[Please welcome author John Anderson in the comments. As with all guest chats, please stay on topic and be polite. Any off topic discussions should be taken to the prior thread. Thanks! -- CHS]
When the George Bush Presidential Library opens its doors, I do not think that Follow The Money will be among the celebrated volumes gracing its bookshelves. Their loss. For Follow The Money is an absorbing read, a connect-the-odious-dots primer on political corruption in the Republican gilded donor age, and a lesson on the value of sunshine and oversight inside a Beltway where power and money flourish sordidly in every nook and cranny of the shadows.
As author John Anderson, former deputy editor at The American Lawyer, so aptly puts it, for Republican leadership and political operatives, it is "all about the benjamins."
While it could rightly be said that this is true about any politician or political operative in the modern era -- where 527s rule the airwaves with their rolling soft money extravagances and where PAC donations create miniature fiefdoms on the Hill -- the level of corruption of the system that is laid out so clearly and concisely in Follow The Money is breathtaking both in scope and ballsy mendacity. For those of you who have followed the sordid tales of Tom DeLay, Grover Norquist, Ralph Reed, Karl Rove, Jack Abramoff, George Bush, Dick Cheney, Jim Baker, the Federalist Society, and all of the many offshoots and related K Street op-shops of the modern GOP, much of this will not be new ground. But for the political novice or for someone who hasn't quite connected all the dots, it is one revalation after another.
This could be the present you've been looking for if you have a political neophyte in your life. Reading all of this, laid out in one continuous, intertwined narrative, showcases the malignant kudzu of modern American political smarm in all its kickback and corruption glory.
Truly, this book reads as though it were laying out the elements of a racketeering indictment. Except that instead of the usual muscle threats that you see in a mob case, what is hung over the heads of those squeezed for hush money and influence bribes is the power of public legislation -- or the withholding thereof. The wheels of the United States government as muscle against the moneyed interests of those wishing to game the system -- and ordinary citizens are left to be ground down by the ever-turning wheels of legislation and its aftermath.
Money has always purchased influence in Washington -- let there be no doubt on that score. But the sheer level of planning, shell and dummy corporations for laundering the ill-gotten donor earnings, and involvement at the highest echelons of power in the most minute details of this mess will blow even the most jaded and cynical political watcher away.
That the genesis of a lot of this began during the College Republican involvement of some of the more odious members of this corruption cabal reeks of long-term planning: Jack Abramoff, Karl Rove, Ralph Reed, and Grover Norquist, among many, many others from those years. With those friendships forged in early dirty campaign tricks for the RNC (for which they were fired) came a series of IOUs that were cashed in, to the detriment of an unsuspecting public (p. 13):
What Jack Abramoff brought with him, to begin with, were a bunch of somewhat dubious IOUs, based on his close ties to Norquist, Reed and Rove. Eventually, the IOUs would come due, but early in 1995, the old friendships counted for little more than introductions. Still, one such introduction did prove pivotal, when Norquist began opening doors on Capitol Hill for Abramoff. Norquist was by then an important figure amng the Contract with America crowd. His Americans for Tax Reform (ATR), founded in 1985, had gradually evolved into a right-wing strategy shop during the early Clinton years.
One door, in particular, that Norquist helped open -- the door to a suite of rooms occupied by the House Majority Whip and, later House Majority Leader -- would remain open for Jack Abramoff for much of the next ten years. Thanks to Norquist, Jack Abramoff was soon able to expand the orbit of his right-wing fellowship to include the powerful inner circle of House Majority Whip Tom DeLay, beginning with his chief of staff, Ed Buckham.
It was Buckham who became Jack Abramoff's lasting entree into the Majority Whip's office....
It is Buckham who is facing frequent attention from the FBI and the DOJ, having had his business records recently subpoenaed by a federal grand jury, currently feeling the heat of scrutiny stemming from Jack Abramoff's multiple pleas to federal felonies and his agreement for cooperation with authorities.
