Cunningham wore a wire in the days before he pled out. I'm not the only one who think's he's going to take Duncan Hunter down with him.
Arianna Huffington has an interesting squib on this morass. She directs our attention to the under-recognised connection between Abramoff and the Marianas islands. The matter, she says, is "developing." One of those devlopments may involve the Chinese women kept as slaves on those islands. Some of them were forced into prostitution...
Bob Fertik suggests that various Indian tribes should bring a RICO suit against Godfather Jack and his cronies. I don't see why not.
More protection: This weekend, I spoke about the possibility -- likelihood -- that Godfather Jack pulled the strings of Florida prosecutors regarding the Boulis business. This blog should have mentioned previously that Jack's pack had similar influence over John Cornyn, now a Texas senator, previously the Attorney General of Texas. As firedoglake puts it:
John Cornyn was the Texas Attorney General at the time Abramoff was taking money from the Cochetta Indians -- funneling it to Ralph Reed who then aimed his flock o' fundie freaks like a missile launcher to give cover to Cornyn as he did exactly what Abramoff wanted him to do -- shut down the competition.This sorry business points up an under-recognised aspect of the current scandals. We are relying on various state and federal prosecutors to clean up this mess. But many prosecutors were part of the problem to begin with.
Did Cornyn do this at Abramoff's and Reed's bidding? According to emails from Reed he did:
"On November 12, 2001, Reed sent Abramoff an e-mail stating, "get me details so I can alert cornyn and let him know what we are doing to help him" [sic]. Similarly, on November 13, 2001, Reed wrote "I strongly suggest we start doing patch-throughs to perry and cornyn [sic]. We're getting killed on the phone." Also, on January 7, 2002, Reed sent Abramoff an e-mail stating "I think we should budget for an ataboy for cornyn" [sic]."
Can we expect justice? How much justice?
S&L scandal, part two: The FDIC wanted $300 million from a Texas wheeler-dealer named Charles Hurwitz, who had profited from the $1.6 billion collapse of the Union Savings Association of Texas. Tom Delay and two of his minions, Representatives John Doolittle and Richard Pombo, came to Hurwitz' defense; they made sure the FDIC went away.
Speaking of the S&L scandal: Remember how Republican pundits (and some inane "progressives) tried to paint that affair as a bipartisan monstrosity? True, a couple of Democrats -- including Alan Cranston, who otherwise had served California very well -- did become trapped in the mire. But their participation was tangential compared to that of the Republicans. Those who doubt the point should read the works of Steve Pizzo and Pete Brewton; you may also want to check out the background of Neil Bush, brother to the current president.
Well, the Republican spinsters are at it again: They're trying to portray the Abramoff affair as bipartisan, when it isn't. It just isn't. As Howard Dean recently told Wolf Blitzer on CNN, not a single Democrat took Abramoff's money.
Despite that fact of history, I predict that the "asshole" wing of the progressive sector -- let's call it the Pacifica wing -- will continue to repeat this "bipartisan" canard. They parroted GOP talking points during the S&L scandal, and they will surely do so again. (Why does Pacifica bother to ask listeners for donations? Why don't they just have Alexander Strategy Group cut them a check?)
The gambling connection keeps cropping up: Alexander Strategy group -- the nexus point for the Wilkes, Delay, and Abramoff scandals -- was also tied in with MGM casinos:
The firm has already been dropped by one client, MGM Mirage, the casino and resort giant, which retained it in 2004, paying about $350,000 to help block a maneuver by an Indian tribe in Michigan.The vile Wall Street Journal editorial page insists that congressional Republicans (those who don't end up in the pokey) should get serious about enacting a reform package. The writers even -- get this! -- try to insinuate that the Democrats have stood in the way of reform.
At the end of last year, MGM ended the relationship. Alan Feldman, a spokesman for MGM, said that the project had ended and that the firm's services were no longer needed, but Feldman acknowledged that the scrutiny surrounding Alexander Strategy was a concern. "It would be dishonest to say that it didn't come up in discussions," he said.
Laughable? Yes. But the WSJ's toxic spew does point up a very real problem: Democrats have not yet offered a comprehensive reform platform. If the Republicans get there first, they may well be able to take control of a corruption scandal which should destroy the Greedy Old Pig party.
