Something funny I just found - RW Blogger says 40/45 Democratic Senators took Abramoff $$$ in 1/06

[ck4829]

There were only 44 Democratic Senators during this time, smart guy.

"Democrats at all levels have attacked Republicans for ties to indicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff and his Indian tribal clients. They do this despite the fact that 40 of the 45 members of the Senate Democrat Caucus have taken money from Abramoff, his associates, and Indian tribe clients. "

http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2006/01/40-0f-45-democratic-senators-took.html

[Aviation Pro]

1. Two words....

Bull and shit.

[Wilms]

2. .

[Eric J in MN]

3. Does Jim Jeffords (I) who caucuses with Democrats make 45? NT

NT

[Kagemusha]

4. Read the fine print, ck4829

He says Abramoff, "his associates, and Indian tribe clients".

Which includes a hell of a lot more than what a sane definition of "Abramoff $$$" would be.

Let me rephrase it: a whole big bunch of Democratic senators took Indian tribe money.

...

And that's a crime why?

[trotsky]

6. Democrats had already been receiving tribes' money.

Abramoff directed some of it to Republicans. Some Democrats continued to get money from tribes, with no direction from Abramoff.

Just another media-manufactured "bipartisan" scandal.

[Kagemusha]

10. Yeah, we're not disagreeing.

In fact I'll rephrase the situation further:

All Senate Democrats received lobbying money.

...

Yes, that's the system. Saying Democrats did not receive "Abramoff $$$" does not mean that they don't get lobbied and don't accept lobbying dollars. That's the system. Associating normal lobbying with blatant corruption is cynical and wrong-headed; the degree of stench is much different.

But, having to say that at all just demonstrates the difficulty of convincing the media and independents that the Abramoff scandal should be regarded as Republican-specific rather than generalized political corruption in the "everyone does it" sense.

[trotsky]

18. Oh yeah, sorry.

I didn't indicate my post was basically just nodding in agreement. :)

[Kagemusha]

20. I thought you might be.

Didn't hurt replying and further expanding for other readers because Lord knows, this is a Republican theme that the media never seems to tire of.

[MannyGoldstein]

5. "his associates, and Indian tribe clients"

Associates and clients ain't necessarily Jackoff hisself.

I even made a bet on this with the good readers of the fringe-right newsbusters.org - they could never produce proof that even a single Democratic legislator received of Jackoff's largesse.

[lapfog_1]

7. Lies, damn lies, and misleading statements...

No democrat took money from Jack Abramoff. But the stmt reads "Abramoff, his associates, and Indian tribe clients", and of course it's the inclusion of Indian tribe clients that makes this sorta true. The Indian tribes, especially those with casinos, spread the money around, donating heavily to Abramoff for his use to buy influence with the Administration and with republican congress men, and Abramoff used illegal means to buy that influence. The Indian tribes also (not under the direction of Abramoff) also donated small amounts of money to Democratic senators and House members, which was perfectly legal.

Ever since the Abramoff scandal broke, the repukes have been trying to make this a "bi-partisan" scandal and smear Democrats by muddying up the waters with this misleading statement. It didn't work before the election and I doubt it will start working now. The Dems have all steadfastly said that they did not take money from Abramoff. And it makes sense as well... Abramoff was never interested in helping any Democrat and, in all likelihood, probably discouraged his clients from donating on their own.

[jumpoffdaplanet]

8. Same crap they tried to pedal months ago

It didn't work then and it works even less now.

[Junkdrawer]

9. Abramoff is going to jail because he scammed Indian tribe money...

Without Abramoff, the Indians gave to Democrats. Abramoff convinced the Indians to give to Republicans who then voted against the Indians, laughing at their gullibility.

Repeat, Abramoff took money AWAY from Democrats.

[Kelly Rupert]

11. This is completely, 100% true,

and completely, 100% misleading. The "Indian tribe clients" were the same Indians that Mr. Abramoff was deceiving, misleading, and defrauding. They, of course, were free to give money to whomever they pleased, as any Tribe is permitted to, being sovereign entities. The question is where the money that Mr. Abramoff directed went--that is to say, which funds were illegally and unethically being used. And not one dime that Mr. Abramoff had touched went to a Democrat.

