Out Come The Knives

by hilzoy

There are two new stories about Tom DeLay, one in tomorrow's Washington Post and one in tomorrow's New York Times. Since I'll quote both stories at some length, I'll put the rest of it below the fold.

From the Post story:

"A six-day trip to Moscow in 1997 by then-House Majority Whip Tom DeLay (R-Tex.) was underwritten by business interests lobbying in support of the Russian government, according to four people with firsthand knowledge of the trip arrangements.

DeLay reported that the trip was sponsored by a Washington-based nonprofit organization. But interviews with those involved in planning DeLay's trip say the expenses were covered by a mysterious company registered in the Bahamas that also paid for an intensive $440,000 lobbying campaign.

It is unclear precisely how the money was transferred from the Bahamian-registered company to the nonprofit.

The expense-paid trip by DeLay and four of his staff members cost $57,238, according to records filed by his office. During his six days in Moscow, he played golf, met with Russian church leaders and talked to Prime Minister Viktor Chernomyrdin, a friend of Russian oil and gas executives associated with the lobbying effort.

DeLay also dined with the Russian executives and two Washington-based registered lobbyists for the Bahamian-registered company, sources say. One of those lobbyists was Jack Abramoff, who is now at the center of a federal influence-peddling and corruption probe related to his representation of Indian tribes.

House members bear some responsibility to ensure that the sponsors for their travel are not masquerading for registered lobbyists or foreign government interests, legal experts say. House ethics rules bar the acceptance of travel reimbursement from registered lobbyists and foreign agents.

In this case, travel funds did not come directly from lobbyists; the money came from a firm, Chelsea Commercial Enterprises Ltd., that funded the lobbying campaign, according to the sources. Chelsea was coordinating the effort with a Russian oil and gas company -- Naftasib -- that has business ties with Russian security institutions, the sources said. (...)

Untangling the origin of the Moscow trip's financing is complicated by questions about the ownership and origins of Chelsea, the obscure Bahamian-registered company that financed the lobbying effort in favor of the Russian government that targeted Republicans in Washington in 1997 and 1998. Those involved in this effort also prepared and coordinated the DeLay visit, individuals with direct knowledge about it said.

In that period, prominent Russian businessmen, as well as the Russian government, depended heavily on a flow of billions of dollars in annual Western aid and so had good reason to build bridges to Congress. House Republicans were becoming increasingly critical of U.S. and international lending institutions, such as the Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC) and the International Monetary Fund, which were then investing heavily in Russia's fragile economy.

Unlike some House conservatives who scorn such support as "corporate welfare," DeLay proved to be a "yes" vote for institutions bolstering Russia in this period. For example, DeLay voted for a bill that included the replenishment of billions of dollars in IMF funds used to bail out the Russian economy in 1998. (...)

The efforts by Naftasib's executives to curry favor among Republicans -- including DeLay -- sowed controversy at the time among conservatives. A journal published by a Washington think tank, the American Foreign Policy Council, claimed within a few days after DeLay's trip ended that it was actually "sponsored" by Naftasib. The journal -- the Russian Reform Monitor -- also highlighted what it characterized as Naftasib's tight connections to the Russian security establishment.

The journal quoted promotional literature for Naftasib that described the firm as a major shareholder in Gazprom, the state-controlled oil and gas giant. The literature also said Natfasib's largest clients were the ministries of defense and internal affairs. The literature also states that Nevskaya [Naftasib's deputy general manager] was an instructor at a school for Russian military intelligence officers. She declined to address those claims in response to questions from The Post.

Steve Biegun, who was then a senior Russia expert for the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and later served as executive secretary to the National Security Council during President Bush's first term, said he deliberately blocked a meeting that Nevskaya sought with Jesse Helms (R-N.C.), then the committee chairman.

