web of relationships between the lawmakers and the lobbyists, they are considering spouses' roles, people involved in the case said.
Neither Mr. Rudy nor Mr. Volz returned calls and e-mail messages seeking comment on Thursday.

Hiring patterns offer a rich and complicated field for investigators. Congressional staff members routinely leave for the private work, with the sole prohibition a one-year ban on lobbying their former supervisors. Mr. DeLay is so renowned for funneling his skilled staff members into lobbying firms across Washington that his political network is known as "DeLay Inc."

Although Mr. DeLay was reprimanded by the House Ethics Committee in the late 90's for pressuring a lobbying firm to hire a Republican, the practice has become so standard in an era of Republican dominance that partisans have given it a name, the K Street Project.

What investigators seek is evidence of a quid pro quo between Mr. Abramoff and the lobbyists he helped hire, lawyers and others involved in the case said. They are especially interested in evidence that Mr. Abramoff discussed hiring Mr. Rudy, Mr. Volz or other staff members before they left the government or around the time they or their bosses were doing favors for Mr. Abramoff's clients.



Copyright 2005 The New York Times Company

From the Financial Times:

Threat of federal charges against DeLay grows

By Holly Yeager and Stephanie Kirchgaessner in Washington
Monday, November 21, 2005
Posted: 06:10 PM EST (00:10 London)

The likelihood of federal charges against members of Congress intensified on Monday when a key player in a broad corruption probe pleaded guilty to conspiracy and agreed to co-operate with investigators.

Under a plea agreement with the Department of Justice, Michael Scanlon, a former aide to Tom DeLay, the powerful Texas congressman, admitted that he had conspired to defraud four Native American Indian tribes that operated or hoped to operate casinos.

He faces up to five years in prison and agreed to pay nearly $20m in restitution. Mr Scanlon, who operated a grassroots public relations firm, admitted that he and an unnamed lobbyist conspired to charge the tribes high fees and split the profits."


Scanlon's plea agreement states he will get a smaller sentence if he helps in the procecution of others (DeLay).

http://news.findlaw.com/cnn/docs/delay/scanlon112105plea.pdf

And so did Ron Brown (sigh)

Hmmm...

"...prosecutors investigating Jack Abramoff, the Republican lobbyist..."

perhaps he was more of a player on both sides of the street than they think:

See: http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=1354456

"Tribe: Abramoff Arranged Dorgan DonationTribe Says Abramoff Arranged for Dorgan Donation After Lawmaker's Letter
By JOHN SOLOMON and SHARON THEIMER Associated Press Writers
The Associated Press

WASHINGTON Nov 29, 2005 — New evidence is emerging that the top Democrat on the Senate committee currently investigating Jack Abramoff got political money arranged by the lobbyist back in 2002 shortly after the lawmaker took action favorable to Abramoff's tribal clients.

A lawyer for the Louisiana Coushatta Indians told The Associated Press that Abramoff instructed the tribe to send $5,000 to Sen. Byron Dorgan's political group just three weeks after the North Dakota Democrat urged fellow senators to fund a tribal school program Abramoff's clients wanted to use.

The check was one of about five dozen the Coushattas listed in a tribal ledger as being issued on March 6, 2002, to various lawmakers' campaigns and political causes at the instruction of Abramoff, tribal attorney Jimmy Fairchild said Monday.

Many of the recipients were lawmakers who had just written letters to the Bush administration or Congress supportive of Abramoff's tribal causes, documents show.

"I am confident of that fact," Faircloth said when asked whether Abramoff had requested the donations listed in a tribal ledger obtained by the AP.

The revelation came as Dorgan took to the offensive Monday, saying there was no connection between the $20,000 in donations he got from Abramoff's firm and tribal clients in spring 2002 and a February 2002 letter he wrote urging the Senate Appropriations Committee to fund the tribal school building program.

Dorgan's letter noted that the Mississippi Choctaw, one of Abramoff's clients, had successfully used the program and requested lawmakers consider long-term funding for it. It made no mention of Abramoff or any of his other tribes that were interested in the program.

Dorgan sharply criticized an AP story last week that divulged he and about a dozen other lawmakers had gotten Abramoff-related donations around the time they sent letters supporting the school building program.