[Nite Owl]

12. Why would he want to help

Democratic Senators bring the bacon home? It doesn't make sense, he was there to help the repukes. And those numbers would mean each and every one of the dems took the money. This is right wing fantasy (otherwise known as lies).

[EST]

13. The critical, actionable word here is "and."

"Abramoff, his associates, and Indian tribe clients."

It seems to that thin piss peddler's use of the word "and" instead of "or" opens the door for one hell of a law suit.
He is thus saying they took money from all three.

If a few of these democrats so libeled, in print, would jump on this idiot and get a judgment for about five million bucks, his future slander and libel output would be dramatically reduced as well as that of some of the other similar idiots.

[orleans]

14. yeah, right. because jackoff loved the dems so fucking much

he gave them money. hahaha.

what crap.

jackoff was/is a pig. a PUKE pig through and through. (the only thing blue about that guy is gonna be his balls -- now that he'll be spending so much time in prison. then, on the other hand, he'll probably swing both ways.)

[Mr_Spock]

15. this is such a joke

[Cleita]

16. Damn. I have information in my hard copies, but unfortunately

not in my bookmarks about who got money from Abramoff. Right now, at this time of night, I don't want to swim through it, however, everybody got money from him. Except, Republicans got more than Democrats. Like if he gave an R-candidate $5,000.00. he gave the opposing D-candidate $1,000.00. It goes down the line this way. So although Democrats did get money from him, it was far less that the Republican candidate got.

[TankLV]

17. WRONG. Abramoff gave NO money to Democrats. None. Nada. Zilch.

AND - he FORBADE anybody else from giving to ANY Democrat.

Period.

Your statement is complete and utter CRAP.

Stop spewing repuke LIES...

This has been debunked so many times before.

And, besides, if there was ANY truth to what you spew, then there would have been endless news programs, complete with music and logos, devoted to these so-called "democrats" A LONG TIME AGO, BEFORE THIS PAST ELECTION SEASON STARTED...

[Cleita]

22. And you believe what a corrupt Republican would say. Tsk,tsk.

I don't have the information in front of me right now because I have been trying to sort through piles of paper that I printed out after the last campaign for a Democratic candidate I was working for. But Abramoff did contribute to Democrats in short amounts. I will get back to you when I find it, probably tomorrow sometime. It could be my source is full of shit, but it seemed rather solid. I don't spew. I have been known to be wrong, but I don't spew.

[Cleita]

23. Here's a couple:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/02/AR2005060202158.html

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

I welcome the debunk.

[SidDithers]

27. On Capital Eye, change the display to "Detail by Donor"...

and select Jack and Pamela Abramoff. There's not a single D on that list. The only donors that gave money to Dems were Indian tribes.

Sid

Edit: You may not be spewing, but you are wrong.

link here http://www.capitaleye.org/abramoff_donor.asp?Name=Abramoff%2C+Jack+A+%26+Pamela

[SidDithers]

29. Kick - to make sure Cleita sees this...nt

Sid

[Mr_Spock]

28. The Dems claim they never heard of Abramoff

and got the money directly from the tribes - are you accusing the Democrats of lying?

Democratic lawmakers who responded to inquiries for this article said that any money they received from the tribes had nothing to do with Abramoff. They were quick to say they did not know the man.

A spokesman for Kennedy said the congressman's donations from the tribes "have nothing to do with Abramoff." Kennedy traces the money's genesis to his family's long-standing commitment to Indian causes, to the fact that he co-founded the Congressional Native American Caucus in 1997, and to his personal relationship with Mississippi Choctaw Chief Philip Martin, whom Kennedy met in 1999 on a fundraising trip for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. "They just became close friends," said Kennedy spokesman Sean Richardson.

Daschle was familiar with another of Abramoff's Democratic lobbyists, Michael Smith. According to Steve Hildebrand, who was Daschle's campaign manager last year, Smith "helped with a lot of Democratic campaigns." In addition, Daschle was a favorite of Indian tribes and received donations from 64, including five Abramoff clients. "We took about $150,000 in this last election cycle from Indian tribes around the country," Hildebrand said. "Tom is viewed as a champion of Indian issues. We have nine tribes in South Dakota, and they worked hard for him."

