Eisler Rebuts White House Spin on Abramoff Email
Washingtonian editor Kim Eisler, the recipient of the Abramoff email first published by ThinkProgress, appeared tonight on CNN’s Situation Room. Despite Scott McClellan’s insistence earlier today that Bush and Abramoff did not have a relationship, Eisler shows how the facts prove otherwise.
BLITZER: What about the president? What kind of relation did the President have with him?
EISLER: Well, the President, as — had already been established that there there were at least six to ten pictures of Abramoff with the President. There’s a picture of Abramoff’s wife with Laura Bush. In one of the meetings, it was not at a Christmas or Hanukkah party as the White House keeps insisting, but in fact was taken in the Old Executive Office building where Jack had taken several of his clients up to shake hands with the President…
BLITZER: So did you get the sense, based on your conversations, your e-mail with Jack Abramoff that if the resident saw Jack Abramoff, he’d know who he is?
EISLER: He definitely knows who he is. Jack was a pioneer who raised a hundred thousand dollars for his campaign.
BLITZER: A pioneer is a big-giver of the Republican party –
EISLER: Every time the president would look at the list of the campaign contributors, Jack’s name was the first on the list because it starts with ‘AB.’ The second thing is that he discussed with Jack on numerous occasions the fact that Jack has twin daughters and so does the President have twin daughters and that was a point of commonality between the two of them.
Read Abramoff’s emails to Eisler here.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
89 Responses to “Eisler Rebuts White House Spin on Abramoff Email”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Bush lied but nobody died this time…yet.
February 9th, 2006 at 8:34 pmthe shit hits the fan and keeps fouling the air all over the country . When would it stops , everybody knows : IMPEACHMENT.
February 9th, 2006 at 8:37 pmHe didn’t really say “resident,” did he? (snicker)
February 9th, 2006 at 8:41 pmCongratulations, guys. I am an avid reader. It’s great to see you making a real difference. Score another one for new media, the blogosphere, netroots. Whatever you want to call it - it’s clear that a paradigm shift is on and it’s so satisfying to watch the wheels in motion. Great job.
February 9th, 2006 at 8:43 pmBusted!!!
February 9th, 2006 at 8:45 pmI just love it!
In the middle of that reuters article link from below gopmsnbc puts this:
“Click for related story
February 9th, 2006 at 8:47 pmDemocrat Reid met often with Abramoff”
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/11261495/
According to Randi Rhoads of Air America, Abramoff visited Bush’s ranch at Crawford no less than 4 times and brought various guests to meet the Prez.
February 9th, 2006 at 8:57 pmI predict Scotty sweating like the idiot child of Richard Nixon under 1000 megawatt klieg lights as the relationship between his master and Jack Abramoff becomes more and more obvious.
February 9th, 2006 at 9:03 pmOn the Bush “We foiled a plot” front, I am sure everybody is aware that Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa said that he did not know anything about this plot.
Scott McCellan had this answer today:
Associated Press
February 9, 2006
White House says California was notified about release of info
So, the White House did tell LA leaders YESTERDAY!
February 9th, 2006 at 9:18 pmGeorgie is just too stupid for his own good… when the Abramoff-Bush connection first came out, Bush should have tackled it head on: “Yeah, Jack’s a friend of mine. I’m very disappointed with his actions with regard to Indian tribes and unethical lobbying, which I condemn.”
ok, it would have been bullshit, but it would have stopped Bush from backing himself into a corner like he now has… he has no choice but to continue the lie now…
February 9th, 2006 at 9:25 pmI think Bush could be a lot less of a burden on the republican party if he was a little more savy, but he is a very blunt, self righteous, snobby, bastard instead.
I think this is the point where you say “It is easy to draw flies with honey than it is with vinegar?
February 9th, 2006 at 9:29 pm#9 LA saved from terra(3+ years ago).Nice timing on the announcement once again. HOW Conveeeeeeeeeniant.
February 9th, 2006 at 9:29 pmPete Bogs,
I also forgot to mention that the republicans also like to place blame rather than change.
February 9th, 2006 at 9:30 pmAbramoff was one of Bushes biggest fundraisers.
Abramoff met with Bush multiple times and theres pictures to prove it.
Abramoff was on his transition team with the Dept. of Interior.
Bush says he don’t know him.
Give me a break.
How stupid does he think we are?