There are a number of insidery bits dropped into this book that I want to flesh out further in today's discussion. As a native Texan, John Anderson had access to a lot of the folks intimately involved in the actions -- and the oppo flinging -- through the years in Texas politics. And it is those bits and pieces of the narrative that I found most intriguing:
-- The tidbit in a footnote on page 277: details of Rove's prior use of a pliant USAtty office in San Antonio for payback against political opponents as a template for the current USAtty scandal and politicization questions embroiling the DOJ. So many of Rove's actions are repeats of successful smaller oppo actions in his past -- what other predictors are we missing?
-- The fascinating connections with Ed Buckham, Christine DeLay, and the whole host of Team DeLay K Street placements that have caught the eye of Federal prosecutors in the public corruption unit. With this slight proviso: with Alice Fisher at the helm, what are the odds that anything will move forward with regard to federal indictment of DeLay while the Bush Administration is still in office? (See the footnote on p. 252 for more.)
-- The fact that Grover Norquist is still running the K Street project, to the extent that he is even running the GOP-linked website of the same name. Given Norquist and Ralph Reed's proclivities for "taking a cut" on any monetary pass through for Abramoff's many shell company money laundering schemes for client largesse, what are the odds that either man is also looking at a future federal inquisition (from page 35):
...On another occasion, Abramoff e-mailed Reed to let him know that a payment of $300,000 was on its way, adding that it would, unfortunately, prove "a bit lighter" than that because he had had to "give Grover something for helping." That something amounted to $25,000, Grover Norquist's standard fee for acting as a "pass through" for Indian gambling money. Following yet another money transfer to Reed via ATR, Abramoff had cause to complain, "Grover took another $25K!" And so it went.
Norquist's appetite for money was insatiable -- as was Reed's (whose management fees could run as high as $45,000 per month) -- as was Abramoff's. No wonder these three proved such good friends. They no doubt saw more than a little of themselves in each other.
And so it went, indeed, for years of back and forth of Abramoff's client money to his pals and back to his shell companies, each taking a larger and larger cut, and providing fewer and fewer real services to the clients. Why, then, have Norquist and Reed thus far escaped much scrutiny? And, for that matter, why have former Sen. Santorum, DeLay's Senate counterpart on the K Street scheme and Sen. John Cornyn, Reed's errand boy when he was AG in Texas, escaped stringent scrutiny? The listing of contacts of all these cronies with the Bush White House truly ought to be plastered into every news story about them from now forward. (You can find this on pp. 262-263.)
-- I have many questions regarding Federalist Society involvement in the Florida recount efforts, various judgeship and DOJ placements, and in prepping Administration officials for congressional hearings. The recent piece from Sidney Blumenthal regarding the Mukasey prep does not make me any more comfortable on this score, and I'm wondering if John has particular thoughts about this group, the Cheney/Addington/neocon connection and the Federalist desire to return the nation to a "landed gentry" control along with the DeLay and GOP affiliated tort reform money crowd -- effectively rolling back decades of democratization of the political and judicial process in favor of the moneyed few.
-- The Jim Baker vignette in the prologue, including the Aziz/Baker transcript in the lobby of the Baker Center at Rice seems like a big, fat finger raised at Dick Cheney and the neocons. And a warning to George Bush that Baker is tired of cleaning up after Junior's messes. I'd love further insights on this.
-- What is the status of the DeLay and TRMPAC and TAB indictments in Texas? Things have seem stalled for a while, and I'm wondering if it is only seeming that way outside of Texas, or if it really is in a holding pattern?
-- Finally, there was some mention of the interconnected nest of DeLay cronies on various defense-related appropriations committees, including the now incarcerated Duke Cunningham. Given the removal of Carol Lam as USAtty on this investigation, and the enormous GOP-power names on the scrutiny list, including the very powerful Rep. Jerry Lewis, this needs much deeper exploration. I'm especially curious about this (pp. 275-276):
The question arose: what if the global war on terror had, at least in part, been the public face used to conceal millions -- perhaps even billions -- of dollars in corrupt appropriations being siphoned into top-secret contracts? What if a small coterie of Appropriations, Defense, Homeland Security, and Intelligence committee members were, in fact, on the take and engaged in a massive giveaway of federal funds.