Dorgan told a news conference in North Dakota he had never met Abramoff, did not know about the donations from the lobbyist's clients around the time of his letter and saw no reason to step aside from the Senate Indian Affairs committee investigation of Abramoff. "

Like I said earlier the Sufferors of Potomac Fever continue to amaze. But do little to delight.

Dorgan may very well get in trouble over it, but he at least will be able to offer the defense outlined above: That the demonstration program run by the Choctaw had been developed over a period of years with participation from Dorgan's staff and Dorgan's perfunctory sponsorship, so of course he was in favor of it. He was demonstrably involved in the issue and on the side he continued to take long before Abramoff or the Coushatta appeared on the scene.

On the flip side, however, Dorgan was NOT much involved with Indian gamling or casino issues, so any sudden interest in -those- subjects post-Abramoff would stink to high heaven.

(I happen to know about Dorgan and the Indian schools thing because our local reservation at Ft. Hall had also been pushing for an expansion of the school building project, and one of their direct mail ads soliciting support had contained photos of "Dorgan visits the Indian school". He's way down on my list of Congresscritters, but fair's fair. His interest in the program really wasn't anything suddenly prompted by Abramoff's lobbying or donations.)

I sorta wish they weren't dragging the whole tribal schools issue into this mess because it tends to give Abramoff some cover as a legit lobbyist. The schools issue WAS one of several years standing that was snarled in BIA infighting. But alas, it DOES seems to have been the issue that first brought Abramoff into Indian Affairs matters, the "hook" he used to reel in the Indians and start milking them for all they were worth.

I really, really hate Indian casinos. The one at Ft. Hall has been, except for making oodles of money, been a disaster for the local tribe.

Liberals Want CNN to Muzzle Coulter
Liberal activist group Media Matters for America is asking supporters to "Tell CNN to ditch Coulter" by launching an email blitz to CNN. The fundraising and publicity pitch pleads: "It's time for CNN to stop helping Ann Coulter to spew her false and offensive bile to the American public."

Read the full story

I have no particular desire to muzzle her, but then I'm not a liberal. OTOH, I sure have a desire to put some CLOTHES on the bitch!

First she quit wearing panties and went to sheer-to-the-waist pantyhose, now she doesn't even bother with panty-hose. Half her popularity seems to lie in guys watching eagerly in the hope of resolving the rumors about her natural hair color, or just how far up she, um, shaves her legs.

I think you have her mixed up with Sharon Stone.

Hey, look, I'm not the one who just posted a picture of her dressed up for leather freaks in a dress that's gonna ride up above her panty line when she sits down!

I'm simply applying the same standard I do Brittney Spears or my own kids: The way you dress informs onlookers how you want them to perceive you. Dress like a hoodlum, you want them to think you're a hoodlum. And, dress like a dominatrix-for-hire, you obviously want people to believe you're a kinky slut.

For all I know about her non-public persona, she's a virgin. But she clearly WANTS the public to think she's a tramp, so there's nothing catty about taking her at her word.

It does, however, puzzle me that you, who takes offense at Girls Inc. teaching girls to be responsible for their own bodies, that too-early sex can not only make you pregnant but get you involved in emotional issues that you may not be able to handle, to seek out advice from trusted adults about sexual issues, that discovering you're a lesbian isn't doom for life and grounds for suicide, that if you INSIST on sleeping with someone use condoms and birth control...

But you guys make a heroine of an airhead whose trademark is causing nice, "conservative" family men to imagine themselves taking orders from her???? Fine role model for your daughters, no?

Yep, I can see where you and Polly Purebred get all bent out of shape about things like that. You and Sherry, the left "sex experts".

BWAAAAAAAAA HAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHH

"sex experts"??

You might as well have responded with a "your mama's so fat" joke.

They being experts on another thread. I thought I'd tie it all together.

Neither her physical form nor her tennis form can/are to be imitated.

Hey, I'll believe that judy and FoF's Dobson aren't hypocrites the day he refuses to appear on a panel with her unless she puts some clothes on. Or better yet, simply removes his jacket and lays it across her lap.

What a fucking prude you are, especially for such an "enlightened lefty".

Are you purposefully misconstruing her point, or what?

She really doesn't have the standing to make that particular point.

