Abramoff-Bush Photos

[gr8fuldaniel]

Think Progress Isikoff Confirms Abramoff Shopped Bush Photos Over the weekend, Time magazine and the Washingtonian both reported on five photos of President Bush with Jack Abramoff, but neither publication revealed its source. Yesterday, ThinkProgress laid out the case for why the source for the photos was likely Abramoff himself. Last night, our hunch was confirmed. Appearing on MSNBC, Newsweek correspondent Michael Isikoff reported that it was indeed Abramoff who floated the photographs to Washingtonian. Watch the video: (Quicktime streaming) Full transcript below: ISIKOFF: As a general rule, if you’re the president … you don’t like pictures out there of you with convicted felons. It sounds like … there’s at least one picture of him with at least one convicted felon and another indicted, so it’s probably not a picture the White House is eager to have out there. The other interesting aspect of this is, while the White House hasn’t put these out, Jack Abramoff has clearly shown them to people. I don’t know anything about Time sources, but I do know that he showed them to Washingtonian magazine, which suggests he may be playing a little bit of a game here. He has, of course, pled guilty already to the Justice Department. But it does raise a question in my mind at least as to whether Abramoff is maybe sort of sending some sort of signal out here: “Hey, I’ve got this stuff.” Maybe he wants something from somebody at the White House, or he wants someone at the White House not to do something, and just sort of subtly playing with people here. You heard it here first.

Looks like blackmail.
See what happens when you jump into bed with the mob?

These pics must be friggin porn!

If they were just handshakes they could explain it away.

Selling them to the highest bidder. That would explain why The Washingtonian and TIME have both seen, but arent releasing. They probly wont release them to the net first. They will peddle them in the print edition. Provided the syndicate (read: White House) doesnt "buy" them with some "time served" for Abramoff and Delay.

These photos could be some really dirty stuff. Abramoff has the cabbage to buy dirt on the pope.



When you think dirty pictures, dont forget Hunter S Thompson was about to break a story exposing our "Best and Brightest":

Mail & Guardian Blog Child Sex Rings and The Murder of Hunter S Thompson (part one) A little bit of background is probably necessary in order to show that the seemingly bizarre claims by some, that Hunter Thompson was either about to write on the use of explosives on 911( to drop the WTC towers) - or alternatively - that he was to write about a high placed pedophile ring implicating senior US politicians, are both quite valid. More....

That last link is a steamy bit.


developing....

[Mr.Vicchio]

Pics of Bush with Abramoff... I love how they left out the pics of Abramoff (and his troupe ) with Dems (who are by the way under the gun on this one too...

And then a Hunter Thompson was murdered for telling the world about the "real 9/11" story...

Right well, this is a legit debate? Please.

[lili462]

Quote by: Mr.Vicchio And then a Hunter Thompson was murdered for telling the world about the "real 9/11" story...

Really?

[gr8fuldaniel]

Quote by: Mr.Vicchio Pics of Bush with Abramoff... I love how they left out the pics of Abramoff (and his troupe ) with Dems

Yeah, there has been so much in the news SPECULATING about the pics that we are SURE exist. But there wasnt a thread to post the progress of this developing story. When the pics finally do get exposed, this is where I will post them. Who will be the highest bidder? If its the WH, we never see those pics. Transparency has not been the strong suit of this mob-style administration.

(who are by the way under the gun on this one too...

Nope. This is purely a republican scandal. Dems never recieved a dime from Abramoff. Not a DIME. Abramoff would never give money to those dems.

Note: I, however dont have any trouble (uncomfortable, yes) picturing Lieberman tangled up in a boy-toy jigsaw puzzle. Or accepting money on the Q.T. But even Lieberman isnt on the record with any Abramoff funds. Its a Partisan Issue. Its about a culture of corruption on one side of the aisle. If Lieberman is indicted, However, I would like to point out in advance, that he is a Dem in name only. Everybody should know that by now.

And then a Hunter Thompson was murdered for telling the world about the "real 9/11" story... Right well, this is a legit debate? Please.

We may never know what Hunter knew. But then, we may just find out real soon. Somebody killed Hunter. Hunter is an investigative journalist.