The question begged answering.
Indeed it does. And with that, I'd like to extend a warm welcome to John Anderson from FDL and open the floor to questions.
Login Here
Share This
Spotlight
Welcome..
welcome!
Welcome John — very much looking forward to the discussion today. Hi everyone…
Thank you, John Anderson, for this important book. Hope it is widely read.
Delighted to be with you tonight.
waiting all day for this!
John, when I was prepping this introduction, I didn’t find a lot of reviews for this book in the corporate media. I find that both shocking and, unfortunately, shockingly predictable. I certainly hope that the book salon today helps to rectify that a bit — this is a tale of corruption and misleading the public that needs to be told far and wide.
Welcome.
My Q is simple: Did they think they wouldn’t get caught, and if so why?
I’d like to add one request to Christy’s great list–hopefully I’m not breaking the rules of the “stay on topic” rule.
Since you wrote your book, DeLay has announced he will form a “Conservative MoveOn” with disgraced OH SOS Ken Blackwell.
The announcement made me think of the many dots you connect in your book. So I’m wondering–have you followed this development? Where do you think the avenue for law-breaking is here (because with these crooks, we should expect it). And do you have any suggestions for how to pre-emptively undercut the dirty tricks we ought to expect from this group?
Oh, and John, feel free to dive right in on my various and copious questions above. Sorry, but you really raised a whole host of them and I’m curious as to the answers, if any are available, from your research on this. I think you have at least one more book in this of all the unanswered smarm…
Christy Hardin Smith @ 7
We could help that along by Spotlighting this post to the media. Let’s get the word out.
BTW, I had to google ‘benjamins.’ I had no idea what that was.
My own sense of it is that I’m not part of the In Crowd. I’m not a Times guy or a Post person, neither a Newsweekie nor a Time Inker. And I’m certainly not a Meet the Press hound. My name not being Tim or David or Bill, nor Mary nor Jim, for that matter.
But it’s also the fact that this book doesn’t have a signature gotcha moment. You won’t find that So W told me kind of moment. But you will find the lines that connect the sins of a generation of right wing power brokers.
ew at 9 — I’m so glad you brought that up — I meant to include it above but there was so much that i wanted to discuss, that I inadvertantly left it out. Thanks!
Is w. a player, enabler or victim of this corruption?
John at 13 — Well, that could be, but so much of this is readable precisely because you aren’t part of that crowd, I think. And because you have a fundamental understanding of the legal process — which informs so much fo the unwinding of this mess on so many levels.
I miss that level of comprehension, frankly, in a lot of the press reports on this — especially in untangling the various plea and indictment documents at the source.
Christy Hardin Smith @ 14
I’ve been saving it up for this discussion, as I try to figure out what to make of it. It reeks of corruption, just because of Blackwell and DeLay, I’m just not sure how yet.
emptywheel @ 9
I have followed this latest development. I must say: Nothing that Tom DeLay does shocks me any more. You know he’s also been going around pontificating on ethics. Tom DeLay On Ethics! It always amazed me when the by-now disgraced Boss Tom would show up on the Matthews show and Chris would call him, “Leader DeLay,” and make some mild mention of his having been censored three times by the House Ethics Committee. And DeLay would solemnly swear that he had never once been “censored.” Well, of course he hadn’t been. But had been “admonished” three times by the same Ethics Committee. But never a word from Chris. No: But you were admonished three times, were you not?
Welcome, John!
I was reading the dogs the Mariana Islands section as a bedtime story last night.
And to answer your question, yes, I was cleaning up barf this morning.
I think the Amy Ridenour bit was an extra regurgitant.
Someone remind me again why DeLay isn’t in jail?
[/rhetorical]
Oh, and welcome, John!
One other thing I forgot to mention in the intro, when I started talking to John about potentially doing a Book Salon on this, he was about to go to a book signing party in Houston. And I was teasing him about not making it out of there in one piece.
Clearly he made it, but I’m wondering if you’ve gotten a lot of pushback from some of the folks in Texas on this, John? Any good stories to share on that?
