State Senator Vincent Fumo
Indicted former state Sen. Vincent Fumo has finished testifying after six days on the stand in his federal corruption trial. The government now plans to call two rebuttal witnesses, former Fumo defense lawyers Richard Sprague and Robert Scandone. They are expected to say they did not advise Fumo that he could destroy e-mail evidence during the FBI investigation.

That testimony would go to the obstruction charges in the 139-count indictment against Fumo. The 65-year-old Fumo is a longtime Democratic power broker from Philadelphia. He spent 30 years in the state Senate. Prosecutors say he defrauded the Senate, a charity and a museum of $3.5 million. Fumo says he was tired after more than a week on the stand in his four-month trial. Sprague, a prominent Philadelphia attorney, is being called to rebut Fumo’s testimony that he was following Sprague’s advice that e-mail messages could be destroyed lawfully. The government says that was obstruction of justice. Sprague was Fumo’s longtime friend, lawyer and a man he has described as a “father figure.” Sprague represented Fumo from the investigation’s early stages in 2003 through the February 2007 indictment, but left the case before trial after an apparent falling out.   
2009 The Associated Press

By: Dick Morris & Eileen McGann
 News broke last week that Rahm Emanuel, now White House chief of staff, lived rent-free for years in the home of Rep. Rosa De Lauro, D-Conn. — and failed to disclose the gift, as congressional ethics rules mandate. But this is only the tip of Emanuel’s previously undisclosed ethics problems.  One issue is the work Emanuel tossed the way of De Lauro’s husband. But the bigger one goes back to Emanuel’s days on the board of now-bankrupt mortgage giant Freddie Mac.  Emanuel is a multimillionaire, but lived for the last five years for free in the tony Capitol Hill townhouse owned by De Lauro and her husband, Democratic pollster Stan Greenberg. During that time, he also served as chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee — which gave Greenberg huge polling contracts. It paid Greenberg’s firm $239,996 in 2006 and $317,775 in 2008. (Emanuel’s own campaign committee has also paid Greenberg more than $50,000 since 2004.)

To be fair, Greenberg had polling contracts with the DCCC before — but each new election cycle brings its own set of consultants. And Emanuel was certainly generous with his roommate. Emanuel never declared the substantial gift of free rent on any of his financial-disclosure forms. He and De Lauro claim that it was just allowable “hospitality” between colleagues. Hospitality — for five years?  Some experts suggest that it was also taxable income: Over five years, the free rent could easily add up to more than $100,000. Nor is this all that seems to have been missed in the Obama team’s vetting process. Consider: Emanuel served on the Freddie Mac board of directors during the time that the government-backed lender lied about its earnings, a leading contributor to the current economic meltdown. The Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight Agency later singled out the Freddie Mac board as contributing to the fraud in 2000 and 2001 for “failing in its duty to follow up on matters brought to its attention.” In other words, board members ignored the red flags waving in their faces.

The SEC later fined Freddie $50 million for its deliberate fraud in 2000, 2001 and 2002.  Meanwhile, Emanuel was paid more than $260,000 for his Freddie “service.” Plus, after he resigned from the board to run for Congress in 2002, the troubled agency’s PAC gave his campaign $25,000 — its largest single gift to a House candidate.  That’s what friends are for, isn’t it? Now Rahm Emanuel is in the White House helping President Obama dig out of the mess that Freddie Mac helped start. The president’s chief of staff isn’t subject to Senate confirmation, but his ethics still matter. Is this the change that we can depend on?

