They've got muck; we've got rakes. TPM Muckraker

I guess everyone has their price. For Grover Norquist, it was $4.3 million.

Two weeks ago, Grover Norquist's non-profit Americans for Tax Reform was exposed in The Boston Globe as a lobbying front - maybe you missed it. The piece had the misfortune to land on a busy news day (Tony Rudy pled guilty), but, man, is it good.

For years, journalists have been trying to get their hands on ATR's donor list, to no avail. But the Globe finally got it, and found, as many have suspected for quite awhile, that "contributors include an array of special interests ranging from tobacco companies to Indian tribes to a Las Vegas casino." ATR is a big-time lobbying firm posing as a nonprofit. But that's not even the good part.

The biggest contributor to ATR was Richard Scruggs, a Democratic lawyer from Mississippi. He put in $4.3 million. What was he after?

Scruggs' law firm had won a $1 billion fee for their work on a lawsuit that resulted in a $246 billion settlement against tobacco companies (some of whom were also ATR donors). He wanted to keep his money. But Republicans were making noises in Congress of passing legislation that would limit legal fees. So:

Scruggs decided that he needed to hire a prominent Republican antitax activist to fight what he viewed as a tax on legal fees. "'There is an expression, 'If you need a thief, take him from the gallows,' " Scruggs said.

And just so there was no ambiguity about what the money was for, here's what Scruggs wrote as a bookeeping note when he made the $4.3 million transfer:

Did Scruggs get his money's worth? The Globe tersely notes, "The effort to reduce legal fees never became law. It is unknown what, if anything, Norquist did to help Scruggs."

Hmm... one would imagine that there was at least some understanding between Norquist and Scruggs of what this money was for. Norquist is probably not too accustomed, after all, to being the recipient of a multimillion dollar donation from Democrats.

Says Scruggs: "I paid a lot of money.... I thought that was the way the game was played."

As Josh has mentioned, the GOP is claiming that Democrats have voted to make illegal immigration a felony crime. Exactly the opposite is the case. Ken Mehlman's RNC is even running ads based on this lie.

Here's what happened: Late last year GOP Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner (R-WI) wrote and sponsored a bill that makes illegal immigration a felony. It's currently a civil offense.

After he got the bill out of committee, it caused such a hue and cry that Sensenbrenner tried to backpedal, and offered an amendment to soften his language, and make illegal immigration just a misdemeanor crime. (That's still worse than a civil offense.)

Over 190 Democrats joined 65 Republicans in voting against that amendment because they didn't think it should be criminalized at all.

The bill went to the floor with the felony language included; it passed on overwhelming Republican support.

The RNC wouldn't return my calls, and Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist's (R-TN) office was closed. When I reached a spokesman for House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-IL), he told me that the GOP claim was based on the committee's vote on the amendment: "It was based on the 191 dems voting on the Sensenbrenner amendment to change it from a felony to a misdemeanor."

So while a GOP Chairman came up with the idea of making immigration a felony, introduced a bill to make it a felony, and pushed it through the House on Republican votes, the Democrats' refusal even to make it a misdemeanor means they're the ones who want to make it a felony.

On the topic of the RNC footing James Tobin's legal bills, remember that their support didn't stop there. Tobin was also tapped to be the New England chairman of the Bush-Cheney re-election campaign, run by Ken Mehlman.

And he remained in that position until he was forced to resign, shortly after his role in the scheme was made public.

This despite the fact that the RNC knew, at least as early as the summer of 2003, that Tobin was mixed up in the jamming - that's when the two other key players pled guilty and fingered Tobin, who was being represented by an RNC lawyer at the time.

A new piece from Murray Waas reveals yet another leak of a classified document to discredit Joseph Wilson. This document was a March 2002 CIA report, a "debriefing of Wilson by the CIA's Directorate of Operations after Wilson returned from a CIA-sponsored mission to Niger to investigate claims."

Cheney directed the leak on July 12, 2003 says Waas. This is in addition to the September 2002 National Intelligence Estimate, which was leaked with President Bush's authorization.

Read all about it.

The RNC has been paying James Tobin's legal bills for going on three years now - at least $2.8 million to date. Why?

The official line - that they believed his innocence - doesn't fly. They've known for quite awhile just what Tobin had done. And Tobin has never disputed the central fact of his involvement. He's argued that he didn't commit a crime, which is something altogether different.

Listen to how it's been spun. Here's the official line, courtesy of The Boston Globe:

Republican Party officials say they are handling his legal bills because the charges arose from his official actions, and because he has maintained his innocence.

