Associated Press Harry Reid apology story says both parties ensnared in Abramoff Scandal

I thought that Dems didn't get any Abramoff money.  But now Harry Reid apologizes.  And in the Associated Press article where I saw this, I see this:  "The Abramoff investigation threatens to ensnare at least a half dozen members of Congress of both parties and Bush administration officials."  WTF?  Is this a lie again, or do they know something we don't?  Consider the WaPo blog shutdown too.  Perhaps the beltway insiders know more this time?

UPDATE - the assertion that Democrats are also ensnared in the scandal is at the end of the article I linked. 2nd to last paragraph. Don't be so quick to dismiss this as GOP spin. Is it possible that Abramoff has trapped some Dems in the complicated web of money?

Flame away.

http://abcnews.go.com/...

UPDATE #2.. I think maybe we should go after the AP? Email them with righteous indignation? Or what should we do? Sigh and go back to Survivor?

•  Worst AP story ever

  And that's saying a lot.

  by mcjoan on Thu Jan 19, 2006 at 08:41:55 PM PDT

  •  na , i was doing some digging

    there are some old 1s where the wording is soooo twisted it should be a felony , these traitors should be doing hard time for some of that shit !

    by cognitive dissonance on Thu Jan 19, 2006 at 09:02:55 PM PDT

•  GOP Spinmaster giving titles to story

  I wish I could see the whole interview.

  If you read the article it is different fromthe connotation of the title.

  I think the title is deliberately misleading.

  by timber on Thu Jan 19, 2006 at 08:42:43 PM PDT

  •  Why does media spin for GOP?

    ....."calling the Abramoff affair a Republican scandal. Reid has come under fire for his own ties to Abramoff, including accepting money from Abramoff's tribal clients. "

    another GOP spin
    

    by timber on Thu Jan 19, 2006 at 08:46:05 PM PDT

    •  the u.$.a corp. machine

      the corp.s own the pugs, the corp.s own the m$m its all about $$$$$$$$ nothing new under the sun , it's just the m$m  .

      by cognitive dissonance on Thu Jan 19, 2006 at 08:57:09 PM PDT

    •  I heard Harry Reid

      on the Ed Schultz show, say I don't know the man, never met him and have never taken money from him--not a dime.  I'm paraphrasing but thats what I heard.

      by hairspray on Thu Jan 19, 2006 at 09:33:46 PM PDT

•  ???? Where'd ya get the diary title

  your link shows no such thing. Piffle over naming names on Senate letterhead is ther vid that I missed???

  by Robert Davies on Thu Jan 19, 2006 at 08:46:01 PM PDT

  •  I got the diary title from the link.

    Read it again.  Check the 2nd to last paragraph.  It's in there.  They say "ensnare at least a half dozen members of Congress of both parties."  See that?  both parties.

    by Greenkermie in AZ on Thu Jan 19, 2006 at 08:50:44 PM PDT

•  josh marshall

  has some good things to say about this.
  

  by dan2 on Thu Jan 19, 2006 at 08:53:09 PM PDT

  •  Thanks for the link.

    Gives some perspective.  

    I'm just concerned that somehow Dems ARE involved and we're setting ourselves up to look like fools with all this adamant, righteous "uh-uh! No Dems at all!"  When Dean said it, I was all "Right on!"  But please don't let it be a mistake.

    by Greenkermie in AZ on Thu Jan 19, 2006 at 08:57:43 PM PDT

    •  Dean stressed...

      ...he could find no record, and he had been looking. If something does turn up after all this time, trust it will be something obscure and piddling. Don't fall on your nail-file.

      by daulton on Thu Jan 19, 2006 at 09:02:54 PM PDT

      •  nail file

        LOL - nail file.  Good point.  

        But then if this is more RW lies, should we be spamming the Associated Press and recommending down the articles we find on Yahoo and elsewhere?

        by Greenkermie in AZ on Thu Jan 19, 2006 at 09:08:39 PM PDT

      •  The GOP would be all over any factual record

        Of Dem donation: "See! These guys did it too! They are just as guilty! We're going to clean up Congress from those lying, cheating Democrats!"

        But what do we hear? A lot of throat clearing, some defensive moves to introduce toothless legislation to stave off any serious reform, a half-hearted attempt to blame Clinton, and...