The WSJ piece does put one interesting factoid on the public record:
The Copley News Service reported that "Wilkes made no bones about where his money was coming from. His jet-black Hummer bore a license plate reading MIPR ME--a reference to Military Interdepartmental Purchase Requests," the means by which his firm got paid.
9 comments:
This scandal keeps getting weirder
sofla said...
The S&L situation WAS enabled by Democrats IN GOVERNMENT, if not so much performed by them in the S&L industry.
Who says? Well, it makes sense, as Democrats were the (corrupt, for the day) party of Congress, typically held the majorities and therefore the chairmanships. Chairman Ferdinand ("Ferdie") St. Germaine (D-RI?) was House Banking Committee head, and after his part in sponsoring and getting passed the (Jake) Garn/St. Germaine deregulation bill, he corruptly went into the banking industry at a huge salary.
Dukakis had intended to raise the S&L issue against GHW Bush in '88, but was told, 'Mike, this isn't a winning issue for Democrats,' by his own VP pick, Lloyd Bentsen. Senator Bentsen's high-handed de facto bribe demands from those he charged $10 to $15 thousand for 'breakfast with the chairman' (of the Senate Finance Committee) earned him the mock title 'Lord' Bentsen.
The fact that so many of the losses to the S&L industry happened in Texas would make one think it must have been mainly a GOP deal, but then, that would be forgetting the long dominance of Texas by Democrats. Even as late as Bush 43's gubernatorial terms, he was dealing with a majority Democratic Party legislature in Austin, and that was 3 presidential terms after the S&L debacle unfolded.
And frankly, even the sainted Carter had involvement, as his own main money man Bert Lance was heavily involved with BCCI and several bank failures, and Carter helped create the origins of the S&L problem when he signed the original increase of the FSLIC guaranteed amount from about $15,000 in deposits to $40,000 (on its way up to $100,000), without increasing the industry's required payments into that insurance fund.
It was definitely a bipartisan scandal, and Lloyd Bentsen's warning as a key insider to Dukakis is really all the evidence one needs to make the case. I say that with considerable regret as a lifelong Democrat myself.
The previous comment is such utter horseshit I was tempted to delete it. Again, I direct readers to the Pizzo and Brewton books. There's also a good book on Silverado, but I can't recall the author offhand. At any rate, those sources prove the point.
Joseph, I'm sure I'm not the only one
who'd interested to read your thoughts underlying your snarky "Pacifica"
remark. I've long been puzzled by
what the deal was with them and their
sit-ins. Some people complain about
Pacifica's "gatekeeping".
I do not know about the reliability of much of what sofla writes above. The part about Lloyd Bentsen's handiwork seems to be correct from what I recall reading in Pete Brewton's tome. Bentsen is regarded by many Democrats as kind of a conservative DLC type infiltrator into the party and not to be trusted. Robert Reich's book Locked in the Cabinet was also very critical of that wing of the Democratic Party.
sofla said...
Thanks for not deleting the prior message from me, but I must object to your characterization of what I wrote.
Not only do I object, please re-read Pete Brewton's book, 'The Mafia, CIA & George Bush,' which I take to be the Brewton book to which you refer, because **Brewton** (recommended by you) agrees with my take, even as early as in his INTRODUCTION.
Last (fourth) paragraph from the original hardback version's Introduction page 1 (er, page i), I guess, it's unmarked):
"For unlike Watergate and Iran-Contra, this [the S&L scandal] was a bipartisan scandal. There was no opposition party to push for an independent investigation. In fact, the same group of wealthy, powerful businessmen, centered in Houston, that encircle Republicans like George [W.] Bush and James A. Baker III, also encircle Democrats like Jim Wright and Lloyd Bentsen.'
Pretty clear and explicit endorsement by Brewton of the position you oppose, and yet you cite Brewton in support of your position? (To be fair, it came out in '92, when I read it, and that is now quite a long time ago, certainly, and time enough to forget what it said. I had to check my copy to be sure).
Later in the introduction:
"(If the Democrats had won in 1988, this book would be entitled "The Mafia, the CIA and Lloyd Bentsen," for Bentsen and Bush are two interchangeable peas in a pod. They have many friends, business associates and campaign donors in common. The story of the most important one they share begins this book.)" [A guy named Walter Mischer, whose Mischer Corporation's HQ building housed Bentsen's '88 senatorial re-election campaign.]