No, he's right, noma. I -am- very much a prude, in my own way. I dislike Ann Coulter, gay rights parades of men in tutus, Brittney Spears, MTV and Ken Starr, all for the same reason.

And he's somewhat correct in believing me to be a hypocrite on this subject because I speak so openly about my own spectacularly sordid early life. I can see why he objects. Would that he understood that I speak so openly about it in the hope of breaking that cycle. Crap like my early life happens precisely BECAUSE of the secrecy, because such things can't be mentioned in polite company. "Out of sight, out of mind".

I'm sure you're aware, noma, that statistically, more than one of the 20-30 regulars on this board are acquainted with someone in their daily lives where such things ARE, presently, going on: Domestic violence, incest, mental illness. And that as long as such things are publically unspeakable, "family business", and the beat goes on. And on. And on. The monster that lives and breeds in the silence, "unto the 7th generation".

Okay. I think I understand your point. Still, I didn't think your alleged current individual prudishness had much to do with the point you were trying to make in re Ann Coulter and the sort of folks who were lionizing her despite . . .

The blue part is what I was alluding to, indirectly, in the other thread.

Finally, I have two point in re hypocrisy and hypocrites.

First off, even a true hypocrite (see below) can make valid points and true arguments, as well as offer sound/wise advice and recommendations.

Secondly, a true hypocrite would be one who pretended, who feigned doing or being that which he/she is advising be done and/or not doing or not being that which he/she is advising not be done.

Tu quoque is simply a logical fallacy.

If they're so pussywhipped by DeLay that they give him his job back, they deserve every last headline of the death by a thousand cuts they're going to suffer. He's the face of GOP corruption, and if they reinstall him, they'll have told the American public everything they need to know about what the GOP stands for.

They are skeert.

well it shoud be obvious to the whole country, since the entire repuslickan party is corrupt, that all the things they are doing in DC are not good for the country or its people. All these "tax cuts" and "social security reform" and all of the other spew they say they are trying to do or have done like the way they took away bankruptcy from the citizenry and gave it to corporations, that all of that stuff is a huge lie that will hurt the people and the nation.

Dec. 5, 2005, 3:31PM
DeLay's hopes dashed for quick end to case
Judge dismisses one felony indictment but upholds another

By R.G. RATCLIFFE
Copyright 2005 Houston Chronicle Austin Bureau
AUSTIN — A senior district judge today dismissed one felony indictment but upheld another against U.S. Rep. Tom DeLay, dashing DeLay's hopes for a speedy resolution to his case.

A quick ruling in DeLay's favor from Senior District Judge Pat Priest throwing the case out of court was crucial to the Sugar Land Republican's efforts to regain his post as U.S. House majority leader. He was forced to step down when he was indicted in September.

Priest had told DeLay's lawyers last month that if he upheld either of the indictments, he would be unable to hold a trial for DeLay before early next year.

House Republicans have indicated they wanted to hold a leadership election in January if DeLay was not cleared by then.

DeLay and two associates — John Colyandro of Austin and Jim Ellis of Washington, D.C. — were indicted on charges of conspiracy to violate the Texas election code, money laundering and conspiracy to commit money laundering in connection to 2002 legislative races.

Indictments returned in September and October accuse DeLay, Colyandro and Ellis of being involved in a scheme to flow allegedly illegal corporate money into 2002 Texas House races. The money laundering charges accuse them of running $190,000 in illegal corporate funds through the Republican National Committee.

Lawyers for the three argued that it was legal for the DeLay-founded Texans for a Republican Majority to raise corporate money so long as the money was not donated to candidates. They said there was no trade of funds with the Republican National Committee.

DeLay's legal team, headed by Dick DeGuerin of Houston, had challenged the indictments on numerous legal issues, but DeGuerin called two the "silver bullets."

Those points were that the state conspiracy law did not apply to the election code until a year after the 2002 elections.

The other was that the definition of money laundering did not include checks until 2005. TRMPAC transferred the $190,000 in corporate money to the RNC by using a check.



Travis County District Attorney Ronnie Earle brought the case against Delay as the statute of limitations was running out on 2002 election code violations. The indictments brought a wild legal ride.

After Earle learned there might be "technical" problems with a Sept. 28 indictment on conspiracy to violate the election code, he went to a second grand jury to seek the money laundering charges. The first grand jury had expired, and the second grand jury returned a no bill.

