Tying Abramahoff to Bush is a stretch, don't you think?
From Josh Marshall. Ah, yes, the correct spelling is Abramoff. Glad to get that cleared up.
-------------------------------------
(August 11, 2005 -- 11:59 PM EDT)
With Jack Abramoff under indictment, a number of readers have suggested that now he might flip and try to offer the feds some figures higher up the food-chain. (Remember, this indictment is not from the DC-based grand jury we've mainly been hearing about; it's a separate grand jury in Florida, tied to alleged fraud in the purchase of a casino boat line. Jack really gets around.)
But I hear it's a bit different. I hear Abramoff has already tried to do that, and been rebuffed. And this gets us into questions I think we'll be talking about a lot.
Why would he be rebuffed?
Decisions like that go right to the top. And since Abramoff's shenanigans are closely tied -- to be generous -- not just to members of Congress (DeLay, Ney, Burns, et al.) but to key GOP power players (Norquist, Reed, et al.) and quite probably Karl Rove himself, you can see why he (i.e., Abramoff) might have a harder time than your usual perp cutting a deal to implicate those above him.
That DC grand jury investigation of Abramoff can't go on forever. Eventually the lawyers at the Public Integrity Section will go to their bosses with some decisions about just who they want to indict. That's when Al Gonzales will have to show his cards.
-- Josh Marshall
talkingpointsmemo.com |
