Sam Stein

BIO

Sam Stein

The Huffington Post

McCain Withheld Controversial Abramoff Email

On the stump, Sen. John McCain often cites his work tackling the excesses of disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff as evidence of his sturdy ethical compass.

A little-known document, however, shows that McCain may have taken steps to protect his Republican colleagues from the scope of his investigation.

In the 2006 Senate report concerning Abramoff's activities, which McCain spearheaded, the Arizona Republican conspicuously left out information detailing how Alabama Gov. Bob Riley was targeted by Abramoff's influence peddling scheme. Riley, a Republican, won election in November 2002, and was reelected in 2006.

In a December 2002 email obtained by the Huffington Post -- which McCain and his staff had access to prior to the issuance of his report -- Abramoff explains to an aide what he would like to see Riley do in return for the "help" he received from Abramoff's tribal clients.

An official with the Mississippi Choctaws "definitely wants Riley to shut down the Poarch Creek operation," Abramoff wrote, "including his announcing that anyone caught gambling there can't qualify for a state contract or something like that."

The note showed not only the reach of Abramoff, but raised questions about Riley's victory in what was the closest gubernatorial election in Alabama history.

And yet, despite the implications of the information, McCain and the Senate Indian Affairs Committee sat on the controversial portion of the email. According to an official familiar with the investigation, McCain also subsequently refused to make the email public after the report was released.

There was a brief footnote in the report that quoted William Worfel, former vice chairman of the Coushatta Tribe of Louisiana, saying that Abramoff told the chief of a Mississippi tribe to spend $13 million "to get the governor of Alabama elected to keep gaming out of Alabama so it wouldn't hurt ... his market in Mississippi."

But Riley's name and the details of what was being asked of him were not mentioned once in the 373-page document.

Indeed, as the Associated Press noted in 2006, McCain stayed deliberately agnostic as to Riley's involvement. "The committee headed by Sen. John McCain, R-Arizona, used the ellipses and did not give the full quotation," the AP said of Worfel's quote. "It also did not say in its report whether it thought the comment was fact or fiction."

Officials with Riley's office pointed to a statement from the Choctaw tribe alleging that reports of their contributions to Riley were "outlandish and patently false." As for the governor's opposition to gambling, Riley's press secretary said he has "consistently [opposed gambling] before he decided to run for governor and since. Anyone who would suggest his long-standing opposition to gambling is tied to anything other than personal conviction would be mistaken."

McCain's campaign did not return request for comment. For critics, however, the senator's decision not to include the email in his report underscores not only a glaring shortcoming of his investigation, but also a chink in his political veneer. Indeed, they claim, the Arizona Republican often takes overt steps to protect Republican colleagues from his anti-corruption dragnets.

"Although Sen. McCain has long bragged of his role in the Abramoff investigation, he let Tom DeLay and the other members of Congress who were doing Abramoff's bidding completely off the hook. The sole exception was Rep. Bob Ney, who served time in prison," Melanie Sloan, Executive Director of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics In Washington told the Huffington Post recently. "Sen. McCain knew what his colleagues were up to, he chose to take the easier path and give them a free pass."

Faced with this criticism in the past, McCain has claimed that it was not his responsibility to "involve ourselves in the ethics process [of senators]." Others have defended McCain by pointing out that the committee approved the report by a bipartisan 13-0 vote.

But it is hard to ignore the political consequences of not exposing the Abramoff-Riley connection.

Just prior to the 2002 election, word leaked that federal prosecutors in Alabama -- appointed by President Bush -- were investigating allegations that then Alabama Gov. Don Siegelman had offered a state-appointed position in exchange for money to help an education program. Siegelman ultimately lost to Riley by less than 3,000 votes.

"It obviously didn't help," said Dr. Sam Fisher, a political science professor at the University of South Alabama, of the leaks. "And there were certain ethical issues about how that was done. It was definitely a close race and giving a close race any negative thing can make a difference."

