Sen. Stevens Refuses To Answer Questions About Federal Investigations
Sen. Stevens Refuses To Answer Questions About Federal Investigations
Yesterday, Sen. Ted Stevens (R) went home to Alaska for the first time since FBI officials raided his home on July 30.
The investigation centers around a remodeling of Stevens’s home in 2000, “thanks to the help of a top executive at local oil company Veco Corp.” Two former Veco Corp. executives recently pleaded guilty to federal bribery and conspiracy charges, which includes paying $242,000 in illegitimate consulting fees to Stevens’s son, Ben, formerly president of Alaska’s state senate.
Yet yesterday in a speech to the Anchorage Rotary Club, Stevens refused to address the ongoing federal investigations:
I know you’re interested in the items that have been in the media recently. I wish I could discuss those in detail. But to avoid any suggestion that I as a senator am attempting to influence an investigation by the Department of Justice, I simply cannot talk about it.
Stevens also defended his extensive earmarking for Alaska, stating, “I believe I was sent there [to Congress] to do the best I can to get the money to meet the needs of this state.”
But much of Stevens’s earmarking hasn’t benefited the state, as much as it has his personal cronies. Federal authorities are also investigating “a series of earmarks pushed through Congress over the past several years by Stevens for an Alaska nonprofit tied to Trevor McCabe, a former Stevens aide and a business partner of his son.”
Stevens’s popularity is now near its all-time low. Fewer than 45 percent of Anchorage voters have a “positive view” of Stevens, down from a “positive rating between September 2005 and April 2007″ of “between 58 percent and 63 percent.”
The Anchorage Daily News reports just “a few dozen” supporters showed up before Stevens’s speech yesterday to show support. The standing ovation for Stevens’s speech “went on for half a minute.”
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
57 Responses to “Sen. Stevens Refuses To Answer Questions About Federal Investigations”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Think ProgressContact Us
Donate
I can’t say I blame him, no one wants to talk about he skeletons in their closet.
August 8th, 2007 at 11:53 amGood for him. I’m sure it will all come out at his trial, and then it will be public record.
August 8th, 2007 at 11:54 amQustions should be directed to Sen. Schumer who directed this bogus raid.
August 8th, 2007 at 11:55 amHubris. He doesn’t even answer to his constituents.
He can answer from his jail cell…..
August 8th, 2007 at 11:56 amThis was a political stunt orchastrated by Chuck Schumer to help his party’s chances in the senate in 2008. It is raw politics, nothing more.
August 8th, 2007 at 11:58 amThis was a political stunt orchastrated by Chuck Schumer to help his party’s chances in the senate in 2008. It is raw politics, nothing more.
Comment by Dr. Dog — August 8, 2007 @ 11:58 am
Comments like this need substantiation, or they are meaningless.
August 8th, 2007 at 12:01 pm#5: I don’t know Dog — looks pretty smelly to me
August 8th, 2007 at 12:02 pm#5: I don’t know Dog — looks pretty smelly to me
Comment by Cynicon Implant — August 8, 2007 @ 12:02 pm
Another silly comment - no facts, no position that’s debatable.
August 8th, 2007 at 12:03 pmThis was a political stunt orchastrated by Chuck Schumer to help his party’s chances in the senate in 2008. It is raw politics, nothing more.
Comment by Dr. Dog — August 8, 2007 @ 11:58 am
#
Would you say the same thing about Duke Cunningham, Tom Delay, Bob Ney, Mark Foley, Doolittle, Renzi. etc.?
August 8th, 2007 at 12:04 pm#5: I don’t know Dog — looks pretty smelly to me
Comment by Cynicon Implant
Schumer’s fingerprints are all over this.
August 8th, 2007 at 12:05 pmSenators don’t direct the FBI and IRS. It’s that simple. Is Schumer also the one protecting Stevens’ son from bribery charges?
FWIW, Ted Stevens has an op-ed in the Anchorage Daily News today touting the F-22 Raptor squadron, arriving in Alaska today, as a boon to the local economy. Oh, and they kill terrorists too, if that’s important to you.
August 8th, 2007 at 12:05 pmSchumer’s fingerprints are all over this.
Comment by Dr. Dog — August 8, 2007 @ 12:05 pm
Substantiation please!!! Or it’s just a pointless rumor.
