Bush Adm OBSTRUCTS Abramoff investigation

[sonnylarue]

Please righites, keep defending this hopelessly corrupt administration.


WASHINGTON - The Bush administration's former chief procurement official was indicted Wednesday by a federal grand jury on charges of making false statements and obstructing investigations into high-powered Republican lobbyist Jack Abramoff.

The five felony counts in the indictment charge David H. Safavian with obstructing Senate and executive branch investigations into whether he aided Abramoff in efforts to acquire property controlled by the General Services Administration around the nation's capital.

Both probes looked into an August 2002 golf outing that Safavian took to Scotland with Abramoff, former Christian Coalition executive Ralph Reed, Rep. Bob Ney (news, bio, voting record), R-Ohio, and others.

Safavian, a former lobbying associate of Abramoff, is the first person beyond Abramoff himself to face charges arising out of the probe of the lobbyist, who is a major Republican fundraiser with close ties to GOP leaders in Congress.

The indictment covers May 16, 2002, until January 2004, when Safavian was chief of staff at the General Services Administration, the government housekeeping agency. From November 2004 until late last month when he resigned three days before his arrest, he headed the government's top procurement officer in the Office of Management and Budget.

The indictment said Safavian falsely told a GSA ethics officer, a GSA inspector general's agent and the Senate Indian Affairs Committee that Abramoff had no business with GSA at the time the Scotland trip was being planned. It said Safavian concealed that Abramoff did have business with GSA before the trip and that Safavian was aiding him in dealing with GSA.

Barbara Van Gelder, Safavian's lawyer, has said that Safavian accurately reported Abramoff was not doing business with GSA at the time of the trip, and she said Safavian would fight the charges.

Each count carries a potential top penalty of five years in prison and a $250,000 fine.

[Ray G.]

Until something sticks to Bush, all that's happening is garden variety corruption indictments. Sorry, but I don't buy the "company you keep" argument.

[xyzzy]

Until something sticks to Bush, all that's happening is garden variety corruption indictments. Sorry, but I don't buy the "company you keep" argument.

At the very least, it shows poor judgment.

[Ray G.]

At the very least, it shows poor judgment.

No question. Bush has shown several times that he puts cronyism above competence. The Miers nomination is the most extreme example.

[RøcketFrøg]

No question. Bush has shown several times that he puts cronyism above competence. The Miers nomination is the most extreme example.
And don't you think cronyism breeds corruption?

[Ray G.]

And don't you think cronyism breeds corruption?

It does. And Bush has made a lot of bad decisions, none worse than putting Michael Brown in charge of FEMA. But the way some Liberals drool at every minor indictment as if it's the death knell for the Republican party makes me roll my eyes.

[sonnylarue]

So if all this is happening without GW knowing about it
(which I don't buy for a second,) ,

doesn't that at least make him incredibly gullible, and dense?

[Ray G.]

So if all this is happening without GW knowing about it
(which I don't buy for a second,) ,

doesn't that at least make him incredibly gullible, and dense?

Yes.

*Waits for how this is different from Clinton administration*

[sonnylarue]

It does. And Bush has made a lot of bad decisions, none worse than putting Michael Brown in charge of FEMA. But the way some Liberals drool at every minor indictment as if it's the death knell for the Republican party makes me roll my eyes.

and it's the lack of concern that conservatives portray , when they sluff off these serious charges, that make me roll my eyes.

[sonnylarue]

Yes.

*Waits for how this is different from Clinton administration*

So, I guess you must be ready to impeach Bush too?

[kaptain]

as long as Bush doesn't lie about sex I don't really see what the big deal is

[Ray G.]

So, I guess you must be ready to impeach Bush too?

When exactly did Bush committ perjury?

*waits*

[RøcketFrøg]

It does. And Bush has made a lot of bad decisions, none worse than putting Michael Brown in charge of FEMA. But the way some Liberals drool at every minor indictment as if it's the death knell for the Republican party makes me roll my eyes.
I hate the way American politics seems to have devolved into a game of get the other guy. Unfortunately it seems to have started with the right wing going after Clinton though, so I have to really blame your team for this. I sometimes wonder if it's an inevitable consequence of our rigid 2 party structure. There's nothing in the notion of a democratic republic that says you can't have multiple points of view who negotiate and reach concensus. But lately we don't seem to play that way.

[Mr. E!]

When exactly did Bush committ perjury?

*waits*
Sigh, if only lying to the American public was an impeachable offense...

[Mr. E!]

I hate the way American politics seems to have devolved into a game of get the other guy. Unfortunately it seems to have started with the right wing going after Clinton though, so I have to really blame your team for this. I sometimes wonder if it's an inevitable consequence of our rigid 2 party structure. There's nothing in the notion of a democratic republic that says you can't have multiple points of view who negotiate and reach concensus. But lately we don't seem to play that way.

Nope. It's all about who can grab the most power and milk the system dry before things implode.
And a lot of conservatives think the current round of sniping began back in '87 when the Dems blocked Bork's supreme court nomination, and others feel that the gloves came off during the Clarence Thomas hearings in '91. Hell, some feel that Clinton's impeachment was payback for Nixon having to resign back in '74.

[Mr. E!]