Hello from Dallas. Couple of questions:
1. Ms. Smith references a footnote on page 277: I don’t have the book, but are you referring to a guy that got a federal conviction for….fraud? election irregularities?…something like that? Back during the time that Rove claimed his office was bugged, and it seems that he used a friendly FBI guy to prove his assertion?
2. Do you trace anything back into the Hunt or Trammel Crow families?
Ghostman
Christy Hardin Smith @ 16
Well, thank you, Christy. There is a simple answer to this one: That kind of unwinding takes a lot of work. And I don’t think the daily media has the time or, often enough, the inclination to work through the documents. It really is research, you know.
John, I have a feeling that bringing this book to a close was tough. There are so many indictments out there, Jack Abramhoff is apparently writing his memoirs for the federal investigators as a part of his plea agreement, etc., etc., etc. I can easily imagine your editor asking “when will you finish?” and you replying, “Oh, wait, there’s this one more shoe getting ready to drop.” It does, but then there’s another dangling from the next limb on the tree, and another after that . . .
So my question: are you incredibly disciplined (”I said I’d finish the book by this date, and here it is”), or is your editor incredibly pushy (”You said you’d have it by yesterday, and I want it NOW!”)?
Considering George’s brother got in trouble for Silverdo collapse, any insight into the current troubles of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae? Somebody made a lot of money and now Freddie and Fannie are suffering.
Jane — Amy Ridenour does seem to pop up in every smarmy little vignette for the GOP these days, doesn’t she?
I finished the book yesterday. It’s mind boggling how much corruption and outright thievery has been going on under everyone’s noses.
Because so many investigations are still underway, the book feels a little unfinished. Are you keeping track of all of them for future, updated versions of the book? And are you following the Alaska oil/VECO shenanigans? That may be an additional chapter all by itself.
Christy Hardin Smith @ 21
Only from the very conservative husband of a dear friend from Rice days. He’s mentioned in the book and was offended. I don’t regret for a moment what I wrote, but I am sorry he felt that way about it.
Folks, this book is great for the person you know who is just starting to tune into the crazy thievery that is BushCo and asks you: “How did this all happen?” I found (as a reader of Franken, Ivins, Moore/Slater, Blumenthal, and Phillips) this author’s ability to tie together so many threads really helpful.
I don’t have a question about this book, particularly, but I would really like to know what’s grabbed your attention for the next book, Mr Anderson.
Thanks very much for joining us today.
Peterr @ 24
Ha! I am anything but. Nevertheless, I pressed ahead; and I was extremely fortunate to have Colin Harrison of Scribner as my editor. This wasn’t the book that Colin or Scribner signed for: They thought I was going to do a book about Baker Botts and the big Houston law firms; but I got hooked on Abramoff. It just got to the point where I was completely fascinated by the saga. I was keeping folders in my computer, month by month; one for Jack, one for Tom. But then it dawned on me: They were joined at the hips. There was surely no Jack without Tom, and Jack was a vital cog in DeLay Inc.
Christy Hardin Smith @ 26
Yeah the proverbial bad penny. She showed up recently at Clown Hall attacking the Frosts over SCHIP, and I was like, “shouldn’t you be in jail for…SOMETHING?”
TheOtherWA @ 27
I love the saga of the Senators Stevens, Ted and Ben. So, of course, I follow it! Then you throw in Road to Nowhere Porkbarrel Supremo Congressman Don Young, and, well, you have something special up there in Alaska, don’t you? Fascinating too how many of these characters show up in tale after tale of greed and graft.
old gold @ 15
A good question. I have my opinions. Any more knowledgeable takers?
Mr. Anderson, do you of any direct connections between Abramoff and Jerry Lewis, former chairman of the Appropriations Committee?
The reason I ask is that the Abramoff cooperation has been going on for a very long time. Shouldn’t there be more indictments by now? (It’s hard to be patient!)
