There are a lot of variations when it comes to Republican Hypocrisy and recently their diversity of hypocrisy has been on daily display. It is hard to keep up with the jaw dropping flip-flopping lying-to-your-face audacity of their mendacity. One could get a Doctorate in Anthropology studying the crafting and spreading of their fables and categorizing the various types of Republican Hypocrites.
Of them all, my least favorite is the "Good Government Republican Hypocrite". These weasels present themselves as "cleaners" of the system. They are "shocked", "shocked" to learn that lobbyists were paying to play in Washington now that their party is out of power.
Of all of the examples of this type of Republican Hypocrite, perhaps it is Rep. Jeff Flake of Arizona who is the worst.
Lately he has been trying to force an investigation into a lobbying scandal concerning the PMA Group, Jack Murtha and possibly others. Yesterday he said something that proved his effort was mere partisan hackery. He claimed the PMA Group scandal was "bigger" than the Abramoff Corruption Scandal.
It is time to call Jeff Flake out.
To the jump...
For weeks now (as chronicled at the excellent resource Congress Matters) Congressman Jeff Flake of Arizona has been offering multiple iterations of a privileged resolution calling for an ethics committee investigation into the PMA Group and a possible lobbying scandal implicating Congressman Jack Murtha and, perhaps, others. According to Flake and news reports as many as four—count em—four Congressmen might be involved
Congress Matters has done a great job of detailing the hypocrisy of Flake’s resolution. It started in this post that discussed the rules of a privilege resolution and Flake’s call for a broad ethics investigation. It included the text of his resolution. Flake presents 13 "Whereas" paragraphs that point to various news article about the PMA Group and some "good government" hyperbole as his basis to call for a very broad investigation by the House Ethics Committee into "earmarks" that relate to the PMA Group.
The resolution is crafted in language that at once focuses on a specific company and also hides the partisan nature of the effort. This is because Flake does not have the courage to actually file an ethics complaint against Murtha or any other Democrat. He is hoping that his continuing series of iteration after iteration of his privilege resolution will gain traction and create the impression of a Democratic Culture of Corruption and therefore help the GOP to "rebrand" themselves. He seeks to do this by innuendo because he fears what would happen if he lodged an ethics complaint against Murtha.
Congress Matters explains how Flake’s scam works in this post:
I had lost count of exactly how many times Flake has been to the floor with his resolution. It's a little tricky unless you're keeping careful count, because each time he offers it, he's on the floor with it to announce his intention to introduce it, and then back two days (sometimes a few more) later to actually bring it up. That's because the rules (Rule IX) allow the Speaker up to two days to rule on whether or not the resolution presents a proper question of the privileges of the House and to schedule a time for its consideration if offered by a Member other than the Majority or Minority Leaders. So every time he brings it up, he's on the floor talking about it twice.
The post goes on to explain how Flake is picking up support for his resolution as he refines and sharpens its focus. According to Politico this is helping Flake get some Democratic support for his resolution. His marks for this scam are Democrats in tough districts and/or those who won promising to clean up corruption in Washington. Politico explained how Flake’s flimflam resolution attracts Democratic support:
Four similarly positioned Democrats joined them on the second vote: Alabama Rep. Bobby Bright, whose conservative district requires him to vote with the GOP on most controversial measures; Illinois Rep. Bill Foster, elected last year to the seat vacated in 2007 by former Republican Speaker Dennis Hastert; and two first-term Democrats who knocked off incumbent Republicans last fall — Idaho Rep. Walt Minnick and Florida Rep. Suzanne Kosmas, who made ethics a centerpiece of her campaign against then-GOP Rep. Tom Feeney.
Foster, a former scientist, read Flake’s initial resolution on the House floor before the vote and reasoned that it was too vague to establish a special ethics investigation, his spokeswoman said.
The first resolution failed to mention PMA by name but, rather, laid out a series of press reports about the firm following the FBI raid of its offices in November. In that initial resolution, Flake called for the ethics committee, or an investigative subpanel, to look for any connections — i.e., campaign contributions or lobbyist ties — between the recipients of earmarks and the lawmakers who requested them. He gave the ethics panel two months to complete such a wide-ranging probe.
"[Foster] just thought the first resolution was too broad," said his spokeswoman, Shannon O’Brien.
Foster backed the second resolution — and each one to follow — because it narrowed the proposed investigation to PMA and its clients.
The goal here is for Flake and Republicans to present themselves and champions of clean government and leading the fight against the corruption of Washington—a corruption that has been firmly branded in the minds of America as Republican corruption. Flake’s goal is to turn that on its head and blame the corruption of the last decade solely on Democrats. His resolution is the parliamentary tool that he is using to help his corrupt party "re-brand" and sucker a few gullible Dems into supporting.
If Flake was actually concerned about corruption and the influence of lobbyists in Washington he should file an Ethics complaint against Murtha and force a full-fledge investigation of the PMA Group and the Congressmen that they may or may not hold in their pocket. Of course Flake (and the GOP) would never do that. Politico and Congress Matters explain why:
Privately, Democrats say that if Flake were serious about wanting an ethics committee investigation, he could file an ethics complaint against Murtha or other members tied to PMA. They note that Flake has failed to do that so far — and they say it’s because he knows Democrats could retaliate by filing their own ethics complaints against Reps. Jerry Lewis (R-Calif.) or Don Young (R-Alaska).
