« previous | MUCK HOME | next »
Scandal Hasn't Sunk Abramoff Ally -- Yet
It was a fundraising pitch for Sen. Thad Cochran (R-MS), but in a May, 2002 email Jack Abramoff's colleague couldn't help taking time out to praise a favorite: Rep. John Doolittle (R-CA). "[N]obody," wrote lobbyist Todd Boulanger, "comes even close (except for Doolittle, maybe) to doing as much for our main clients as Senator Cochran."
While Cochran went to bat for a moneyed interest in his home state (Abramoff's marquee client The Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians), however, Doolittle would help any Abramoff client in need. The Northern Mariana Islands were thousands of miles away from his California district, but they received his special attention; so did Indian tribes from Massachusetts and Iowa.
That's why Cochran has kept his name out of the headlines, while Doolittle nearly lost his recent election due to the Abramoff scandal, which has drained $100,000 from his campaign coffers to pay lawyers to fight off federal prosecutors.
The question for Doolittle now is whether the House ethics committee, following the calls from government watchdogs, will initiate an investigation of him. Despite being more mucked up with Abramoff than even Bob Ney, the former congressman who pled guilty to accepting bribes earlier this year, there have been no clear indications that the largely useless House ethics panel will move against him.
I spoke with Doolittle's office yesterday for this post. His spokeswoman did not provide a comment for the record in time for publication.
Fred Wertheimer, the President of government watchdog Democracy 21 has already filed two ethics complaints against Doolittle, but heard nothing back. Undeterred, he'll be trying again in the new Congress. “We believe the case against Rep. Doolittle is very powerful," he told me, "and that the House has a clear responsibility to address and reach decisions on these serious ethics issues early and expeditiously.” He added that he won't have any more confidence in the ethics committee of the new Democrat-controlled Congress than in the old one, and so is supporting the idea of an outside Congressional ethics enforcement panel.
"If the ethics committee wants to be taken seriously (though there is no evidence that it does) it would look at Doolittle," observed Melanie Sloan, Executive Director of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington.
The case against Doolittle -- which involves more than just his closeness to Abramoff, but also a key figure in the Duke Cunningham bribery scandal -- has been outlined in a number of news stories, and you can see it laid out in all its glory and knotty specifics in Democracy 21's ethics complaint and our reference section. But it's fairly easy to summarize.
Doolittle's wife was on Abramoff's payroll on and off for approximately two years, and the payments suspiciously align with actions Doolittle took on behalf of Abramoff's clients. On top of that, Abramoff, his associates and clients were very generous to Doolittle, contributing $140,000 to his various committees dating back to 1999. Doolittle himself saw a cut of that, thanks to the fact that for a number of years he's paid his wife a 15% sliver of contributions to his campaign.
In return, Doolittle went to bat for Abramoff clients. He delivered $400,000 in federal funds to the Northern Mariana Islands, for example, the Abramoff client known mostly for its garment sweatshops; Abramoff referred to him as a "hero" for the islands. And he wrote letters to help out Abramoff's tribal clients. In 2002, he wrote a letter that sought to prevent a Louisiana tribe from building a casino, an action which he explained as consistent with his anti-gambling position. And in 2003, he wrote letters seeking to help Indian casinos open up; he explained there that he was "just trying to ensure a fair process" for the tribe. The list goes on.
Will Doolittle, who narrowly survived a spirited re-election challenge in his very conservative district, be able to emerge from the 109th Congress without anything worse than a hefty legal bill?
Comments (13)
Agjobs wrote on December 15, 2006 4:17 PM:Any politician who is convicted of corruption involving defense money should be executed. That include the Dukester. He was my hero back in Nam but he did the crime to his eternal shame. How many troops have given their lives because of lack of equipment and armore because these rats we busy stealing defense dollars for their contributors. Execute a few of them and that shit will stop. I thought the Republicans were supposed to be for law and order?
Mark Clark wrote on December 15, 2006 4:25 PM:Of all Doolittle's pay-to-play shenanigans, the skimming of 15% of all campaign contributions directly into the his and his wife's own pocket seems the most transparent sort of bribery. Doolittle's only defense has ever been that it was "not illegal."
If Doolittle (and his wife for that matter) cannot be indicted, our system of government should be.
