« Brad Berenson | Main | The Next Open Thread »

April 16, 2007


Abramoff is key here for several reasons. Remember the dismissal of the USA in the Marianas was kind of a dress rehersal for the later USA purge. And of course Abramoff's dealings required that not too much be done about tribal gambling problems. And most importantly, Abramoff was a key cog in the permanent GOP majority cash machine. Susan Ralston has always been much more important than she seemed on the surface.

The do-less-than-nothing GOP Congress let them get really, really sloppy, and it has proven very difficult for these undertalented overachievers to realize how things have changed and what they needed to be doing.

I agree, Mimikatz. Add in the fact that the most likely explanation for Chiara's ouster in MI has to do with a tribal gambling issue (the rich Grand Rapids Republicans, including DeVos and a guy already implicated in the Abramoff scandal, Pete Secchia) want to prevent a nearby tribe from opening a casino. The casino/DOI/DOJ won a lawsuit in March which means the casino likely will go foward.

ANd one of our insta-replacement USAs was the same guy they sent to Guam/Marianas after they had ousted the guy bearing down onto Abramoff.

As Deepthroat told Woodward and Bernstein at some point, "It's all part of the same thing" or words to that effect. In order to provide the funding to keep the permanent Republican majority in place, Republican supporters had to make a LOT of money -- and donate a large part of that money to the party (read: "Rove") to do with as it pleased to keep the Republicans in power.

Abramoff et al were greasing the skids on certain matters such as the Indian gambling, and legislation that directly benefited BushCo friends. That would help keep the spigot of money going.

The issues surrounding our DoJ were also designed to keep the Republicans in office. With the "right" people in the "right" places, anything could be accomplished -- including blocking investigations or starting them as needed.

I am becoming more and more amazed at the perceived power that Karl Rove has. It is literally to a point that I think he could ask some of the White House minions to go jump off the Brooklyn Bridge for the Republican Party, and they would do it! That is very scary! What else would they do? Obviously, they are not above trying to destroy our United States, as imperfect as it may be... There are some things that have worked, though, and they are doing their level best to destroy those, as well.

I see a new day dawning for all of us. It will take a while longer, but we will not have to put up with these zombies for too much longer...

EW, you really should be picked up as a contract forensic examiner by the next special counsel. Your command of these many threads is a beautiful thing to behold.

I agree. Your work is invaluable. I just hope the right investigators are making a point of following your work and insights...including this blog.

BTW, someone mentioned your next book could be "Anatomy of Delete"! LOL :-)

The name you're looking for is Frederick Black. He was the USA for Guam and the Northern Marianas Islands, before Abramoff persuaded Rove to fire him to obstruct the investigation into the Tan family. Oh, I'm sorry, I mean, before the President realized that Black wasn't launching enough fraudulent prosecutions of Democrats for voter fraud. Er, wait, that's not right either. How about, before Kyle Sampson decided that someone else from the Federal Society needed to pump up their resume?

What was the excuse for firing Black?

No, the name is Russell Stoddard. The guy who was in charge of all public corruption cases after Black was removed. He was eventually sent to MI WD. In other words, he may have been doing to the same kind of fixing in MI WD he did in Guam.

You are so right about this. Although the R's love revenge, it is sport for them. What's really important to them is the money. So whenever there is any kind of a R scandal, I always try to figure out where the money is. And, with this administration, the money has pretty much been in Abramoff's Bag. This is going to be food for political writers, economics writers, and history writers for years and years to come. If we can get rid of them. When I finally see Commander Codpiece sitting on his mountain of Paraguayan cocaine, then I'll know the real probing can begin.

ok ew, different emphasis I guess. What I mean is, if the SAIC has all of this Abramoff / Ralston / Rove email already, shouldn't it be easy to just search the archive for all mentions of the terms "guam", "black", etc and see what falls out? If they thought the RNC emails were secure, they probably would have been less discreet (as we've already seen with some of Tasia and Monigoo's more recent mail).

If we take it as a given that Black was the first USA fired to obstruct an investigation, don't you think the conversations leading up to the axe would also show the highest hurdle to clear w/r/t justifying the decision? And planning the cover-up, if the press decided to notice?

my bad. Senate Indian Affairs Committee = SIAC, not SAIC. (note to self: use preview!)

first we need to know if there was a court order or FBI issued "Hold" on the emails

if this was done, then the destruction of the emails is already A CRIME IN ITSELF

if there was a court order or hold, I don't really care which case triggered it

given the wide scope of criminal investigations that these emails cover, I'd say that we could jump the seven regulatory hurdles required to qualify for a criminal investigation under the RICO Act

RICO is a vicious law, and it comes with a super-superior 10 year statute of limitation

what was the name of Al's lawyer in Bush v Gore, Broils, Broyes, or something like that ???

think we could we get Mr Broils (???) to serve as special prosecutor if we offered to give him Patrick Fitzgeral as his chief deputy ???


No offense, but I doubt anyone much worried about justifications wrt the Black quashing. Know how many reporters the AP and NYT and the WaPo have between them in Guam? Know how many Senators, who used to enjoy privileges relating to picking judicial candidates? Know how many Americans even know what the Marianas Islands are, or care?

Sojourner, above:

As Deepthroat told Woodward and Bernstein at some point, "It's all part of the same thing" or words to that effect.