That Riley had taken a position favored by Abramoff, whether coincidentally or not, wasn't known at the time. While Abramoff's aide, Michael Scanlon (a former aide to Riley), gave $100,000 to Riley's campaign, Riley had previously opposed gambling in the state. In the late 1990s, he signed a fundraising letter lobbying against the building of a casino within Alabama. "We need your help today," the letter, which reflected another Abramoff objective, read, "to prevent the Poarch Creek Indians from building casinos in Alabama."

Siegelman soldiered on after the 2002 loss, running again for governor against Riley in 2006. By then, the extent of Riley's connection to Abramoff was still unknown. Moreover, Siegelman was still under investigation for allegations of bribery. The inquiry, detailed in an extensive 60 Minutes report last night, raised many ethical red flags, mainly over political interference from the Bush administration, specifically Karl Rove. On June 22, McCain issued his Senate report without mentioning Riley's name. And one week later, Siegelman was convicted without the Abramoff email ever being made public.

"If you had a document that showed something that had not been reported about the financial reports and the direct expectations for that money," said a source familiar with the case, "that certainly would have called into attention the government's case against Siegelman."

See the Abramoff email below


 
 

Comments
424
Pending Comments
0

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next › Last » (6 pages total)

Double FULL NAME DROPS on Countdown with Keith Olberman!!!

Hey, do I know talent? (I'm Sam Stein's first fan... not really, I'm saying that to sound cool.)

But, seriously, Sam... WAY TA GO! When do we see you doing the live interview? Fuck Dana Milbank (not really, see above) you can do his spot!

Okay, I'm being totally silly, but damn, what a "get", SAM!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:46 PM on 02/26/2008

McCain's got no integrity, it's a myth. He now kisses the ass of the Religious Right, who he previously defamed. He now will allow torture, and now this. He's a scumbag.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:14 PM on 02/26/2008

straight talk? wiggle walk!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:45 PM on 02/26/2008

Obstruction of Justice pure and simple...

Prosecute and Convict!!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:13 AM on 02/26/2008

You mean sanctimonious, war hero, John McCain, is NOT purer than gold? Could have fooled me!!!

Go to TheRealMcCain.com for the REAL story on this phony!!!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:12 PM on 02/26/2008

You think Bushie is going sic an Atty Gen or DA against Johnny "the kiss ass" McStain? Fergedaboudit.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:27 PM on 02/26/2008

Once before, back in 1929, the oil industry had to steal the presidency so they would get away with robbing the public and they did it again for our memory is short and we are not educated
as we should be. And did you really think we have two parties? Are we being duped again and again. Ask yourself how many times does that have to happen before we wake up?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:36 AM on 02/26/2008

www.dailykos.com/story/2008/2/23/03912/3990 Can you say Special Investigator? Dems, for the present we're laid-back. After the elections; with a Democratic Presidency and a Democratic Congress (hopefully a super-majority) it will be time to install a special investigator and hold a Watergate for the new millennium. - Here's hoping you don't disappoint me (2006) again . . .

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:00 AM on 02/26/2008

Screaming silently.
Until upon occasion.
I just scream out loud.
:Larry Battis, 2008

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:14 AM on 02/26/2008

Screaming silently.
Until upon occasion.
I just scream out loud.
:Larry Battis, 2008

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:12 AM on 02/26/2008

www.dailykos.com/story/2008/2/23/03912/3990
-
Can you say Special Investigator? Dems, for the present we're laid-back. After the elections; with a Democratic Presidency and a Democratic Congress (hopefully a super-majority) it will be time to install a special investigator and hold a Watergate for the new millennium.
-
Here's hoping you won't disappoint me (2006) again . . .
-
Screaming silently
Until upon occasion
I just scream out loud
. . . Larry Battis, 2008

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:11 AM on 02/26/2008

This "Justice Department" is now an arm of the republican party.

Most of the republicans and some of the dems should already be in prison for accepting bribes.