I reraise in Q at 8. Do (did) they think they can (could) get away with it, and if so, why? Early success led to more, then more & more? System they set up seems to complicated to work. And other corrupt politicians, such as Tammany Hall, seems to hae provided some benefits to voters, but these guys haven’t. Without 9/11 they’d have been toast years ago.
eCAHN at 8 — I think they thought they could use the money to continuously game the system. John talks a bit about Rove’s McKinley obsession — it’s been discussed widely in the various Bush’s Brain/The Architect type books on Rove — leveraging all that corporate cash to buy the nation’s vote, in a sense.
When you have your hands on the executive branch, both houses of Congress and you are in the process of front-loading the judiciary, you tend to let your ego go a little hog wild and sense goes out the window. Unfortunately for them, they — like almost every criminal I have ever prosecuted — were too stupid to see their own limitations. And their greed got the better of their sense of restraint. Plus, to be perfectly honest, Jack Abramoff liked to boast too much…as did DeLay…and that came back to bite them in the ass.
Jane Hamsher @ 31
Bad penny, indeed. She and her outfit were major money-movers for Abramoff. But there is another aspect of the story here that the Ridenours and the Federicis embody: The faux reform shop non-profit that functions as a money-moving machine. Norquist’s ATF would be another classic example. You have to wonder if the Abramoff task force — which includes folks from the IRS — isn’t looking into this issue.
TeddySanFran @ 29
I’ll second that, Teddy. It’s especially suited for disillusioned moderate republicans — of which there are a number in my family who may be getting it for Christmas.
(Or maybe they won’t. Gotta keep them guessing, you know, if any of them happen to be lurking.)
TheOtherWA @ 34
I don’t, but I wouldn’t be shocked to learn that there was. What we do know a lot about — thanks to intrepid reporters at the San Diego newspaper — is the tale of disgraced former California Republican Congressman Randy “Duke” Cunningham, who was a mid-level member of Lewis’ House Appropriations Committee. It’s the Approps Committee itself that I would focus on. And I’d bet money that Lam was focusing on it when she got yanked.
CHS @ 36
Thanks. That’s the kind of insight I was looking for. I am continually baffled by motivations of this sort; they’re so foreign to me.
In a section of the book on Casino Jack Sinks, there was a line that made me spill my coffee: “Abramoff instructed Greenberg staffer Todd Boulanger to draft a letter to [Interior Secretary] Gale Norton warning her that ‘we hold you accountable’ for stopping ‘reservation shopping’ on the part of the Jenas [a Native American tribe in Mississippi].”
Abramoff must be one of the few people ever to hold any Bush Administration official accountable for anything.
I’d like to hear that phrase a bit more often, but delivered by a jury instead of a K Street godfather.
Christy Hardin Smith @ 36
Indeed: An endless gaming of the system. And they almost got away with it. The amazing thing is that with these tiny margins in the House and Senate, the Republican Congressional leadership always delivered the goods. DeLay was the essential man: Thanks to DeLay and his whip, there was no oversight. None. Zero. Zip. That’s why the Bush was going on about wasted energy on Capitol Hill the other day. What he meant was oversight. The dreaded words that will haunt him and them for the rest of his tenure. And with Henry Waxman out there, they have good reason to fear.
eCHAN — I really think that the grandiose levels of hubris of these people is grossly underestimated when the stupid decisions they make get analyzed. The level of ego — and sheer balls — it takes to pull some of this crap off is beyond belief. And yet, they do it.
Mr. ReddHedd and I were talking about this as I re-read the book this week in prep for this chat. His take was that moguls get where they are in large measure because so many of them are willing to do whatever it takes — step on whomever gets in their way, cut whatever ethical and legal corners are necessary — to get what they want. You see that especially in a lot of the things that both Rove and Cheney have had a hand in with this crowd. And DeLay and Buckham, who ironically is also DeLay’s spiritual mentor and pastor. (Go figure!)
John~ Great to have you on here! I was wondering if “Mr. Outsider” and current Presidential candidate Ron Paul was actually as untainted by the DeLay/Abramoff corruption as many seem to think? Do you have any information on whether Paul, whose Congressional District pretty much completely surrounded DeLay’s Sugarland District was a recipient of Abramoff favors?