August 8th, 2007 at 12:06 pmThey don’t represent us.
But your stupid f*ckers can argue all day…
August 8th, 2007 at 12:07 pmOh, and they kill terrorists too, if that’s important to you.
Comment by Grumpy — August 8, 2007 @ 12:05 pm
Will Al Qaeda and his band of Terraists be coming across the Bering Sea?
August 8th, 2007 at 12:08 pmSenators don’t direct the FBI and IRS.
Comment by Grumpy
These are holdovers from Clinton’s FBI.
August 8th, 2007 at 12:08 pmTwo former Veco Corp. executives recently pleaded guilty to federal bribery and conspiracy charges, which includes paying $242,000 in illegitimate consulting fees to Stevens’s son, Ben, formerly president of Alaska’s state senate.
mmmm…crooks. What a nice family.
August 8th, 2007 at 12:08 pmOh, and they kill terrorists too, if that’s important to you.
Comment by Grumpy
Terrorists = baby seals.
August 8th, 2007 at 12:10 pmSchumer’s fingerprints are all over this.
Comment by Dr. Dog — August 8, 2007 @ 12:05 pm
Substantiation please!!! Or it’s just a pointless rumor.
Comment by The Republic of Stupidity — August 8, 2007 @ 12:06 pm
He is repeating what Rush said this morning. After all Rush is a paragon of journalistic integrity.
August 8th, 2007 at 12:11 pmStevens is a typically corrupt right-wing fascist who only cares about the money he and his corporate friends can make at the expense of taxpayers. And to anyone gullible enough to think this is nothing but a political stunt- I have some beautiful ocean front property in Lubbock, TX I’d like to sell you.
August 8th, 2007 at 12:14 pm“hasn’t benefited the state, as much as it has his personal cronies”
The author apparently doesn’t understand the good ole boy networks. The Senators personal cronies **ARE** the state. Anyone else doesn’t count.
August 8th, 2007 at 12:14 pmmmmm…crooks. What a nice family.
Comment by Juan C
Sen. Schumer is crooked for using his old connections in the FBI for politics. He is politicizing the department.
August 8th, 2007 at 12:14 pm#19 Comment by WaltinTexas — August 8, 2007 @ 12:14 pm
With Global Warming, I’m not sure that would be a bad deal. How can I buy ??????
August 8th, 2007 at 12:15 pmSen. Schumer is crooked for using his old connections in the FBI for politics. He is politicizing the department.
Comment by Dr. Dog
And? Who is defending that Schumer guy?
August 8th, 2007 at 12:18 pmTalk about the poster child for pork. Term limits folks sure would solve a whole slew of problems.
August 8th, 2007 at 12:22 pm“And? Who is defending that Schumer guy?”
Comment by Juan C
The “Doc” is chasing his tail - again.
August 8th, 2007 at 12:22 pmAnd you guys are always going ona bout how it’s the republicans who are closet gays…..sheesh!
http://www.news-tribune.net/ local/ local_story_219210228.html
August 8th, 2007 at 12:23 pmWhat do you mean by, “now you’ve gone and screwed the pooch”?
August 8th, 2007 at 12:23 pmTalk about the poster child for pork. Term limits folks sure would solve a whole slew of problems.
Comment by the fly-man
But when Democrats lard bills with pork that is ok with you, right?
Stevens may pork up bills, but that still doesn’t justify him getting set up with a bogus sting by Sen. Chuck Schumer.
August 8th, 2007 at 12:24 pmStevens may pork up bills, but that still doesn’t justify him getting set up with a bogus sting by Sen. Chuck Schumer.
Comment by Dr. Dog
Oh, I got it…we´re supposed to take sides and defend ours no matter what, right? Oh, well, Im not in then.
August 8th, 2007 at 12:26 pmPlease compare and contrast this position with the statements of Jean Valjean in Misérables.
August 8th, 2007 at 12:27 pmThese are holdovers from Clinton’s FBI.
Comment by Dr. Dog — August 8, 2007 @ 12:08 pm
Factual, verifiable substantiation????