February 9th, 2006 at 9:31 pm#6
That story has now been thoroughly discredited by Josh Marshall over at Talking Points Memo since very important facts were left out.
Here’s a link for you.
Enjoy it.
February 9th, 2006 at 9:31 pmSo, does this latest revelation about the thwarted terrahist attack on LA elevate the Skittle Alerts (and the subsequent “Ain’t we doing a heckuva job fightin’ the terrahists)level to boisenberry?
February 9th, 2006 at 9:34 pmThink Progress, I’m starting to quiver out of control with anxiety; you mean The White House and even Scott McFelon have lied to us and are continuing to do so?
February 9th, 2006 at 9:35 pmJosh Marshall didn’t do a thing, he just called a bunch of Reid shills and got their spin.
Harry Reid has been part of the Democrat culture of corruption for decades, and his corruption is being exposed.
Who is behind this?
Howard Dean.
Howard Dean is feeding the media information to discredit Reid.
Howard Dean has done opposition research on Harry Reid
Howard Dean is turning the knife on Harry Reid in order to remove a pro-life figure from the pro-Abortion Democrat party.
February 9th, 2006 at 9:40 pmThe problem is that W believes he can never be wrong. I guess that would make him an A student at any institution, including MIT.
February 9th, 2006 at 9:44 pmOk Gary, whatever.
So, check this out:
This exchange from from right after the Scott McClellan exchange that TP has posted above. Just scroll down a tad.
Ha ha
How come the “liberal media” didn’t write about this stupid theory being debunked at the WHite House Press Briefing?
February 9th, 2006 at 9:45 pmGary, sweetie, the entire AP story has already been diagnosed as a republican spin piece. The lobbyists and legislators involved have already said that Reid didn’t act according to the wishes of the Abramoff firm.
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/007647.php
I know your partisan brain is incapable of processing facts, or new information - but son, it’s a little embarrasing for you today. But I forgive you. Clearly you’re doing the best you can, with the limited material that the republican scandals give you.
And how’s that flare gun coming? You promised to take one for the team - why would you lie about something like that anyway?
February 9th, 2006 at 9:46 pmMaybe Gary can’t afford a flare gun. How about a road flare from the local auto parts store. Just remove the nail before insertion.
February 9th, 2006 at 9:49 pmGary, are you part of the operation along with Jeffrey/AKA mighty aphrodite? Should I go do some research and see if I can unveil your secret identity in the same way I did our fake goddess?
http://thinkprogress.org/ 2006/ 02/ 09/ boehner-supports-investigation/ #comments
It’s amazing that partisan republicans would go about doing what appears to be a concerted and intentional effort to spread propaganda and deceit. You’d think they’d be more interested in morality, integrity and the american good - but apparently the level of partisan treachery they will support knows no bounds. Poor lost little souls.
February 9th, 2006 at 9:50 pmThe AP story is probably the work of Howard Dean’s campaign to destroy the few moderates left in the DNC
February 9th, 2006 at 9:50 pmAnd use Vasilene.
February 9th, 2006 at 9:51 pmWalt,
These guys all seem to come from conservativeunderground.com, republicanoperative.com and the rightsociety.com. From what I can see, these aren’t just the ordinary partisans - they’re the lost it all, looney toons launched off the cliff partisans.
February 9th, 2006 at 9:52 pmSays the person who thinks that Howard Dean is doing a good job
February 9th, 2006 at 9:54 pm“The AP story is probably the work of Howard Dean’s campaign to destroy the few moderates left in the DNC
Comment by Gary Ruppert — February 9, 2006 @ 9:50 pm”
Sweetie, it’s more likely the work of a partisan republican much like yourself who’d like to distract attention from the level of corruption, lies and immorality that inflicts the republican leadership. Just blaming Dean, and trying to wedge Democrats would be a side bonus for you pumpkin.
But I forgive you - desperate people like yourself often say and do desperate things. Like that comment where you PROMISED to use a flare gun on yourself if Libby was indicted. How come you have so little honesty and integrity Gary - is it because you’re a partisan republican like Abramoff? ;)
February 9th, 2006 at 9:54 pm“Says the person who thinks that Howard Dean is doing a good job
Comment by Gary Ruppert — February 9, 2006 @ 9:54 pm”
I’m not much of a partisan myself, Dean seems alright - and certainly more competent than Mizz Mehlman is. And as I understand it he’s narrowed the fundraising gap from 3/1 to 2/1 that the GOP traditionally had. And the main job of a party boss is fundraising - so that sounds like a good job to the sidelines person pumpkin. But I’m sure you’ll find some partisan way to disregard reality, and spin yourself a comfortable lie. And I forgive you for that pumpkin.