Craig Davie wrote on December 15, 2006 4:36 PM:So far, all indications point to turning a blind eye on ethics violations and administering 'slaps-on-the-wrists' variety punishments to violaters, and that is a big disappointment to those who worked for a change last November 7th.
Maybe it'll change when the actual shift in power occurs...Pelosi, et al., need to pay attention to the two main reasons voters opted for Democrats: (1) the Iraq debacle', and (2) the corruption and bribery scandals involving Abramoff.
Matt Ortega wrote on December 15, 2006 5:08 PM:That picture is priceless.
Sonomabob wrote on December 15, 2006 5:19 PM:Doolittle's opponent was Charlie Brown a retired air force officer and a really down to earth, intelligent guy.
If the investigation goes ahead in some form, maybe next time will bring better results for California.
Bill W wrote on December 15, 2006 5:26 PM:For a really disturbingly funny look at just how much of a nutjob Doolittle is, you have to see this video montage created from Doolittle's only debate before this year's election. You'll laugh, you'll cry, you'll email this link to all your friends.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JWClB1snOG4
ps, Here's a couple really choice quotes.
(4:28) " I'll jump in and say the general ... the the the former Iraqi generals Saddam Hussein explained that they were all shipped to Syria. I believe with every ounce of my soul that those existed and exist today we just haven't found them yet but you know what, I voted to go to war, and it didn't matter to me whether or not there were weapons of mass destruction. "
(5:28) " As for Armageddon I know it with interest that that's what the bible says that it's on the plains of Megiddo. Right there in uh Israel and uh it makes you wonder where this conflict is all going to ultimately lead. I happen to believe it ultimately leads to what the bible says. "
That's right. Doolittle says he didn't care if there were WMDs in Iraq or not, he would have voted for the war anyway because he believes it will lead to Armageddon!!!!!!
Mrs Panstreppon wrote on December 15, 2006 5:40 PM:Julia Doolittle's name and home address is on a Virginia corporate registration for Tech Travelers Inc. (now Red Branch Technologies,LLC). The CEO of Tech Travelers is Doolittle's neighbor, Thomas Murray.
By searching links to Tech Travelers, I found evidence that its executives have ties to software provider, Managment Systems Designers, Inc. (MSD). MSD is a participant in a recently awarded Dept. of Commerce contract with a potential value of $8 billion.
I posted about Doolittle and Tech Travelers in the TPM Cafe and wrote to Dave Witney at the SacBee a couple of months ago but that's about it.
I'm pretty sure there is more to this story. Tech Travelers changed its name within one week of my first post about the company, for one thing.
Bill W wrote on December 15, 2006 5:51 PM:Sure sounds mucky enough it ought to be raked over a bit more, Mrs P. ;)
BarnOwl wrote on December 16, 2006 11:02 AM:The recommended video at youtube is, in my opinion, a mindless critique. I have no doubt that Doolittle is a terrible person and deserves to be in jail, but taking that fool's statements out of context and running them one after the other, like a never ending stream of consciousness, does nothing for me.
Bill W wrote on December 16, 2006 1:00 PM:Well BarnOwl, the entire debate video is posted in parts on the same youtube page if context is what you were looking for.
IMHO, 20+ mentions of gay marriage, liberals and the ACLU pejoratively and the numerous attempts to link them to NAMBLA, not to mention the admission that he supports the war in Iraq because he ultimately believes it will lead to Armageddon, all during a single debate isn't quite a bit of context I don't know what is.
M.P. wrote on December 16, 2006 4:19 PM:Thank you for your continuing to bring this issue out in the open. I was in his district for many years, and every letter I wrote to him was, gee, that is nice, but basically get lost. Mostly over the environment and Auburn Dam proposal. He is crooked, mean-spirited, and frankly, I am dumbfounded that his district did not vote the crook out.
master cards wrote on April 24, 2007 7:17 AM:MasterCard Worldwide is a membership organization owned by the 25,000+ financial institutions that issue its card. MasterCard is also the company's brand of credit cards. It was originally created by United California Bank, Wells Fargo, Crocker National Bank, and the Bank of California as a competitor to the BankAmericard issued by Bank of America. BankAmericard is now the VISA credit card, issued by Visa International.
epenisa wrote on January 11, 2008 1:05 AM:Hello
Nice work from your side... have a nice time with yoru blog :)
Bye