Then on Oct. 3, Earle asked a newly impaneled grand jury to indict Delay, Colyandro and Ellis on money laundering charges, and it did.

DeGuerin had asked to have the indictments dismissed because of prosecutorial misconduct. Priest said he would hear that motion only if he upheld the indictments against the legal challenges.

Besides the squabble over the legal issues, there also was a judge merry-go-round.

DeGuerin asked to have the original judge in the case, District Judge Bob Perkins of Austin, removed because he had made political donations to national organizations opposed to DeLay. After a hearing, Senior Judge C.W. "Bud" Duncan removed Perkins from the case.

Earle then got administrative Judge B.B. Straub of Seguin to remove himself from assigning a new judge to the case because he had made Republican political donations that could appear to favor DeLay.

Assigning the case then fell to Texas Supreme Court Chief Justice Wallace Jefferson. In the 2002 elections, Jefferson campaigned for House candidates in events organized by TRMPAC.

Jefferson refused Earle's request to recuse himself from making the appointment. Jefferson named Priest, a Democrat, to try DeLay's case.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/3504045.html

Man of Peace

"We are in a terrible dip at the moment, a kind of abyss, because the assumption is that politics are all over. That's what the propaganda says. But I don't believe the propaganda. I believe that politics, our political consciousness and our political intelligence are not all over, because if they are, we are really doomed. I can't myself live like this. I've been told so often that I live in a free country, I'm damn well going to be free. By which I mean I'm going to retain my independence of mind and spirit, and I think that's what's obligatory upon all of us. Most political systems talk in such vague language, and it's our responsibility and our duty as citizens of our various countries to exercise acts of critical scruntiny upon that use of language. Of course, that means that one does tend to become rather unpopular. But to hell with that."

I first met Harold when he was supporting the popularly elected government in Nicaragua in the 1980s. I had reported from Nicarugua, and made a film about the remarkable gains of the Sandinistas despite Ronald Regan's attempts to crush them by illegally sending CIA-trained proxies across the border from Honduras to slit the throats of midwives and other anti-Americans. US foreign policy is, of course, even more rapacious under Bush: the smaller the country, the greater the threat. By that, I mean the threat of a good example to other small countries which might seek to alleviate the abject poverty of their people by rejecting American dominance.

What struck me about Harold's involvement was his understanding of this truth, which is generally a taboo in the United States and Britain, and the eloquent 'to hell with that' response in everything he said and wrote. Almost single-handedly, it seemed, he restored 'imperialism' to the political lexicon. Remember that no commentator used this word any more; to utter it in a public place was like shouting 'fuck' in a covent'. Now you can shout it everywhere and people will nod their agreement; the invasion in Iraq put paid to doubts, and Harold Pinter was one of the first to alert us. He described, correctly, the crushing of Nicaragua, the blockage against Cuba, the wholesale killing of Iraqi and Yugoslav civilians as imperialist atrocities.

In illustrating the American crime committed against Nicaragua, when the United States Government dismissed an International Court of Justice ruling that it stop breaking the law in its murderous attacks, Pinter recalled that Washington seldom respected international law; and he was right. He wrote, 'In 1965, President Lyndon Johnson said to the Greek Ambassador to the US, "Fuck your Parliament and your constitution. American is an elephant, Cyprus is a flea. Greece is a flea. If these two fellows keep itching the elephant, they may just get whacked by the elephant's trunk, whacked for good..." He meant that. Two years later, the Colonels took over and the Greek people spent seven years in hell. You have to hand it to Johnson. He sometimes told the truth however brutal. Regan tell lies. His celebrated description of Nicuragua as a "totalitarian dungeon" was a lie from every conceivable angle. It was an assertion unsupported by facts; it had no basis in reality. But it's a good vivid, resonant phrase which prsuaded the unthinking...'

In his play 'Ashes to Ashes', Pinter uses the images of Nazism and the Holocaust, while interpreting them as a warning against similar ' repressive, cynical and indifferent acts of murder' by the clients of arms-dealing imperialist states such as the United States and Britain. 'The word democracy begins to stink', he said. 'So in Ashes to Ashes, I'm not simply talking about the Nazis; I'm talking about us, and our conception of our past and our history, and what it does to us in the present.'

