Originally posted by weaselsan
ROTFLMAO...If Abramoff gets the tribe to contribute directly and then gets what it paid for, thats ok, but if it goes to abramhoff then gets contributed thats not. Incidently how many Republicans have been indicted?
The American Indian tribes had, until 2000, contributed the vast majority of their politcal contributions towards the Dems. When they hired Abramoff things changed. The money given to him was misused for his party's benifit and not for the tribes benifit, that's where the charge of fraud comes to play.
Any contributions directly from the tribes are not under scruitney since those donations are perfictly legal.
Indictments will come when the DOJ decides it's time, just as Abramoff was indicted when they got the evidence they needed to indict.
BTW, giving back the tainted money doesn't absolve them of their crimes. The fact that the issue is so clouded by websites like the one you posted is the reason why some on both sides are returning money that wasn't tainted in the first place.
Now Jack Abramoff is singing like a bird trying to reduce his sentance, I sincerly hope he keeps his butt safe and doesn't have any unfortunate mishaps.
Now for a bit of logic unrelated to this case.
If one wanted to..
Who is it better to bribe, the party in power who can get things pushed through the legislature OR a member of the party who, for all intents and purposes, have no power and can't even get a bill out of commttee?