Rick Santorum R-PA... complete farging liar.

[jAZ]

Everyone in the Republican Party (including the President) is trying to distance themselves from the corruption & lobbying scandals involving Jack Abramoff, Grover Norquist and the so called "K-Street Project".

Pennsylvania Senator and often-time moralist preaching RRWNJ flat out lied his ass off in his most recent attempt to distance himself from the controversy in the Republican Party.

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06026/644541.stm
"I had absolutely nothing to do--never met, never talked, never coordinated, never did anything -- with Grover Norquist and the -- quote -- K Street Project."

And then up popped this video from a Santorum press conference where Ricky was introduced by none-other-than Grover Norquist... from waaaay back in the day (June 2005).

http://movies.crooksandliars.com/thankyougrover_060127a.wmv
"Thank you Grover, and I appreciate your help and support on this and many other issues..."

[PunkinDrublic]

C&L is an awesome site thanks for turning me on to it.

[banyon]

The literal quote from Santorum may be accurate (if he wants to quibble about the meaning of the word "met" like conservatives rail against Clinton for. I'm not trying to say that Rick Santorum is a saint, he's a certified nut job. But, in the article, Santorum says "I never met with Grover Norquist and the K Street Project." Then the second part leaves out the "and the K Street Project". And audio shows that yes, the two individuals have met.

But Santorum probably would say that he meant that he hasn't met Norquist in his capacity as a representative of the K Street Project. It's like saying "No, I haven't met Kool and the Gang" But what if you just met Kool? Well, you still haven't met "Kool and the Gang." And Norquist and the K Streeters are probably so down that they go together like Kool and the Gang. See? mystery solved. http://www.ncaabbs.com/forums/memphis/phpbb/images/smiles/05-duck.gif

[Chief Henry]

I think Howard Dean on the Today show this past week said no Democrat ever took money from
Abramoff. Is that found in Crooks and Liars too.
Just wondering if Howard Dean is a farging Liar?

[Adept Havelock]

I think Howard Dean on the Today show this past week said no Democrat ever took money from
Abramoff. Is that found in Crooks and Liars too.
Just wondering if Howard Dean is a farging Liar?


In some cases absolutely, but not this one.

http://www.newsmeat.com/washington_political_donations/Jack_Abramoff.php

The link shows all of Abramoffs personal donations. I don't see a one with a (D) after their name.

That said,there is some buzz that some of the Indian Casinos he represented contributed to Dems as well.

[Adept Havelock]

Coming this summer, to a theatre near you.....

"I wish I knew how to quit you."

[jAZ]

I think Howard Dean on the Today show this past week said no Democrat ever took money from
Abramoff. Is that found in Crooks and Liars too.
Just wondering if Howard Dean is a farging Liar?
He's 100% correct.

Here's the details...

Jack Abramoff is a hardcore Republican. He's never given Dems any money ever (and Dems have never then, taken).

So Dean is 100% correct.

Now, the Casinos (who later hired Abramoff) had been giving money to Dems in their casino's regions. They then hired Abramoff. After that, Jack steered more money from those Dems to the Republicans.

The casino's contribution to Dems went DOWN after hiring Jack. So not only didn't he GIVE any money to Dems, his efforts in fact took money AWAY from Dems.

And yes, this is on C&L...
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/01/27.html#a6890

But there's much more on TPM...
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/007554.php
(January 27, 2006 -- 04:43 PM EDT // link)
Oops. New study by non-partisan research firm says no dice to claims Jack Abramoff was steering tribal money to Dems like he was to Republicans. In fact, the study suggests opposite.

Some nuggets ...

The analysis shows that when Abramoff took on his tribal clients, the majority of them dramatically ratcheted up donations to Republicans. Meanwhile, donations to Democrats from the same clients either dropped, remained largely static or, in two cases, rose by a far smaller percentage than the ones to Republicans did. This pattern suggests that whatever money went to Democrats, rather than having been steered by Abramoff, may have largely been money the tribes would have given anyway.

and this ...

The analysis shows:

in total, the donations of Abramoff’s tribal clients to Democrats dropped by nine percent after they hired him, while their donations to Republicans more than doubled, increasing by 135 percent after they signed him up;

five out of seven of Abramoff’s tribal clients vastly favored Republican candidates over Democratic ones;

four of the seven began giving substantially more to Republicans than Democrats after he took them on;

Abramoff’s clients gave well over twice as much to Republicans than Democrats, while tribes not affiliated with Abramoff gave well over twice as much to Democrats than the GOP -- exactly the reverse pattern.

The truth is that only idiots and liars (actually, I guess the liars 'say' but don't 'believe') think the Abramoff operation was really bipartisan in any meaningful sense. But here's at least some more data points to add to the mix.

[MarcBulger]

One of Reid's top people in his circle has also left to become one of Abramhoff's people. Heard it this morning on Meet the Depressed. I bet he is going to pull a "who was that guy in the Clinton WHite House who was found stealing document classified papers" He is there to clean up Reid's Name....Keep trying Dems your party is slowly becoming the Rep in the 1930's......

[patteeu]

The literal quote from Santorum may be accurate (if he wants to quibble about the meaning of the word "met" like conservatives rail against Clinton for. I'm not trying to say that Rick Santorum is a saint, he's a certified nut job. But, in the article, Santorum says "I never met with Grover Norquist and the K Street Project." Then the second part leaves out the "and the K Street Project". And audio shows that yes, the two individuals have met.

But Santorum probably would say that he meant that he hasn't met Norquist in his capacity as a representative of the K Street Project. It's like saying "No, I haven't met Kool and the Gang" But what if you just met Kool? Well, you still haven't met "Kool and the Gang." And Norquist and the K Streeters are probably so down that they go together like Kool and the Gang. See? mystery solved. http://www.ncaabbs.com/forums/memphis/phpbb/images/smiles/05-duck.gif

I don't think this is quite the same as the Clinton "is" situation. It seems pretty reasonable to me to interpret the "I had absolutely nothing..." quote to mean that he never had any interactions with Norquist about the K Street project. Whether that is actually true or not, I can't say.

Disclaimer: I haven't watched the video since I'm on dialup so I don't know what it's supposed to prove. I'm assuming it just proves that Santorum has met Norquist (in a context other than discussions involving the K Street project) which I find unremarkable given the fact that Norquist has been a big player in conservative politics for years.

[patteeu]

It's funny to see you guys defending Dean's comments when even Katie Couric took him to task. Check out this Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/graphic/2005/12/12/GR2005121200286.html) graphic. Dean was talking about the little sliver of black at the bottom of the graph. That's a pretty irrelevant chunk of change in terms of the entire influence-purchasing scandal. In that sense, I would say that to the extent that Dean was "100% correct," he was also being nonresponsive to Couric's question while trying to leave the misleading impression that he'd answered it directly.

http://media3.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/graphic/2005/12/12/GR2005121200286.gif

[Chiefs Express]

He's 100% correct.

Here's the details...

Jack Abramoff is a hardcore Republican. He's never given Dems any money ever (and Dems have never then, taken).



You are 100% incorrect!

Howard Dean said that unequivocally that no democrat ever got money from Abramoff. That comment was addressed with the numbers that indicated that the democrats got over $500,000 in "donations" from Abramoff. Not only that but one of the democrats cast a vote to protect an indian tribe from competing Casinos in his district from being voted to be appoved. The democrat in question was named!

What you don't realize is that Abramoff is just one lobbyist, there are many lobbyists and for each side of the political table. Virtually all, if not all, of them have benefited from illegal gifts and donations.

Face it...everyone is going to be bit in the ass with this one.