Posted on 02/11/2006 3:38:06 PM PST by frankjr
After weeks in which the White House has declined to release pictures of President Bush with Jack Abramoff, the disgraced lobbyist, the first photograph to be published of the two men shows a small, partly obscured image of Mr. Abramoff looking on from the background as Mr. Bush greets a Texas Indian chief in May 2001.
By itself, the picture hardly seems worthy of the White House's efforts to keep it out of the public eye. Mr. Abramoff, a leading Republican fund-raiser who pleaded guilty last month to conspiring to corrupt public officials, is little more than a blurry, bearded figure in the background at a gathering of about two dozen people.
But it provides a window, albeit an opaque one, into Mr. Abramoff's efforts to sell himself to Indian tribes as a man of influence who could open the most secure doors in Washington to them. And it leaves unanswered questions about how Mr. Abramoff and the tribal leader, whom he was trying to sign as a client, gained access to a meeting with the president on the White House grounds that was ostensibly for a group of state legislators who were supporting Mr. Bush's 2001 tax cut plan.
The White House confirmed the authenticity of the photograph. It was provided to The New York Times by the Indian chief, Raul Garza of the Kickapoo tribe of southwest Texas. Mr. Garza, who is under indictment on federal charges of embezzling money from his tribe, said he was eager to demonstrate that he had "nothing to hide" in his dealings with the White House and Mr. Abramoff.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Where's Waldo? No, the question is "Where's Jack?"
hint:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1576712/posts
When are they going to show Searchlight Reid meeting Abramovitch with his kneepads on?
Is that John Kerry and Jane Fonda in the background???
Now that's a bonifide photoshop.
Hhhmm....Raul Garza That's an Indian name? Sounds like an Italian Indian to me.
That's the best libs have?
No, by itself, the picture hardly seems worthy of the New York Times's efforts to keep it in the public eye.
boo-yah, baby!!
I think I see "tourist guy" in the upper right hand corner and "looter guy" in the lower left behind the woman with the sign.
The photo allows for the inflated FAKE headline.
In Communist China, we would all be killed for contradicting it.
This is a boring article.
"Daddy, teacher says that every time that the stupid NY Times desperately attacks President Bush, it's stock price declines by 5%."
LOL! Perfect.
Every time the Left leads with their ace, it walks into a full house (of sensible Americans).
So it's fake, but accurate (/dan rather & mary mapes)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.