Former Washington lobbyist Jack Abramoff has been sentenced to four years in prison for corruption.

A Washington court found Abramoff guilty of trading expensive gifts, meals and sports trips in exchange for political favours.

bbc

i-3821ed536a6af6b1c7a62121d3b907d6-abramoff_court_fedora_mn.jpg

In a possibly related matter …

A review of campaign finance filings shows that .. Arizona Republican [John McCain] has accepted more than $100,000 in donations from employees of Greenberg Traurig, the very firm where Abramoff once reigned.
source

Comments

  1. #1 baines
    September 4, 2008

    We are legitimate and reputable company from Uk,London we have all brands of Mobile Phones,Ipods,xbox 360, Sidekicks,Nextels phone,Laptops for sell at cheap and affordable .. bla bla bla

  2. #2 tincture
    September 4, 2008

    Weird place for spam, maybe that means your hits are up?

    Anyways, colour me surprised that McSame is into the same old crap. He’s a maverick dontcha’know?

  3. #3 MikeB
    September 4, 2008

    Almost as shameless as Abramoff…

  4. #4 Art
    September 4, 2008

    LOL.
    IMHO you have to look closely and skeptically at anyone who opens a conversation with: “We are legitimate and reputable company” …

    Sort of like the used car dealer claiming: ‘Everyone knows me as honest john’.

    When they start by defending their integrity it makes me wonder how much of it they have.

    On topic.
    Yes, for a guy worried about the corrosive influence of big money on our political system McCain certainly seems to have no problems taking their money.

    In comparison Obama seems to have gotten the majority of his campaign money from small contributors. Grass roots politics in action.

  5. #5 Stephanie Z
    September 4, 2008

    He looks almost thoughtful there, almost contrite. But you know the only thing he’s thinking is “How many more years will they add if I slug everyone with a camera?” Remember that the next time you see a conservative looking thoughtful.

  6. #6 Alan Kellogg
    September 4, 2008

    Oh that sneaky McCain. He knows he’s getting booted around 2010 because of Abramoff, so he chose Palin knowing she’ll become President after his forced resignation. Just as Obama knows that his association with Wright and Ayers would force him to resign, making Biden President.

    That’s right, the two men selected the running mate they did knowing full well that the person they chose would become President of the United States of America. Thanks to Presidential candidate prerogatives our right to select the person we want to vote on for President has been circumvented. Once again politicians have stripped us of our natural rights.

    It comes down to this; who do you want as your President for the next four years, Sarah Palin or Joe Biden?

    Scenario: In the year 2011 Vice President Sarah Palin approaches President John McCain regarding assassination threats being made against him. President McCain reassures her with, “Worse comes to worse I am confident you will do a great job in the Oval Office.”

    Scenario: In the year 2011 Vice President Joe Biden approaches President Barack Obama regarding assassination threats being made against him. President Obama reassures him with, “Why would anybody want to shot me to make you President?”

  7. #7 Joel
    September 4, 2008

    Top Contributors

    John McCain
    Merrill Lynch $296,913
    Citigroup Inc $268,501
    Morgan Stanley $234,272
    Goldman Sachs $208,395
    JPMorgan Chase & Co $179,975
    AT&T Inc $174,497
    Greenberg Traurig LLP $150,387
    Credit Suisse Group $150,025
    Blank Rome LLP $149,426
    PricewaterhouseCoopers $140,120
    UBS AG $139,665
    US Government $137,117
    Bank of America $129,475
    Wachovia Corp $122,846
    Lehman Brothers $117,500
    Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher $104,250
    US Army $102,898
    FedEx Corp $99,753
    Bear Stearns $99,300
    Sidley Austin LLP $96,200

    Barack Obama
    Goldman Sachs $653,030
    University of California $576,839
    JPMorgan Chase & Co $414,760
    Citigroup Inc $408,299
    Harvard University $407,219
    Google Inc $404,191
    UBS AG $389,294
    Lehman Brothers $361,482
    National Amusements Inc $360,703
    Moveon.org $347,463
    Sidley Austin LLP $329,776
    Microsoft Corp $326,847
    Skadden, Arps et al $320,550
    Morgan Stanley $307,221
    Time Warner $305,538
    WilmerHale $275,132
    Jones Day $272,755
    Latham & Watkins $270,595
    University of Chicago $268,285
    Stanford University $258,388

    Grass roots in action, indeed.

  8. #8 Stephanie Z
    September 4, 2008

    Joel, you know you’ve got to source these things so we can figure out what we’re looking at.

  9. #9 Joel
    September 4, 2008

    Sorry Stephanie, here is the source.

    http://www.opensecrets.org/

  10. #10 tincture
    September 4, 2008

    Probably opensecrets.org which notes, as Joel does not, that This table lists the top donors to this candidate in the 2008 election cycle. The organizations themselves did not donate , rather the money came from the organization’s PAC, its individual members or employees or owners, and those individuals’ immediate families. Organization totals include subsidiaries and affiliates.

    Which makes a lot more sense considering that everything that would be good for Goldman Sachs as a company is pretty much standard Republican line. Deregulation, privatization, w/e.

  11. #11 tincture
    September 4, 2008

    Also of note, is that apparently 96% of Obama’s donations come individual contributions w/ less than 1% from PACs. In comparison to McCain who is at 81% from individual contributions.

  12. #12 Joel
    September 4, 2008

    So, how does that make more sense?

