Republicans sinking in sleaze, Times Online, The Times, Sunday Times

By Tim Reid
A decade ago the Democrats were thought to be shady. Now it is the turn of Mr Bush's party


A DECADE ago Newt Gingrich’s Republican revolutionaries seized control of Congress after 40 years of Democrat rule by promising to end the culture of graft and corruption on Capitol Hill.

Today, after a string of indictments, scandals and a criminal investigation that threatens to implicate dozens of politicians next year, the tables have turned full circle. It is now President Bush’s Republicans who are seen as the party of sleaze.

Polls suggest that two thirds of Americans believe that corruption is a serious political problem. That, allied with the growing unpopularity of the war in Iraq, is raising fears in the White House of a voter backlash in next year’s mid-term congressional elections.

Since the summer, leading Republicans have been hit by a steady stream of scandals.

In September Tom DeLay, one of the most powerful politicians in America, had to step down as leader of the House of Representatives after being indicted for violating election finance laws. He is vigorously contesting the charges.

Bill Frist, the Republican leader of the Senate, is also under investigation over insider trading allegations involving the sale of his stock in a healthcare company. Mr Frist has denied any wrongdoing.

How the Bush Administration led the country into the Iraq war, and Democrat accusations that the White House manipulated prewar intelligence, then dominated much of October and November after the indictment of Lewis “Scooter” Libby, the former chief of staff to Dick Cheney, the Vice-President, for his role in the Valerie Plame CIA-leak affair. Mr Libby was charged with perjury and obstruction of justice, and he too has pleaded not guilty.

This week Patrick Fitzgerald, the special prosecutor leading the CIA-leak investigation, convened a new grand jury to investigate further the role of Karl Rove, Mr Bush’s chief political adviser, in the Plame affair. The move suggests that Mr Fitzgerald may yet bring charges against Mr Rove.

Meanwhile, Randy “Duke” Cunningham resigned from the House of Representatives two weeks ago in one of the most spectacular cases of political corruption in recent years.

Mr Cunningham, a Republican congressman since 1991 and member of the House Defence Appropriations committee, admitted accepting $2.4 million (£1.4 million) in bribes from defence contractors, including a Rolls-Royce and a $7,200 antique Louis-Philippe commode.

But of greatest concern to White House strategists is a criminal investigation by the Department of Justice into a Republican lobbyist named Jack Abramoff that could lead to the indictment of several politicians — mostly Republican — next year.

Over the past two years other investigations have exposed an intricate web of contacts between Mr Abramoff, one of the most powerful Republican lobbyists in Washington, and senior politicians.

Mr Abramoff allegedly gave them millions of dollars in donations as well as gifts, meals at top restaurants and lavish overseas trips, including golfing holidays at St Andrews. In return he sought legislative favours on behalf of his clients.

Last week Michael Scanlon, an Abramoff business partner and former aide to Mr DeLay, pleaded guilty to conspiring to bribe public officials and defraud several Native American tribes. The tribes had hired Mr Abramoff to lobby politicians to get legislation favouring their gambling interests.

Scanlon is thought to have agreed to provide prosecutors with evidence that politicians took money in direct exchange for favourable votes.

One of the congressmen Scanlon is accused of bribing has been identified as Bob Ney, a Republican from Ohio. Mr Ney has been subpoenaed by a grand jury investigating Mr Abramoff, and denies wrongdoing.

It is alleged that, in addition to $14,000 in campaign contributions, Mr Ney received from Mr Abramoff’s Native American clients, he also got a golfing trip to St Andrews.

Among others who went on a St Andrews trip was Mr DeLay, who once described Mr Abramoff as my “dear friend”. The cost of Mr DeLay’s trip went on the lobbyist’s credit card.

Another Abramoff friend and former associate who went to St Andrews was David Safavian. He was forced to resign as the White House’s chief procurement officer in September after being charged with obstructing the Government’s investigation into his dealings with Mr Abramoff.

