The Fargo Forum: Dorgan Doing Right Thing On Abramoff
The Fargo Forum has, predictably, come out in support of North Dakota's embattled Senator Dorgan. The paper has released an editorial on the subject of Dorgan's acceptance of contributions from Abramoff's firm and from his clients, which I will respond to below:
That Dorgan gave this money back is irrelevant. Being a ranking member of the investigation into the Abramoff scandal Dorgan knew full well who was involved in these proceedings. He also knew that he accepted money from these people, yet he did not acknowledge that acceptance of contributions, nor did he give the money back, until he had been called to task on the matter by certain journalists in the media.
Dorgan was not forthright about his involvement with Abramoff and his clients. He laid low about his connections until they came under scrutiny, only then choosing to do the "right thing." These are not the actions of an honest person. Had Dorgan been pro-active about this, had he announced his connections immediately and offered to give back the money before the media had to call him on it, this would be a different situation entirely. He didn't.
The editorial continues:
That the donations themselves were legal, and that Dorgan did not deviate from his historical course of political action with regard to the policies in question, is not germaine to this discussion. What is germaine is that he had dealings with Abramoff and his clients which are very similar in nature to the dealings he is now tasked with investigating. This is not appropriate by any stretch of the imagination.
Judges with financial ties to mobsters are not allowed to preside in cases involving those mobsters. Senators with financial ties to corrupt lobbyists should not be allowed to preside over investigations into the dealings of those lobbyists. And all double-speak and misdirection from Dorgan and his allies in the media aside, he did (by his own admission) accept money directly from Abramoff's firm.
Sure Dorgan has now severed those financial ties, but that doesn't mean they never existed. And as I pointed out before, he certainly wasn't forthright in doing so. He waited until his connections with Abramoff came under scrutiny, which suggests to me that he only severed his financial ties with Abramoff and his clients for the sake of public appearances.
That is hardly an endorsement of the Senator's character.
This is an interesting tactic the Forum writers are using. Certainly Dorgan isn't going to pull any punches in the Abramoff investigation now. His connections to Abramoff have come to light. It would look bad. We don't know what would have happened had the Associated Press journalists not made an issue of Drogan's connections to Abramoff, and that's why Dorgan should step down and let the investigation run its course without him.
The allusion to "Washington scuttlebutt" suggesting that the source for the AP reporting is an Abramoff ally is exactly that: Scuttlebutt. Inconsequential garbage. The connections are real and confirmed. The source of the information is hardly relevant. If someone tells you that your house is on fire, does the fact that the person who told you was also the one who set the fire change the fact that your home is burning?
As for North Dakotans knowing that Dorgan is honorable and smart, this North Dakotan knows no such thing. Senator Dorgan certainly wasn't very honorable about disclosing his connections to Abramoff before the media had to call him on it, was he? I certainly don't think so. Nor was that a smart move now that the connections have come to light. And while giving the money back to Avramoff's firm and his clients was the right thing, so is stepping down from the investigation.
I, for one, won't be satisfied until Dorgan does just that. Dorgan has laid down with dogs, and now he has fleas. The man with fleas does not get to give the dogs a bath. The man with fleas gets a bath with the dogs.
(via The North Dakota Democrats Blog)
Sen. Byron Dorgan’s decision to give back donations from American Indian tribes that were associated with lobbyist Jack Abramoff was correct. The North Dakota Democrat also is right to resist calls to recuse himself from an investigation of Abramoff’s lobbying activities.
Abramoff is under investigation by Arizona Republican Sen. John McCain’s Indian Affairs Committee. Dorgan is ranking member, and is one of about 60 senators who received money from tribes apparently at Abramoff’s behest. When Dorgan learned (in part because of an Associated Press story) that some $67,000 from several tribes was tied to Abramoff’s lobbying firm, he returned the money. At least one senator, Conrad Burns, R-Mont., first said he would not return $150,000 from Abramoff’s client tribes because it had been spent already. Late last week he changed his mind.
