{"id":3694,"date":"2008-09-10T00:53:00","date_gmt":"2008-09-10T06:53:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.nmpolitics.net\/index\/2008\/09\/e-mails-tie-former-wilson-staffer-to-abramoff-scandal\/"},"modified":"2008-09-10T00:53:00","modified_gmt":"2008-09-10T06:53:00","slug":"e-mails-tie-former-wilson-staffer-to-abramoff-scandal","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/2008\/09\/e-mails-tie-former-wilson-staffer-to-abramoff-scandal\/","title":{"rendered":"E-mails tie former Wilson staffer to Abramoff scandal"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"\"<\/a>U.S. Rep. Heather Wilson<\/a> says she knew nothing until Tuesday about e-mails that indicate that a former staffer in her office may have tried to influence Sandia Pueblo\u2019s<\/a> decision on whether to extend a contract with disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff\u2019s<\/a> firm in 2003. <\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

TPM Muckraker<\/a> was the first to report on Tuesday that the indictment of former Abramoff associate Kevin Ring<\/a>, filed Monday, includes e-mails indicating interaction between a staffer in the office of Wilson, R-N.M. and Ring and another former lobbyist for Greenberg Traurig<\/a>.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

The indictment, according to TPM Muckraker, states that the lobbyist for the firm, identified as \u201cFirm B\u201d in the indictment, e-mailed the Wilson<\/st1:place><\/st1:city> staffer on Jan. 30, 2003, stating, \u201cSorry I couldn\u2019t hangout last night. I greatly appreciate your taking the time to han(g)out with the (New Mexico<\/st1:place><\/st1:state> tribe). It meant a lot to (K)evin and I.\u201d<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

That e-mail also suggests that the staffer, who is not named in the indictment, may have taken a gift from the firm.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

\u201cBTW, you should be all set for the (Los Angeles<\/st1:place><\/st1:city>) Clippers (basketball) game,\u201d the e-mail states, according to the indictment.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

There\u2019s more. A Feb. 14, 2003 e-mail from the Wilson<\/st1:place><\/st1:city> staffer states that the staffer \u201cwould be disappointed\u201d if the law firm didn\u2019t get the contract to represent the pueblo. A March 4, 2003 e-mail from the firm\u2019s lobbyist to Ring states, \u201cI\u2019m going to kill (the New Mexico<\/st1:place><\/st1:state> tribe) with (its U.S. Representative) if we don\u2019t get hired.\u201d And a March 7, 2003 e-mail from the lobbyist to Ring states that Wilson<\/st1:city>\u2019s staffer \u201cis going to be in the meeting with (the New Mexico<\/st1:place><\/st1:state> tribe) when they come to town. He\u2019s going to give the \u2018are you guys staying with (Firm B) this cycle? They did a great job on\u2026 legislation\u2026 and really cleared the path for you guys\u2026 yadda yadda\u2026 he\u2019s gonna gather as much intel as possible for us.\u201d<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

\u2018Not sure whether to be amused or offended\u2019<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

Wilson<\/st1:place><\/st1:city>, in a statement released by her office, said the e-mails involve to a \u201cformer staffer.\u201d She said the e-mails relate to whether the firm would continue to be retained by the pueblo, which first hired the firm in 2002, and said the e-mails were sent after Congress passed the final legislation on the Sandia Land Claim. (Her statement is mostly accurate: Three of the four e-mails identified in the indictment were sent after that happened).<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

Wilson<\/st1:place><\/st1:city> also said she has not been contacted by the Department of Justice about the situation.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

The congresswoman said in her statement that she is \u201cnot sure whether to be amused or offended that (the firm\u2019s two employees) were operating under the delusion that I would help them retain their contract, or that losing their contract would hurt the Pueblo\u2019s longstanding relationship with me. As my constituents, I represent the Pueblo<\/st1:place><\/st1:city> regardless of who they hire to represent them. At no time did I take any action on behalf of Greenberg Traurig with Sandia Pueblo.\u201d<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

Wilson<\/st1:place><\/st1:city> said her office has strict rules related to gifts, including tickets to events, and said her staffers are trained on House ethics rules, which are enforced \u201cup to and including dismissal.\u201d She didn\u2019t name the former staffer or say why he or she is no longer employed.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

Campaign cash<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

Ring hosted a fundraiser for Wilson<\/st1:place><\/st1:city> in May 2003 and contributed $1,000 to her campaign on June 2 of that year, the congresswoman disclosed in Tuesday\u2019s statement.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

\u201cWhen we discovered that Mr. Ring had not submitted a bill for the cost of the fundraiser to my fundraising consultant, our consultant sought to pay the bill and, when unsuccessful because the restaurant was no longer in business, my campaign made an equivalent contribution to charity as required by Federal Election Commission (FEC) rules,\u201d Wilson said.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

Abramoff is the central figure in a high-profile corruption probe. He pleaded guilty in 2006 to defrauding American Indian tribes and corruption in two separate cases. Earlier this month, he was also convicted of trading gifts for political favors. He is serving the prison sentences concurrently and is scheduled for release in 2012.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

The ongoing investigation has led to the conviction of former U.S. Rep. Bob Ney<\/a> and several White House and congressional staffers and lobbyists.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

U.S. Rep. Heather Wilson says she knew nothing until Tuesday about e-mails that indicate that a former staffer in her office may have tried to influence Sandia Pueblo\u2019s decision on whether to extend a contract with disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff\u2019s firm in 2003. TPM Muckraker was the first to report on Tuesday that the indictment […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-3694","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3694","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3694"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3694\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3694"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3694"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3694"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}