As I recall, Deepthroat also said, "follow the money," which seems particularly good advice in this case too.

BTW, Tom Tomorrow has a FABULOUS cartoon today on the comparison between Watergate & Gonzo-gate. It's available @ Salon.com, but you have to wait out a couple of ads. Tomorrow it will be "free" -- Marcy et al., maybe you could use it here or @ FDL.

David Boies.

Freepatriot - Mimikatz has the name right, but I don't see Boies as our boy, not after his hog-nogging with Hannity and Rove over at the Fox News trough and expressing doubts that any crime was committed in the Plame leak and that Fitz should not have continued on with the investigation once he knew Armi was "the" leaker and questioning Fitz' prudence in the closing. True Crime is not his bag anyway. Also, you're far from either the first or the last to raise the prospect of Fitz getting involved in some counsel position with the Congress hearings or some special prosecutor proceedings, but even if there's no true conflict of interest which would prevent that [My strongly held view is that there are several such conflicts, absolutely no criticism of Fitz intended or implied], then at the very least the optics on the former are prohibitively bad. And the only current law in place to bring about the latter runs right across AlG's desk blotter. Congress could pass a new law, but then guess who has a veto?

ew - On the matter of the WSJ piece, may I suggest we reserve some skepticism?

First - It’s in the WSJ.

There are other reasons.

Second - While it may appear to be written in the style of investigative reporting - it's still in the WSJ ["investigative reporting" and "the WSJ" in one sentence; I may faint from all the oxymoronia].

Third - We find ourselves in Year Six of the reign of King George VII of the House of Bush, so by now we should all have learned to keep our Bushimeters fully charged and set on high at all times.

Fourth - The investigating unit said to be on the job here is called the “Public Integrity Section” - - of the DoJ; again - of the DoJ. And it’s still AlG’s DoJ, for at least one day longer.

Even then, it's hard to see why AlG’s departure would effect real change while George remains Regent. For crying out loud, even UNCLE DON is still puttering around the Magic Kingdom, with his big important corner office and a great whack of staffers, and an unaccountably hefty budget[unaccountable budgets being quinessentially the spore of the Greater Bushie]. And he's doing SOMETHING. Whatever it is, I hope it’s nothing more consequential than maintaining Bushie contact with the Military Geekosphere in Future Combat Systems, or investing more of the national debt in academic centrifuges like Professor Pheith of Georgetown - who AFAIK still holds the belt as TDFGITW. Though I expect it’s a bit more unnerving & has something to do with Persia and rugs.]

Fifth - Take a read at how that office's name looks up on the door: “Public Integrity Section”. Entire chapters of Orwell’s Animal Farm rush the frontal lobe.

Let each of us imagine ourself such a loyal Bushie we're entrusted our own set of keys to the Magic Kingdom AND the power of life and death over all the vasty projects of the DoJ. Being a loyal INSIDE Bushie, we naturally would be inclined to outsource all ethical and organizational decisions to the King’s own Kardinal Richelieu - where from in the fullness of time would come one among the Kardinal's Shop of Dreadfuls in Political Affairs, getting back to us, or if we're more Gonzo-inclined to one our own little Repulsives at the DoJ, and then - VOILA! Progress would start"being made", and we'd all be "moving ahead together and for America"!

Wouldn’t we expect that something with such a big bull's eye on it as the "PUBLIC INTEGRITY SECTION" would be very high up the list of units to be put to the torch ... er, on the agenda for discussion among the Kardinal's Horribles and our own Repulsives?

Even the ACRONYM cries out for change.

["Monica thinks it would look a bit more translucent if we just add on an “S.”]

Sixth - My Bushitometer is catching a surge here, telling me the chances are awfully strong that the sources this WSJ "investigative reporter" is referring to as “lawyers involved in the case” and the sources he refers to later on as the “lawyers for some of the cooperating witnesses” are - the same lawyers.

Maybe even acting for the same client. Or with the same firm.

Which after a couple more triple espressos gets me all the way to the surmise that perhaps not even a single one of the “sources” so-called in this story is in any way antagonistic to any other source, or even entity, referred to as a player in the balance of this story.

I could go on indefinitely, but I’ll just stop here and finish with one of many potential implications to this chain. I point to the clear implications this: “People with direct knowledge of the investigation say that all of Mr. Abramoff's email correspondence was preserved and turned over to prosecutors, including those with the White House.”

Really? All of it?

Well then, I guess we can all sit back and relax and forget all about getting ourselves all worked about the suggestion that a few [million] White House emails have been [or are being] accidently flushed down the RNC White House loo - - because if the highly trained professional PIS-ants conducting this investigation haven't found [won’t come up with] any hanky-panky among the emailae Abramoffi, then that means [will mean] there never WAS any!


Wow, talk about connections here...and I also believe Paul McNulty was also involved in the Abramoff and Aipac cases and was promoted (rewarded?) and is now smack dab in the middle of Attorneygate. Some people and names sure do keep popping up alot when it comes to being found at the middle of republican wrongdoing.


Abramoff's law firm was involved in the Florida recount in 2000.

Do you know who were the firm lawyers who recruited Abramoff, and when?

The comments to this entry are closed.

Where We Met

Blog powered by Typepad