Pinter is not saying the democracies are totalitarian like Nazi Germany, not at all, but that totalitarian actions are taken by impeccably polite democrats and which, in principle and effect, are little different from those taken by fascists. The only difference is distance. Half a millions people were murdered by American bombers sent secretly and illegally to skies above Cambodia by Nixon and Kissinger, igniting an Asian holocaust, which Pol Pot completed.

Critics have hated his political work, often attacking his plays mindlessly and patronising his outspokenness. He, in turn, has mocked their empty derision. He is a truth-teller. His understanding of political language follows Orwell's. He does not, as he would say, give a shit about the propriety of language, only its truest sense. At the end of the cold was in 1989, he wrote, '...for the last forty years, our thought has been trapped in hollow structures of language, a stale, dead but immensely successful rhetoric. This has represented, in my view, a defeat of the intelligence and of the will."

He never accepted this, of course: 'To hell with that!' Thanks in no small measure to him, defeat is far from assured. On the contrary, while other writers have slept or twittered, he has been aware that people are never still, and indeed are stirring again: Harold Pinter has a place of honour among them."

Free Speech.

http://www.theorwellianinternetwatch.com/o...mls/pinter.html

I noticed something odd. Went to a couple sites that say Delay's conspiracy charges dropped, then to Yahoo where it says Delay's money laundering charges were upheld.

The same story, or not?

The story is always the same. Everyone tries to spin, including the news services. They know a lot of people only read the headline.

The money laundering indictment was upheld, whether artie likes it or not. But even if he is convicted and sentenced with overwhelming evidence artie will bitch and moan because DeLay is a hero to Republicans.

Ryan pals got nearly $1 million premium

Jury is told leases were way over market rates



Tuesday, December 6, 2005

By Mike Ramsey

OF Copley News Service
CHICAGO - State government paid nearly $1 million above market rates to lease three suburban properties from friends of former Gov. George Ryan, a commercial real estate appraiser testified Monday in Ryan's federal racketeering trial.

The secretary of state's office during Ryan's 1990s tenure paid $12.15 per square foot to lease a Joliet building when rates for comparable properties were $8 per square foot, appraiser P. Linas Norusis said. Over the course of the four-year contract, Ryan's office paid $296,485 above market value, he testified.

Similarly, Ryan's office paid a premium of about $7 per square foot for properties in South Holland and Bellwood. Norusis estimated the overpayments totaled $175,225 and $428,909 over the course of five- and 10-year leases, respectively.

Prosecutors say Ryan friend Larry Warner, his co-defendant in the case, owned the Joliet and Bellwood properties but attempted to conceal his financial interests. Warner, 67, allegedly got the lucrative leases after Ryan intervened with subordinates in the secretary of state's office.

The South Holland building was owned by former currency exchange owner Harry Klein, who hosted Ryan annually at a Jamaican villa. The lease was allegedly one way Ryan repaid his friend.

Defense attorneys have said neither Ryan nor Warner did anything illegal, and they have tried to portray the leases as good for taxpayers. But Norusis agreed with prosecutor Laurie Barsella, who suggested that Ryan's office paid rents for the three buildings that were "substantially" over market rates.

Norusis conceded there is subjective element in making the type of "retrospective" calculations he did. Under cross-examination from Warner attorney Ed Genson, he said he did not take into account that the secretary of state's office generated heavy wear-and-tear on its properties.

"I made the adjustments that I felt were appropriate," Norusis said.

The appraiser, who said he will be paid about $25,000 for his work, continues testifying Tuesday. The next scheduled witness is Dennis Culloton, who served as Ryan's spokesman during the Kankakee Republican's final years as governor.

Ryan, 71, was secretary of state from 1991 to 1999.

http://www.pjstar.com/stories/120605/REG_B8B2FJSL.050.shtml

Contractor 'knew how to grease the wheels'

ADCS founder spent years cultivating political contacts
By Dean Calbreath
UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER

and Jerry Kammer
COPLEY NEWS SERVICE

December 4, 2005

In government documents, he is referred to as "co-conspirator No. 1": a man who gave more than $630,000 in cash and favors to former Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham for help in landing millions of dollars in federal contracts.


