That is what John Fund would have you believe:
House Speaker-designate Nancy Pelosi’s endorsement of Rep. John Murtha for majority leader, the No. 2 position in the Democratic leaderhsip, has roiled her caucus. “She will ensure that they [Mr. Murtha and his allies] win. This is hardball politics,” Rep. Jim Moran, a top Murtha ally, told the Hill, a congressional newspaper. “We are entering an era where when the speaker instructs you what to do, you do it.”
But several members are privately aghast that Mr. Murtha, a pork-barreling opponent of most House ethics reforms, could become the second most visible symbol of the new Democratic rule. “We are supposed to change business as usual, not put the fox in charge of the henhouse,” one Democratic member told me. “It’s not just the Abscam scandal of the 1980s that he barely dodged, he’s a disaster waiting to happen because of his current behavior,” another told me.
As for Abscam, a recent book by George Crile, a producer for CBS’s “60 Minutes,” provides damning evidence that Mr. Murtha escaped severe punishment for his role in the scandal only because then-Speaker Tip O’Neill arranged for the House Ethics Committee to drop the charges, over the objections of the committee’s outside prosecutor. The prosecutor quickly resigned in protest.
I have no idea why Pelosi is so set on Murtha, but so be it. This also should be causing some concern among Democrats:
Convicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff is scheduled to report to federal prison tomorrow, over the objections of federal prosecutors who say they still need his help to pursue leads on officials he allegedly bribed.
Sources close to the investigation say Abramoff has provided information on his dealings with and campaign contributions and gifts to “dozens of members of Congress and staff,” including what Abramoff has reportedly described as “six to eight seriously corrupt Democratic senators.”
Could get interesting.
Doctor Gonzo
I don’t see the Abramoff story as a concern. I see it as good news. If there are corrupt Democrats in the Senate, they need to be gone. Along with the corrupt Republicans.
Corruption is never okay.
ThymeZone
Is there anyone in Washington who can put ethics ahead of politics and power?
I’m new to most of the facts in the case, but if this piece is accurate, Pelosi is making an unforced error and stepping into dogshit for no good reason that I can fathom.
demimondian
It’s not just Pelosi, it’s Pelosi and Hoyer together. They hate each other’s guts, and she (quite rationally) doesn’t trust him to work along with her. He (quite rationally) wants to be Speaker, and so wants to be Majority Leader. If the two of them could have worked out a compromise candidate for ML, then this wouldn’t be a problem.
They haven’t.
However, John, I don’t trust ABC as an unbiased source right now. I suspect that Halperin is still continuing his rim-job on Hewitt. When you look at the money, Abramoff worked exclusively with R’s. How would he have corrupted D’s? I think the “source” is trying to extend the “both parties do it” meme, and I’m very suspiscious.
Cyrus
I agree that Murtha looks worse and worse now that he’s on track for a position of responsibility rather than just being a gadfly that’s harder to ignore than most, and more generally will be faced with temptation which he apparently doesn’t handle very well.
However, if Abramoff actually had personal involvement with “six to eight seriously corrupt Democratic senators,” somehow I think we would have heard about, oh, I don’t know, even ONE of them before now. If he really can name names (not just hearsay, old news, or stuff on a par with Harry Reid’s non-scandal Tim was all over), I imagine recently defeated Republicans will be as pissed at him for waiting until now as they were at Bush for holding back on Rumsfeld.
Zifnab
*crosses fingers* Please let it be Lieberman, please let it be Lieberman, please let it be Lieberman
But regarding Murtha, here’s a list of where his pork was headed back in ’94:
~Newsbusters
Certainly, I’d agree that Murtha’s pork spending is disproportionately high. One more reason to push for open government and pork reform. But for Republicans to call foul on Murtha’s so-called epic spending, they’d have to turn a blind eye to:
So, before we run off and crucify Murtha for his swine sins, lets acknowledge who is doing the complaining.
As for why Pelosi is so fond of Murtha, I’ve got three perfectly good reasons for you. Iraq Iraq Iraq. If you need more than that, you’re living in the wrong decade.