That Dorgan gave this money back is irrelevant. Being a ranking member of the investigation into the Abramoff scandal Dorgan knew full well who was involved in these proceedings. He also knew that he accepted money from these people, yet he did not acknowledge that acceptance of contributions, nor did he give the money back, until he had been called to task on the matter by certain journalists in the media.
Dorgan was not forthright about his involvement with Abramoff and his clients. He laid low about his connections until they came under scrutiny, only then choosing to do the "right thing." These are not the actions of an honest person. Had Dorgan been pro-active about this, had he announced his connections immediately and offered to give back the money before the media had to call him on it, this would be a different situation entirely. He didn't.
The editorial continues:
The donations to Dorgan were legal. He certainly could have held onto the money. But he correctly concluded the tribal gifts were tainted because of the Abramoff connection. The McCain/Dorgan investigation of the lobbyist mandated that Dorgan separate himself from the taint.
Furthermore, there has been no credible suggestion of a quid pro quo regarding tribal donations to Dorgan – now or in his long career in the House and Senate. Rather, he’s been known as an effective advocate for American Indians during that time. It’s no surprise that tribal leaders seek his support.
That the donations themselves were legal, and that Dorgan did not deviate from his historical course of political action with regard to the policies in question, is not germaine to this discussion. What is germaine is that he had dealings with Abramoff and his clients which are very similar in nature to the dealings he is now tasked with investigating. This is not appropriate by any stretch of the imagination.
Judges with financial ties to mobsters are not allowed to preside in cases involving those mobsters. Senators with financial ties to corrupt lobbyists should not be allowed to preside over investigations into the dealings of those lobbyists. And all double-speak and misdirection from Dorgan and his allies in the media aside, he did (by his own admission) accept money directly from Abramoff's firm.
Sure Dorgan has now severed those financial ties, but that doesn't mean they never existed. And as I pointed out before, he certainly wasn't forthright in doing so. He waited until his connections with Abramoff came under scrutiny, which suggests to me that he only severed his financial ties with Abramoff and his clients for the sake of public appearances.
That is hardly an endorsement of the Senator's character.
Finally, Dorgan’s critics and political antagonists are grasping at straws when they insist the senator should remove himself from the Abramoff investigation. They’ve suggested Dorgan will pull his punches because of the tribal donations. That makes no sense.
Dorgan and McCain have been going after Abramoff with extraordinary tenacity. If anything, revelation of the Abramoff-directed money to Dorgan hardened his resolve to get to the bottom of the lobbyist’s shady activities. Indeed, purveyors of Washington scuttlebutt suggested last week that the initial source of the AP stories was in Abramoff’s organization – the lobbyist’s attempt to tarnish Dorgan’s credibility and scuttle the committee’s work.
It didn’t work. Moreover, North Dakotans know Dorgan to be honorable and smart. Other than the usual gaggle of partisans, they understand he’s done the right thing regarding tribal money and the Abramoff investigation.
This is an interesting tactic the Forum writers are using. Certainly Dorgan isn't going to pull any punches in the Abramoff investigation now. His connections to Abramoff have come to light. It would look bad. We don't know what would have happened had the Associated Press journalists not made an issue of Drogan's connections to Abramoff, and that's why Dorgan should step down and let the investigation run its course without him.
The allusion to "Washington scuttlebutt" suggesting that the source for the AP reporting is an Abramoff ally is exactly that: Scuttlebutt. Inconsequential garbage. The connections are real and confirmed. The source of the information is hardly relevant. If someone tells you that your house is on fire, does the fact that the person who told you was also the one who set the fire change the fact that your home is burning?
As for North Dakotans knowing that Dorgan is honorable and smart, this North Dakotan knows no such thing. Senator Dorgan certainly wasn't very honorable about disclosing his connections to Abramoff before the media had to call him on it, was he? I certainly don't think so. Nor was that a smart move now that the connections have come to light. And while giving the money back to Avramoff's firm and his clients was the right thing, so is stepping down from the investigation.
I, for one, won't be satisfied until Dorgan does just that. Dorgan has laid down with dogs, and now he has fleas. The man with fleas does not get to give the dogs a bath. The man with fleas gets a bath with the dogs.
(via The North Dakota Democrats Blog)
