You would think
this would get a bit more play. Back in 2002 there was an investigation into Jack Abramoff in the US Territory of Guam. A day after a supeona was issued President Bush replaced the federal prosecutor.
Inquiry Into Lobbyist Sputters After Demotion
# The unusual financial deal between Jack Abramoff and officials in Guam drew scrutiny.
By Walter F. Roche Jr., Times Staff Writer
WASHINGTON -- A U.S. grand jury in Guam opened an investigation of controversial lobbyist Jack Abramoff more than two years ago, but President Bush removed the supervising federal prosecutor and the inquiry ended soon after.
This story was on page A31 of the criminally liberal Sunday LA Times. Josh has done a decent number of posts, scroll up for updates, and TPM Cafe had a 31 comment discussion on it. Today Josh discussed it on Franken's show.
more...
First off it shows how corrupt this administration is. Second thing that comes to mind is the
Newsweek story on Fitz' replacement. We now have a precedent for exactly what we are afraid of.
There are many details in this case that just scream for an investigation. First off you have Abramhoff involved. He was payed $324,000 to lobby against the a law that would make the Supreme Court authority over the Superior Court. But look at the way he was payed.
In 2002, Abramoff was retained by the Superior Court in what was an unusual arrangement for a public agency.
The Times reported in May that Abramoff was paid with a series of $9,000 checks funneled through a Laguna Beach lawyer to disguise the lobbyist's role working for the Guam court. No separate contract was authorized for Abramoff's work.
snip
The auditor's office is reviewing Abramoff's payments totaling $324,000 in 36 separate checks for $9,000 paid through lawyer Howard Hills of Laguna Beach. Hills said he was a middleman.
Check out the Josh link above for theories on the $9,000 amounts.
There's another aspect of the lobbying and investigation that bears looking at as well. Black, the fed Pros, had done a review of security after 9/11. Check out Abramhoff's response.
The acting U.S. attorney was a controversial official in Guam. At the time he was removed, Black was directing a long-term investigation into allegations of public corruption in the administration of then-Gov. Carl Gutierrez. The inquiry produced numerous indictments, including some of the governor's political associates and top aides.
Black also arranged for a security review in the aftermath of Sept. 11 that was seen as a potential threat to loose immigration rules favored by local business leaders. In fact, the study ordered by Black eventually cited substantial security risks in Guam and the Northern Marianas.
Abramoff, who then represented the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, alerted his clients in a memo about the expected report and warned: "It will require some major action from the Hill and a press attack to get this back in the bottle."
What was that that Herr Rove said about reactions to 9/11. The Democrats looked for ways to secure the country while the Republicans looked for ways to make a buck? I might have that wrong.
Now in fairness to Bush and his party, Black was a temporary prosecutor. He had only been on the job for 10 years. His replacement had some fine credentials and honest backing.
Black, 56, had served as acting U.S. attorney for Guam and the Northern Mariana islands since 1991.
The career prosecutor, who had held a senior position as first assistant before accepting the acting U.S. attorney job, was demoted to a staff post. Black's demotion came after an intensive lobbying effort by supporters of Gov. Gutierrez, who had been publicly critical of Black and his investigative efforts.
Black declined to comment for this article.
Black's successor, Leonardo Rapadas, was confirmed in May 2003 without any debate. Rapadas had been recommended by the Guam Republican Party for the job. Fred Radewagen, a lobbyist who had been under contract to the Gutierrez administration, said he carried that recommendation to top Bush aide Karl Rove in early 2003.
After taking office, Rapadas recused himself from the ongoing public corruption case involving Gutierrez. The new U.S. attorney was a cousin of "one of the main targets," according to a confidential memo to Justice Department officials.
What do you think the reaction would have been 30 years ago if someone had said that a Republican administration would be even more corrupt than the man who had just resigned? Of course if you are a member of the New Republican Party then you don't think Nixon was corrupt so I guess it's a moot point.