It isnt debate until somebody can step up to the plate and debate what we DO KNOW.

Are you familiar with the WAY Abramoff rose to power?
If you dont like that source (WAY), check the facts in this Wasington Post story: "Abramoff Indicted in Casino Boat Purchase" They match the facts in the first source
They didnt have enough to indict Abramoff for the murder of the former gambling boat owner. That could surface, if our justice system isnt polluted to the core. And provided the pictures in question dont involve your president in an "un-christian" pose with non-consenting adults (or children)

[gr8fuldaniel]

Just because Sun Myung Moon (Prince of Peace and King of Kings :rolleyes: )
newspaper The Washington Times reported:

(2nd paragraph) Abramoff, 46, the once-powerful Washington lobbyist and friend to both Republicans and Democrats

In spite of a paper trail to imply a monetary connection. How does one IMPLY friendship to the mob. Is the issue here about "FRIENDSHIP" or is it about POLITICAL CORRUPTION and BRIBERY?

[Mr.Vicchio]

Uhm, Gr8, anyone with corrupt ties to the man will probably go down and should. But Abramoff isn't a pure Republican scandle, as much as you might wish it to be. It's an indicment on the whole lobbyist system in Washington.

But hey, if it makes you feel good..

Oh and Hunter was murdered because he knew "The truth". Yeah and we never went to the moon either, right?

[gr8fuldaniel]

Viccio is a liar....
Until he shows us sources to back up his claims that this involves both parties.

But Abramoff isn't a pure Republican scandle,

PROVE IT!

[gr8fuldaniel]

That 2nd story in my last post, in the first paragraph:

..... but say they will not release them on the grounds they are not relevant to the money-for-favours investigation.

How about the sex ring scandal that Delay and bush and Abramoff are involved in? Do the photos relate to THAT?
And speaking of relevance Scott McClellen (the official white house spokesliar) said

"Trying to say there's more to it than … taking a picture [of the President] in a photo line is just absurd,"

Right thats why we (Your Employer) want to know that they were NOT a photo line shot.

Little lies like that help him to sleep with himself.

Our local morning propagandists "Armstrong and Getty" have a new catch phrase "Monarchy Now"

God, I know I am not supposed to hate. Can I despise, deplore and abhor, though?

[xyzer]

As if some pictures of a lobbyist in the same room with our president are proof of something underhanded? Sounds more like leftwing idiocy to me. No one has to prove anything Gr8 except you who are making the insinuation!

What you post falls under the definition of argumentum ignoratum ..that is what you say is true because no one has proved it isn't. Common sense and history prove your not even close on that one. ! The history is comprised of your continually demonstrated bigotry which has warped your version of truth.

My version is that a President comes in contact with literally thousands of citizens in a week or so. What they are doing is unknown to him. A problem does arise when a President uses his power to pardon a wanted felon(for a donation to his library fund) as your leftwing hero Clinton is known to have done. That's serious and deserving of criticism.

It turns out that many of the politicians who were influenced with Indian money were from both parties. Thats they way the system legally functions, Lobbyist are charged with attempting to influence politicians. They operate in a legal sense within the system. Abramoff went beyond that by defrauding the Indian tribes who gave him the money. Thats not cause to indict any politician who took Indian money through him.

The politicians who gave back such moneys were vying for political favor with their constituents and IMNSHO didn't have to.

[madprophet]

Jack Abramoff's political contributions can be seen here and here. All Republicans for the last five election cycles. Burn.

[xyzer]

madprophet..are you suggesting that if someone doesn't give donations to a Republican he is somehow tainted? And if Republican politicians take donations that spawns illegality? Come on we still live in a free society and if we choose to give to either party thats our business.

Obviously the Indians were interested in giving money to the campaign chests of any who would help them in their quest for more casinos. There is evidence that Abramoff defrauded them and thats what he has pleaded guilty to..not to only giving money to Republicans....Get real?

