(I fixed the ActBlue form and added the YouTube video. You’ll also see buttons to set up monthly contributions to the Calitics ActBlue recipients. Let me know if you have any questions. – promoted by Brian Leubitz)

The US Attorney scandal has gobbled up a lot of the headlines recently, but its origin can be traced back five years, well before the firing of 8 federal prosecutors for suspicious reasons in December 2006. 

Actually, we have to go back to the island nation of Guam, a well-connected DC lobbyist who’s now sitting in a jail cell, and a certain Congressman from Roseville.

Jack Abramoff made a cool seven million dollars from contracts with the Commonwealth of the Northern Marianas Islands.  His duties were essentially to shield the American protectorate from all US labor laws, while retaining the ability to place a “Made in the USA” label on any of their products.  This successful lobbying effort allowed the CNMI to create sweatshops where sexual slavery, child labor and forced abortions were part of the landscape.  And the greatest ally to Jack Abramoff in Congress on this issue was John Doolitte (CA-04), called a “hero for the CNMI” in internal emails between Abramoff and the CNMI government.

Abramoff’s success in stopping all efforts to reform the labor situation in the CNMI caught the notice of other Pacific island protectorates.  He soon got a job lobbying for Guam, and sought to lobby against a court reform bill which would weaken the authority of the Guam Superior Court.  The Superior Court hired Abramoff, unusual in itself, and paid him in a series of laundered $9,000 checks funneled through a Laguna Beach lawyer.  Abramoff was trying to hide his involvement lobbying for the Superior Court while seeking to torpedo the bill that would impact them.

Now, Guam had a federal prosecutor, named Fred Black, and he saw this business and opened a grand jury investigation.  At precisely that time, he was fired.

A US grand jury in Guam opened an investigation of controversial lobbyist Jack Abramoff more than two years ago, but President Bush removed the supervising federal prosecutor, and the probe ended soon after […]

(Abramoff’s financial) transactions were the target of a grand jury subpoena issued Nov. 18, 2002, according to the subpoena. It demanded that Anthony Sanchez, administrative director of the Guam Superior Court, turn over all records involving the lobbying contract, including bills and payments.

A day later, the chief prosecutor, US Attorney Frederick A. Black, who had launched the investigation, was demoted. A White House news release announced that Bush was replacing Black.
The timing caught some by surprise. Despite his officially temporary status as the acting US attorney, Black had held the assignment for more than a decade.

Black was looking into other official corruption on the island as well, so it was sensible that Abramoff would want him out of the picture.

This connection to the current scandal, a clear case of firing a federal prosecutor to shield Republicans from corruption investigations, has caught the notice of the Congress. 

Two House committee chairmen yesterday asked that the congressional probe into the firing of eight U.S. Attorneys be widened to include the case of acting U.S. Attorney Fred Black who was replaced in 2002 after he began investigating the now-convicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff and his dealings with Guam and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands.

California Congressman George Miller, the Education and Labor Committee chairman, and West Virginia Congressman Nick Rahall, the Natural Resources Committee chairman, have repeatedly pressed for a full investigation of Abramoff’s dealings with the CNMI and its sweatshop industry and of the replacement of Fred Black, the then-acting U.S. Attorney for Guam and the CNMI.

Nobody in the Congress today was closer to Jack Abramoff when all of this was going on than John Doolittle.  He received hundreds of thousands of dollars in campaign contributions from Abramoff.  He knew exactly what Abramoff was doing in the various Pacific protectorates, and in fact he supported it with his votes.  He enabled the kind of politicization of the cause of justice that we see today.

Fortunately, we have a choice in Congress.  Charlie Brown needs your support at the end of the first quarter.  Please consider making a contribution.

P.S. Yeah, and Jerry McNerney too.  He just announced through email that he WON John Kerry’s “March Madness” competition, and will receive funding from the Senator.

(Listening tour details! – promoted by blogswarm)

Perhaps one of the nation’s most corrupt political players currently representing us in Congress, Republican John T. Doolittle has made sleaziness an art form. During this last election, Congressman Doolittle did everything short of throwing a kitchen sink at Democratic challenger Charlie Brown: from calling him an “extremist” to trying to tie him to NAMBLA (North American Man-Boy Love Association for those of you not in the know) to sending out a campaign flyer insinuating Charlie was a Nazi sympathizer. Every accusation was completely unfounded and had the obvious stench of Rovian tactics, but somehow November 7th led to a very narrow victory for the Mormon Republican.