        Crickets chirping (in the middle of winter no less)

        Gotta think that if Dean's crew can't find any, Harry Reid can't find any, and the GOP ain't yelling about any, well, there ain't none to be found.

        by marksb on Thu Jan 19, 2006 at 11:32:47 PM PDT

  •  Dan

    I recntly learned how to create a link from a website, but still can't do what you just did "has some good things to say about this".  How do you get it into your own words.

    by hairspray on Thu Jan 19, 2006 at 09:41:25 PM PDT

    •  Copy the link

      then insert it in here between the two apostrophes
      < a href="" > TYPE YOUR WORDS HERE < /a >

      Make sure to remove the 4 extra spaces before and after each bracket < or >. I had to put spaces after the first bracket and before the closing bracket so you could see the code.

      You just put your own words between the opening code < a href=" > and the closing code < /a >.
      

      Our... constitutional heritage rebels at the thought of giving government the power to control men's minds. Thurgood Marshall

      by bronte17 on Thu Jan 19, 2006 at 10:18:56 PM PDT

      •  Thanks

        by hairspray on Fri Jan 20, 2006 at 12:20:56 PM PDT

•  Still NO Proof

  There is still no concrete evidence that the Dems were invovled. But if ANY were invovled without a shadow of a doubt, I hope the Democrats ask him/her to step down and show some respect for the office they are elected to. If a tainted democrat voluntarily steps down and is removed from office by the Democrats it will be a slap in the face to all of those corrupt Republicans still holding on to their seats after being invovled in scandals and corruption. It will show which of the two parties (wish there were more in congress tho) actually respects its consituents more.

  My 2 cents...

  by chicoTowner on Thu Jan 19, 2006 at 08:55:55 PM PDT

  •  *spelling*

    sorry for spelling "involved" wrong 3 times... was typing in a hurry...

    by chicoTowner on Thu Jan 19, 2006 at 08:57:19 PM PDT

    •  Lemonade

      Now that's certainly making the best of a situation.  Lemonade out of lemons.  If that were the case, of course.

      by Greenkermie in AZ on Thu Jan 19, 2006 at 08:58:40 PM PDT

•  Ancient Chinese Saying:

  The first dog barks at nothing. The rest bark at him.

  I see no reason to assume this is not just more reverb on the same old lie. I was listening to Stephanie Miller today and she played a clip of O'Reilly yelling at a women and calling her names because she told him Abramoff had not given a dime to a Democrat.

  Let's face it. Abramoff wouldn't piss on a Democrat if he was on fire. Did he go back and poison the record by giving some bucks to Dems? Doubtful. And if he did, what's taking them so long in producing the names and numbers?

  Betcha it's bullshit.

  by daulton on Thu Jan 19, 2006 at 09:00:42 PM PDT

•  Where's the evidence?

  All I see is a vague reference to "members of both political parties".  There's no evidence and so far we've got the Chairman of the DNC saying that there are NO democrats involved.  The only link between Abramoff and Democrats is that a few of Abramoff's clients also contributed to Democrats.  That's a long way off from Abramoff bribed those folks too, or even that Abramoff had anything to do with it.

  Large businesses often hire more than one company to provide essentially the same service.  There's no reason lobbying would be different.

  by Nellebracht on Thu Jan 19, 2006 at 09:00:42 PM PDT

  •  indian tribes cover their asses too

    they give to both parties as do many many corp.s , same thing , i know this first hand , its the game .

    by cognitive dissonance on Thu Jan 19, 2006 at 09:08:56 PM PDT

  •  Perhaps Abramoff gave

    to the Constitution Party.  Or the Greens.  Or the Revolutionary Vegetarians.

    I wouldn't bet on it.

    by phillies on Thu Jan 19, 2006 at 09:26:53 PM PDT

    •  Wait a minute

      Abramoff didn't give any money to Democrats.  Only some of his clients did.  Are you implying that Indian tribes are agents of Jack Abramoff?

      by Nellebracht on Thu Jan 19, 2006 at 09:46:15 PM PDT

•  Harry Reid apologized for the tone

  of the attacks in a document on Republicans, not for receiving money from Abramoff--because he did not.

  by Viktor on Thu Jan 19, 2006 at 09:01:08 PM PDT

  •  I agree.