  13. #13 Joel
    September 4, 2008

    How is it that Obama’s total contributions from PACs is far less than any one of the PACs listed?

  14. #14 tincture
    September 5, 2008

    Like i said, opensecrets.org notes: This table lists the top donors to this candidate in the 2008 election cycle. The organizations themselves did not donate , rather the money came from the organization’s PAC, its individual members or employees or owners, and those individuals’ immediate families. Organization totals include subsidiaries and affiliates.

  15. #15 Greg Laden
    September 5, 2008

    So in theory, the number of dollars per company should be partly affected by the size of company measured in number of employees.

    When I first saw this I knew it was wrong (Thanks Stephanie) because there is no overlap between the lists. At the corporate level, most companies give roughly similar amounts to both candidates.

  16. #16 Stephanie Z
    September 5, 2008

    Joel, grassroots is the fact that Obama has raised more in contributions that don’t need to be reported individually (i.e., under $200 from an individual) than McCain has raised in total. From OpenSecrets:

    49% (under $200) times $389,423,102 (total raised by Obama) equals $190,817,320, which is greater than $174,165,949 (total raised by McCain).

    McCain has, however, received more from individuals donating over $4,600 ($31M to $26M).

  17. #17 Stephanie Z
    September 5, 2008

    Greg, I think you’re not seeing as much overlap as you usually would because of the way university employees have come out for Obama. Push further down on the Obama list and you should see more.

    I think someone, lots of someones, are saying, “Fuck the anti-elite crowd. We need someone smart right now.” Of course, since they’re mostly professors and administrators, they swear with their wallets. They leave the real swearing to the grad students who can’t afford much in the way of donations.

  18. #18 David Marjanovi?
    September 5, 2008

    Greg, what do you mean there’s no overlap?

    Citigroup Inc McCain $268,501 Obama $408,299
    Morgan Stanley McCain $234,272 Obama $307,221
    Goldman Sachs McCain $208,395 Obama $653,030
    JPMorgan Chase & Co McCain $179,975 Obama $414,760
    Lehman Brothers McCain $117,500 Obama $361,482
    Sidley Austin LLP McCain $96,200 Obama $329,776

    It is, however, interesting to note that each of these has given considerably more to Obama than to McCain.

    It is also interesting that there are several of the world’s top universities (California, Harvard, Chicago, Stanford), Microsoft, and Google among the top contributors of Obama but not McCain.

    The “we need someone smart right now” sentiment is palpable.

  19. #19 David Marjanovi?
    September 5, 2008

    Time Warner, too, has given more to Obama than anyone has given to McCain.

  20. #20 Joel
    September 5, 2008

    When I first saw this I knew it was wrong (Thanks Stephanie) because there is no overlap between the lists.

    Where is it wrong? As someone else pointed out, there are several instances of overlap.

  21. #21 Joel
    September 5, 2008

    Stephanie, that still leaves 51% greater than $200.00 and it’s hard for me to understand how someone who received over $3 million from the organizations listed above, yet only lists 1200.00 from PACs?

  22. #22 Stephanie Z
    September 5, 2008

    David and Joel, there is usually much greater overlap between the lists, enough that it’s apparent at a very quick glance. The difference threw me, too, which is part of why I asked Joel where they came from. It wasn’t just pure formality. :)

  23. #23 Joel
    September 5, 2008

    Sorry, that’s actually 1,600.00 from PACs.

    Individual contributions $374,333,800 96%
    PAC contributions $1,635 0%
    Candidate self-financing $0 0%
    Federal Funds $0 0%
    Other $15,087,667 4%

  24. #24 Stephanie Z
    September 5, 2008

    Joel, the employer of an individual making a donation is listed even if the individual does not contribute through their employer’s favorite PAC. This helps expose companies illegally giving money to their employees and having them funnel it to a candidate.

    The numbers you see above are not donations by the employers. They are donations by individuals that own or work for those employers. They are mostly not coming through PACs for either Obama or McCain.

  25. #25 Greg Laden
    September 5, 2008

    Stephanie: “Fuck the anti-elite crowd. We need someone smart right now.”

    Maybe. I’ll have to think about that.

    David: The “we need someone smart right now” sentiment is palpable.

    Right on, man!

    But David, seriously, I see that overlap, but if you look (typically) at a list that is corporate, not this list (which is NOT a list of corporate doners!) you will see much more of a match. Stephanie, right, I agree completely about the role of the universities. Note, the universities themselves are not giving a dime to any of these candidates.

  26. #26 Stephanie Z
    September 5, 2008

    Yeah, like public universities have any money to spare these days, even if they were able to make political contributions.

  27. #27 Joel
    September 5, 2008

    The numbers you see above are not donations by the employers.

    Stephanie, As an example, the above list shows Greenberg Traurig LLP giving $150,387 to John McCain. Does that mean, this didn’t come from Greenberg Traurig LLP as a company?

  28. #28 Greg Laden
    September 5, 2008

    The listed organizations did not themselves donate the indicated amount of money. The total is the sum of money donated by the company/institution’s PAC, the various members, employees, owners, and their families.

    Have you given money to a candidate? If you do, they ask you who you work for and you are bound by law to tell them.This money is eventually all added up. So for example, the money I’ve given to the Al Franken campaign would be listed in a table such as this one as comeing from the University of Minnesota.

Current ye@r *