(Patrick) Kennedy among leading recipients of convicted lobbyist's clients

[wicket]

http://www.boston.com/news/local/rhode_island/articles/2006/01/04/kennedy_among_leading_recipients_of_convicted_lobbyists_clients/

U.S. Rep. Patrick Kennedy is one of the leading recipients of campaign contributions from Indian tribes represented by Jack Abramoff, the Republican lobbyist who has pleaded guilty to corruption charges.

From 1999 through last year, the Rhode Island Democrat and his political action committee received $42,500 in contributions from a half-dozen tribes represented by Abramoff, according to a report in Wednesday's Providence Journal.

One Washington watchdog group ranked Kennedy eighth among congressional beneficiaries of Abramoff, his tribal clients or his gambling company. The Center for Responsive Politics ranked Kennedy the top recipient among congressional Democrats.

Sean Richardson, Kennedy's chief of staff, said Abramoff has never lobbied Kennedy, and Kennedy has not received any campaign contributions directly from Abramoff, according to the Federal Election Commission. "None of this -- not a single penny of it -- had anything to do with Jack Abramoff," Richardson said. "We don't believe he's ever met Jack Abramoff."

[54anickel]

1. Boy, they are quick to try and tag a Democrat in this mess. Where

are the rest of the names?

[NFL80]

44. Here thay are...

http://www.capitaleye.org/abramoff_recips.asp

[ThomWV]

2. Hold It Just A God Damned Minute

Look at what it says. Two different things. One is that Kennedy got money from Abramoff. The other is that Kennedy got money from the tribes, who also contribued to Abramoff.

The first, if true, links Kennedy to Abramoff. The second does not.
Which is it?

[patdem]

4. Tribal contributions have ALWAYS gone to Democrats..they twist this

One Washington watchdog group ranked Kennedy eighth among congressional beneficiaries of Abramoff, his tribal clients or his gambling company. The Center for Responsive Politics ranked Kennedy the top recipient among congressional Democrats.

They have lumped Abramhoffs CLIENTS in with tainted funds from Abramhoff himself.. Native American tribes have historically given to Democrats...

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

10. If you read the whole article:

Sean Richardson, Kennedy's chief of staff, said Abramoff has never lobbied Kennedy, and Kennedy has not received any campaign contributions directly from Abramoff, according to the Federal Election Commission.

"None of this -- not a single penny of it -- had anything to do with Jack Abramoff," Richardson said. "We don't believe he's ever met Jack Abramoff."

Kennedy has received money from Indian tribes interested in gambling for much of his career. He was a founder of the Native American Caucus in the House of Representatives, and has received contributions from 110 tribes, Richardson said.

Sounds fairly definitive.

[Tight_rope]

38. Now there...That settles it. Kennedy doesn't know that scum Abramoff!

[420inTN]

8. Both say clients, not Abramoff directly. n/t

[DoYouEverWonder]

28. Plus the title leaves out the word Democrat

He was #8 overall. The title states he got the most, when it is George Bush who got more then anybody. Jack was a Bush Pioneer.

[rodeodance]

40. yes, the headline is VERY misleading!

[patdem]

3. Abramhoff has tainted ALL tribal contributions no matter how innocent

In fact Native American tribes used to contribute almost exdclusively to Democrats until Abramhoff and the K-Street project came along. The people who gave to Kennedy were his CONSTITUANTS! Not a lobbyest! Reid, Dorgan, and both Kennedys received funds from TRIBES..NOT ABRAMHOFF!

[gratuitous]

5. Well, if he just gives that money to charity, it's all okay, right?

After all, that's what Bush and Hastert say they're going to do with money they received directly from Abramoff, so why shouldn't the same dodge work for Kennedy for money that didn't come from Abramoff?

[OKNancy]

6. I made a post early this morning

about this in GD. Taking money from tribes is not illegal or even unethical.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=47291&mesg_id=47291

[jsamuel]

7. See, this is exactly their tactic. Confuse you into thinking that Republi

See, this is exactly their tactic. Confuse you into thinking that Republican lobbyist Abramoff was tied to Democrats. If you are reading carefully you will realize that what the article actually says is that the TRIBES gave to Kennedy, not that Abramoff gave to Kennedy. Where as, the Republicans were benefiting directly from Abramoff through money he stole from the tribes.

They are trying to confuse you into thinking this is a “bi-partisan” scandal.

STAY SMART!

Look at how they word that line: “eighth among congressional beneficiaries of Abramoff, his tribal clients or his gambling company”
Even though the only one of those he received money from was the tribes themselves. Democrats have always received donations from Indian tribes and that is completely normal (and legal). Where Republicans historically wouldn’t get money from the Indian tribes because Republicans are supposed to be against gambling… until they get a bribe anyway…

[jamesinca]

9. What I think they should look at is this

What are the changes in the trends of giving by the groups and what are the changes in voting once those contributions were made. If Kennedy has always received money from the different tribes and he has always voted a certain way, then there is nothing there. If he changed his voting patterns and received an increase in funds, that is suspicious, regardless of who is lobbying for the group.

[ernstbass]

18. An excellent suggestion

[Algorem]

11. gonna see the MSM hoe like never befoe

[redqueen]

14. That's a very frightening thought... however,

the silver lining is maybe they'll be so over-the-top with the bending over backwards to paint Dems as evil and republicans as innocent that even the most moranic of the morans won't be able to play stupid.

