« previous | MUCK HOME | next »
The Daily Muck
Nothing to see here. The House Democrats tabled a motion to reprimand Rep. John Murtha (D-PA) for threatening to remove another lawmaker’s future earmarks. Although the motion was tabled, Democrats had to stand up and vote not to consider whether one of their own violated a rule that came about as part the new Congress’ ethics reforms. Meanwhile, Dana Milbank has a good narration of the scene between Murtha and Rep. Rogers (R-MI). (Washington Post, NY Times)
The new Democratic Congress is struggling to pass comprehensive ethics reforms that were a keystone in 2006 midterm campaigns against a Republican party plagued by a “culture of corruption.” With Rep. John Murtha (D-PA) and other senior members bristling at change, Nancy Pelosi and her class of freshmen lawmakers are now worrying about their ability to pass a stripped down ethics bill in a vote this afternoon. (NY Times, Washington Post)
Lurita Doan, the chief of the General Services Administration who encouraged cooperation between her department and the White House, has violated the Hatch Act, according to the Office of Special Counsel. (Federal Times)
The sentencing of Jack Abramoff and his associate Michael Scanlon has been delayed again, since both men continue to cooperate with prosecutors. The Legal Times asks the obvious question: who else in Washington should be nervous? (The Hill)
Rep. William Jefferson’s (D-LA) battle with the FBI over the raids of his office is playing more than just a role of constitutional clarification. The legal question has stretched on long enough to push the original offense close to the statute of limitations. At this point, a new grand jury investigation of Jefferson would have to be launched before the constitutional issue would be decided, meaning the prosecution might not be able to base their case on evidence currently in their control. (New Orleans Times-Picayune)
Senators acknowledge that a vote of no-confidence on Attorney General Gonzales will likely be delayed until after the Memorial Day holiday, amid a heavy legislative schedule including immigration reform and Iraq war funding. (Roll Call)
Wyoming’s US Attorney Matthew Mead is confused why he was put on Kyle Sampson’s firing list. So are we. (Jackson Hole Star Tribune)
John McKay is out of the public sector, at least for now. The former US Attorney has agreed to a job as general counsel of Getty Images. (Seattle Post-Intelligencer)
Cheney is not in the phone records of the DC Madam. (Is he?) He can’t be. (Can he?) Roll Call doesn’t clear things up.
Comments (13)
Buck wrote on May 23, 2007 10:00 AM:..just a technical correction. Mrs. Doan hasn't been "found guilty".
Not just yet.
That comes later.
Passing Shot wrote on May 23, 2007 10:06 AM:re the second item, although sometimes he doesn't act or vote like one, Murtha is a Democrat.
(security code: "bent", as in corruption doesn't necessarily break by party line)
Jake Bryan wrote on May 23, 2007 10:12 AM:On McKay: I'm not sure of its current status, but as of a few years ago Getty Images was wholly owned by Bill Gates (personally, not through Microsoft). Gates was rolling up a near monopoly of image archives.
smile wrote on May 23, 2007 10:16 AM:I suppose that if Goodling's testimony were compelling enough, the Senate would reshuffle the schedule and find the time to hold a no-confidence vote?
Perhaps Schumer has a good idea what is expected to come out of her testimony today.
IMHO Immigration reform is important, but is a distant third to funding the troops and the Gonzo show.
NitPicker1 wrote on May 23, 2007 10:19 AM:"...Cheney isn’t not on the phone records of the alleged D.C. Madam..."
Hmmmm.
"Isn't not" is equivalent to "is".
Is this an attempt to get around the judge's injunction preventing the D.C Madam from revealing more names on her list? Or was it an editing error somewhere along the line? Inquiring minds want to know!
(I don't usually do the security code thing, but this one was too perfect to pass up: linen, as in airing dirty...)
pollen count wrote on May 23, 2007 11:18 AM:Hate to say it, but I wish TPM would do more coverage of the Murtha story. Do the Dems have any plausible reason beyond pure partisanship for squashing this? I find the whole story deeply disturbing -- is our commitment to ethics reform REALLY that shallow?
pollen count wrote on May 23, 2007 11:21 AM:Hate to say it, but I wish TPM would do more coverage of the Murtha story. Do the Dems have any plausible reason beyond pure partisanship for squashing this? I find the whole story deeply disturbing -- is our commitment to ethics reform REALLY that shallow? If the guy broke the new, Dem-authored rules in front of a passle of witnesses, why NOT sanction him in some fashion -- at the very least, he deserves it for his stupidity and brazen-ness.
Leisureguy wrote on May 23, 2007 11:35 AM:I am bitterly disappointed at the Democrat's support of corruption and their efforts to block ethical reforms. This is NOT what the country needs right now. Selfish Representatives interested in their own personal gain---it seems to be a trait of both parties.
Marty Didier wrote on May 23, 2007 6:31 PM:"Prosecutors can't get enough of Jack Abramoff and Michael Scanlon".
I especially like this one: "The question is who else should be nervous?"
There's a reason for this and "YES" there are others who are nervous. This is bigger than huge and it's not over yet either. It's also in other parts of the news but most people wouldn't know that it is.
If you have found it difficult to believe what is surfacing thus far, you haven't seen anything yet! Usually the best part is saved for last!
Marty Didier wrote on May 23, 2007 6:31 PM:"Prosecutors can't get enough of Jack Abramoff and Michael Scanlon".
I especially like this one: "The question is who else should be nervous?"
There's a reason for this and "YES" there are others who are nervous. This is bigger than huge and it's not over yet either. It's also in other parts of the news but most people wouldn't know that it is.
If you have found it difficult to believe what is surfacing thus far, you haven't seen anything yet! Usually the best part is saved for last!
Marty Didier wrote on May 23, 2007 6:31 PM:"Prosecutors can't get enough of Jack Abramoff and Michael Scanlon".
I especially like this one: "The question is who else should be nervous?"
There's a reason for this and "YES" there are others who are nervous. This is bigger than huge and it's not over yet either. It's also in other parts of the news but most people wouldn't know that it is.
If you have found it difficult to believe what is surfacing thus far, you haven't seen anything yet! Usually the best part is saved for last!
Marty Didier wrote on May 23, 2007 6:32 PM:"Prosecutors can't get enough of Jack Abramoff and Michael Scanlon".
I especially like this one: "The question is who else should be nervous?"
There's a reason for this and "YES" there are others who are nervous. This is bigger than huge and it's not over yet either. It's also in other parts of the news but most people wouldn't know that it is.
If you have found it difficult to believe what is surfacing thus far, you haven't seen anything yet! Usually the best part is saved for last!
Mentifex wrote on May 24, 2007 12:34 AM:We anti-war protesters are going to use this Hookergate thing to bring Cheney down, all the way to resigning his office, like another Republican vice-president, Spiro T. Agnew, did when he was revealed to have committed crimes when governor of Maryland. Agnew's crimes are insignificant in comparison with what Cheney has done to the people of Iraq, to three and a half thousand dead American soldiers, and to twenty thousand wounded American soldiers. The Nuremberg War Crimes Tribunal ought to be reconstituted, and we ought to see Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld hanging dead from the gallows of justice in punishment for their war crimes against humanity.