August 8th, 2007 at 12:29 pmSting is a pretty good musician - he’s not bogus. I also think he’s heterosexual, and wouldn’t consent to anything involving “pork”, “lard”, or Sen. Ted Stevens. Please clarify your remarks.
Thanks.
August 8th, 2007 at 12:31 pmPlease compare and contrast this position with the statements of Jean Valjean in Misérables.
Comment by Marcus Aurelius — August 8, 2007 @ 12:27 pm
When Sen. Stevens was caught stealing Vaco Corp’s silverware, they told inspector Javert it was a gift, and offered him $242,000 worth of candlesticks as well!
August 8th, 2007 at 12:32 pmDon’t “debate” w/ the Talking Dog, folks. He’s just trying to tie the thread in knots. DON’T TRY TP PROVE HIM WRONG. You can’t refute a nonsense position and that’s what he’s presenting.
Name-calling does no good. Trying to “prove” him wrong” won’t work.
Now that we’ve established the Dog has no real position or facts, IGNORE THIS TROLL! DO NOT TAKE THE BAIT! SHOW SOME SOME INTELLIGENCE AND DISCIPLINE!!!
August 8th, 2007 at 12:32 pmOh, I got it…we´re supposed to take sides and defend ours no matter what, right? Oh, well, Im not in then.
Comment by Juan C — August 8, 2007 @ 12:26 pm
Don’t address comments to Dog directly and engage him, Juan. You know better.
August 8th, 2007 at 12:33 pmDr. Dog, did i specify that i would like term limits for one party? How could you possibly think that I was for pork if my solution would effect both parties?
August 8th, 2007 at 12:34 pmFactual, verifiable substantiation????
Comment by The Republic of Stupidity — August 8, 2007 @ 12:29 pm
He doesn’t have any, he was saying the same thing for Ney, Duke, Foley and all the rest..
He’s just a “Defender of the Corrupt”. Because his “team” sucks, they lost in 06, predictions of 08 that they will really be wiped out of Congress as well as the whitehouse.
Really the only hope the GOP has of maintaining any power, is another terrorist attack, and Dubya declare martial law.
Pathetic isn’t it? Dr Dog and his type are the ones Hitler loved to surround himself with. (Bush too).
August 8th, 2007 at 12:34 pmWhen it’s one of their own with his nuts in a vise, Rethugs are suddenly all about justice. Tell it to Padilla.
August 8th, 2007 at 12:35 pmSo when they asked him to answer questions, did he just say “NO!”?
August 8th, 2007 at 12:35 pmWhen Sen. Stevens was caught stealing Vaco Corp’s silverware, they told inspector Javert it was a gift, and offered him $242,000 worth of candlesticks as well!
Comment by toasterhead —
Schumer could have contacted his old sources in the FBI to conduct this raid any year. He chose to wait until Stevens was up for reelection for maxium impact. This is bogus, it’s poltics, and Schumer should be ashamed of himself.
August 8th, 2007 at 12:36 pm“Please compare and contrast this position with the statements of Jean Valjean in Misérables.”
Comment by Marcus Aurelius
When did TP morph into summer school?
Please don’t do that anymore - you make my head hurt!
August 8th, 2007 at 12:37 pmPoor Ted Stevens.
Couldn’t have happened to a nicer guy.
August 8th, 2007 at 12:38 pmDid I ever tell you that you’ve got a really pretty mouth? No? Well, you do!
August 8th, 2007 at 12:43 pmI think this Schumer guy is behind the polonium plot to kill Litvinenko.
August 8th, 2007 at 12:54 pmWhether it’s a sting instigated by Senator Schumer or not is irrelevant. If Senator Stevens pushed through earmarks for his own personal benefit or for the benefit of those directly supporting him, he must be held accountable.
If the voters believe he is innocent (or even if they believe he is guilty but like him anyway), they can return him to office in 2008 — unless he is found guilty of a crime and is convicted, of course.
I would like to point out that the standards of accountability we are holding Senator Stevens to should apply equally to ALL of our elected legislators, regardless of party. Stevens could just be the most obvious tip of the iceberg.
Observation about earmarks and other pork in spending bills — didn’t we give the president line-item veto power especially to address this? How come it’s never used?