Howard Lipin / Union-Tribune
ADCS has received at least $80 million in government contracts since 1996. Its $11 million headquarters is located in Poway.
Poway military contractor Brent Wilkes – whom Justice Department officials identify as the co-conspirator – has long been active in local political circles, serving as the San Diego County finance co-chairman of Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's campaign and the state finance co-chairman for President Bush.

Wilkes has not been charged with a crime in the Cunningham case. The former Rancho Santa Fe congressman announced his resignation Monday after pleading guilty to charges of tax evasion and conspiracy. Three other men – Washington defense contractor Mitchell Wade, businessman Thomas Kontogiannis and financier John T. Michael, both of New York – also have been identified as co-conspirators.

Wilkes' story shows how gifts, favors and campaign contributions can be used to gain lucrative business from the government.

Over the past 20 years, Wilkes has devoted much of his career to developing political contacts in Washington. He and his associates have spent at least $600,000 on political contributions and $1.1 million on lobbying beyond the gifts mentioned in the Cunningham plea agreement, as they cultivated such politicians as House Majority Leader Tom DeLay and Appropriations Committee Chairman Jerry Lewis.

And since 1996, he has received at least $95 million in government contracts for the small family of firms based in his $11 million headquarters in Poway, including ADCS Inc. and Group W.


Brent Wilkes, founder of ADCS Inc., is identified by officials as "co-conspirator No. 1" in the Randy "Duke" Cunningham bribery case.
Those who know Wilkes describe him as gregarious and ambitious, a person who can make friends easily and toss them aside just as quickly.

Born in San Diego County in 1954, Wilkes graduated from Hilltop High School in 1972, along with his football teammate and best friend Kyle Dustin "Dusty" Foggo, currently third-in-command at the Central Intelligence Agency. Wilkes and Foggo were roommates at San Diego State University, were best men at each other's weddings and named their sons after each other.

Wilkes' career in political relations dates to the early 1980s, shortly after Foggo joined the CIA. Foggo was sent to Honduras to work with the Contra rebels who were trying to topple the Sandinista government of Nicaragua, according to sources within the CIA.

Making connections
Wilkes had moved to Washington, D.C., and opened a business named World Finance Corp. about three blocks away from the White House. One of his chief activities, sources say, was to accompany congressmen – including then-Rep. Bill Lowery of San Diego, whom Wilkes met during his participation in the SDSU Young Republicans organization – to Central America to meet with Foggo and Contra leaders.

A number of sources who have had business dealings with Wilkes say he hinted at that time and afterward that he was affiliated with the CIA. CIA sources say he was never employed by the agency.

By the time Wilkes returned to San Diego in the late 1980s, he had established relationships with members of the House Armed Services, Intelligence and Appropriations committees.

Neither Wilkes, Foggo nor Lowery responded to requests for comment.

By 1990, Wilkes was working for Aimco Financial Management in La Jolla. His chief duty was to bring in politicians, including Lowery, to talk to Aimco clients about how new laws might affect their finances.

Aimco ran into trouble after securities regulators accused its founder, Marvin I. Friedman, of taking $268,000 of a client's funds in 1991.

Wilkes left Aimco in 1992 to take a job as a political consultant for Audre Inc., a Rancho Bernardo firm that specialized in automated document conversion systems, which converted maps and engineering drawings into a format that could be edited via computer.

Audre, which was nearly bankrupt at the time, was eager to get more federal contracts. Shortly after Wilkes' arrival, the 35-person firm, headed by San Diego businessman Tom Casey, began donating thousands of dollars to key members of Congress.

"Wilkes was a political operator," said former Audre engineer Dirk Holland. "He was pretty slick. He knew how to grease the wheels."

Said a former business associate of Wilkes: "He knew that it pays to get a sponsor. He knew that's the way the game is played, and he convinced Tom Casey that that's what it's all about."

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/metro/2...99-1n4adcs.html

I can't stand DeLay, but it is just too funny to watch Dems go crazy trying to get him for anything they can, including things they do all the time.

The reason I don't trust all those finance rules is they just talk people into trying to cheat in new and more imaginative ways.

Just like any other law or regulation.

Indeed. I prefer simpler rules so everyone knows what they are and doesn't have to have teams of lawyers to enforce AND to subvert them.