Notes on the data in the second reference:

1/12/06 UPDATE: In our efforts to refine this list, we have further researched lobbying data and removed contributions from Indian tribes made before Mr. Abramoff's registration as a lobbyist for the contributor. Contributions made during the 2004 cycle but received after Abramoff ended his affiliation with a contributor remain on the list. Also, this list now includes contributions made by Michael Scanlon, an Abramoff associate who has also pleaded guilty to federal crimes. For more information about this data, our methodology and this refinement, see the answers to frequently asked questions.

Can you not see that just because someone gave to a Dem (or Republican for that matter) who was also lobbied by Abramoff may not be in any way involved in the blackmail scheme of Abramoff. Also note that contributions were not removed from the list even after Abramoff was not involved with the contributing person.

I also defer to the post above showing that NO Democrat received money directly from Abramoff. You really shouldn't be accusing the Dems without any evidence to prove your accusation - it's unseemly at best, especially on a Democratic site.

[Cleita]

32. I'm making no accusations. What if what I'm saying is fact?

Democrats are known to take contributions from PACs and other donors that contribute heavily to Republicans, however, it's usually a five to one ratio in favor of the Republicans, which exonerates Democrats from having to pay them back. Go look up stuff on "Open Secrets". The website breaks down donations in several ways.

If my sources are wrong, then they are wrong. However, to deny that our politicans sometimes act in self-interest, especially when it comes to donations, is perpetrating a lie and that I believe isn't what Democrats should be doing. I do believe in the case of Abramoff that no Democrat accepted all the gilded golf trips and other bribes heaped on the Republicans, like the trip to the Marianna Islands. Any donations that filtered through were small and unimportant.

[SidDithers]

33. Your own source proves you wrong...

http://www.capitaleye.org/abramoff_donor.asp?Name=Abramoff%2C+Jack+A+%26+Pamela

The link you provided as an example of Dems getting money from Abramoff actually shows just the opposite. No Dem accepted donations from Abramoff, small or otherwise.

Sid

[Mr_Spock]

36. It's not only an accusation, but it's a false accusation

Are you deliberately trying to tar the Democrats here? You even state that your supposition that Abramoff gave to Dems is wrong.

What is the problem with admitting when you are wrong? Just because politicians act on their self-interest doesn't give you the right to tar our party here on DU.

[papau]

24. Your source is mistaken - the clients of Abramoff - the tribes - gave Dems money as they always

have - because they know Dems fight for schools and water and the rest for Indian folks.

But no money from Abramoff or any organization he controlled went to any Dem.

This is not a grey area.

As to Abramoff, the Dems are pure white robed angels.

[EST]

19. OK - your subject line is misleading.

This is old news from January, not that Abramhoff gave them the money in Jan.

I was unduly ticked. They had ten months to prove any of this bullshit and failed to do so. That should go a long way to discredit this idiot, but from my experience of republicans, they won't notice that particular fly in their lie soup-just drink it up and ask for more.

[nickyt]

21. great post from Dems Will Win earlier this evening: re Abramoff:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x2799625

[Catherine Vincent]

25. Republicans still grasping at straws.

:eyes:

[lpbk2713]

26. He heard it on the internets so it's just gotta be true!

Or maybe it was on Limbaugh's or Hannity's Propaganda/Comedy Hour.

[MercutioATC]

30. PLEASE stop this shit.

We're not lily-white in this either. he less attention called to it, the better.

(no, I'm not suggesting real guilt, but the statement that "Dems took NO money from Abramoff" is pure spin...they may have taken it legitimately, but they did take it.

Let's let this sleeping dog lie.

[SidDithers]

31. Find the Dem...

http://www.capitaleye.org/abramoff_donor.asp?Name=Abramoff%2C+Jack+A+%26+Pamela

Sid

[MercutioATC]

37. Harkin. Abramoff's skybox.

http://www.hillnews.com/thehill/export/TheHill/News/Frontpage/102005/news3.html

Yes, he discovered the "accounting error" later (after Abramoff was under investigation)and paid for the use of the box as required by FEC regulation, but if a Republican had done this we'd be all over it.

All I'm asking is that we stop making outrageous "NO money" statements.

[Mz Pip]

34. Look at it this way

Try this:

Democrats <--- Clients ---> Abramoff ---> Republicans.

Of course the clients gave money to the Democrats. Big deal. But they gave money to Abramoff to get access to the Repugs. Duh. How hard can this be for some people to get???

Mz Pip
:dem:

[SidDithers]

35. Verrrrry Hard, apparently...nt

Sid