As well, after peeking at Paul’s Personal Finance Disclosure Forms it’s pretty obvious that most of his wealth derives from Gold, Silver and other Precious Metal commodities or mines.
Yet Paul has submitted legislation to remove taxation on precious metal transactions, tried to establish a parallel gold denominated currency system in the US, and a number of other things that one would think would be things he could profit from himself if they were actually enacted.
Do you think his votes and sponsorship of such Bills constitutes a conflict of interest?
I was glad to see Jerry Lewis in your book, because we don’t hear nearly as much about him as the others, even though he had access to much more money than most of the folks being investigated. This set off huge alarm bells for me last year.
Add in the $800k Lewis has spent on his own legal defense, and my spidey sense is telling me there’s a BIG, BIG story there.
Peterr @ 38
Thank you both for the kind words. It’s a spider’s web of corruption, and you touch it here, and it sings there.
John Anderson @ 41
I hope you are right — though the fact that Congress allows their subpoenas to be ignored is not a good sign.
And as you note in the book, the House Ethics Committee was a joke…but I don’t think it’s gotten any better, has it?
Oops.
A word of wisdom for newcomers, and a reminder to regulars: certain words that are key to the plot of this book trip the mod filters, as I discovered with “c*sino” at 2:41.
My apologies — and thanks — to the mods.
cinnamonape @ 43
I hadn’t focused that much on Ron Paul, but I’ll certainly take a look at the financials. Thanks.
Around the liberal blogosphere, Waxman is known as the Moustache of Justice. :)
John — One other thing I meant to mention in the intro (darn! There were so many good nuggets…) was the nexus between Abramoff/Ralston/Rove and the frequent use of the RNC.com e-mail addys to end-run the governmental records requirements when Rove was requesting favors and what I would argue were outright bribes from Abramoff — tickets for sporting events and other things ongoing from Jack’s skybox, free dining at Signatures, and on and on. Same with Ralston and so many others at the WH.
Seems to me to be in contravention of the public corruption laws on the books, but there hasn’t been much movement on that with Alice Fisher serving as a bottleneck in public corruption. (She’s a Chertoff and DeLay protege, as I remember.) Any thoughts on this? Those e-mails won’t have disappeared, not based on my understanding of hard drive reconstruction capabilities — but will they be? That’s a big question that deserves public answers, I think.
Jane Hamsher @ 46
I don’t perceive that House Ethics is any less of a joke; and I think it’s perfectly outrageous that the subpoenas are being ignored — and that Congress is just sitting back and taking it.
I’m enamored of the PBS documentary “Watergate Plus 30″ — which I watched over and over during the final months of writing this book — and I keep wondering where our Sam Ervins are today. You think you might have romanticized the Watergate Committee, but to watch this wonderful documentary is to be reminded of just how good a job they did. Sam Dash, Lowell Weicker, old Senator Ervin. But even people like Herman (Ole Huhmun) Talmadge, for gods sake. They rose to the occasion. They rose above themselves.
Welcome John.
While we’re following the Benjamins, why do you think there is so little (and infrequent) comment from Democratic Presidential candidates about the $16 million or so increase in value of Dick Cheney’s Halliburton stock options arguably as a result of policies he supported which have killed over 3,800 Americans and about a million Iraqis? The basic details are available at Sen. Lautenberg’s Senate home page under press releases.
I noted that there’s no mention of Sibel Edmonds in your book. She seems to have some good dope on some of the players, like Hastert. Any insight from her that you might not have been able to include, for lack of verification?
The question arose: what if the global war on terror had, at least in part, been the public face used to conceal millions — perhaps even billions — of dollars in corrupt appropriations being siphoned into top-secret contracts? What if a small coterie of Appropriations, Defense, Homeland Security, and Intelligence committee members were, in fact, on the take and engaged in a massive giveaway of federal funds.
The question begged answering.
wow. this very idea makes the scandels of the early 20th century seem like a minor indiscretion.
God, I HAVE TO FIND TIME to read this book. I really wanted to do so in time for Book Salon, but….