And here's the "love is blind" defense, courtesy of Hotline's Marc Ambinder:

...we've talked to several Republican officials and party insiders who believe that the RNC and Tobin's friends in the White House accepted his explanation(s) without applying the requisite skepticism. That's a human reaction, certainly.

So what was Tobin's explanation that was so credulously received? And what do RNC officials mean when they say "innocence?"

First, you have understand what James Tobin's role in the scheme was. According to Tobin's indictment and Chuck McGee's testimony, McGee, the Executive Director of the New Hampshire Republican State Committee, came to Tobin with the idea to tie up Democrat's phones. Tobin, rather than condemning McGee's plan, gave McGee the number for a telephone services vendor (Allen Raymond's GOP Marketplace) to carry out the scheme. That's it. That's the key piece of Tobin's involvement.

Now, Tobin's innocence in this case to you or me would mean that Tobin had no part in this. Maybe McGee was lying, or there was some confusion, or whatever. But certainly for Tobin to be innocent in the common sense of the word, he could not have known the gist of what McGee was asking him to help with.

Read More →

Aha! Two days ago, there was a story in The Hill that Grover Norquist was seeking to trademark "K Street Project."

Well, you can see the application here. It turns out, despite all of Norquist's chest thumping about suing anyone who gets "the real phrasing" wrong, that it really pertains to the "K Street Project" icon - yes, that same icon we've posted here for you to see (since it's not yet trademarked, we can show it to you without fear of hearing from Norquist's lawyers).

Obviously Norquist was just blowing smoke when he said, "We will jealously guard the real phrasing the way Kleenex and Coca-Cola do. We will sue anyone who says it wrong and make lots of money." That doesn't seem likely to happen unless someone uses his icon while saying "it wrong." But you know, just to rib him, we'll be using this little bugger whenever we bring up the K Street Project - his application is likely to take upwards of 18 months to process, so we should get plenty of use out of it.

Read More →

You gotta see this to believe it.

In a bulletin issued yesterday, the Homeland Security Department warns U.S. businesses of the threats they face from animal rights group and "eco-terrorists." Such radical extremist groups may use several tactics -- each devastating in its own way -- including:

- "organizing protests" - "flyer distribution" - "inundating computers with e-mails" - "tying up phone lines to prevent legitimate calls" - "sending continuous faxes in order to drain the ink supply from company fax machines"

That's right. If the ink runs out of your fax machine, that means the terrorists have won.

To be fair, these groups have engaged in vandalism and arson, which DHS also warns of. But, c'mon. E-mail inundation is something a $40 billion security agency needs to worry about?

The real outrage in this is that on the very day some DHS yahoo spent time and government money producing this bulletin, a jury was convicting a white supremacist on five counts of trying to obtain a chemical weapon and stolen explosives. The man's dream: to explode a briefcase "dirty" bomb inside the U.S. Capitol.

Needless to say, I'm told DHS has yet to send out a warning on wackos like him: white supremacists, militias, anti-abortion groups or other violent far-right groups that have actually killed people. It's the vicious left-wing flyer brigades that pose the greatest danger.

Of course, we can't say we didn't see this coming.

Just one day after officially opening his campaign office, the GOP's New Hampshire gubernatorial candidate was hit with the news that his PAC's treasurer had been sued for lying in financial documents.

In 2000, shareholders sued Glenn DiBenedetto and other officials of the Del.-based PressTek company, charging they "issued false and misleading reports, misstated earnings, and failed to correct analysts' reports concerning Presstek that contained inflated financial projections," New Hampshire Public Radio reported. DiBenedetto, now treasurer for the Friends of Jim Coburn PAC, was Presstek's chief financial officer.

Read More →

Rep. Dave Weldon (R-FL), who earmarked federal funds to the ultimate benefit of an ex-aide to former majority leader Rep. Tom DeLay (R-TX), says he had "no idea" the former aide would profit from the deal, Florida Today reports.

The former aide, Ed Buckham, owned half a million shares in MapROI, which won a $500,000 contract funded by Weldon's earmark. Buckham's company, Alexander Strategy Group, had lobbied Weldon to insert the earmark.

Christopher Buckley, whose book "Thank You for Not Smoking" was just adapted for the screen, has said that the difficulty of writing satire in Washington is that your most outrageous idea gets trumped by the next day's headlines.

Such is the case with the issue of leaks -- particularly in the last couple weeks.

First, of course, came the ironic revelation that the pre-eminent anti-leaker, President Bush, authorized the leak of classified information via Lewis "Scooter" Libby.

Read More →