The cost of Boston’s “Big Dig” has ballooned to over $15 billion. In September 1983, this 7.5 mile highway project was originally proposed with a completion date of 1995 and for a cost of $2.2 billion. In 1980, a Special Commission Concerning State and County Buildings (know as the “Ward Commission”) filed a final report on corruption in the award of state and county construction projects in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and found that: 1) Corruption was a way of life in Massachusetts; 2) Sub-standard construction was the norm; and 3) Political influence, not professional performance, was the prime criterion for doing business in the Commonwealth. While some of the Ward Commission’s recommendations were enacted into law, many important recommendations, especially the elimination of the filed sub-bid system, were not enacted. The failure of Massachusetts governmental officials to implement the recommendations of the Ward Commission and their promotion of a culture of malfeasance and political corruption has resulted in the mostly costly and sub-standard public works project in the history of the United States!

On December 4, 1875, William Marcy “Boss” Tweed, notorious leader of New York City’s Democratic political machine, escaped from prison and fled to Europe. Between 1865 and 1871, Boss Tweed and his cronies stole millions of dollars from the city treasury. Convicted of forgery and larceny in 1873, Tweed was released in 1875. Immediately rearrested on civil charges, he was allowed daily visits to his family in the company of his jailor. On one of these trips, Tweed made his escape.

Elected an alderman in 1851, the former bookkeeper and volunteer fireman worked his way up New York City’s Democratic hierarchy by holding various elected and unelected positions in the municipal government. He served one congressional term, but operated most effectively at the state level. By 1868, the year he gained a seat in the New York senate, Tweed firmly controlled the state Democratic Party. Two years later, he maneuvered passage of a revised city charter. A newly instituted board of audit became the principle means by which the Boss and his friends siphoned the city treasury of between twenty million and two-hundred million dollars.

The movement to overthrow the “Tweed Ring” included the New York Times, Harper’s Weekly cartoonist Thomas Nast, and reforming Democrat Samuel J. Tilden. On July 22, 1871, the newspaper began publishing an exposé of the Tweed Ring’s activities. Nast followed up with cartoons roasting Tweed. “Let’s stop them damned pictures,” the Boss supposedly said, “I don’t care so much what the papers write about—my constituents can’t read—but damn it, they can see pictures.” Despite bribes and threats, Nast continued to lambast Tweed weekly on the pages of Harper’s. Meanwhile, Tilden’s efforts to oust Tweed solidified his name as a reformer—a reputation that made him Governor of New York in 1874 and nearly put him in the White House in 1877.

With his 1873 conviction behind him, Tweed was sued by New York State for $6 million. Held in debtor’s prison until he could post half that amount as bail, the former boss had few options. Still wealthy, his prison cell was fairly luxurious. Yet Tweed was determined to escape. Fleeing to Spain, he worked as a common seaman on a Spanish ship until recognized by his likeness to a Nast cartoon and captured. Extradited to New York, William Marcy Tweed died in debtor’s prison on April 12, 1878.

Boss Tweed, acting as a policeman, although wearing the uniform of a convict, holds two boys by the collar with one hand, and carries a billy club in the other. Reform Tweed: “If all the people want is to have somebody arrested, I’ll have you plunderers convicted. You will be allowed to escape; nobody will be hurt; and then Tilden will go to the White House, and I to Albany as Governor.”

The political machine that created Boss Tweed and that Tweed strengthened remained a powerful force in New York City politics. Through a system of patronage and charity, Tammany Hall, the executive committee of the New York City Democratic Party, commanded the allegiance of many voters. Lacking a government safety net, poor citizens relied on the party for access to employment, or for help with funeral expenses. Public works projects like Central Park provided politicians with patronage opportunities ranging from lucrative contracts to day work digging ditches.

Do politicians try and live above the law? Well, it seems like not paying your taxes, employing illegal immigrants, extortion and bribery are alive and well in all political bodies in our country. Are we receiving the political leadership we deserve because of our apathy and failure to get involved in government? No matter what political party, age demographic or position a certain politician holds, it seems like corruption is rampant. Yes, politics has always been corrupt to some extent. But so is Wall Street, the medical industry and other industries in our nation. Corruption is not limited to politics. BUT I dare say there is much more corruption among our leaders who are supposed to take oaths of integrity, honor and dignity.