Pb
Yeah, I’m not buying this without any solid info, especially considering the previous Harry Reid non-scandals on this topic. They haven’t managed to tie *one* Democratic senator to Abramoff yet, and that’s not for lack of trying, either. Also note that in dengre‘s “Abramoff 65”–65 Republicans running for re-election who actually did have ties to Jack Abramoff–there were 5 Senators listed.
Mr Furious
I’m with Cyrus on Abramoff. Unless holding that info til after the election and punishing Republicans was some sort of payback by Black Jack.
As for Murtha, I expressed my initital concerns yesterday, and everything I’ve read since has made him look worse. I don’t trust the WSJ not to amplify the negative, but Murtha is clearly not squeaky clean—and that’s what I want.
Pelosi is making a mistake here. If she gets her way, I think it’s bad for the Congress. If the caucus resists her and taps Hoyer, she just got rolled on her first major initiative—bad for her and bad for a unified Congress.
Mr Furious
Gah. I blew the link, but I’ll just paste in what I said yesterday about Murtha…
pie
This really makes no sense. WTF, Nancy?
Mr Furious
Yeah, Pelosi was winning me over, now I have to question her judgement. This is clearly a case of her doing what makes HER comfortable (installing Murtha over Hoyer) over what’s good for the Party, the Congress or the country.
I don’t even care if Murtha keeps his ass pristine from here on out, he has too much baggage. It’s not even about the earmarks, etc as much as his seeming resistance to reform. This is not the guy I want at the top. If he gets installed, he better concentrate on party discipline or something and stay the fuck out of the way of whoever is leading the reform charge.
Steve
The Republican noise machine has ginned up so many fake scandals involving Dems that my credibility threshold is pretty high at this point. But when CREW comes out strongly against Murtha, I’m sold. As is he, apparently.
jcricket
I agree with that, although I’m not particularly worried about Abramoff. Based on everything I’ve read he spent 99% of his time with Republicans, and if he had a ton of dirt on Democrats I think we would have heard far more about it by now. It’s like suggesting that Noe (GOP fundraiser in Ohio, convicted for coingate, now a felon) had a lot of dirt on Democrats. And remember that the MO of Delay & the K Street Project’s was designed to shut Democrats out, not reward them. Republicans desperately tried to infect Democrats with the “Abramoff money/corruption” taint, but it didn’t stick because all the money flowing back and forth was between Republicans, Abramoff and his clients. The closest they could get was that some of those same clients also gave to Democrats.
Again, it’s possible, but not plausible.
As background, look at how Halperin is desperately trying to curry favor with the right. Look at reporters like Solomon from the AP, who seem to have it in for Harry Reid (three bogus stories this year alone). If there were real dirt on 6-8 Democratic Senators from Abramoff, it would be out by now.
That said, it wouldn’t surprise me if there were Democratic Senators who were corrupt in other ways. I for one want Bill Jefferson (ok, not a Senator) to lose the runoff election this next month. There’s no place for Mr. Freeze in the House.
jcricket
Speaking of Democratic corruption – what happened to the Lieberman petty cash issue? Something like $400k in petty cash unaccounted for within his campaign coffers.
Probably just a “FEC” violation (not a felony or misdemeanor) but still…
grandpa john
Using congenital liar John Fund as a source for dirt against democrats is taking absurdity to the limit
DoubtingThomas
Oh ye of little faith! Yeah, guys, you were with Murtha when he took a stand against the war, but now you’re gonna fall for all the DLC centrist crap coming from the Hoyer side? Hoyer is just what the Dems need (NOT!): Another pol owned by K Street, another Majority Leader without balls who will poll test every position and get upset at the mean Murtha’s of the world who deliver pork to their constituents and stand up for what they believe in and were embroiled in a 26 year old scandal. Never mind that Hoyer threw a fit when Murtha challenged Iraq policy, never mind that Hoyer hates the Speaker, wants her job and will do anything to backstab her if it means he gains power. Then there’s the wonderful TV images—put Tony Snow or the President up against Hoyer on TV and tell me who the public will believe more? Hoyer looks like a typical New England liberal professor. Put Tony Snow or the President on TV against Murtha and I guarantee Murtha comes out looking like the wise old soldier. Murtha’s pork all goes to defense contractors in his state, Hoyers is bought and sold by the financial and insurance companies. He voted for the Bankruptcy Bill for cristsakes! But no, we must choose him because he doesn’t have the taint of the mean corrupt Murtha. Look, John Fund said so! If the Dems vote Hoyer we are screwed with the same old stand-for-nothing Democrats that have disappointed us time and time again. No one of the DLC ilk is Clinton and until they are their take-no-stand-poll-test-everything positions will lose every time. Murtha is the one the Repubs are afraid of. Murtha is the one the Speaker says she can work with. Murtha is a no-brainer.