Now that the election is over, and Doolittle realizes the political reality that a majority of his constituents voted for someone other than him, talk is in the air that change is on its way. More below the fold…

This last week, Congressman Doolittle’s office released a franked mailer explaining Congressman Doolittle’s new desire to reach out to his constituents. Susan Crabtree of The Hill reported this last week that Doolittle is ready to take steps to get in touch with the voters who nearly threw him out in November. With all of his grand talk of “coming home, listening, reaching out,” you’d think that maybe this is one of those instances when the people have collectively sent a message to their congressman that had actually been received. This is unfortunately not true.

In love with himself and the money he and his wife rake in from campaign donations (not to mention special interests and lobbying groups), Doolittle was recently defending indicted defense contractor Brent Wilkes. “I’ve always said I don’t believe Brent Wilkes could be involved in something like this,” Doolittle said. “The behavior they’ve alleged about Brent Wilkes is inconsistent with everything I know about the man. I’ll be shocked if it turns out differently.” Brent Wilkes contributed over $52,000 to Doolittle’s Superior California Federal Leadership PAC as well as his re-election campaigns, and Wilkes’ private jet was used fly disgraced ex-Congressman Tom DeLay to a Las Vegas fundraiser for Congressman Doolittle. In exchange, Doolittle had helped push legislation to get Wilkes defense company PerfectWave a $37 million contract with the Pentagon that was not needed nor wanted according to Pentagon officials.

These statements are similar to the ones mentioning imprisoned congressional briber Jack Abramoff. On multiple occasions, Doolittle has called Jack Abramoff a “close personal friend,” and that he had “no clue” that the jailed lobbyist was up to shady business in the Mariana Islands and elsewhere. Doolittle received over $14,000 in contributions from Abramoff in what appears to be a scheme to stop labor and immigration reform in the Mariana Islands, and to this date he has yet to return or donate any of the money. As many of you know by now, the Mariana Islands saw horrible human rights abuses from the garment factory sweatshops owned by the Willie Tan Family, represented in Washington by Jack Abramoff. Sex slavery, cramped working conditions, sub-minimum wages and forced abortions have plagued the islands in the 10+ years Abramoff influenced the Republican majority, and change is only just now beginning to happen on those small islands under US protectorate. (here’s a link to a great piece on the subject)

So now Congressman Doolittle has plans to reach out to the 4th Congressional District in Northern California. He is holding six “listening sessions,” although it is not clear whether these are actual town-hall-styled meetings or simply informational reports to the public. It is also unclear as to whether Congressman Doolittle will even be present at all or any of the sessions, as his flyer states

“You views are important-please share them with the congressman and his staff at one of the following listening sessions.”

The Congressman is talking a big game, and his efforts are not brave or noble: they are the bare minimum requirements a congressman should be doing. All of our representatives should come back to visit the district as often as possible (and it would be even better if they resided in the district). There should be satellite offices throughout the district: one is not enough for a district that has over nine counties and covers over 100,000 square miles.

Luckily, we have a chance to demand more of Congressman Doolittle and his staff. Regardless of whether these meeting will allow questions, we must take the initiative to stack these meetings with people who want real answers to the problems that face this nation and this district. We want answers to questions like:

– Are you still in favor of constructing the Auburn Dam, even though your $1 million Army Corps of Engineers report said that the Dam could cost more than $10 billion to construct and structural integrity cannot be guaranteed?
– Will you return the money from Jack Abramoff?
– Do you still believe that there are weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, as stated in your debate with Charlie Brown?
– Why didn’t you vote for HR 2, the bill that will increase the minimum wage for working Americans?
– Why did you vote No on HR 3, the bill allowing stem cell research?
– Why did you vote No on HR 4, the bill that brings down prescription drug prices for seniors?
– Why did you vote No on HR 6, the “Creating Long-Term Energy Alternatives for the Nation Act,” when you claim to be in favor of alternative fuel research (including hydrogen development)?