Just look at yesterday:
Daschle withdraws from Secretary of Health and Human Services position, since he did not pay taxes to the tune of $128,000. And, then claims “I did not know” – c’mon give me a break. That argument means you are either ignorant or arrogant. You signed the return, or you are responsible for what your Accountant does. It’s really that simple. Ask any American who does pay all of their taxes. We apparently pay more attention than you do…

Ironies of irony? Why, after all the slams at Bush and his administration, is the American public having to be subjected to this by a group claiming to be representing change? If this was Bush, he would be crucified for making stupid selections. But,Obama will get a pass for now. Don’t get me wrong: I voted for Obama and I want a new culture in DC. BUT then Obama has to break away from the Olde Guard and forge a new one – because the Olde Guard is too entrenched (in his own party) in what he campaigned against. Daschle epitomized all that is wrong with politics. Let him make his millions in the private sector, schmoozing and calling in old favors in DC for lobbyists. Or writing books, hitting the lecture circuit or rubbing elbows with the Saudis’.

Change? – Yes, but then recruit new private sector blood into politics. Out with the Olde Guard, in with the New.

Disclosures show how his name, connections helped him lead lavish lifestyle
By David D. Kirkpatrick      The New York Times      Mon., Feb. 2, 2009

WASHINGTON – Tom Daschle, the former Democratic Senate leader, had been voted out of office. His close friend Leo Hindery, a Democratic donor and media mogul, was out of a job too, having just sold his latest company, Yes Networks.
So in early 2005 the two men decided to team up. Mr. Daschle agreed to become the founding chairman of “a world-class executive advisory board” of “industry and regulatory experts” for a new investment firm run by Mr. Hindery, according to a news release announcing its inception and seeking investors. The Daschle-led board, the release said, would help provide a “collective depth of industry knowledge and expertise that will allow us to pursue unique and high-value opportunities.”

In addition to lending the prestige of his name, Mr. Daschle traveled to help raise money from investors for Mr. Hindery’s new venture, said Jenny Backus, a spokeswoman for Mr. Daschle. And in exchange, over the next four years the firm compensated Mr. Daschle with over $2 million, and Mr. Hindery lent Mr. Daschle the use of a chauffeured limousine in Washington.
Ms. Backus said that when Mr. Hindery was not in Washington he lent his car to Mr. Daschle as a favor to a friend.
The partnership has now come back to haunt Mr. Daschle, with the disclosure that he had failed to pay $128,000 in taxes on the car and driver Mr. Hindery’s firm provided him, threatening to derail his confirmation as secretary of health and human services.

Beyond the ramifications for Mr. Daschle’s ascent to the cabinet, the disclosures about Mr. Hindery and the many clients Mr. Daschle advised on public policy offers a new window into how Washington works. It shows how in just four years an influential former senator was able to make $5 million and live a lavish lifestyle by dint of his name, connections and knowledge of the town’s inner workings.

There is no evidence that Mr. Daschle pulled strings for Mr. Hindery. Indeed, Mr. Hindery’s firm appears to have had few interests before the government. But interviews and a review of public documents show that in his work for a Washington law firm, Mr. Daschle did take on an array of clients seeking influence with the government, including concerns involved in Indian gambling, ethanol, health care, telecommunications and federal contracting.
At least one, the nonprofit student loan company EduCap, may pose new problems for Mr. Daschle. The Senate Finance Committee said it was trying to determine whether trips to the Bahamas and the Middle East provided to Mr. Daschle by the company should also have been reported as income.
Ms. Backus said that the trips predated his work for EduCap, that he traveled at the request of a different charity, and that his accountants say he handled the trips appropriately.
Affiliated with the firm Alston & Bird, Mr. Daschle has operated in the gap between the popular understanding and legal definition of a lobbyist. There is no evidence that he directly sought to influence his former colleagues or other government officials in ways that would have required him to register as a lobbyist or could have run afoul of the restrictions on former lobbyists entering the Obama administration. But the rules still left plenty of room for him to advise businesses seeking to influence the government or to profit otherwise from the fame and insights he acquired in public life.