More than 30 members of Congress have been revealed to have taken legislative action favourable to Mr Abramoff’s Native American gambling clients after receiving money from the lobbyist or the tribes. Most are Republican, but they include Harry Reid, the Democrats’ Senate leader, and another Democrat senator, Byron Dorgan, of North Dakota.

Time Reporter Testifies in Leak Case

Rove Lawyer Was Deposed Last Week by Special Prosecutor

By Carol D. Leonnig and Jim VandeHei
Washington Post Staff Writers
Friday, December 9, 2005; A08



A special prosecutor questioned Time magazine reporter Viveca Novak under oath yesterday about a conversation she had with the attorney for presidential adviser Karl Rove that has become part of the CIA leak investigation, according to a top editor at the magazine.

In another twist, the lawyer, Robert D. Luskin, was deposed on the same issue last Friday, a source close to the case said.

Special Counsel Patrick J. Fitzgerald's questions in both sessions focused on the same subject: the conversation that Luskin and Novak, longtime friends, had over drinks sometime in the first half of 2004 about Rove's potential exposure in the probe.

Fitzgerald's decision to delve into the once-removed chat between a reporter and the lawyer for the top Bush political adviser comes as the prosecutor considers whether to charge Rove. For more than a year after the investigation began, Rove failed to reveal to the FBI and the grand jury that he had privately told another reporter for Time, Matthew Cooper, about the CIA role of undercover operative Valerie Plame.

Novak was deposed a day after Fitzgerald spent three hours meeting with a new grand jury in the leak inquiry. A previous grand jury investigating the case indicted Vice President Cheney's chief of staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, on Oct. 28 and then disbanded. At the time, Fitzgerald warned Luskin that Rove remained under investigation, and he said in public filings that he would probably present information to a new grand jury.

Fitzgerald has spent two years investigating whether White House officials leaked Plame's name in the summer of 2003 to discredit allegations made by her husband, former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV, that the Bush administration twisted intelligence in the run-up to the Iraq war.

Viveca Novak is not related to columnist Robert D. Novak, who disclosed Plame's identity in July 2003.

According to sources familiar with Rove's status, Luskin persuaded Fitzgerald in late October to postpone indicting Rove by alerting Fitzgerald to Luskin's previous conversation with Novak, among other things. Luskin argued that these private discussions helped show Rove did not intentionally conceal his conversation with Cooper from investigators. Rove has argued he forgot about the chat he had with Cooper on the phone in the summer of 2003.

Sources familiar with their conversations say Novak's and Luskin's accounts to Fitzgerald appear to conflict on when they spoke.

The timing of Rove's actions since the leak investigation began in September 2003 have been of keen interest to Fitzgerald, according to sources familiar with the prosecutor's questions. Rove did not mention his contact with Cooper to the FBI during interviews in 2003, or to the grand jury in February 2004.

He revealed to the grand jury that he spoke with Cooper on Oct. 15, 2004. That was one month after Fitzgerald subpoenaed Cooper to testify about his confidential conversations with administration sources other than Libby. It also came two days after a federal judge ordered that Cooper cooperate.

Viveca Novak and Luskin refused to comment yesterday. Fitzgerald and his spokesman have declined to comment on the Novak-Luskin conversation.

A source familiar with Novak's account said she believes the conversation took place in March or May, and definitely took place after February 2004, when Rove first testified before the grand jury.

But one person close to the case said the conversation took place before Rove's first grand jury appearance in February. This person said the conversation was not the event that led Rove to change his testimony.

Time's managing editor, Jim Kelly, said yesterday that the magazine will publish Novak's account of her testimony in its Monday edition, and it will be available in an online edition Sunday. Kelly said he did not yet know and could not comment on the full details of Novak's testimony or Fitzgerald's questions because he had not spoken with the reporter.

Novak was traveling from Washington to New York yesterday afternoon, he said, and planned to brief him and other Time editors at the magazine's headquarters about her testimony.

"To be fair, I need to speak with Viveca now that she has testified under oath," he said. "We felt it important to let Viveca prepare for her testimony. Now we'll be looking at the questions that have been raised by this whole incident."