CLINTON DONATING FUNDS CONNECTED WITH ABRAMOFF

Buffalo News ^ | 1/5/06

[areafiftyone]

News Washington Bureau Chief
1/5/2006

WASHINGTON - Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton will donate to charity $2,000 in contributions from Indian gambling interests once represented by convicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff, her campaign said Wednesday as members of the New York congressional delegation reacted to the spreading scandal. Ann Lewis, Senate campaign spokeswoman for the New York Democrat, told The Buffalo News "after examining our records we found two contributions for $1,000 from tribes which have been clients of Jack Abramoff in the past." "To ensure that there is no question of any connection with Mr. Abramoff, Friends of Hillary will contribute the total of $2,000 to a New York charity," Lewis said. However, Reps. Thomas M. Reynolds, R-Clarence, and Charles B. Rangel, D-Manhattan, said they won't return funds they got from tribes represented by Abramoff, who is at the center of a spreading bribery scandal. Reynolds created fund-raising entities, such as Together for Our Majority Political Action Committee, called TOMPAC, that received $76,000 from Indian tribes since 1999, according to the nonpartisan PoliticalMoneyLine.com. Of the total, $12,000 came from California and Mississippi tribes represented by Abramoff. Bill Oorbeek, spokesman for TOMPAC, said the money was "spent . . . to strengthen the Republican majority. The contributions were made and reported in the strictest accordance of the law." "The fact that these contributions came from Indian tribes should not come as any great shock," Oorbeek said. Rangel received $124,000 from Indian tribes since 1999, $22,000 of it from former Abramoff clients. His spokesman said Rangel is keeping it. Some others in the New York delegation, including Reps. John Sweeney, R-Clifton Park; Nita Lowey, D-Westchester County, and Eliot Engel, D-Bronx, are either returning the Abramoff-connected campaign donations or giving the money to charity. Abramoff, 46, pleaded guilty in Miami federal court Wednesday to conspiracy and wire fraud stemming from his 2000 purchase of a gambling boat fleet. A day earlier, he was in a Washington courtroom pleading guilty to three other federal charges as part of a deal with prosecutors to cooperate in a corruption investigation into members of Congress.

[areafiftyone]

but...but... the Dems did not receive any money connected with Abramoff. It's only the Republicans and Bush don't cha know that? (/sarcasm)

[dfwgator]

"Me Too!"

[InvisibleChurch]

didn't bill do a tax write-off on some of his underwear he donated years ago?

[areafiftyone]

Yea but he donated Ole Crusty's underwear - that's a liablity.

[Peach]

What the Dimwhits are saying is that Abramoff only personally contributed to Republicans, although they admit his clients gave to Democrats.

It's hardly illegal for Abramoff to contribute money to Republican candidate campaigns and I'll bet during the 90's, he gave plenty personally to Democrats. Guys like him like to give $$ to whomever is in power.

[daler]

Apologies if this has been addressed elsewhere, but did anyone catch Chrissy Matthews last night (all right, I have no excuses)?

He had a crawler of "all" the Abramoff recipients on the bottom of the screen...and NONE were Democrats.

While I'm not surprised, I still have to ask how he thinks he can get away with this - -

[mewzilla]

Does that include any PAC money she may have received?

[areafiftyone]

Apparently Chris Matthews is not paying attention. He's sooo focused on a possible Republican Scandal that he's not seeing the real truth. He's been looking for a Republican Scandal for a long time now and he keeps thinking he found one. The problem with this is the Abramoff fiasco involves Dems as well as Republicans. Someone needs to send him a few links and/or posts.

[conserv13]

Corruption knows no party. I hope we vote them all out of office.

[Long Distance Rider]

"While I'm not surprised, I still have to ask how he thinks he can get away with this - -"

Freedom of the Press. The First Amendment. The same amendment that allows the press to report that 12 miners were alive. The same freedom that allows the MSM to lie about the President.
Do I wish they would change and be more responsible? YES!
Do I want them to be regulated? NO!

[GianniV]

Does MSNBC have any journalistic standards? The facts clearly show this scumbag was involved with both parties. It's utterly preposterous for MSNBC and other networks to not clearly articulate that.

Chris Matthews should be fired.

[jayef]

Don't tell Chris Matthews . . . he was pumping the line the other night that Hastert returning money after Abramoff pled guilty was . . . oh, how did he put it? Did anyone else see it?

[lugsoul]

"Guys like him like to give $$ to whomever is in power."

When you say "guys like him," are you referring to former presidents of the College Republicans, or to "Pioneers" for the Bush/Cheney campaign?

Whatever. 'The other guy is corrupt, too' is not a defense.

[areafiftyone]

MSNBC and CNN are both slime. They don't care how many Dems are involved they only see a big GOP in front of every scandal. AP & Reuters are the same too. I noticed a headline in AP: GOP Politicians Dump Abramoff Donations - You have to scroll down all the way in the middle of the article before they even mention the Dems demping their donations. And even then they don't mention the fact that so far Charlie Rangel has refused to do it.

[Cicero]

If you carefully parse this statement, you will notice that, contrary to the first impression her words convey, clinton's spokesperson does not directly deny that the tribal funds were channeled through Abramoff.

Knowing how the clintons use English, this leads me to suspect that he was the middleman. Of course they are telling the truth that the money came from those nice Indians, but perhaps they are not telling the whole truth.

It depends what the meaning of is is.

[Peach]

Your constant attempts to portray Abramoff as only linked to Republican scandal don't wash with most of us. You've been given links where Abramoff has, through his clients, given money to Democrats as well as Republicans.

Your assertion that since Abramoff has only personall donated to Republicans is countered by my bet that during the 90's he gave personally to Democrats.

The money doesn't matter anyway, as you must surely know. It's whether the money was used in exchange of a favor. And it looks like this Dimwhit will be caught up in the investigation:

A lawyer for the Louisiana Coushatta Indians told The Associated Press that Abramoff instructed the tribe to send $5,000 to Sen. Byron Dorgan (news, bio, voting record)'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.

[lugsoul]

So now my assertion - backed up by your own links - is "countered" by your completely unsupported supposition?

That is so obviously ridiculous it requires no further comment.

I'm not attempting to portray Abramoff as anything other than what he is. YOU are attempting - hard, I might add - to portray him as some kind of equal opportunity scumbag. But the FACT is that Jack is a Republican, through and through. He was a prominent leader in the College Republicans. He was a Bush Pioneer. He has pled guilty to an information that charges him with buying favors from Republicans. Those are facts, not spin.

He may well have bought favors from Democrats. If he did, they should go down. But your effort to push moral equivalence flies in the face of the facts.

[Peach]

You'll have to peddle it elsewhere, lugsoul. The guy is dirty. Everyone connected with him when it comes to influence buying is dirty. And they'll go down. And it won't just be Republicans.

[goodnesswins]

Hmmmmm.....is she the only DEM giving BACK the funds? Patty Murray of Washington says she's "not even thinking" about giving back the $$....and she's in the top 10.