If you are interested in attending the February Doolittle Listening Tour, the dates and locations are as follows:

Tuesday Feb. 20: Susanville 10-11am
  Lassen County Fairgrounds
  Commercial Building
  195 Russell Avenue
  Susanville, CA 96130

  Quincy 5-6pm
  Plumas-Sierra County Fairgrounds
  Tulsa E. Scott Building
  204 Fairgrounds Road
  Quincy, CA 95971

Wednesday, Feb. 21: Placerville 2-3pm
  El Dorado County Fairgrounds
  Marshall Building
  100 Placerville Road
  Placerville, CA 95667

  Orangevale 6-7pm
  Orangevale Community Center
  6826 Hazel Avenue
  Orangevale, CA 95662

Thursday, Feb 22:  Grass Valley 4-5pm
  Nevada County Fairgrounds
  Northern Mines Building
  11228 McCourtney Road
  Grass Valley, CA 95949

Friday, Feb. 23: Auburn 2-3pm
  Gold Country Fairgrounds
  Sierra Building
  1273 High Street
  Auburn, CA 95603

Gather a group of friends if you live in the Northern California- vicinity. If you live anywhere within driving distance, this is an opportunity to show Congressman Doolittle that he needs to truly listen to his constituents instead of paying them lip-service. If you are interested in attending one of these events, email me at [email protected] and we will get groups together to carpool!

CA-11: Pombo and Abramoff: More lies?

Oooh, we have a doozy of a question for Richard Pombo.  And we can call his home phone and ask him.  Yay!!  Over at FDL, Matt O. notes that the AP has Pombo in a lie.  You see in last week’s “candidate forum” Pombo said that he had never spoken, seen, heard, fondled (oops, sorry, I’ve been reading too much on Mark Foley) Jack Abramoff.  Never.  Ever. Swear, cross my heart, and hope to die.  Or something like that.  Well, the exact quote is:

“I’ve seen myself described as one of (Jack Abramoff’s) closest allies in Congress. I met the guy two or three times in my whole life — he never once lobbied me on anything, never asked me to sign a letter, to vote for or against a bill, to introduce a bill; he never once stepped foot in my office. …” (Tracy Press 10/5/06)

Maybe he never mentioned anything about fondling Jack Abramoff or hoping to die, but you know the story.  Pombo wants nothing to do with Abramoff.  At least not now.  It was a different story a few years ago.  Well, Pombo’s nose must have grown after that doozy:

California Rep. Richard Pombo has insisted he was never lobbied by Jack Abramoff. Records show the disgraced lobbyist billed a client for at least two contacts with Pombo a decade ago. The lobbying records released by the Northern Mariana Islands show that Abramoff billed once for calls to Pombo, chairman of the House Resources Committee, and a second time for a discussion with him, while lobbying in 1996.

On more than two dozen other occasions from 1996 through 2001, Abramoff associates called or met with members of Pombo’s staff, including his chief of staff, the records indicate. As the contacts picked up, Pombo voted Abramoff’s way on a bill important to Abramoff’s clients. (SF Chronicle (AP) 10/10/06)

Of course, Pombo is saying this is all bullshit, you know just a felon trying to make a few more bucks from the Islanders.  Well, unfortunately, there’s a nice little money trail.  Follow the money,  young Jedi:

On Sept. 10, 1996, Abramoff billed for a discussion with Pombo. Two days later he gave Pombo a $500 donation, the first of what would become $7,500 in campaign contributions. Pombo has since donated the money to charity. On Nov. 21, 1996, Abramoff reported putting in calls to Pombo and other lawmakers.

That’s what we call quid pro quo.  Donating $7500 to charity resolves nothing, it is just a cover for corruption.  And a relatively cheap cover too.  Pombo is bought and paid for by Big Oil and DC Lobbyists.
A better choice: Jerry McNerney.  Contribute at our ActBlue page. Or volunteer at JerryMcNerney.org or at Pombo In Their Pocket.

The media investigation of the Republican leadership cover-up is now focusing Republican Secretary John Doolittle (R-CA) who is refusing to answer questions about his role in the Mark Foley scandal.

“This story is going to trace itself up to just exactly who exactly in the leadership of the Republican Party knew what when,” former White House advisor David Gergen told CNN’s Anderson Cooper.

The tracking through the GOP leadership advanced with the Associated Press quote from Kirk Fordham that draws the senior staff of the Republican leadership into the scandal — while extending the length of the GOP leadership cover-up by more than a year.

What did Doolittle’s former chief of staff, Kevin A. Ring know and when did he know it? What did Richard Robinson known and when did he know it? What did GOP Secretary John Doolittle know and when did he know it?

Even embattled Speaker Dennis Hastert told the Chicago Tribune, “I think the base has to realize after a while, who knew about it? Who knew what, when?”