[Spinzonner]

12. Well, if we're going to do Guilt by Correlation

then we have lots of stuff for Bush

[redqueen]

13. Eighth? EIGHTH?! How about we list 1-7, you gutless whore?

Gotta love that liberal media.

:nuke: :puke:

[Freddie Stubbs]

16. Perhaps they are covering Kennedy because the newspaper

is in New England, and Kennedy represents a district in New England.

Just as the Montana media is covering the story and how it specifically affects Conrad Burns:

http://www.helenair.com/articles/2006/01/04/national/a01010405_02.txt

[redqueen]

17. That MIGHT make sense, IF what Kennedy did was illegal.

But it's not, is it?

So now try and explain it all away. Go ahead. I'll check back.

[Freddie Stubbs]

20. So far it hasn't been proven that any member of Congress has

broken the law. Accepting campaign contributions from Abramoff isn't illegal if there is no quid pro quo. So far no one has proven that Burns (or any other member of Congress) has accepted any money in exchange for official actions.

[redqueen]

23. Fine, then there's nothing SMELLY about what Kennedy did, is there?

Is there really any comparing him getting donations from tribes to getting ALLEGEDLY (:eyes:) dirty money from Abramoff?

Is there?

[Freddie Stubbs]

36. There is if Abramoff directed the tribes to donate the money

Tom Delay's legal troubles are not for donations he gave but for donations he directed others to give.

[redqueen]

45. So you're saying those Dems broke the law as well?

I wonder why they're not subjects of the investigation. Any idea?

[Freddie Stubbs]

46. No, I'm not saying that they broke the law.

I'm also not saying that they didn't. How do you know that they are not subjects of the investigation?

[redqueen]

47. Haven't they released the names?

There's another thread with lots of names given... maybe it's from a different investigation?

[Chemical Bill]

29. The Providence Journal...

or urinal, as I like to call it, has always been repug, and they love to smear dems at any chance. I'm sure the corporate masters at Belo, in Texas, were happy that the Projo (as they call themselves, I say blojo) was dragging the Kennedy name through the mud, and probably hope that every paper in the country picks this up.

Bill

[Justitia]

30. BELO???? That explains everything. "Hi!" from Houston, TX

:hi:

[Chemical Bill]

31. Back atcha there Houston.

:hi:

[Freddie Stubbs]

37. This article is from the Boston Globe, not the Providence Journal

[Chemical Bill]

43. They reference the Belojo...

From 1999 through last year, the Rhode Island Democrat and his political action committee received $42,500 in contributions from a half-dozen tribes represented by Abramoff, according to a report in Wednesday's Providence Journal.

Bill

[wicket]

19. Liberal media MY ASS!

I'll join you in :puke:

[HuffleClaw]

15. guilt by association but 'once removed'

the phrase 'degrees of separation' comes to mind. watch FOX run with this one.

[fasttense]

21. This is nothing but a lying smear

You know Rove does this whenever he wants to screw someone. This just follows the same pattern as the swift boat liars. Note how they imply that Kennedy took money from Abramoff but he did NOT. He took money from the Tribes. If you are going to blame Kennedy than you are going to have to blame every Democratic politicians for the last 100 years. Tribes routinely give money to Democratic politicians and causes. The Tribes aren't stupid, like the Christian wackos. The Tribes know Democratic politicians are more honest and more likely to protect the causes that support American Indians.

Don't buy into the lies of the corporate media and the Rove spin. Don't be Stupid like the repukes.

[OKNancy]

22. I did a little looking up his history

and posted it here. http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=49746&mesg_id=49746
He has been consistant in his support of Indian issues.

[OzarkDem]

24. R's "catapulting" propaganda

over and ahead of the real facts to get a lock on public opinion, while putting Dems on the defensive instead of themselves.

Dems really need to work on doing this and be prepared with pre-emptive strikes for the next scandal. When will we learn?

[Justitia]

25. The tribes are Abramoff's VICTIMS, not CLIENTS, & Kennedy is founder

of the Native American Caucus in the House of Reps - these two items are completely unrelated except for the fact they both regard Native Americans to some degree.

This is a bullshit attempt to conflate the two and muddy the waters.

Kennedy has never been lobbied by Abramoff, and has never rec'd A SINGLE DIME from him.

These assholes are desperate to spread blame where none belongs.

[newscott]

26. Haven't the Indian tribes been trying to build a casino in RI for years?

It would make sense they'd lobby Kennedy. Possibly to see if he would influence the old man somehow for the Wompanoags in MA.

Hasn't paid off for them much has it?

[Justitia]

27. I've gambled in Indian casinos & given $$$ to Dems, am I suspect too? -nt

[Name removed]

32. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Lavender Brown]

33. Right, because Bush doesn't raise $... he funds his campaigns

exclusively from his personal fortune. :eyes:

[wicket]

35. LOL

Did someone order a pizza? ;)

[wicket]

34. The Bush family is much richer

:shrug:

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

42. It's called politics. Look into it

jackass.

[rodeodance]

39. the tactic of saying over and over that it is bi-partisan seems to be

working for the Repugs!!
Headlines such as these do the job!

[rodeodance]

41. Shame on the AP -and the Globe for this misleading headline!