February 9th, 2006 at 9:56 pmGary,
February 9th, 2006 at 9:58 pmWhat about the idiot who says everyone in his admin is doing a ‘heckofajob’? Maybe he means blowjob. Is that the same as sucking butt from the other end?
And Gary,
Sweetie,
Here’s a link to that flare gun you were promising to use on yourself. I would prefer that you just apologize and admit that you lied, over using violence on yourself. But if you feel like your honor, honesty and integrity require that you followthrough on your promise - well just make sure that you own that decision yourself pumpkin.
February 9th, 2006 at 9:59 pmThat AP article on Harry Reid debunked
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/007647.php
February 9th, 2006 at 10:02 pmWhat about the fact that Abramoff’s firm held a fundraiser for Reid?
Two months later, Abramoff’s firm threw a fundraiser for Reid at its Washington office that netted the Nevada senator several more donations from Greenberg Traurig lobbyists and their spouses. Ayoob was instrumental in staging the event, Reid’s office said.
February 9th, 2006 at 10:04 pmAnd Gary,
Sweetie,
If those GOP research papers were true, don’t you think they’d have used them on Reid during the last election? You’re such a gullible little partisan - poor thing. I bet you were gullible enough to believe the swiftboat smears weren’t you? Poor thing - that partisan brain of your should be studied. Oh wait, folks like you already have been, and they discovered that your reasoning centers were turned off - it explains the gullibility pumpkin. Poor thing, you have my pity.
February 9th, 2006 at 10:04 pmRightPunch,
February 9th, 2006 at 10:04 pmGary will also need a telescopic sight the find the target. Can’t find it otherwise.
Let’s keep this discussion substantive and not let it degenerate into a string of personal attacks. Thanks.
February 9th, 2006 at 10:06 pmPeace.
February 9th, 2006 at 10:07 pm“What about the fact that Abramoff’s firm held a fundraiser for Reid?
Comment by Gary Ruppert — February 9, 2006 @ 10:04 pm”
That depends on how you look at pumpkin. From a bribery standpoint - it means they were incompetent, because Reid didn’t back the legislation. From a ‘tie in’ standpoint, it was the firm Abramoff used to work for, and not the independent solo work he apparently did his bribery through. And finally from a lobbying standpoint, these sorts of lobbying affairs are a way to common, and unfortunate product of america’s election system. The question is did they get something for their lobbying, and according to the other legislators involve and Reid’s voting record - the answer was no.
So pumpkin, you’ve got a lot of smoke, but no fire. A quid pro quo requires both the ‘quid’ and the ‘pro quo’ in order to be bribery.
I know that this requires reasoning, and the partisan brain you possess can’t perform that task - so this is for the benefit of those who can actually read, reason and think for themselves pumpkin. I forgive you for not being able to get past your partisan brain. Keep trying though sweetie, and I’ll keep hope alive for you!
February 9th, 2006 at 10:08 pmJudd,
I’m guessing you don’t like us asking Gary to honor his agreement? Sorry. I agree it is off topic, but I’m not sure it qualifies as ‘person’ does it?
February 9th, 2006 at 10:10 pmWhat agreement?
February 9th, 2006 at 10:12 pmGary, I posted it multiple times. You promised that if anyone was indicted in the Plame case you’d take a flare gun and shove it in a dark place and fire it. I personally think that’s rude and violent - but hey, you promised.
February 9th, 2006 at 10:14 pmThis one :
February 9th, 2006 at 10:15 pmhttp://thinkprogress.org/terms = Terms of Use agreement
Judd,
Just so you know, I identified one of the bloggers as a known ‘operative’ associated with the conservative underground and several other sites. He’s no ordinary poster, and a blog administrator for those sites. Perhaps you don’t care the source, or origin of the partisans who post here - but I thought it might be of interest to you that your site appears to be ‘targeted’ by the GOP ‘operative’ bloggers themselves. I think that means congratulations :)
February 9th, 2006 at 10:16 pmGary Ruppert, the fact that you post stupid crap all the time and don’t back up anything you say with facts. Anything you do post has already been debunked. To me, this is an agreement that you don’t want to debate, you just want to spin.