"They were a client of the lobbying firm Preston Gates," said Biegun, who is now a Ford Motor Co. vice president for international governmental affairs. "I made some calls . . . and got enough warning signs" to ensure that Helms avoided dealing with the firm. Biegun said the information he obtained from his sources was "nothing that would stand up in court" but he worried that in this period, "a lot of unsavory figures from Russia were buying their way into meetings and getting their pictures taken, to put on the wall back in Moscow." "

So: Tom DeLay's trip to Russia seems to have been paid for by a mystery company that was either working with or fronting for a Russian energy company that is alleged to have close ties to the Russian security establishment, and that was lobbying for large-scale federal assistance. Lovely. Add to this the revelations in the Times story:

"The wife and daughter of Tom DeLay, the House majority leader, have been paid more than $500,000 since 2001 by Mr. DeLay's political action and campaign committees, according to a detailed review of disclosure statements filed with the Federal Election Commission and separate fund-raising records in Mr. DeLay's home state, Texas.

Most of the payments to his wife, Christine A. DeLay, and his only child, Dani DeLay Ferro, were described in the disclosure forms as "fund-raising fees," "campaign management" or "payroll," with no additional details about how they earned the money. The payments appear to reflect what Mr. DeLay's aides say is the central role played by the majority leader's wife and daughter in his political career.

Mr. DeLay's national political action committee, Americans for a Republican Majority, or Armpac, said in a statement on Tuesday that the two women had provided valuable services to the committee in exchange for the payments: "Mrs. DeLay provides big picture, long-term strategic guidance and helps with personnel decisions. Ms. Ferro is a skilled and experienced professional event planner who assists Armpac in arranging and organizing individual events."

Mrs. Ferro has managed several of her father's re-election campaigns for his House seat. (...)

The payments to Mr. DeLay's family have continued into 2005; the latest monthly disclosure filed by Americans for a Republican Majority shows Mrs. DeLay was paid was paid $4,028 last month, while Mrs. Ferro received $3,681. Earlier statements show that the two women received similar monthly fees from the political action committee throughout 2003 and 2004.

Mrs. DeLay has been involved in her husband's political career and his fund-raising operations in Washington and Texas. In an interview in 2003 with Roll Call, a newspaper on Capitol Hill, a spokesman for Mr. DeLay explained Mrs. DeLay's role as "the final signoff of Tom's travel schedule, what events he attends and what his name appears on."

Mrs. Ferro has also helped manage Mr. DeLay's charity operations. Financial disclosure statements filed by Mr. DeLay's House campaign committees, which are separate from Americans for a Republican Majority, show that Mrs. Ferro and her political consulting firm, Coastal Consulting of Sugar Land, Tex., received $222,000 from 2001 through last year, reflecting her role in the re-election campaigns. (...)

"It's DeLay Inc. " said Melanie Sloan, executive director of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, a research group that has closely monitored Mr. DeLay and his campaign fund-raising and expenditures. "If it's not illegal, it certainly is inappropriate for members of Congress to use their positions to enrich their families." "

I think it's too obvious to be worth belaboring that these stories, if true, constitute two more reasons to think that Tom DeLay is not fit to serve in government. (Why can't these people just live on their salaries? Tom DeLay has an answer: “I challenge anyone to live on my salary.” Reportedly, when he said that, his salary was $158,000 a year.) The business of accepting favors from people linked to the Russian defense establishment is particularly appalling. And, of course, these two latest stories come on the heels of ethics investigations and criminal indictments of DeLay's associates.

What's also interesting, however, is that I take the simultaneous appearance of these stories to mean that someone in the Republican party is trying to throw Tom DeLay overboard. Why do I say the Republican party? Two reasons. First, if the Democrats had had this kind of information, they would have used it a long time ago. Second, the Post piece in particular quotes a lot of people who would have to be Republicans -- a former staffer for Jesse Helms, people involved with planning the trip to Russia, and so forth.

But nothing about Tom DeLay suggests that he will go gently. He is, after all, the man who told a restaurant manager who told him that federal rules prohibited smoking: "I am the federal government". And he has amassed enough IOUs over the years that he will probably be able to put up a serious fight. All of which means: this could be very interesting.

