Monday, January 16, 2006

Rep. Ney is toast. Email proves bribery

This is from TPM Cafe:
Time has a copy of the email that may hang Bob Ney. In late October of 2000, Abramoff and sleaze partner Michael Scanlon were trying to get Ney to read a statement into the Congressional Record that praised Adam Kidan, another business partner of Abramoff's (the two had just purchased SunCruz, a casino boat company). Apparently Ney needed a little nudge. "Would 10K for NRCC from Suncruz for Ney help?" Abramoff wrote to Scanlon. "Yes, alot [sic]! But would have to give them a definate [sic] answer--and they need it this week ..."

The $10K went to the National Republican Campaign Committee on Oct. 23rd. On Oct. 26th, Ney inserted the statement into the Congressional Record. Why would Ney have shilled so shamelessly? Because otherwise, the Hammer would come down:
"Abramoff has told the feds, according to [a source close to the Justice Department probe], that Ney, the chairman of the powerful Committee on House Administration, and his staff repeatedly demanded help in raising cash for the National Republican Campaign Committee--the "NRCC" of Abramoff's e-mail. Under then House majority leader Tom DeLay, Ney and his fellow G.O.P. chairmen had to meet steep fund-raising quotas or risk losing their plum positions."
[Snip]

The $10K went to the National Republican Campaign Committee on Oct. 23rd. On Oct. 26th, Ney inserted the statement into the Congressional Record.
This is a dream case for a prosecutor of official bribery. An email asking Ney "Will you perform an official act if I contribute $10,000 to the NRCC?" And a reply saying "Sure." Then the act is performed and the money is contributed.

Ney is toast.

Note also the way this is blamed on DeLay. DeLay's demand for funds in exchange for Ney keeping his job as a committee chairman demonstrates why this is a result of Republican systemic corruption, not just the actions of a rogue Congressman.

Then there is the way that this is a crime committed to obtain properly reported campaign contributions.
"Although refusing to comment on the specifics of the Ney case, a U.S. government expert on criminal law made the following point: "Contributions are lawful only if made in support of a lawmaker's policies. They are clearly illegal as part of a prenegotiated deal involving a quid pro quo."
Considering the rather loose "ethics" of many Congresspersons, this must leave any number of politicians feeling highly uncomfortable.

No comments: