There’s been a lot of questioning as to what the actual evidence is against lawmakers that Abramoff will be able to provide in order to implicate them for their actions. Further, there remains in some circles questions as to what actually happened, what was the nature of the corruption. This week an article in Time Magazine seeks to start that explanation.

The article focuses on the soon to be famous emails between Scanlon and Abramoff. For two such smart guys you’d figure they’d try to be a little more covert in their dealings, although I suppose when your party is doing the wiretapping you really have little to fear. The email in question here regards a donation of $10,000 to the NRCC from SunCruz Casinos.

On Oct. 20, 2000, the e-mail records show, Scanlon sent Abramoff Scanlon’s draft of a statement praising Adam Kidan, a co-owner of SunCruz Casinos, a Florida gambling-boat company that Abramoff and Kidan had bought the month before, after a public dispute with the previous owner. Abramoff and Kidan, who have since pleaded guilty in Florida to fraud in connection with their financing of the SunCruz purchase, hoped that Ney’s positive statement would “let people know that SunCruz now was in honest hands,” according to a source familiar with the case. In an Oct. 23 e-mail, Abramoff proposed throwing $10,000 at the NRCC in the form of a SunCruz check signed by Kidan. The money was sent within days, and Ney got credit within the G.O.P. for raising it. Ney then inserted praise for Kidan into the Oct. 26 Congressional Record.

The entire Abramoff scandal has raised questions as to whether this is merely a case of corruption being built upon legally reported campaign donations. In fact a conversation I recently had took this same vein. However, as the Time article continues to point out through the comments of a government expert on criminal law: “Contributions are lawful only if made in support of a lawmaker’s policies. They are clearly illegal as part of a prenegotiated deal involving a quid pro quo.”

That doesn’t sound good for the cabal of corruption atop Capitol Hill. This issue is separate from legal donations, or even the perks of being a lawmaker. This is a direct contribution for an action that had nothing to do with the legitimate function of Ney in his role in Congress and upon performing this favor, he was credited with a $10,000 check to the NRCC to which he must fundraise to certain levels in order to retain his chairmanship. Does not this also speak to a greater corruption within the GOP that runs our Congress? Are chairmanships based upon successful fundraising efforts? It would make sense to me that the best qualified person should sit on each committee, but this corruption and crooked way of doing business just goes deeper and deeper.