August 8th, 2007 at 12:55 pm#45 — well said, missmolly
Your question about why so much pork and no line-item vetoing going on — I think it is simply the culture of Washington at this point. It’s been going on so long and Reps. and Sens. are in the culture for so long it’s like they don’t know any other way.
Someone else brought up the idea of term limits — might help change the culture for the better by reducing the average time spent in Wash.
August 8th, 2007 at 1:07 pmI would have to check, but I think the line item veto was taken away at the end of the Clinton Administration. Bush uses “signing statements” to break the law.
August 8th, 2007 at 1:20 pmSomeone else brought up the idea of term limits — might help change the culture for the better by reducing the average time spent in Wash.
Comment by Cynicon Implant — August 8, 2007 @ 1:07 pm
I agree term limits, as well as Chinese like methods for taking care of those in power who break the law, or ethics rules.
August 8th, 2007 at 1:21 pmThe line item veto was declared unconstitutional by the supremes in 1998.
August 8th, 2007 at 1:25 pmI would have to check, but I think the line item veto was taken away at the end of the Clinton Administration. Bush uses “signing statements†to break the law.
Comment by Krazny — August 8, 2007 @ 1:20 pm
You’re right — I DID check, and the line-item veto was declared unconstitutional in 1998, two years after it was granted.
Not that it would have made much difference to Bush — using the line-item veto would mean he would actually have to read the line-items.
August 8th, 2007 at 1:25 pmThe line item veto was declared unconstitutional by the supremes in 1998.
Comment by WaltTheMan — August 8, 2007 @ 1:25 pm
I see you responded at the same time I did with that info. Thanks!
Are these the same supremes that believe in giving Bush anything he wants? Wonder why they haven’t reversed themselves now that they have a Republican president?
August 8th, 2007 at 1:31 pmSomeone else brought up the idea of term limits — might help change the culture for the better by reducing the average time spent in Wash.
Comment by Cynicon Implant — August 8, 2007 @ 1:07 pm
I like the idea of term limits (if it’s OK for the president, it should be OK for both houses of Congress), but only if it’s on a national level — that way the playing field is level for everyone. I would not, for example, support any effort by the state I live in to limit our congresspeople if the rest of the states were not similarly limited. Why give up seniority if we don’t have to?
Why term limits? I believe our founding fathers believed that service to our country in the form of congressional participation was never intended to be a lifetime career. Yet that’s what it’s become. And the system has become one where the most senior fossils serving are able to funnel the most pork back to their states. And the sad thing is — the longer people spend in Washington, the greater the chance they serve the political system more than the people they represent.
Unfortunately, a constitutional amendment would be required to put term limits on Congress. And this will be almost impossible to ratify. If you look at the current seniority list of senators, you will see that the top ten in seniority come from not so big states.
Byrd (D-WV), 48 years
Kennedy (D-MA), 44 years
Inouye (D-HI), 44 years
Stevens (R-AK), 38 years
Domenici (R-NM), 34 years
Biden (D-DE), 34 years
Leahy (D-VT), 32 years
Lugar (R-IN), 30 years
Hatch (R-UT), 30 years
Baucus (D-MT), 28 years
It would not be easy asking the citizens of these states to give up their very senior senators and the resulting flow of pork. We would have a better chance of eliminating the Electoral College.
August 8th, 2007 at 1:55 pmHubris. He doesn’t even answer to his constituents.
He can answer from his jail cell…..
Comment by Zooey — August 8, 2007 @ 11:56 am
——————————–
Wow! Zooey is misusing her newly learned vocab. words!!!
Why am I not suprised?!?!?!
August 8th, 2007 at 2:09 pmGreat Work in here, Trolls.
KKKarl is proud!
August 8th, 2007 at 2:25 pmMaybe Ted can use the money intended for his “Bridge to Nowhere” for his and his son’s defenses. It’ll just take a quick-thinking lobbyist to think up a plausibly deniable explanation…
August 8th, 2007 at 2:44 pmSmell that? That’s Ted Stevens’ wrinkled ass roasting on a spit. Call it Baked Alaskan. Stick a fork in him; he’s done.
August 8th, 2007 at 4:49 pmStevens must step down from the Appropriations and Commerce committees. He is unfit to serve on the Commerce committee considering he doesn’t even know what the Internet is.
August 8th, 2007 at 5:12 pm