February 9th, 2006 at 10:18 pmWalt,
I like that agreement too. Although I have to say based on my reading - versus what I see posted - I’m rather vague on what constitutes its enforcement or resulting removal or banning. After all, much of what’s posted by the partisan republicans in particular is completely unrelated and off topic from the threads.
Judd, is there some specific criteria you follow, or is it a case by case judgement you apply? More clear guidance would be helpful I have to admit. For instance you scolded Spudge the other night for discussing 9/11, yet you then posted a 9/11 thread like the very next day. It’s just strange to me, that’s all. And I hope you understand my inquiry?
February 9th, 2006 at 10:19 pmI saw Blizer interview eisler. And while Eisler said jack knew bush, Blitzer never pointed out the obvious. jack was on bush’s transition team. bush would have to be the retard he pretends to be not to remember him.
February 9th, 2006 at 10:23 pmI was like “I don’t see anything aimed at me.”
February 9th, 2006 at 10:27 pmHOT! TIP!,
February 9th, 2006 at 10:33 pmI’ll reply in the other thread.
Osama doctored those pictures. And then handed them off to… handed them off to… to.. Michael Moore!! ya ya thats it and a.. and Michael Moore g gave them to …ah .. ah… ah… ah screw it! SCREW IT! I knew the guy ok. He just gave me a little money, I shook some hands, Rove took care of the rest. I dont ask questions around here ok!? I just nod yae or nae when Rove or Dick suggestion somethin.
February 9th, 2006 at 10:50 pmOff-subject,
February 9th, 2006 at 10:55 pmSpudge_Boy,
We’re in trouble - they think that we have done a mind-meld! A whipper-snapper an an old fart. WTF, we agree about 68% of the time.
An old fart who should not try to touch-type.
February 9th, 2006 at 10:58 pmThis story ain’t doin’ it for me. It’s very “gossipy”. Am I just tired? Scandal fatigue? Unless it’s hurting national security, watching cities die, or spying on Americans without probable cause I just can’t get wood like I used to…
February 9th, 2006 at 11:07 pmWaltTheMan,
If we agree on logic, then so be it. It is probably the teriary stuff we don’t agree on and that stuff isn’t as important as the big picture I think.
Typing. Hell, when I was in school, they had just put in the computer lab. IBM compatible 8088. Duel 5 1/4″ floppies. One for loading DOS and the other for saving you work on. The school figured keyboard/typing computer teacher/typing teacher. She was like a deer in headlights.
February 9th, 2006 at 11:08 pmSpudge_Boy,
February 9th, 2006 at 11:27 pmIf you were programming, the Assembler or Compiler would catch the errors (most of the time). One of the worst bugs I ever pursued was when someone used a ‘S’ instead of ‘ST’ in an assembly program. Go to the 360 green card to understand the difference. Both assemble without protest.
#55, how about some Viagra? There’s a dick in here somewhere…
February 9th, 2006 at 11:28 pm#56, #57 oh for heaven’s sake, you’ll be telling us who played you at mission control in ‘Apollo 13′ next….
February 9th, 2006 at 11:30 pmTerrytheTurtle,
Tom Hanks played me. Walt, who played you?
February 9th, 2006 at 11:33 pmI can’t do that, but, in Dallas, my father had 6 of the Mercury 7 over for barbeque. He was on the teet.
February 9th, 2006 at 11:34 pm#60,
February 9th, 2006 at 11:37 pmvon Braun.
Crap, my wife’s Dad’s house is right behind Ben Rothlesberger’s grandma’s house. She says Ben’s dad taught her to how to throw a spiral too. I’m still waiting for her seven figure football career to get going….
February 9th, 2006 at 11:42 pmThat’s about all I can come up with…
February 9th, 2006 at 11:43 pmMaybe if the Democrats actually had some ideas instead of running on another “Bush is evil” platform (like they did in 2000, 2002, and 2004), then they wouldn’t be in so much trouble when they are exposed as being crooks.
February 9th, 2006 at 11:43 pmYeah, you all are going to trust a convicted felon here?
