Talk:Records reveal US Senator John Sununu had ties to convicted lobbyist

From Wikinews, the free news source you can write!
Jump to: navigation, search

Sorry if it's disruptive editing so early. What's the link between Sununu and the bill? 86.44.22.206 09:36, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

He's on the House Appropriations Committee, and I thought I had seen him somewhere on THOMAS as having had to do with committee votes related to the bill in July. Before I started writing this, I went around looking through and bookmarking all my source documents. This is kind of like just taking notes at first, so I'll probably be looking through this for a while. Daniel Bush (talk) 14:31, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Send a letter to Senator Sununu:

Dear Senator Sununu,

I am contacting you to inquire about donations from Mr. Jack Abramoff and associates of the Alexander Strategy Group. Last Thursday, Mr. Abramoff was convicted on charges related to conspiracy to commit fraud against public officials and the clients he lobbied for.

I had been looking through his campaign records, and I noticed that on October 24, he, his former boss, and three other associates from a group founded by Rep. Tom DeLay's chief of staff had each given $1000 to a political action committee, Rely On Your Beliefs Fund.

On the same day in October, records show the committee donated $3000 to Team Sununu. Abramoff, according to the final report by the U.S. Senate Indian Affairs Committee, told Native American tribal clients to direct their funds through the Alexander Strategy Group. In addition, your campaign received $1000 from Greenberg Traurig in December 2002, during which Abramoff worked for that political action committee, for purposes of debt retirement.

If your campaign isn't too busy, I'd like a response or comment on these Federal Elections Commission records. Thanks you for your service.

Sincerely, Daniel Bush

Daniel Bush (talk) 22:40, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Review[edit]

Newsworthy?[edit]

I fail to see how this is news. This is simply a rehashing of old news and old documents and I do not see what is new here at all. This MSNBC article from 2006 has Sununu on the list of people with ties to Abramoff, there are no new revelations in this article. --SVTCobra 17:11, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Actually, the article discusses when the contributions happened, how they happened (through the R.O.Y. committee), and circumstances in Congress when they happened (a funding bill in Congress with provisions relevant to Abramoff clients). In the article, Sununu does admit to having received funds and that they would be donated to charity, but there has been nothing beyond that, and the three-year-old news that Abramoff's Choktaw tribe clients donated to the New Hampshire Republican Party. This can be added, but I don't see how it would take away from the story. The documents themselves being "old" does not change anything, or else there would never be a story about leaked memos.
If you would like, though, I could request this story be removed and I can post it elsewhere. Daniel Bush (talk) 17:36, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
I appreciate your hard work, but I don't think you have uncovered anything new that wasn't already reported elsewhere years ago. The Choctaw tribe's New Hampshire donations were for example covered in this 2005 article (see about half way down). --SVTCobra 17:54, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I saw that. The Choctaw tribe wasn't even mentioned in the article; I had just given it as an example of the only Abramoff-connected things that have ever come out in relation to Sununu aside from the $3000 donation in the MSNBC article. So the story should be left at that single sentence in that single article? Daniel Bush (talk) 17:58, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I am getting a little confused here ... so I am going to slow it down a little. What, in the article you wrote, is new and not previously covered? Please be specific. --SVTCobra 18:22, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

All five Abramoff and Tom DeLay associates donated on the same day. The PAC donated on the same day. The same month it happened, there was a bill that gave funding to one of Abramoff's clients, the Saginaw Chippewa. Then, actually, if Sununu admitted that he had received the $3000 from Abramoff on his own, that would mean he knew the money had gone through the PAC for the purpose of donating to him. In Abramoff's e-mails, they speak of a $4-5 or more million dollar program, in the ballpark range of the program in the bill. Thus, there is the method and reason. Daniel Bush (talk) 18:27, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Speaking of the Abramoff e-mails, "Abramoff wrote to fellow lobbyist Michael Scanlon on October 4 via e-mail": what year? Obviously the other stuff will take me a little time to reply to. --SVTCobra 18:44, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

2001, same month as the contributions. Sorry for not including that. Daniel Bush (talk) 18:51, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Also, the $3000 he donated, according to news articles from January 2006 when that MSNBC article came out, had come from different donors: the Saginaw Chipewa themselves. Thanks for your dispute; actually, this makes the article much stronger. I will add it in. Daniel Bush (talk) 19:58, 9 September 2008 (UTC)