This week, Doolittle’s re-election campaign in California’s fourth district has been featured in articles by Peter Hecht, Rachel Gordon, Laura Kurtzman, Molly Hennessy-Fiske and Rone Tempest with none of the reporters getting on record what John Doolittle knew and when he learned it.

The A.P.’s Robin Hindry reported on the Doolittle stonewall that is now in at least it’s third day:

[Charlie] Brown on Monday also called for Doolittle to return a donation he received from Mark Foley, the Republican Florida congressman who resigned last week after sexually explicit e-mails he sent to congressional pages were made public.

Doolittle should say what he knew about Foley’s actions and return $1,000 he received from him in 2002, Brown said.

Doolittle issued a statement through his House office on Monday condemning Foley. Calls requesting comment from his campaign Monday evening were not returned.

Congressman Doolittle’s government website – www.gopsecretary.house.gov – features a welcome message from the GOP Secretary listing his primary objective as, “to provide members and their staffs with the support they need to become more informed, innovative, and proactive.” Voters deserve to know to what degree Doolittle was informed, whether he was innovative in the cover-up, and why he wasn’t proactive in protecting children.

While the media has failed to get Congressman Doolittle on record, constituent’s are demanding answers. This morning’s Sacramento Bee features a letter from John Garon of Placerville who notes, “Rep. John Doolittle makes much of the fact that he is a member of the “leadership” of the House GOP. Since members of this inner circle, and a few more, knew of Rep. Mark Foley’s sexual advances to young boys, what did Doolittle do if and when he found out? Prima facie evidence indicates he did nothing, going along to get along, as he always does.”

With Doolittle stonewalling the press and refusing to deny involvement, the speculation is growing that Doolittle will play dumb. In another SacBee letter today, Mary Ann Keerer wonders, “Does Doolittle want us to believe that he knew nothing about his cohort’s sexual exploitation of underage boys just like he knows nothing about the sex slaves and other obscenities occurring in the Northern Mariana Islands?”

The Predatorgate scandal is sure to draw attention to Doolittle’s long history of protecting sexual predators in the Northern Marianas Islands for Jack Abramoff.

In addition to stonewalling the press, Doolittle’s damage control team is also ignoring constituent questions:

I called John Doolittle’s office today to ask if he still supports Dennis Hastert for Speaker, since the guy has known about and covered up the truly creepy activities of Congressman Foley.

The person who answered started telling me about how Hastert didn’t know about what was going on with Foley.  I said, “So that means Congressman Doolittle does support Hastert?”

She said no, no, no.  I’ll find out and get back to you.

Why is this important?  I’ve called Doolittle’s office many times over the years to ask about his positions on things like social security, net neutrality, etc.  The people there are always arrogant and dismissive, they give Doolittle’s position with no regard or care whether anyone disagrees with Doolittle.

This time, the person seemed very worried.

Unlike Representatives Heather Wilson and Geoff Davis, Rep. Doolittle is refusing to donate to charity the donations he received from former Congressman Mark Foley.

( – promoted by SFBrianCL)

Charlie Brown is demanding that Rep. John Doolittle, who’s too cowardly to even face him in a televised debate, to return a campaign donation from Mark Foley’s Political Action Committee.

Now the donation is a mere $1,000.  I think Abramoff would tip Doolittle that for walking him to his car.  But the point is that Brown is campaigning with the aggressive, take-no-prisoners, seize-every-opportunity streak we’ve come to expect from Republicans.  From his multitude of creative websites to his non-stop attacks on Doolittle’s involvement with the CNMI, Brown is attacking hard but also putting the entire thing into an easy-to-read narrative.  From his email to supporters:

“This is an absolute moral outrage,” said Brown.  “Any Member of Congress, Democrat or Republican, who had knowledge of Congressman Foley’s illicit behavior and took no action should resign. There is no excuse for putting political considerations before protecting children,” Brown said. He called for an independent, non-partisan investigation into the issue.

“This Congress is losing the moral authority to lead – every day the news is about corruption, bribery, campaign-finance scandals and cover ups,” Brown continued. “This is not about left versus right, it’s about right versus wrong. It’s long past time for a change.”

I can’t help but be impressed with Brown’s skills as a campaigner and a candidate.  His rapid response team is ridiculously good.  He’s skilled at grabbing free media attention by attacking his opponent’s weak points and not letting go.