KCinDC
Count me in with those who think the “six to eight seriously corrupt Democratic senators” is Halperin continuing to curry favor with the wingnuts. If Abramoff actually had the goods on that many Democrats, it would mean he has the goods on at least two dozen Republican senators as well. But there’s no way the Bush Justice Department wouldn’t have leaked the info about the Dems before the election.
Thomas
Hey, guys, you don’t have to believe John Fund. The Abscam video is available. You can disbelieve your own lyin’ eyes.
But we shouldn’t forget the important things: the needs of leadership, the needs of the party, etc, etc.
DoubtingThomas
Okay, that’s good enough for me. If Thomas is against Murtha I know he’s the man for me!
jcricket
Speaking of “new boss, same as the old boss”: Trent Lott is back!. Wheee!
Pooh
Word. Hoyer is little better, however. I mean aside from being caught accepting a bribe on tape.
At the same time, I wonder how much this matters substantively (and why we’re hearing so much more about this than about Trent “Strom was right” Lott re-emerging as a credible figure.) The proof will be in the pudding, I suppose – give me meaningful lobbying/earmark reform and I’ll think that this is much ado about nothing. Give me business as usual, and I start to get upset.
MNPundit
It doesn’t cause me concern, not at all.
If we have dirty Dems and the Feds have the goods on them then off to the court house they go. I’m not sure what’s so hard about this if you are corrupt like that then you need to suffer.
KCinDC
MNPundit, there’s nothing hard about it, if the facts are as presented, but that’s a big if. I want to make sure that those Dems are actually dirty. In addition, I want dirty Republicans to go as well — selective prosecution based on party is not acceptable, and neither are selective leaks from the Justice Department.
The Other Steve
The crime in Abscam was not immediately reporting the bribe offer to the FBI. Otherwise he did nothing wrong in the Abscam video.
Darrell
SeesThroughIt
Nope. You can’t get to Washington by putting ethics ahead of politics and power, so it’s sort of a self-selecting pool.
Fuckin’ politicians, man.
DougJ
I’m not worried about the Abramoff testimony: a Republican felon talking to Republican appointed DOJ officials, lots of credibility there.
I am worried about the Murtha stuff.
DoubtingThomas
Wow! Darrell approves! Now I’m certain Murtha should be Majority leader.
just sayin
TOS – That’s a pretty generous interpretation of the Abscam video. He didn’t accept a bribe per se, but he suggested a favor for a friend instead, and he was sure leaving the door open to “do business” in the future.
It’s also true that the Abscam video is now 27 years old, but I’d sure like to see him on board in support of serious transparency and other earmarking reform before I’d think this was a particularly good idea for the Dems or the House.
Krista
Exactly. It’s the nature of the beast. In order to go to Washington you need money, lots of ambition, and lots of favours from other people. The combination of those three things tends to quickly weed out any earnest, honest citizens who just want to make their country a better place.
Pity, really.
MNPundit
KCinDC, I couldn’t agree more. I meant if the Feds have actual real goods on Dems (real evidence) then those Dems need to go. But the Feds have definitely been taking out a lot of Rs this past year, so I have some expectation that this isn’t just a ploy masterminded by Gonzales. I think the current status via TPM is something like 17-2 for members under investigation.
If Democrats are actually corrupt then they must go.
KCinDC
MNPundit, I agree that the Feds have been surprisingly good at going after Republicans (I was blown away by the Weldon raid so close to the election). But if those indicted as a result of Abramoff’s testimony end up being mostly (or even, say, one quarter) Democrats, that will be damning evidence of political tampering with Justice, as far as I’m concerned.