“Did he attempt to influence? Maybe,” said Thomas Susman, an official at the American Bar Association and author of its lobbying manual. “Did he advise others in the business of influencing? Probably. But he wasn’t a lobbyist.”

Ms. Backus said Mr. Daschle provided clients with advice based on years of public service. But she said he also gave the same insights free to the One campaign and the liberal Center for American Progress, as well as to his students at Georgetown University.

Aides to President Obama said on Sunday that they still expected Mr. Daschle to win confirmation. The Senate Finance Committee will meet on Monday to discuss the nomination.

What expertise Mr. Daschle contributed to Mr. Hindery’s firm is hard to determine. The firm, Intermedia, has hired no federal lobbyists and it mainly invests in media businesses — the television program “Soul Train,” for example; cable networks devoted to gospel music or hunting and fishing; and the Christian publisher Thomas Nelson — with few interests before the government.

Mr. Hindery, who sought the chairmanship of the Democratic National Committee in 2000, could not be reached for comment. Other firm executives did not return calls. Former Senator Bob Kerrey, another board member, did not respond to an e-mail message.

Former Senator Slade Gorton, a Washington Republican who also joined the board, said in an interview on Sunday that the other members received $100,000 a year in compensation, mainly for attending quarterly meetings about the state of the firm.

The Senate Finance Committee expects to disclose this week the results of a two-year investigation into the possibility that Mr. Daschle’s client EduCap abused its tax-exempt status by providing lavish entertainment and travel to its officers and their guests, including Mr. Dashcle. Mr. Daschle is an old friend of Catherine B. Reynolds, EduCap’s chief executive.

Another client paying for his policy advice was UnitedHealth, a giant insurance company with many issues pending before the Department of Health and Human Services. About a third of its $81 billion in revenue last year came from federally regulated sales of Medicare Advantage and Medicare supplement and prescription drug plans.

The company boasted in its annual report that “one in five Medicare recipients participates in a UnitedHealth Group Medicare program.” (Mr. Daschle has said he will recuse himself from matters involving former clients.)

Two of the clients Mr. Daschle disclosed involved Indian tribes: the Great Plains Indian Gaming Association, and the law firm Fredericks Peebles & Morgan, which represents Indian tribes in legal and government-relations matters involving gambling, health care and other issues.

Another was Perry Capital, a firm that specialized in handicapping the completion of mergers, many of which required federal approvals.

Several other clients or employers have stakes in federal support for the production of ethanol, an alternative to petroleum popular in farm states but controversial among environmentalists. Mr. Daschle received fees as a director of Prime BioSolutions and the Mascoma Corporation, which are involved in ethanol production, and he sold policy advice to the Governors’ Ethanol Coalition and the Renewable Fuels Association. Other clients were investment companies with stakes in federal environmental policies, and one, Crown Consulting, specialized in work for the Federal Aviation Administration.

Mr. Daschle was also a director of the Mayo Clinic. Although he did not officially lobby for the hospital, he did lend his voice to its cause in at least one notable battle. (As a director, Mr. Daschle received free medical care from the clinic, and for that he paid taxes, his spokeswoman said.)

Over the last few years, the clinic paid several Washington lobbyists to help beat back a $2.5 billion government loan for a company from Mr. Daschle’s home state, South Dakota, that wanted to operate a freight rail line near the clinic’s headquarters in Rochester, Minn.
To much criticism in his home state, Mr. Daschle sided with the clinic, calling it “an American treasure.”
“I don’t think the Mayo Clinic is asking too much,” he told The St. Paul Pioneer Press. The Federal Railroad Administration killed the project last February.
Robert Pear and Sheryl Gay Stolberg contributed reporting.
This article, “In Daschle’s Tax Woes, a Peek Into Washington,” first appeared in The New York Times.