There is no way Charlie Brown should have a shot in CA-04.  It’s redder than red.  But contesting everywhere has a great benefit, by freeing up the Democrat in question to absolutely go for broke.

I don’t make predictions often, but I really think that Charlie Brown will be the next Congressman from California’s 4th District.

It’s very exciting when you see Congressional campaigns using frames that have been floating around Kos and the blogosphere for some time.  I have read so many posts that paint the picture of Republicanism in the age of Bush as a bipolar question: they’re either completely incompetent or they’re making it LOOK like they’re incompetent so they can steal.  It’s the “stupid or lying” argument.

Now, Fighting Dem Charlie Brown has internalized this central critique of the entire Republican Party, focused it on his opponent John Doolittle, and manifested it in the new website Corruptorineffective.com.

More on the flip:

The site has two columns and basically poses a central question: is John Doolittle corrupt?  Or is he ineffective?  And there are several examples to bolster either argument.

For example, Doolittle took a hundred grand from Jack Abramoff, who he still considers a “good friend”.  Corrupt.  But Doolittle also has stood by idly while the national debt surged, port and border security has not improved from its disastrous state and dependence on foreign oil remains troublingly the same.  Ineffective.

Every argument in the election, every reason not to return John Doolittle to Congress, can be neatly tossed into these two boxes.  Kos has discussed the value of narrative in these political races.  With this site, Brown completely defines his opponent, and tells a little story about him that gives two concrete narrative frames through which to view the campaign.

There’s even a little poll where you can vote for “corrupt” or “ineffective.”  This site comes with a companion radio spot, the second time the Brown campaign has done this (they released Doolittle Facts along with a spot about Doolittle’s CNMI connections earlier).

I don’t think there’s another campaign that I’ve seen that is as innovative with using the Web to set the narrative as the Brown campaign.  That’s why, in a very gerrymandered state, Charlie Brown has the best opportunity to flip a seat in California.  And with more touches like “Corrupt or Ineffective,” I think he’s going to do it.

Other campaigns need to learn by example.  Essentially, corrupt or ineffective could be applied to HUNDREDS of Republican candidates.  It works great for someone so tied to Abramoff like Doolittle, but there are plenty more like him in Congress.  It’s a powerful argument that gives your opponent nowhere to turn.  You’re either corrupt, or ineffective.  No answer can be satisfactory.  Both answers demand the call for new leadership.  It’s absolutely brilliant.

Call your local race and ask them to come up with something like “Corrupt or Ineffective.”

(Both? – promoted by SFBrianCL)

Republican John Doolittle is the last of big member of Jack Abramoff’s congressman who hasn’t gone down. Duke Cunningham, Tom DeLay, Bob Ney — they are all out the door and Doolittle is next.

The Charlie Brown campaign is very aggressive and just launched a new website on Doolitte: www.CorruptOrIneffective.com.

Today’s Sacramento Bee reports:

Democrat Charles Brown on Thursday launched radio advertisements attacking Rep. John Doolittle and promoting his own military background in the opening shot of his effort to unseat the eight-term Roseville Republican.

The two spots are the first in the 4th Congressional District general election battle, the most strenuous Doolittle has faced in more than a decade. […]

The second ad is a parody of the “tastes great, less filling” beer commercials from several years ago and features bar patrons challenging each other over whether Doolittle is “corrupt or ineffective.”

The corruption cited in the ad refers to campaign contributions Doolittle has received from disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff. The ineffectiveness makes fun of the congressman’s name, “Do Little,” and his advice to a group recently that it should hire a lobbyist to help get the attention of Congress.

The ad invites listeners to cast their vote for “corrupt or ineffective” at a Web site the Brown campaign has established at www.corruptorineffective.com.

The Doolittle people are hoping that they’ll be able to buy the election, hoping that voters won’t find out about Doolittle’s record:

Richard Robinson, Doolittle’s campaign spokesman, said the ads pose no threat to the congressman.

“We’re not concerned,” Robinson said. “They don’t have the money to run them in any fashion.”

The Brown Campaign blog has issued a challenge to raise $30K by August 25th to keep the ads running and notes, “a gift of $500-$1000 buys a :60 AM Drive Time slot on our most popular local radio stations, and a gift of $250-$500 buys a PM Drive Time slot.” If you are interested in helping buy some air support for Brown, you can help out here.