[Chris]

Interesting site

http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/list.asp?order=A

[madprophet]

Quote by: xyzer My version is that a President comes in contact with literally thousands of citizens in a week or so. What they are doing is unknown to him. A problem does arise when a President uses his power to pardon a wanted felon(for a donation to his library fund) as your leftwing hero Clinton is known to have done. That's serious and deserving of criticism. It turns out that many of the politicians who were influenced with Indian money were from both parties. Thats they way the system legally functions, Lobbyist are charged with attempting to influence politicians. They operate in a legal sense within the system. Abramoff went beyond that by defrauding the Indian tribes who gave him the money. Thats not cause to indict any politician who took Indian money through him. The politicians who gave back such moneys were vying for political favor with their constituents and IMNSHO didn't have to.

First, Native American money is not the same as Abramoff money. Second, the three tribes that were represented by Abramoff were unique in that they were the only three to give more money to Republicans than Democrats. Their contributions to Dems also declined substantially after Abramoff began representing them. Third, politicians did not "give back" the tribal money, they got rid of the personal donations from Abramoff. Fourth, Abramoff's second guilty plea was for "conspiracy to bribe memebers of congress," and part of his plea bargain is for him to testify against congressmen, likely all of whom will be Republicans. Fifth, the Justice Department's investigation into influence peddling by Abramoff is focused on four current congressmen, over a dozen congressional aides and two Bush administration officials.

Finally, Jack Abramoff is not just some bumkin who got to meet the President because he grew the world's biggest pumpkin. He's a Bush Pioneer. He's one of a small group of people who raised more than $100,000 for the Bush campaign. A group that has a history of close contact with the administration they financed. He's been photographed with Bush at least five times. And that's just the meetings that were public enough to allow pictures to be taken.

Information

[madprophet]

Quote by: xyzer madprophet..are you suggesting that if someone doesn't give donations to a Republican he is somehow tainted? And if Republican politicians take donations that spawns illegality? Come on we still live in a free society and if we choose to give to either party thats our business.

No, I'm simply showing that the attempt by some people to paint this as a bipartisan scandal is disengenuous at best. Abramoff has pled guilty to "conspiracy to bribe congressmen," and it's hard to see how he would bribe Democrats when he never even gave them legitimate campaign donations.

Quote by: xyzer Obviously the Indians were interested in giving money to the campaign chests of any who would help them in their quest for more casinos. There is evidence that Abramoff defrauded them and thats what he has pleaded guilty to..not to only giving money to Republicans....Get real?

Yeah. I'm the one that needs to get real. I'm the one that doesn't even know that Abramoff has pled guilty to three felony counts including bribing congressmen.

[xyzer]

No, I'm simply showing that the attempt by some people to paint this as a bipartisan scandal is disengenuous at best. Abramoff has pled guilty to "conspiracy to bribe congressmen," and it's hard to see how he would bribe Democrats when he never even gave them legitimate campaign donations.

Not really! you are trying to indict Repubs of something different than the norm in D.C..
Your post..

Jack Abramoff's political contributions can be seen here and here. All Republicans for the last five election cycles. Burn.

suggests that there is something crooked about a lobbyist giving money to a Republican...unreal?

Both of my Democrat senators indicated they would "give up" any such money which had come thru Abramoff. Murray to charity and I don't know about Cantwell? Note they are not Repubs!.. You politically bigotted leftists are trying to distort facts and shift blame where it is not merited. You can't wait to see just what develops(maybe some revelation will come up which we don't yet know about) you have to paint a bizarre impression based on sketchy evidence of what really went on. Shame on you!

[madprophet]

Quote by: xyzer Not really! you are trying to indict Repubs of something different than the norm in D.C..

No, I think it's the Justice Department that is trying to indict Repubs on "something different than the norm" (re: illegal.) Specifically, Rep Tom Delay, Rep Bob Ney, Rep John Doolittle and Sen Conrad Burns--plus more than a dozen congressional aides and two Bush administration officials.

Quote by: xyzer Your post.. suggests that there is something crooked about a lobbyist giving money to a Republican...unreal?

No, my posts simply make note that there are only Republicans being investigated in connection to Abramoff's illegal dealings and that Democrats have not even been the recipients of legal donations from him, contrary to certain claims. Very real, yet you still seem to be under the impression that nothing illegal took place, no matter how many times I point it out.