You and Thomas Hobbes, alike. I think, on that one, you're both right.

Lawyers have good lobbies. I doubt they'll want to give up the extra income. I worked for a lawyer for a while. They make money coming and going. Win, lose, or draw.

[
A Shark is a shark is a shark!

Same with physicians. I worked for them and it's quite a racket.

Tell the news to Santorum and his wife.

Articles From Graft Case to Be Auctioned
# The IRS displays luxury furnishings seized from home of former Rep. Randy Cunningham. Government agencies will split the proceeds.

By Tony Perry, Times Staff Writer

POWAY, Calif. — The Persian rugs, silver candelabra, vases, armoires, French commode, end tables, mirrors, buffet table, leather sofa, sleigh-style bed and custom oak and leaded-glass doors once adorned Randy "Duke" Cunningham's 8,000-square-foot mansion in Rancho Santa Fe.

On Tuesday, they were spread across the concrete floor of a nondescript warehouse here, displayed by the Internal Revenue Service near crates of possessions seized from convicted drug dealers and financial finaglers. The Cunningham goods will be sold at auction next year under the government's asset-forfeiture program.


"Some people like opulence," said appraiser Dave McPheeters as he surveyed the expensive furnishings that contributed to the loss of Cunningham's reputation, his seat in Congress, and, soon, his freedom. In his plea agreement with federal prosecutors, Cunningham admitted that the goods were given to him by military contractors as bribes.

Cunningham, 63, pleaded guilty last week to taking $2.4 million in bribes and to evading $1 million in taxes. The Republican's formal resignation letter was submitted Tuesday to House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill).

"I have discredited my high office and the party that I love," Cunningham wrote. "I have misled my family, friends, colleagues, staff and even myself."

The inclusion of the phrase "even myself" made the resignation letter different from the statement he read tearfully outside the federal court house after his guilty plea. In that statement he admitted misleading others about the case.

In his plea agreement, Cunningham said he pushed defense projects on behalf of two co-conspirators, in part, because he had received "payments and benefits" and not because the projects were in the best interest of the United States.

Cunningham faces 10 years in prison and a $350,000 fine when he is sentenced Feb. 27.

A special election will be held to fill the vacant seat in the 50th Congressional District in an affluent suburban district north of San Diego. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has another week to set the date for the vote.

Along with the furnishings, the federal government has also seized the 8,000-square-foot home in Rancho Santa Fe. Cunningham bought the home after military contractor Mitchell Wade bought his former house in Del Mar Heights for an inflated price. The proceeds from the auction of the furnishings will be split between the IRS, FBI, and Defense Criminal Investigative Service.

Not all the furnishings from the Rancho Santa Fe home were seized. Some things in the house are owned by Cunningham and his wife, Nancy, and were not part of the bribery case, officials said.

Judging from the items on display, the Cunninghams' taste ran to classic period pieces, some original, some reproductions — in oak, cherry, walnut, and maple. McPheeters said he was impressed.

Journalists pawing through the items learned something. The 19th century French commode, listed in the plea agreement, is not a toilet but rather a chest of drawers.

As the federal government prepared to sell off the furnishings that were part of his bribery scheme, Cunningham's former colleagues were trying to make sense of his fall as they returned from the Thanksgiving recess.

Rep. Jerry Lewis (R-Redlands), chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, said he was "just seething" at Cunningham's behavior.

"I can't remember a time I've been more angry," Lewis said. "I don't know anybody around here who wasn't just amazed."


Suuuure you are. Amazed he got caught maybe. I'd bet you have a couple of gold palted skeletons in your closet too.

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-du...-home-headlines

Right's Claim to Moral High Ground Exposed as Fraud
Conservatives admit Abramoff scandal is devastating

December 7, 2005 – Call it Tonto's revenge: The outrageous rip-off of Native American tribes by a top Republican lobbyist is leading inexorably to a reckoning for the allegedly morally superior religious and political right.

"I don't think we have had something of this scope, arrogance and sheer venality in our lifetimes," Norman J. Ornstein, of the conservative American Enterprise Institute, wrote in Roll Call. "It is building to an explosion, one that could create immense collateral damage within Congress and in coming elections."