And it couldn't happen to a more deserving guy.

***

Added note: I don't have a problem with DeLay paying his daughter out of his PAC. I assume he wouldn't hire her as his campaign manager just to be nice. It's his wife that I find problematic. I've never even been married to any of my boyfriends, and I always gave them "big picture, long-term strategic guidance" for free.

Comments

[bob mcmanus]

Tom DeLay is not going to resign. If indicted he will continue to serve until convicted. These leaks have what purpose? Not protecting the party from DeLay's bad image.

DeLay has been distancing himself from the White House for at least a year. He was not happy with the Medicare Bill, the Highway Bill, SS Reform(at least in timing). He has expressed this dissatisfaction publicly. He has an agenda different from, and in some ways detrimental to, the agenda of the White House. The budget is in crisis, with essential pork in competition with other essential pork.

If you ask me, the Terry Schiavo affair was in part House Republicans showing the White House some of their resources and willingness to put them in play. If not an intra-party war, we are at least in a shoving match.

[Sebastian Holsclaw]

Hooray, a good reason for Republicans to rid themselves of DeLay.

[DaveL]

I'll swipe Atrios' line...pass the effing popcorn.

[Jesurgislac]

Tom DeLay has an answer: “I challenge anyone to live on my salary.”

Really? I'll take him up on that challenge. He can transfer it to my bank account month by month for as long as he likes.

Sebastian: Hooray, a good reason for Republicans to rid themselves of DeLay.

That his dirty laundry has become so public? His misconduct, as I recall, has been known for some time - but the Republicans (by which I mean the senior party leaders, not rank-and-filers like you, Sebastian) show no signs of wanting to rid themselves of DeLay. Aren't the Republican party's rules being changed so that DeLay can continue to be the leader of the House (sorry if I'm not using the correct term) even if he's convicted of misconduct?

No criticism of you intended, or of any other low-level ordinary members who have no power to rid yourselves of Tom DeLay - but your party appears to be rallying round in support, even whipping up juicy human-interest stories such as Terri Schiavo (again, no offense to Terri Schiavo, but I doubt if Tom Delay was in any way motivated by humanitarian considerations when he mixed in) to drive Tom Delay's misconduct off the front pages.

[felixrayman]

I'm not a Republican, but out of the goodness of my heart, I will, with all sincerity, offer those of you who are some advice. DeLay is a great man. Don't let a bunch of liberals slime him with a host of unproven allegations. DeLay would make a fine, no, a great, candidate for president in 2008.

I may have had some issues with the GOP in the past, but a DeLay candidacy for president, that is exactly what it would take to unite all America behind one politician.

I have your best interests at heart, as I know that you are thinking only of mine when you offer unsolicited political advice to the left. DeLay in '08. Think about it - for our country's sake.

Or at least keep him around until the midterm elections. Please?

[sidereal]

Purely on the merits, the Russian story doesn't exactly fill me with outrage. I realize that the House has rules of conduct and everyone agrees to them when sworn in and that if the allegations are true, Delay knowingly violated them, but I don't think the practice of semi-arbitrarily defining who is and who is not allowed to grease the palms of Congress and by what mechanism they can be greased is a particularly righteous or even defensible one.

And paying his own family members $60K each for 4 years is very shoddy, but it seems an issue for his contributors, who should be wondering how their money is spent, and I don't think it's illegal or particularly atypical.

All of which is to say, it doesn't smell any worse than straw to me, but if it can add enough to the load to break Delay's back, that's fine with me.

[sidereal]

No, no felix. There's a trick to handing out unasked for political advice to the opposition party. You can't sound friendly or entreating. . that makes them suspicious. You have to sound haughty and belligerent, as if anyone with half a brain could see the wisdom of your advice (which is obviously asking too much), and you're just throwing a bone out of pity.