Comment by Gary Ruppert — February 8, 2006 @ 4:02 pm
Why is it illegal for Jack Abramoff to give money to someone? He gave the legal limit, and he did it without strings.
Comment by Gary Ruppert — January 3, 2006 @ 12:58 pm
Yay Gary!!!
February 9th, 2006 at 11:45 pmLooks like the AA meeting is over…
February 9th, 2006 at 11:45 pm… where Gary lives.
February 9th, 2006 at 11:46 pmGo Gary Go!!
Yeah, you all are going to trust a convicted felon here?
Comment by Gary Ruppert — February 8, 2006 @ 4:02 pm
Why is it illegal for Jack Abramoff to give money to someone? He gave the legal limit, and he did it without strings.
February 9th, 2006 at 11:46 pmComment by Gary Ruppert — January 3, 2006 @ 12:58 pm
Gary, Gary he’s our man, if he can’t do it, no one can!!!! Hoorayyy!!!!!
Why is it illegal for Jack Abramoff to give money to someone? He gave the legal limit, and he did it without strings.
Comment by Gary Ruppert — January 3, 2006 @ 12:58 pm
Yeah, you all are going to trust a convicted felon here?
February 9th, 2006 at 11:48 pmComment by Gary Ruppert — February 8, 2006 @ 4:02 pm
I think I would have to start feeling compassionate for Garo, his partisan brain is running him, I too love you pumpkin patch.
February 9th, 2006 at 11:50 pmHOT! TIP!,
February 9th, 2006 at 11:50 pmIch vehrenstehen. Loved the brew too. Fresh Dinkel Achker und meitwurst - Heaven! (Stuttgart). That’s ‘einen bier bitte’.
#69, I’m still trying to understand this post. I can’t understand it, I’m not worthy. I have a few ideas:
1. Paper voting 100% hand counted
2. Exit polls carried out by the UN and elections verified by UN observers
3. Government mandated access to TV channels, no buying of airtime, only parties scoring significant % in local opinion polls get airtime
4. Disband the electoral college, go to direct voting for president.
There are some ideas, but then I’m not a Demo, so you can trash them now.
February 9th, 2006 at 11:53 pmTTT,
February 10th, 2006 at 12:01 am1 and 2 are crucial, 3 is doubtful plus 4 is dubious (and immaterial in 2006).
I hope you folks realize that at some point you are just kicking a dead horse. Gary Ruppert, all the trolls are dead, rotting horse corpses. By even acknowledging their presences and responding to them and their foul odors, you are in essence, kicking a dead horse. By ignoring them, you bury them, in silence and their own putrefication. Keep kicking the one half dead horse that counts but it ain’t the trolls here. It’s the clowns soon to be out of office.
February 10th, 2006 at 12:02 amWalt, the aim of 3. is to cut off the reason for the cash need to get off the ground - airtime. If your party gets say 5% of the vote locally in a local election, then your candidate gets to run his/her mouth in a 30 second spot and the station runs it as a public service, like the disaster warning alerts and so on…their needs to be an ombudsman to watch for the spots that the shifty ones run to get into ads and programming, but that’s possible. No money needed for airtime, campaigns get infinitely cheaper, not as much money needed from donors…. well it probably won’t happen as you say, there’s too much vested interest. Like asking a lunatic to give back the keys to the asylum…
February 10th, 2006 at 12:09 am#79, normally, I’d agree but how can you make your case sucessfully, if you can’t parry and riposte the ‘arguments’ of the other side? And there are also some vile individuals who visit this site that need to be confronted whenever possible so that their views do not gain credence amongst the easily led.
February 10th, 2006 at 12:12 amBush and Abramoff were chums, so for George to claim otherwise is one of his LIES! I think this whole episode proves that Dubya is incapable of telling the truth about anything, so he is unfit to remain as president!
February 10th, 2006 at 12:18 amGlue Factory,
Yes, “ignore the troll” sounds good on electrons, but If I would confront a person who is lying in person, why wouldn’t I do it on the Internet. It is even more imprtant, as a conversation ends up blowing away in the wind and electrons stay on the Internet for a long time, or until George Bush needs to scrubs some images of himsefl yucking it up with a corrupt lobbiest.
See that, I got back on topic. Sweet.
February 10th, 2006 at 12:18 amSpudge, please be aware that I am trying to say something humorous here, not wanting to offend. But I had pegged you as more of a “Clint Howard”, than a “Tom Hanks”. In that it would just not be right if “Clint” wasn’t in the movie! It’s tradition!!