I so want to read this. It’s just the sort of fact specific stuff that sends me to heaven.
I WILL GET TO IT
LHP at 55 — Be prepared — it will send your former prosecutor self through the roof. You have been forewarned…
I’d add a not-so-OT comment that the trouble with creating your own reality is that you come to believe it is so.
Christy Hardin Smith @ 50
Christy, you are absolutely right on all counts. I’m not a lawyer, but I’d think the Honest Services provisions would cover these sorts of transgressions. The e-mails between Abramoff the WH prove beyond doubt that things of material value were being exchanged for services. A Final Four here, a hockey game there. And Rove’s assistant — who was Abramoff’s former assistant — Susan Ralston was the conduit.
While we’re talking about Honest Services, let’s not forget that “The Mayor of Capitol Hill,” disgraced former Congressman Bob Ney is sitting in a federal prison cell now in part because of taking a trip to Scotland in 2002 in return for his services. So is former White House procurement officer David Safavian.
The all-first-class Ney Scotland trip to visit St. Andrews and play a round or two of golf was a reprise of an earlier Abramoff-sponsored trip to Scotland and St. Andrews in 2000. The recipient of that favor: Thomas D. DeLay.
Any word on when DeLay will finally go on trial in Texas for the money laundering? What’s the hold up?
old gold at 15 — You know, I vacillate back and forth on whether W’s a player or a prop — and I think the answer truly is that he’s a bit of both. He knows shit is going on, and enjoys the smarmy take-down of people he doesn’t like — the part of this book where John is talking about Paul O’Neill and Bush’s treatment of him because he was an honest guy is a priceless window into the skeezy jackassery that is George Bush. It’s as though his emotional development stopped in the 7th grade on so many levels.
But, at the same time, he’s cut out of the process so much by Cheney and Rove — but is it knowingly so? His CEO presidency — he’d rather be biking, so they are given carte blanche to just “git er done,” so to speak. If so, he’s just as responsible as they are for the asshattery.
Ghostman at 22 — There are a number of Texas officials discussed, but one very prominant one that Rove wanted taken down — and succeeded in taking down — was Jim Hightower. HTH!
My guess is Bush wants “plausible deniability.” He knows the big picture, but doesn’t want to know details. And yes, he’s just as responsible.
Speaking of the RNC servers, why hasn’t anyone truly investigated the fact Ohio’s election results were sent through them…? Ohio was the reason Kerry lost the electoral college… Mahalo, John for your appearance here at the Lake!
Christy Hardin Smith @ 62
Yes, Hightower was becoming a very populist force….something akin to a modern-day Ralph Yarborough…and so, yes, Rove went after him.
Ghostman
If enough corruption is exposed, will there be a tipping point where the public will demand indictment and prosecutions?
Mabel’s Wig Shack @ 54
Yes, and as I said to Christy earlier today, if you want to follow the money this is where I would start today. We know, for example, that former CIA director Porter Goss resigned his position for “family reasons” just as his # 3, Dusty Foggo’s role in the Duke Cunningham scandal was beginning to emerge. Goss, you’ll recall was previously the chair of House Intel, where the good old Duke-stir was the # 3 Republican. And we know that Alberto Gonzales’s chief of staff, the pasty-faced Kyle Sampson began focusing on San Diego US attorney Lam just as the Dusty Foggo revelations began to appear in print.
Now Cunningham’s other claim to fame was service on the House Defense Approps subcommittee. What if that committee — whose chair was former Big Approps chair Bill Young of Florida — were a hotbed for corrupt practices? Young and Jerry Lewis are clearly the key figures here. Lewis was chair of Defense Approps under Young; and then Young became chair of Defense Approps under Lewis.
Then you throw in the likes of former Pennsylvania right-wing Congressman Curt Weldon, who was vice chair of House Armed Services.
These were folks at the highest levels of the House Republican caucus, and they controlled billions of dollars in spending–much of it blackbox.
No wonder they thought they could get away with it. Minus Duke’s extravagant life style, his boat and his houses and his girlfriends, maybe they would have. Think about it.