Like this,

"If the Republicans could pull their heads out of their pants long enough to pay attention to the real world, they might notice that running DeLay for President in '08 could actually lead to political relevance. . but I'm not holding out any hope"

[Sebastian Holsclaw]

Though it pains me to agree with felixrayman for the second time in two weeks, I agree. DeLay would be an excellent candidate for president. He should definitely run as a Democrat. Democrats obviously need a fiery Southern speaker to run if they ever have a chance to beat the Republicans. DeLay would be perfect. No one would ever mistake him for a policy wonk, and it would be impossible to portray him as an out-of-touch hyper-intellectual. What are you guys waiting for?

[felixrayman]

This is awesome. If you all would just pull your heads out of your pants long enough to pay attention to the real world, you would have to agree with the cold, hard facts in this op-ed:

The left has come up with a target, and his name is Tom DeLay. He isn’t their first and won’t be their last, but for now he’s the Republican they hope to take down.

They’ve tried in the past to do the same thing to others. Vice President Cheney, Defense Secretary Don Rumsfeld and White House adviser Karl Rove have all been portrayed as ethically challenged and sleazy by the same folks who are now going after the House Republican leader from Texas. Trumped-up charges of illegality, paid ads and reports from ethics groups that are little more than fronts for partisan and ideological assaults on their opponents are all part of the now familiar pattern.

Anyone can see the truth in that bit of wisdom. Why are so many Republicans ready to give in to attacks from the left? DeLay must stay.

[Opus]

DeLay may have his own agenda and be determined to stick around, but it's obvious that this current influx of info is coming from his own Party and the folks who need him to be gone now, so there's more than a year between him and the midterms.

I'd like to think that there are also (1) some folks who've been strongarmed in the past who are piling on, just for payback (and fun!) and/or (2) some principled Republicans who have just realized how corrupt he is (talk about head-in-the-sand) -- but the reality is just political expediency.

And it's kind of sad, in a way, to see all the Dems who've been calling for his head for years suddenly saying, "Whoa! Wait! Don't get rid of him now! We need him!"

[Slartibartfast]

All of this advise is wonderful; I offer my sincere thanks.

Back to reality for a second: at one time in my life I wished that you Democrats would continue voting in folks like Teddy Kennedy and those whose mental health is borderline, such as Dennis Kucinich. After a year or two of espousing that belief, I realized that what we want is strong opponents, not weak. What we want is that which makes it necessary for us to be better, not that which allows us to (as a party, here) to get by with minimal effort. Because we're talking about politicians, here. Politicians, given the least amount of slack, turn into criminals. So now I wish for no slack. No slack for us means no slack for you, and perhaps a better government for everyone.

That's the hope, anyway. Guess I'm an idealist.

[Slartibartfast]

I don't think they were serious, Opus.

[John Thullen]

Tom Delay is not an individual. He is a machine. One of the big cogs in the machine designed to crush government.

It's the machine that needs to be driven off the cliff.
Whether Delay is driving it or not is of no matter to me.

Look at it this way. Monica Lewinsky, in Tom Delay's eyes, pleasured the entire Democratic Party. Lucky us, but I digress. We all were required, by Delay, to pay the piper, so to speak.

So, yeah, supersize that popcorn!

[Macallan]

"I always gave them "big picture, long-term strategic guidance" for free."

Some jokes really do write themselves...

;-)

[Michael Cain]

"I challenge anyone to live on my salary." Reportedly, when he said that, his salary was $158,000 a year.

Not to defend Mr. DeLay in particular, but for a mid-range Congressman, that is, not a one-termer but not high in the ranks of power, I could actually understand that statement. Assume a one-earner family. Pay your taxes. Save towards the future. Maintain a principle residence for your family near Houston and have a small but comfortable and safe place to live in Washington. Given the hours a Representative is expected to keep, pay someone to clean your apartment, do your laundry, prepare your meals. Pay for the necessary travel back and forth, unless you expect to abandon your family much of the year every year. Pay for local transportation in both places -- in Washington public transit might make sense, but certainly not in the area around Houston. Pay all the normal expenses of the family back home. I could see it being a challenge.