February 10th, 2006 at 1:19 amFacing increasing pressure over his ties to convicted Republican lobbyist Jack Abramoff, George W. Bush is doing what comes naturally: playing dumb. And why not? It worked for him with Ken Lay and the Valerie Plame leak.
For the details, see:
February 10th, 2006 at 1:21 am“Playing Dumb: Bush on Abramoff, Lay and Libby.”
Ok, I know this is off topic, but election reform was mentioned. My 2 cents:
1. Election day needs to be a national holiday
2. Instant runoff voting
http://www.instantrunoff.com/faq.asp
3. Non-partisan funded campaigning
February 10th, 2006 at 2:04 amgood work Think progress. excellent.
February 10th, 2006 at 2:06 amhttp://video.google.com/ videoplay?docid=-5137581991288263801&q=loose+change
February 10th, 2006 at 4:35 amGentlemen,
Women,
It is all true:
See this particular link:
http://www.highvizpr.com/hubzone_military_project1
HighVizPR had projects such as these, and part of their job was to have the Tribal officials meet and greet top level officials at the Old Executive Office Building. Jack Abramoff had the meetings with George Bush.
~Tallu~
February 10th, 2006 at 5:23 am#20. Eureka!
A highjacker with explosives in his shoes would use the additional force to FORTIFY the tons and tons of explosives provided by plane fuel to do extra building damage! (satire).
In reality the story is, at best, loosely tenable and announced at the most effective time to say. “See???!!!! Our efforts are protecting you.”
In response to the admininstration: Go ahead and monitor terrorists, but either follow the laws (FISA) or challenge the law to make oversight more efficient: Either way, provide for the oversight required by the 4th admendment when American citizens are involved. We trust you, but….ONLY AS FAR AS WE CAN VERIFY (i.e. throw you) that you are not using spying for political advantage or unrelated to Al Quaeda/ 9-11-01.
That is why oversight is being demanded by an increasing number of Republicans, too. It comes to a matter of trust. Most Americans now don’t trust the Administration. Some that want to trust, but not without some verification or oversight (a reason the Constitution was written in the first place - to limit power).
Regarding the Abramoff connection: I can’t wait for the other shoe(s) to drop. No need to comment, it’ll all play out on its own.
February 10th, 2006 at 6:48 amBono is Brian Peppers!
February 10th, 2006 at 8:14 amput me down for two 8×10’s and a dozen wallet-sized pics of Dishonest George and Dishonest Abe together when they’re released…
http://blogdebogs.blogspot.com/ 2006/ 02/ picture-this-jack-abramoff-and-george.html
February 10th, 2006 at 10:01 amTtT, I like your list, particularly doing away with the electoral college (Wayne and I have talked about that for years.) I’ve been thinking about this recently, and would like to see campaign funding come from, say, only registered voters, or somehow through the donation from your income tax. I’ve got a few other ideas, but this would not be the appropriate thread, right, Judd?
February 10th, 2006 at 11:10 amBush should have tackled it head on: “Yeah, Jack’s a friend of mine. I’m very disappointed with his actions with regard to Indian tribes and unethical lobbying, which I condemn.â€
Comment by Pete Bogs #10
Pete,
I guess there’s something about being in the seat of power that “intoxicates” the powerful…
…so much so that it makes them believe they can get away with pretty much anything…
…but as far as bushiva is concerned…
Remember his infamous, “Fool me once…” blunder?
…well this moron NEVER learns…
…one would’ve thought he would’ve remembered what happened with the ‘Kenny Boy’ Lay denial…
…Oh crap! That’s right NOTHING happened, they just swept IT under the rug too…
February 10th, 2006 at 11:43 am#95, I forget where I saw this, but the White House early on decided on a definite policy regarding scandals: to deny deny, deny, lie if necessary, but never, never admit fault.
February 10th, 2006 at 5:58 pmOk, so Abramoff met Bush at the White House and perhaps at Crawford. And, this implicates/connects GW with the Abramoff’s scandal. But, what I want to know is how “chummy” were they? You know, did they make-out? Well, dammit, who knows? With people like Jeff Gannon in the White House who knows what the former cheerleader is up to?
February 12th, 2006 at 5:03 am