    Last night on NewsHour Harry Reid was very clear about the Abramoff scandal involving ONLY Repugs.

    (paraphrase)

    Jim: But Democrats took Abramoff money.

    Harry: Not a one, Jim. You're buying the Republican spin.

    by mtibb0910 on Thu Jan 19, 2006 at 09:28:10 PM PDT

•  Ok, so now what? Go after the AP?

  Enough posts are saying this is just more spin, more lies, VRWC.

  So do we spam the Associated Press?  What's the recourse?

  by Greenkermie in AZ on Thu Jan 19, 2006 at 09:03:58 PM PDT

•  you're suggesting Dean is lying?

  Because that's what it sounds like to me

  by Nordic on Thu Jan 19, 2006 at 09:20:07 PM PDT

  •  Not at all

    Not sure how you're getting that out of the discussion but that's not what I'm saying at all.

    by Greenkermie in AZ on Thu Jan 19, 2006 at 09:25:30 PM PDT

    •  Dean has said

      in no uncertain terms that they've investigated the situation and that no Democrat received any money from Abramoff, and that this is a 100% Republican scandal.

      If you're suggesting otherwise, you're calling Howard Dean a liar.

      by Nordic on Thu Jan 19, 2006 at 09:30:27 PM PDT

      •  I'll let another poster's comment be the reply.

        http://www.dailykos.com/...

        Dean stressed... (none / 0)

        ...he could find no record, and he had been looking. If something does turn up after all this time, trust it will be something obscure and piddling. Don't fall on your nail-file.

        It's also possible to be mistaken on something.  I doubt it, but Dean could be wrong.  He could have missed something.  That is different than saying he lied.

        Wow.  With friends like these, who needs enemies?  

        by Greenkermie in AZ on Thu Jan 19, 2006 at 09:38:17 PM PDT

        •  edit

          can't edit these - My comments begin after the words "nail-file."  I need to learn how to block quote.  

          Anyway, my comments are: It's also possible to be mistaken on something.  I doubt it, but Dean could be wrong.  He could have missed something.  That is different than saying he lied.

          Wow.  With friends like these, who needs enemies?  

          by Greenkermie in AZ on Thu Jan 19, 2006 at 09:39:29 PM PDT

          •  indeed

            with Dems like these, who needs enemies?

            Why are you so anxious to believe the Republican bullshit about Abramoff?  They are DESPERATE, absolutely desperate to deflect this over to anybody but them, and the MSM is helping them do it.

            They have a 35-years-in-the-making media manipulating MACHINE at work here.  The Dems don't have shit.  

            The machine is working, and you're falling for it.  It's sad, really.

            You're assuming "gosh, I'm hearing this from so many places, it MUST be true!"

            How many times are these people gonna lie to your face before you realize that they are LIARS and they are ALWAYS gonna lie to your face?

            Abramoff's job was to fraudulently engage in money-raising for REPUBLICANS.  That's what he did, and he did it well.

            by Nordic on Thu Jan 19, 2006 at 09:53:39 PM PDT

            •  Simple

              I've been on political Blogs since the Dean candidacy in mid-2003.  I've seen the blogosphere's mob mentality jump on something and shred it apart only to be wrong.  This is caution, pure and simple.  I was only trying to bring up a plausible explanation.  Go to the "Reid apologizes" blog and see how much speculation is going on there.  This is simply more of the same.

              by Greenkermie in AZ on Fri Jan 20, 2006 at 12:49:49 PM PDT

      •  BTW

        I voted yes in your poll.  ^.^

        by Greenkermie in AZ on Thu Jan 19, 2006 at 09:43:06 PM PDT

        •  Change the diary title?

          Pretty please...so that it's clear that it's spin?

          by coigue on Thu Jan 19, 2006 at 09:47:58 PM PDT

•  Makes no sense

  that a raging partisan Republican Abramoff would give money to a Democrat. Democrats aren't in power to do diddly, after all. And only if Abramoff was smart enough to cover his bases would he give money to Democrats.

  Yeah, he's smart, but probably felt he'd never get caught or if he did, he'd get a pass. After all, when you have clout with the Chimpy Prez, you have no worries.

  by fumie on Thu Jan 19, 2006 at 11:27:46 PM PDT