What Flake and his party fear is a full investigation into their many years of corruption, catering to lobbyists and pay for play earmarks in Washington. Flake wants folks to forget about Abramoff, Wilkes, Cunningham and a host of interconnected lobbying scandals and instead just focus on PMA Group and Murtha.
His shame and hypocrisy are without limits.
Yesterday he said he told Fox News (emphasis added):
Rep. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.), who has pushed six times for a House Ethics Committee investigation into PMA, said that the group's involvement with lawmakers could be more extensive than the Abramoff scandal, which brought down several Republican lawmakers and staffers through conviction, resignation, retirement, and lost reelections.
"That was a big scandal, but I can tell you, it doesn't touch the PMA scandal," Flake said Wednesday on Fox News before attempting to introduce his 7th resolution seeking to open an Ethics Committee investigation. "This is much bigger, much more sophisticated, it goes much deeper into Congress."
WTF!
Look, I’ve been following the Abramoff scandal for ten years and it only broke as a scandal five years ago. I have also some paid attention to the PMA scandal. To claim that the PMA scandal is "...much bigger, much more sophisticated, it goes much deeper into Congress..." is absolute bullshit.
When the Abramoff scandal broke, Flake was silent; same thing with Duke Cunningham and the Wilkes scandal. He was silent about Tom DeLay, Don Young, John Doolittle, Jerry Lewis and the 60 or so Republican Members of Congress connected to Jack Abramoff’s web of corruption. He was silent about Jack’s ties to the Bush White House and jack’s deep support among the Republicans in the Senate.
Now, after years of silence and inaction, he calls for an investigation. Finally, after all the cows have long since left the barn, he calls for a door. His hypocrisy is stunning. And he has the audacity to claim than this PMA scandal is a "bigger deal" than the Abramoff scandal. WTF!!!
Let’s play this out.
Imagine the worse about the PMA Group and Jack Murtha is true. Let’s say they have been involved in a pay to play earmark selling scam for years and that a few other Congressmen where also involved. Now imagine that the scandal turns out to be even worse and that it is all turns out to be true. Even then, the entire PMA scandal would only rise to the level of a mere sidebar, or a footnote if it was a part of the Abramoff scandal.
Jack Abramoff was a 25 year bagman for the Republican Party. The investigation into his crimes is active and ongoing. Over 21 people have confessed to their guilt in the scandal. Two more are currently facing trial and many more—including Congressmen, Congresswomen, Senators, Governors and members of the Bush Administration have been cited in court documents. More of these folks will be indicted soon. The investigation into the PMA Group will not last years and when it is over the DOJ may still be trying to unwind the Abramoff scandal.
And yet, Jeff Flake has never called for an Ethics investigation into the Abramoff scandal or any of the corruption scandals of the era of Republican control.
It is time to call his bluff. It is time for a Democrat to introduce a Resolution calling for a full and complete investigation into the lobbying scandals of the last decade. It should be a call for a review that goes beyond an Ethics Committee investigation. It should be done by a Commission empowered by Congress with subpoena power and a mandate to expose the corruption. Commission members should be dedicated to truth telling.
I would model it on the 9-11 Commission, but I would give this team a mandate to name names and place blame. I would give them a mandate to propose real lobbying and ethics reforms that would cut to the cords of Washington’s culture of corruption. I would call for them to investigate widely and let the chips fall where they may. Some Democrats would go and they should, but many more Republicans would fall in any real investigation of corruption over the last decade.
Many of the crimes that a Corruption Commission might uncover would be past the statute of limitations, but still it would be helpful to our Democracy to expose these crimes. Perhaps Congress could pass a law to at least keep any exposed weasels from any future Government service.
It is time to call Flake out on his fake resolution. If he is interested in a full fledge investigation into corrupt earmarks and pay to play arrangements with lobbyist, I say we offer him a chance to put his vote when his spin is.
The Abramoff Scandal broke over five years ago. Neither the Congress nor the Senate ever investigated Jack’s influence on Members and staff of both Houses of Congress. After five years, the Abramoff Scandal is still an uninvestigated scandal. If Flake is serious about rooting out corruption he would join a call for Congress to finally investigate the Abramoff Scandal and the Members of Congress who did his bidding. If Flake had any integrity he would specifically add the Abramoff scandal to his resolution.
It is five years since the Abramoff scandal broke and Congress has never investigated their role in the scandal.
It is time to change that. It is time to call Flake’s bluff.
A resolution to create a Corruption Commission with real power would be powerful tool to clean up Washington and pass meaningful reforms. It should be embraced by any reformer, but any real investigation would have the GOP running for the hills (and I’m sad to say a few Democrats as well—I’m looking at you Murtha).
Leading that GOP run for cover would be Jeff Flake. After all, he is Washington’s leading "Good Government Republican Hypocrite".
Cheers