[Bernard Yomtov]

Michael,

I don't think members of Congress buy their own plane tckets back and forth to their home districts. And of course the salary and duties are public knowledge. Can't live on $158K? Don't run. Stick to the exterminating business.

[praktike]

Do Mr. and Mrs. DeLay have a joint account?

[hilzoy]

Slarti -- I agree with you about strong opponents. I have been longing for the reemergence of a conservative party for years. (Seriously.) If I were a real partisan, I would hope DeLay sticks around. But I can't.

Sidereal: it doesn't bother you that DeLay was accepting all expenses paid trips from a Russian firm with connections to the Russian Defense establishment? What would bother you, exactly?

[Slartibartfast]

I have been longing for the reemergence of a conservative party for years.

Sadly, me too. I went by the wayside with the GOP during the Moral Majority years; those who are crying theocracy now were either too young then or weren't paying attention.

And OT, I'm about to purchase your book. I hadn't realized that you had written one, and the subject matter looks to be interesting. To tell the truth, who other bloggers are in real life isn't nearly as interesting as what they have to say, but in this case there's an intersection of the two.

[sidereal]

"Sidereal: it doesn't bother you that DeLay was accepting all expenses paid trips from a Russian firm with connections to the Russian Defense establishment? What would bother you, exactly?"

If his wife breast fed on the plane.
Whoops, mixing threads.

It does bother me. But it also bothers me when politicians are flown around by the US defense industry. Or by tobacco companies or by Big Cotton(tm). All of which happens daily, if not hourly. I just find it slightly weird that everybody's breathlessly obsessing over behavior that I'm fairly sure is daily fare for Congressmen and women. It's as if the agreement by everyone involved that this is a serious scandal is more important than the actual contents. Maybe I'm just incredibly cynical and this really is unique behavior.

[sidereal]

Addendum: I believe my last point is reinforced by the fact that the blogosphere coverage and conversation is more about the sausage making ('Delay is being thrown to the wolves', 'the knives are out', 'It's finally sticking on Delay') than the sausage.

[Frank]

Micheal Cain- Something missing from your list is: the cost of living in the style which Congressmen are expected to.

Sidereal- Agree about how this isn't really about what he has done. Sure the ones actually sticking the knife in do the same kinds of thing. Whoever the Republican's chose for DeLay's job will need to have an extremely close relationship with K street in order to further the Republican agenda of making sure all K street lobyists are loyal Republicans.

The Republicans don't want the real stories coming out, that would damage their own long term interests, and since they are the ones who get the newspaper stories published, we aren't likely to hear anything that is really that serious.

[hilzoy]

Slarti: "I'm about to purchase your book." -- A man of courage, and rare discernment. Be warned: my Dad, who does not do philosophy but is quite smart, gave up after chapter 2 (which is, admittedly, the hardest), and said: the odd thing is, I couldn't understand it, but I could tell that it was very clearly written.

[Slartibartfast]

Recall that I've tempered myself with Buckminster Fuller. If you can even get through the first quarter of an inch of Synergetics, well, kudos.

[hilzoy]

My only attempt to read Fuller involved poetry. By chance I flipped to a version of the Lord's Prayer, which (if memory serves) began:

Our father
Who art in heaven
Who art in He-Even

And at that point I just gagged and stopped.

[Slartibartfast]

I'll have to excerpt from Synergetics one day. I'm wondering if it still carries the capacity to boggle, excised from context. Oh, and about Phantom Tollbooth, there's a wee bit of art posted here. I can scan my copy, though. Hey, I'm all about service.

[ral]

If you want more detail on Tom DeLay's network of questionable activities, the place to go is the Texas Observer and especially the work of Lou Dubose.

It seems likely that the K Street project and Grover Norquist will be caught up in the scandal, too, thanks to suits filed by Jack Abramoff's disgruntled Native American clients.