"But Bush won in 1988, and one of the reasons he did was his ability to keep the S&L scandal out of the political debate. He was assisted in this by none other than Bentsen, as we shall see."
Later, after the intro and prologue and 'cast of characters,' on page 5 Brewton cites William Greider's 'Who will Tell the People?' as the source for Bentsen telling Dukakis that the S&L issue would not be a winning one for the Democrats.
Look, I like your blog, and agree with your political take about 95%, but let's try to be a bit more realistic about the Democratic Party and its fellow-travelling with the PTB and big money. I say that as a registered Dem who voted for McGovern and every party presidential nominee since.
Over time, you have made several snarky comments about Pacifica. I've listened to them (off and on) for 35 years. It's harder to find programs I really like now than it was 35 years ago, but on the whole, it's info we can't get elsewhere. I know a few years ago they went thru some takeover plot that I never understood since I hadn't been listening for a while. I'm not sure that the current setup will work, it seems to be ripe for a takeover by some faction or other. Perhaps, someday, when all the current scandals ebb a bit, you could go more into your thoughts about this. I value what you say about other stuff going on, so it would be interesting to get your take on Pacifica.
About Brewton: Yeah, I had forgotten he wrote that shit in the intro. Writers used to feel obligated to make comments of that sort in order to avoid being labeled as partisan. (By now, we've all learned that, despite such qualifiers, the Republican mobsters will still fling the "partisan attack" lable at anyone who perturbs them.)
I never liked Bentsen, but so what? He really was a minor player, and he was always a throwback to the "old" party system, when the Dems had a conservative wing (Bentsen, Scoop Jackson) and the Republicans had a "sort of" liberal wing (Ike, Nelson Rockefeller).
The main text of the book itself, taken in conjunction with Pizzo's, proves my point: Reagan deregulated the industry and let all sorts of cronies commit robbery. If you can name a single liberal among the bank robbers, let me know.
(Incidentally, there was a genuine S&L crisis in the Carter years, and I don't think he was out of line to take some sort of action.)
As for Pacifica -- perhaps I shouldn't single out the network, since they have broadcast a lot of good stuff over the years. My main quarrel is really with a mind-set, with a weltanschauung, with a certain type of progressive. Alexander Cockburn, Michael Alpert and Marc Cooper are a few names I associate with this crowd. I just cannot stomach these guys. (Christopher Hitchens used to be among their number, and I always hated him too. I'm GLAD he switched.)
This creepy cadre formed a "progressive mafia" in the 1980s and early '90s. Their chant was always the same: Every time someone rallied the troops against Reagan/Bush perfidy, they would chime in: "The Dems are just as bad!" These are the guys who attacked the Clinton health care plan from the left. (Happy with the results?) In fact, they assailed Clinton almost as mercilessly as did the Repblicans. Their audience became the Nader vote. The asshole vote. The vote that gave us W.
These left-wing mafiosi pretty much RAN all the organs of counter-cultural thought during the Reagan and Bush I eras. And what was their legacy? Did the country shift to the right or to the left during that time? Did left-wing thought prosper during those years, or did it dwindle?
I say that Cockburn, Cooper and co. have resumes comparable to that of the Captain of the Exxon Valdez.
And I'm glad that we've found new voices. Give me a Randi Rhodes over a Marc Cooper any day of the effing week.
Joseph, I advise you to look again at the index of your copy of the Brewton book. You will see Senator Lloyd Bentsen references quite a few more places than the introduction. Bentsen was mentioned about half as many times as George Bush throughout the text. I don't recall the author Brewton making a strong partison distinction in the S&L scandal, although Republicans like Bush seem to be fingered more than Democrats, like Bentsen. I also remember a CIA operative remarking that it was difficult to tell where the CIA ended and the Republican party started, or words to that effect.
While we are discussing Brewton's book, have you read this article from the LA Times which resurrects the case of Texan Charles Hurwitz's bank fraud and corruption:
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-banker8jan08,0,4529287,full.story?coll=la-home-headlines
"A Donor Who Had Big Allies
* DeLay and two others helped put the brakes on a federal probe of a businessman. Evidence was published in the Congressional Record."
This article is quite a strong indictment of Reps. Pombo and Doolittle, it seems to me. I hope more will surface about this in the near future.
Post a Comment