Christy Hardin Smith @ 61
Heh, ‘Plausible Deniability’ ;-)
He’s a player. We misunderestimate him.
John, since it has only recently been possible to begin to “follow the money” - do you plan to chronicle this over the next few years as the Bush administration further unravels?
TheOtherWA @ 59
There’s been a lot of give-and-take with appeals and the like. Any of my Texas Dem friends out there who could weigh in with an update?
emptywheel @ 9
I’m sure next year the election won’t be stolen again using the RNC servers since Tom Delay & Ken Blackwell will be busy with their new “Conservative Moveon”. *rolling eyes*
TheOtherWa — I think the “plausible deniability” issue is a very real one for Bush. And for Cheney, whose careful placement of loyal acolytes in almost every facet of government, who are loyalists in terms of philosophy and action, but who can be managed in a hands off way — first by Libby and currently by Addington — is also a key componant.
DeLay did much the same with his K Street crony out-placements, but he was so much more hands on and in you face about it. Which is exactly what left him open for indictment in Texas and, hopefully at some point soon, federally. Because both Cheney and DeLay form the nexus points in broader webs of corruption — DeLay on the money end, and Cheney on the circumvention of the rule of law for unilateral executive power grab purposes. The scope and breadth of all of this is truly ballsy — appallingly so.
One of the more telling vignettes in the book about Cheney was his grab of the Ways and Means chair in the House’s office. (The one that he got booted out of when the Dems won in 2006.) Talk about both hubris and a “we own your ass” statement wrapped into one Machiavellian package!
John Anderson @ 70
Texas Court of Criminal Appeals (our state’s highest criminal appeals court) threw out a few counts but said a few others were ok to go to trial on. I “suspect” that defense counsel now appeals that ruling, and so things remain hung up in appeal land.
If it ever gets back to trial, the trial judge is a guy named Pat Priest, something of a criminal trial judge legend from San Antonio. He used to be elected (now retired) as a Democrat.
Ghostman
looseheadprop @ 56
And it’s got . . . footnotes.
*g*
You know how you love footnotes.
Christy Hardin Smith @ 60
I’m frequently asked why the seemingly moderately conservative Governor George Bush turned into the reactionary President George Bush. I think there’s a simple two word answer: Dick Cheney. There was no one remotely like Cheney during the Bush Texas governorship.
I’m sure I’ll get in trouble for saying this, but, what they heck: This administration at the highest levels reminds me a lot of the old Soviet Union with its politburo. You’ve got a lot of incompetence, a lot of graft. And a gang of thieves perched at the top of the heap. The politburo includes the State President, and he’s a full-fledged member, but he’s a figurehead too and ranks no higher than third or fourth in the secret sessions where things really get decided; then there’s the head of the party, and that’s Cheney, and he’s the #1 actor; then the party ideologue, which is Rove; then the premier, who was DeLay, and who makes the legislative machine run; the defense minister, Our Rummy; and rounding out the crew, the foreign minister, Powell. After that there are a passel of Candidate Members, Condi and the like. Well, she’s a full member now; and Rummy, Powell and Boss Tom are toast. But I don’t think the mechanics of the thing have changed that much.
a truly revolting look at the cosa nostra at work(Yankee style)
The current economic circumstances led me to search on vanishing assets.
Lo and behold up comes this 1939 review of THE ENDING OF HEREDITARY AMERICAN FORTUNES by Gustavus Myers.
Imagine my shock at reading this bit of history…
Nowadays, those $50,000 parties are $1 million, but that’s inflation for you! But here is the problem:
When will we ever learn? As Mabel’s Wig Shack says @ 55
wow. this very idea makes the scandels of the early 20th century seem like a minor indiscretion.
Ghostman @ 64
Yes, and the comparison with the sainted Red Ralph is a good one. Senator Yarborough was a childhood hero.
I want every pundit and talking head to read this book. Not skim it, like they usually do before interviewing an author, but actually read it cover to cover. They need this information to understand what’s going on when the next batch of indictments comes down.
Then they need to book you on their shows, Mr. Anderson!