Vote for the democrat or they will never be prosecuted.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:52 AM on 02/26/2008

*

Senator McCain's Real Record on the War in Iraq

Senator John McCain presents himself as a maverick and a critic of the Iraq war. But a close read of his record indicates that his position on the Iraq war has consistently matched President George W. Bush"s...........

http://votevets.org/pages/?id=0006

*

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:44 AM on 02/26/2008

McCain/Reagan's Corpse 08

(tip o' the cap to JaneC)

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:41 AM on 02/26/2008

LOFL

The only question is, how to tell them apart.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:03 AM on 02/26/2008

One's taller than the other!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:14 AM on 02/26/2008

On Bill O'Reilly's show on Fox, Bill O'Reilly does a segment he calls 'Pinhead or Patriot.' And today President Bush said, 'Well, why can't you be both?'

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:31 AM on 02/26/2008

That's the image of the archetypal Republican woman:

Silent and hidden from view.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:38 AM on 02/26/2008

Hillary in Muslim Garb, I think its childish of her to spread the pic of Barack, so heres back at her.

http://michellemalkin.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2008/02/1costume004.jpg

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:24 AM on 02/26/2008

Mr. Stein,

Thanks for posting this. McCain's involvement with the Abramoff scandal is a long and sordid affair. If it comes out, he goes down, and he goes down hard!!!!

PLEASE READ THIS EVERYONE: www.dailykos.com/story/2008/2/23/03912/3990

Only 3% of Abramoff's 750,000 pgs of lobbying documents have been released. McCain sat on a lot of information.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:11 AM on 02/26/2008

I almost fell off my chair when I read that earlier. SHOCKING info!

I wish everyone would read it and forward the link to others and to the media.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/2/23/03912/3990

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:36 AM on 02/26/2008

McCain really got irritated over this Abramhoff thing. I haven"t seen him this angry since "Matlock" was canceled.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:09 AM on 02/26/2008

"That's a good cracker."

(Andy Griffith for Ritz crackers)

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:44 AM on 02/26/2008

McCain/Vitter 08

A team literally wrapped in Dependability. ;)

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:59 PM on 02/25/2008

TOO funny!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:38 AM on 02/26/2008

LOL

Keep em comin'.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:04 AM on 02/26/2008

LOL. Added that one to the file.

Ok, this isn't about mccain, but it's all I've got right now:

Why men aren't secretaries -

A husband leaves a note on
the refrigerator for his
wife.

Some one from Gyna Colleges called. They said the Pabst beer is normal. I didn't know you like beer.

wife.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:26 AM on 02/26/2008

you've swallowed too much iraqi oil....

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:03 AM on 02/26/2008

Why is it fair to make fun of McCain's age (ageism) but not Hillary's gender (sexism) or Obama's ethnicity (racism)?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:56 PM on 02/25/2008

*

BushJustdrivesdemscrazy

Why is it fair to make fun of McCain's age (ageism).....

=============

No one is making fun of McCane's age, that's the only news he can not hide, but a 71 years old who can barley talk not a good idea for president.

*

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:07 AM on 02/26/2008

Because at some point in a person's life, assuming that they live that long, they will become dotty or even senile. And we within our lifetime experienced a senile president, no reason to do that again.

But there is nothing inherent in being a woman or black that would disqualify a person from being president.

I'm sure you will scratch your head over that one for a few days.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:07 AM on 02/26/2008

Age is relevant. McCain would be 72 when he entered office. 76 during his last year. Life expectancy in the U.S. is about 75 for men. That's for men who haven't had as stressful a life as McCain. People also say that Obama is too inexperienced (i.e. young).

In terms of humor, it's a couple of hundred years of history at work. Americans were not discrimated against for being older for the most part. Being Black or a woman prevent lots of right including voting (1870: Black men; 1920: All women)

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:06 AM on 02/26/2008

You didn't know, rules only apply to republicans, dems have a free rain via the ACLU.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:01 AM on 02/26/2008

Free rain?

Where?

I'm tired of paying for mine.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:06 AM on 02/26/2008

"Free rain?

Where?

I'm tired of paying for mine."


In Spain. But it's mainly on the plains.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:14 PM on 02/26/2008

touche'

We wouldnt have to pay for it if it weren't for all that damn global warming (does it work when conservatives use Global warming as an excuse for everything too?)

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:11 AM on 02/26/2008

Rule must apply to Republicans, because they must be kept in check.

A lot of good it does, however--you see the results.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:05 AM on 02/26/2008
- 2008andbey