Until something sticks to Bush, all that's happening is garden variety corruption indictments. Sorry, but I don't buy the "company you keep" argument.

Yeah, because if that were the case, then the Regan administration would have been the most corrupt in American history with 32 criminal convictions. And we all know Ronnie was the patron saint of conservatives who could do no wrong...

[WinterRose]

It does. And Bush has made a lot of bad decisions, none worse than putting Michael Brown in charge of FEMA. But the way some Liberals drool at every minor indictment as if it's the death knell for the Republican party makes me roll my eyes.

And if it weren't for the dead people in New Orleans as a direct result of an ineptly appointed horse trainer Bush crony put in charge of FEMA, I'd consider not being excited every time one of those cronies gets indicted for wrongdoing. His chief political advisor, the top congressional members in his party, infamous republican lobbyists... ALL indicted for wrongdoing and corruption. Appointing yet another crony to the supreme court. And this is STILL just the first year of the second term.

And this isn't even getting into the recently ordered released Abu Garib photos that haven't hit the news cycle yet. Do we need a videotape of the man wiping his ass with the constitution, rolling it up and fisting it into the rectum of a 14 year old girl that needed an abortion before we revolt?

[Jamie Howdeshell]

Do we need a videotape of the man wiping his ass with the constitution, rolling it up and fisting it into the rectum of a 14 year old girl that needed an abortion before we revolt?

wait.... did the girl want an abortion?
:mistrust:
it's an important distinction and could well be the difference in whether or not i revolt.

;-)

[WinterRose]

So if all this is happening without GW knowing about it
(which I don't buy for a second,) ,

doesn't that at least make him incredibly gullible, and dense?

That's been my argument for about a year now. He delegates his authority poorly, and shows a complete lack of control OF those people. Yet endorses them wholeheartedly and unreservedly when they fuck up royally. He apparently doesn't know how to lead these people, much less the nation without a wedge issue to polarize us over. If he's not lying incredibly well about being dense and completely ignorant of what his people are doing, then well... he's dense and completely ignorant of what his people are doing.

Which is it, Ray? Is he a teriffic machiavellian deciever and manipulator? Or is he incompetent and unfit for office due to a lack of leadership qualification? At this point, it's a little hard to see a third choice.

[WinterRose]

Sigh, if only lying to the American public was an impeachable offense...

Well... if we could tie it to criminal negligence and the dead people that resulted from it. Unfortunately, he's behind about 100 cronies willing or only somewhat willing to take the bullet for him. What's the saying? It's a poor craftsman that blames his tools.

[Amos Moses]

wait wait wai! If the Bush admin is obstruction an investiagation, and obstruction of Justice is still a crime, why the fuck are his goons still walking free? And why does Bush slide when crap like this happens? Is he the new teflon president?

[Mr. E!]

wait wait wai! If the Bush admin is obstruction an investiagation, and obstruction of Justice is still a crime, why the fuck are his goons still walking free? And why does Bush slide when crap like this happens? Is he the new teflon president?

Well, duh.

[WinterRose]

Well... all we'd need is ONE guilty member of the administration to turn on Bush and testify, "Dude, he TOLD me to. What was I gonna do? Say NO, Mr. President, that would be wrong? Have you seen what happens to the people that cross this administration? I did what I was told!" THEN the fun begins.

[bachman]

Please righites, keep defending this hopelessly corrupt administration.

Ok.

[Jastermereel]

It's a poor craftsman that blames his tools.
And what a bunch of tools they are!

[Fusion]

Sigh, if only lying to the American public was an impeachable offense...

No shit! I agree with you there. :lol:

[xyzzy]

Well... all we'd need is ONE guilty member of the administration to turn on Bush and testify, "Dude, he TOLD me to. What was I gonna do? Say NO, Mr. President, that would be wrong? Have you seen what happens to the people that cross this administration? I did what I was told!" THEN the fun begins.

Even if he's behind everything, I'm fairly certain that the President wouldn't give any such orders to anyone who was not absolutely loyal. I'd expect that there are couple layers between him and anybody who might point fingers.

[WinterRose]

Even if he's behind everything, I'm fairly certain that the President wouldn't give any such orders to anyone who was not absolutely loyal. I'd expect that there are couple layers between him and anybody who might point fingers.

True enough. Which sort of weights the Tragically Stupid vs Evil Liar argument toward the Evil Liar side. If he's an evil liar, no way does he delegate to someone that would turn on him. Or tell them to do something directly. That's what vice presidents are for. (His daddy could testify to that.) There's a catch 22. Bush supporters have to HOPE he's an Evil Liar. If he's just stupid, someone's gonna turn traitor take him down with on the road to prison-ville.

I'm hoping for stupid myself. Cos when little Georgie goes, he's going to go kicking and screaming. And he'll take his entire network with him to stay out of jail. If it comes to that, just watch. It'll make my decade.

[BrianS]

Even if he's behind everything, I'm fairly certain that the President wouldn't give any such orders to anyone who was not absolutely loyal. I'd expect that there are couple layers between him and anybody who might point fingers.

Right. But isn't is so Christian of him to allow others to fall on the sword for his mistakes?

[Caley Tibbittz]

Sigh, if only lying to the American public was an impeachable offense...
Instead of lying about a blowjob. Which I could give a fuck less about.