[gr8fuldaniel]

From Post #2

Quote by: Mr.Vicchio I love how they left out the pics of Abramoff (and his troupe ) with Dems (who are by the way under the gun on this one too... <snip> Right well, this is a legit debate? Please.

Its not legit debate if you run away from me. Where is your response? Back up your statement: "who are by the way under the gun on this one too..." Mr V.
HOW are the dems under the gun on the abramoff issue?

From post #6

Quote by: Mr.Vicchio But Abramoff isn't a pure Republican scandle, as much as you might wish it to be.

Exactly the same, unsubstantiated claim! What the hell are you implying. Do you have some super-duper secret agent information that the rest of us arent privy to?
Spill it. Who is the Dem that can be implicated?

Waiting......

[Mr.Vicchio]

No, Gr8, I saw this was moved and ignored it. It was brought to my attention by another member.

It was rightly moved IMHO. Howard Dean claims that no Democrat recieved money through Abramoff. Well... Since you are taking the time to make a HUGE deal out of me ignoreing your dumped thread, I will spend a minute to make YOU happy, why? Because people like you need a little love, we all know the elections aren't helping your cause, at all.

I entered: Democrats recieved money from Abramoff.

Here are a few results. See I am on 56k line, with a MAC laptop, cut and paste is a pain (Guess I am just not hip enough to memorize the multi button hotbuttons to do it) so appreciate this would ya?

But Abramoff didn't work just with Republicans. He oversaw a team of two dozen lobbyists at the law firm Greenberg Traurig that included many Democrats. Moreover, the campaign contributions that Abramoff directed from the tribes went to Democratic as well as Republican legislators. Among the biggest beneficiaries were Capitol Hill's most powerful Democrats, including Thomas A. Daschle (S.D.) and Harry M. Reid (Nev.), the top two Senate Democrats at the time, Richard A. Gephardt (Mo.), then-leader of the House Democrats, and the two lawmakers in charge of raising funds for their Democratic colleagues in both chambers, according to a Washington Post study. Reid succeeded Daschle as Democratic leader after Daschle lost his Senate seat last November.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...060202158.html

Consider yourself spanked. Thanks for playing, try spinning over at www.democraticunderground.com They believe your lies without question.

[Mr.Vicchio]

But Abramoff didn't work just with Republicans. He oversaw a team of two dozen lobbyists at the law firm Greenberg Traurig that included many Democrats. Moreover, the campaign contributions that Abramoff directed from the tribes went to Democratic as well as Republican legislators. Among the biggest beneficiaries were Capitol Hill's most powerful Democrats, including Thomas A. Daschle (S.D.) and Harry M. Reid (Nev.), the top two Senate Democrats at the time, Richard A. Gephardt (Mo.), then-leader of the House Democrats, and the two lawmakers in charge of raising funds for their Democratic colleagues in both chambers, according to a Washington Post study. Reid succeeded Daschle as Democratic leader after Daschle lost his Senate seat last November.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...060202158.html


While the whole affair shows how messed up washington is with lobbyist, I must say the patently false claim made by the likes of Howard Dean "No Democrats have taken money from Jack Abramoff" is... I think going to be useful. And I don't mean this as a conservative GOP supporter, but as a conservative.

Lobbyists are high on my list of "Muffed up things with the political system". I hope this whole affair gets LOTS of attention. The GOP Saying "Hey our guys weren't alone" and the Dem's saying ""Yes they were!" and then we see that it's a mess.

Maybe people will push to fix this system. Realize BOTH parties need to be spanked for this sort of sad abuse of trust and power. I am hoping, honestly that it can lead to some changes that will alter the way both parties do business (or even give rise to a new power if one or both cannot change) that makes thing sbtter in Washington. Or they'll find a new way to do the same ol dsame old if the people don't speak out.

We shall see.

[gr8fuldaniel]

So you are saying that the company Abramoff worked for, gave money to Dems?

Thats a lot different from Abramoff giving money to dems.

Same question:
Do you have any record of Abramoff giving money to dems?

You see its Abramoff that is on trial, not Greenberg Traurig.

Nice try though.