Selling firewater to the natives – or in this case charging them $82 million for government breaks on slot machine and other gaming licenses – is not exactly what the high-minded prophets of the Republican revolution promised. And to see behind the scenes as Christian right superstar Ralph Reed, bought off by top Republican lobbyist Jack Abramoff, dupes his grassroots "pro-family" followers into unwittingly supporting casino-rich Indian tribes under the guise of anti-gambling initiatives, is to glimpse moral corruption of biblical proportion.

Reed, now a Republican candidate for lieutenant governor in Georgia, at first denied knowing the $4 million he acknowledges receiving from Abramoff and his closet associate, public-relations expert Michael Scanlon, to run the pseudo anti-gambling campaigns in the South came from tribes hoping to retain local monopolies for themselves. Once the investigation picked up steam this past summer, however, he changed his mind and said he was assured that the tribal money didn't come directly from casino proceeds – a hair-splitting attempt at face-saving ethics, indeed, since the goal of the payments was so clearly to benefit the casinos.

Furthermore, the release of a treasure trove of documentation on the Abramoff investigation to the Internet by Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., chair of the Senate's Indian Affairs Committee, makes it clear that Abramoff and his colleagues had no interest in the finer points of morality when they were transferring huge sums of cash from the tribes to the accounts of such allegedly high-minded heavyweight pro-Republican outfits as Grover Norquist's Americans for Tax Reform.

"This town has become very corrupt, there's no doubt about it,'' McCain said Sunday on "Meet the Press," adding that he expects "lots" of indictments and that there is "strong evidence" of "significant wrongdoing" by some legislators.

Reading the documents, in fact, is a horrifying look at democracy for sale. For example, an Abramoff e-mail to Reed about a conversation the lobbyist had with Nell Rogers, a Choctaw representative: "Spoke with Nell. They have a budget issue. They want to know if we can get through to October on $1 million. Can we? If not, let me know."

In response, Reed lays out what it costs, in very precise amounts, to kill legislation on Capitol Hill to favor of a wealthy entity: "I believe [$1 million will be enough]. If we can kill it in the House [,] definitely. If it goes to the Senate, the worst case scenario is what the pro-family groups spent to defeat video poker and the lottery – each about $1.3 million. ... We will be doing all we can to raise money from national anti-gambling groups, Christian CEOs and national pro-family groups."

Overall, both Reed, once the religious right's boy savior, and Abramoff, the former head of the College Republicans, a "pioneer"-grade fundraiser for President Bush, and a stalwart friend of Texas Rep. Tom DeLay, come off as morally degenerate political savants in the Senate committee's files. Reed seems possessed by the gods of greed as he exults, "I need to start humping in corporate accounts!"

But Abramoffgate goes much higher than these two political pimps. In those e-mails between Abramoff and Scanlon, it is clear that they trafficked in their ties to DeLay and others in the Republican leadership. As the Washington Post reported, Abramoff "cultivated a reputation as the best-connected Republican lobbyist in Washington," and it was not a false claim. DeLay, who referred to Abramoff as "one of my closest and dearest friends," received no fewer than three free golf trips to Scotland from Abramoff, among other payoffs.

Both DeLay and Abramoff are under indictment for charges in other cases but not, as of yet, this one. Scanlon has already pleaded guilty to conspiring with Abramoff to defraud various Indian tribes and bribe government officials. Former White House official David Safavian has been indicted for lying about his ties to Abramoff. The bet now is that Abramoff will also cop a plea bargain instead of spending many years in jail and paying even larger fines than the $19.7 million Scanlon has accepted.

If so, more depressing tales of corruption may be detailed publicly. But what is already clear is that the Republicans' reputation for moral superiority is as dead as the Lone Ranger.

http://www.robertscheer.com/

http://www.nationalreview.com/editorial/ed...00512070958.asp

OK, I'll say it: Texas has lousy ambiguous laws, and Earle is really, really reaching. And it probably IS unfair if DeLay loses his post because of Earle's charges.

"Fair", not to mention just, would be for DeLay to lose his post because he's influence-peddling corrupt greedy power-mad scum who brings disrepute on his party, his nation, the US Congress, and the United States of America as a whole, and his ass just plain need fired.

He needs fired because he thinks any deeds that don't carry a jail term are "fine"!!!