To Russia, Love Tom DeLay

[Guest guest]

S

Thu, 5 Jan 2006 15:40:51 -0800 (PST)

To Russia, Love Tom DeLay

 

 

 

To Russia, Love Tom DeLay

Russ Baker

January 04, 2006

 

Investigative reporter and essayist Russ Baker is a

longtime contributor to TomPaine.com. He is the

founder of the Real News Project, a new organization

dedicated to producing groundbreaking investigative

journalism. He can be reached at russ.

 

Once in a very long time, a scandal comes along that

seems to capture the essence of our times. I'd say

that scandal appeared on Saturday, when most of us

were too busy getting out the honkers and the booze to

notice.

 

Here's the crux: Was the Republican leader Tom DeLay

working on behalf of Russians against the American

public interest—and being compensated for it?

 

That's a pretty strong accusation, but unless I read

my Washington Post wrong, that is exactly what was

alleged in a front page story that appeared on

Saturday, the last day of 2005, and therefore may

escape proper notice. The article is even easier to

miss because of the mundane " more of the same "

headline above it: " The DeLay-Abramoff Money Trail :

Nonprofit Group Linked to Lawmaker Was Funded Mostly

by Clients of Lobbyist. "

 

First, some background. Tuesday, as the world knows by

now, Jack Abramoff, the powerful Republican lobbyist

and major DeLay associate, pleaded guilty to

conspiracy, fraud and tax evasion charges, agreeing to

cooperate in a federal corruption probe in Washington.

He faces up to 11 years in federal prison and must pay

$26.7 million in restitution.

 

For many months, we've been hearing stories about

Abramoff's shakedowns and indiscreet e-mails mocking

Indian tribal leaders and other outrages, many of them

with DeLay at the periphery or more directly involved.

 

The problem with these stories—which range from

machinations over gambling licenses and Pacific island

sweatshops to golfing junkets in Scotland—is that they

are complicated, seemingly obscure and center on

figures like Abramoff, who, while important, is merely

an enabler of a larger and more troubling reality: How

Republicans inside and outside of the Congress are

subverting democracy itself, with public funds going

to advance the personal interests of a small set of

powerful Americans.

 

The figures that really matter in this story are

bigger fish—among them DeLay, the architect and de

facto leader of the corporate takeover of Congress

under cover of a social revolution.

 

That's why the Post story should be one of the biggest

stories of the new year, even if it got lost on the

last day of the old one. It needed to be published on

another day, and it needed to be told differently. So,

here's a stab at capturing what I see as most

important about it.

 

Cumulatively, a careful reader comes away with the

following conclusion: DeLay was essentially being

bribed by Russians. Specifically, a phony nonprofit

set up by DeLay's former top aide was used to transfer

monies from powerful Russians to DeLay, in return for

his influencing legislation that could direct U.S.

taxpayer money into their pockets. The Russians,

working through super-lobbyist Jack Abramoff, put up

most of the $2.5 million " contributions " that funneled

through the outfit.

 

DeLay got free international trips and fancy free

office space in a secret townhouse, and his wife got

paid a sizable monthly salary for doing nothing.

Meantime, the nonprofit presented itself to the public

as devoted to promoting family values, and ran ads

attacking Democrats.

 

Monies were passed from Russian oil and gas executives

working with Abramoff through a now-defunct London law

firm and an obscure Bahamian company into an outfit,

set up by former DeLay Chief of Staff Ed Buckham,

masquerading as a grassroots advocacy group on family

values. The group, the U.S. Family Network, existed

for five years, but apparently did little or nothing

on family issues, though it actually had the temerity

to send out fundraising letters to the public, warning

that " the American family is under attack from all

sides: crime, drugs, pornography, and… gambling. " It

also paid for ads attacking vulnerable Democratic

candidates.

 

But what it was really doing, according to the

article, was influencing DeLay to support legislation

favorable to wealthy Russians—with the bill paid for

by American taxpayers. DeLay traveled to Moscow in

1997 and spent time with the Russians, though he

claimed to the House clerk that another nonprofit paid

for it and that he was in that country to " meet with

religious leaders there. "

 

Probably the most incendiary material in the Post

story was buried, beginning in paragraph 32. The

former president of the U.S. Family Network, a pastor

no less, actually says that Buckham explained to him

in 1999 that a $1 million payment passed through to

the organization was intended specifically to

influence DeLay's 1998 vote on a bill that enabled the

International Monetary Fund to use U.S. taxpayer

monies, in part, to bail out the Russian economy and

specific wealthy Russian investors involved with the

scheme.

 

" Ed told me, 'This is the way things work in

Washington,' " [Pastor Christopher] Geeslin said. " He

said the Russians wanted to give the money first in

cash. " Buckham, he said, orchestrated all the group's

fundraising and spending and rarely informed the board

about the details.

 

Tom DeLay and his cronies appear to have been

accepting what amounted to bribes from Russians with

connections to the Yeltsin-Putin regimes who wanted

U.S. taxpayer monies to keep flowing to benefit them.

They laundered the money, and, worse, did it through a

nonprofit organization, which, in turn, claimed to be

established to fight the decline in moral standards in

America. Even more appalling, while this phony charity

was doing this mercenary work, it was hitting up naïve

members of DeLay's political base for contributions.

 

The fine print is equally tawdry. Mrs. DeLay's salary

of " at least $3,200 each month for three of the years

the group existed " (that's a total of at least

$115,200) was supposedly in compensation for supplying

Buckham with a list of " lawmakers' favorite

charities. " The Post mentions this only briefly, and

with a straight face. But the transparent

ridiculousness of this on so many levels offers a

bounty for journalists who pursue it.

 

How better to capture the brazen hypocrisy of all this

than through tabloid-style headlines:

 

Revenue from the phony `family' charity was used to

finance radio ads attacking vulnerable Democratic

lawmakers. So, let's see: " Putin Buddies Paid For

Attacks On Dems "

Other funds went to finance the cash purchase of a

townhouse near DeLay's congressional office. DeLay's

guys called it " the Safe House. " So, maybe this

headline: " Russian Cash Bought DeLay Safe House "

The point man for this, DeLay's former aide Buckham,

had been executive director of the Republican Study

Committee, a group of `fiscally conservative' House

members. Headline: " Fiscal Conservatives Give U.S.

Money To Rich Russians "

The Russian angle is especially important, as recent

developments show a growing clampdown by Putin on

democracy in Russia—from arrests of political

opponents to curtailment of the press—along with

blatant attempts to intimidate former Soviet republics

like Ukraine. This puts the so-called freedom-loving

GOP leadership in bed with the least savory of the

holdover Communists.

 

There will be many developments in the weeks ahead,

now that Abramoff has cut a deal with the feds. When

he begins his promised cooperation with the

prosecution, he may have things to say about many

other matters, including the U.S. Family Network.

 

But it's important in these overwhelming times to stay

focused. Ultimately, these cases are not about Jack

Abramoff, a fellow most of us never even heard of

until fairly recently. They are about what has

happened to this country. Put simply, the American

people were taken to the cleaners by a group of

charlatans in the guise of faith healers who didn't

even believe in their own product.

 

I doubt The Washington Post would give front page play

to such a story—or have assigned a reporter with

experience covering national security—if this was not

the big one.

 

Ladies and gentlemen, may I introduce you to

RussiaGate?

 

http://www.tompaine.com/print/to_russia_love_tom_delay.php