I am trying to figure out what the Gregg office 'quo' might have been for the Boulanger/Abramoff 'quid'.
The Department Of Justice has alleged, and Todd Bolanger has confirmed, that:
a. On September 27, 2002, defendant BOULANGER emailed Staffer F that it was good to see him the other night and seeking Staffer F's help in preserving a $3.5 million earmark that was favorable to one of BOULANGER's lobbying clients, which earmark had been included in the House version of a defense appropriations bill.
b. On January 22, 2003, defendant BOULANGER emailed Staffer F seeking his help in defeating a proposed amendment to a defense appropriations bill which would have enabled an Alaskan entity to establish a gambling casino, thereby threatening the market share of Native American tribes represented by Firm B which already owned or operated gambling casinos. Staffer F responded to defendant BOULANGER that he would tell his Senator and that his office had the proposed amendment "flagged."
Can any of the Blue Hampshire Irregulars determine what the two pieces of legislation described above would have been? And what were the actions of Senator Gregg in regards to each in the Appropriations Committee and on the floor?
I am reasonably sure that the second relates to an amendment filed by Ted Stevens to allow Alaskan Native Americans to open casinos in other states. The first may relate to a school improvement project that Abramoff was trying to hijack for a clients (the Saginaw Chippewa) around this time, but the figure in that episode is usually said to have been only three million dollars.
The answers to those questions might prove to be the key to a very interesting tale.
