AP's take on who could still be ensnared by prosecutors in the Abramoff case -- Tom DeLay, John Doolittle, Conrad Burns and Steven Griles:

The investigation had already ensnared Ney's former chief of staff as well as two aides to former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-Texas. The investigation cost DeLay his leadership seat before he ultimately resigned, and it contributed to the Election Day defeat of Sen. Conrad Burns, R-Mont.

Safavian was sentenced in October to 18 months in prison for lying to investigators about his ties to Abramoff. He is asking a federal judge to postpone his sentence until he can appeal his conviction.

Burns, who received about $150,000 in Abramoff-related donations and whose aides traveled on the lobbyist's jet to the 2001 Super Bowl, has denied any wrongdoing. Though two of DeLay's aides have pleaded guilty, the former majority leader maintains his innocence and has not been charged.

Also under scrutiny are Rep. John Doolittle, R-Calif., who accepted campaign money from Abramoff and used the lobbyist's luxury sports box for a fundraiser without initially reporting it, and former Deputy Interior Secretary Steven Griles, who senators and a former colleague said gave preferential treatment to Abramoff and his Indian tribe clients.

 

A letter to the editor to be published on Thursday in a Montana paper explains the very close relationship between Jack Abramoff and the office of Senator Conrad Burns (R-MT) -- and that includes the Senator himself: 

A Republican media consultant and friend of indicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff recently wrote a letter to a Montana newspaper saying Burns' staff ate so many free meals at Abramoff's restaurant, people joked they would have "starved to death" without the lobbyist.

"Frankly, it was widely viewed in D.C. that Mr. Abramoff effectively exerted implicit control over Mr. Burns whenever he and his team needed to get something accomplished," reads the letter, which was sent to the Whitefish Pilot last week.

Burns was named one of the 20 most corrupt members of Congress by CREW in September 2006.   The Senator from Montana is also one of the 19 members of Congress currently under federal investigation.

Conrad Burns maintains that he is not a target of the Justice Department. That doesn't mean he's not being investigated. Something is keeping his lawyer busy according to TPM Muckraker:

Sen. Conrad Burns (R-MT) has spent at least $91,500 in campaign funds on a white collar defense lawyer this year.

Last November, both The Wall Street Journal and The New York Times reported that Burns is on the short list for Abramoff investigators. Burns finally hired defense attorney Ralph Caccia of Powell Goldstein in April of this year. At the time, Burns' spokesman said that Caccia had been retained to "[help] review all the facts in this matter."

The review must be continuing, as Burns' recent FEC disclosure shows a $27,460 payment to Caccia's firm in September. Together with the $64,000 that Burns had paid out since April, that makes approximately $91,500 in fees.

There was a time when Conrad Burns and Jack Abramoff were closest of associates. Abramoff spoke of their very tight relationship in a Vanity Fair interview earlier this year.  He said their respective staffs "were as close as they could be." Yet, these days, Conrad Burns DOES NOT want to talk about Jack Abramoff. The Senator made that clear at a recent barbecue in Great Fall, Montana.

When a reporter put the Abramoff question to Burns at Sunday's barbecue, the senator barked back: "Old news." Burns said that he's not a "target" in the Justice Department's ongoing Abramoff probe. But when I asked him whether he falls into the category of potential "targets" federal prosecutors call "subjects," Burns said, "I'm not a target." I asked him again if he's a "subject." "I'm not a target," he said again.

Burns spokesman Jason Klindt confirmed later that the Justice Department has told Burns' criminal defense lawyer that he's not a target. But when I asked Klindt whether Burns is a "subject" -- described in the U.S. Attorney's Manual as "a person whose conduct is within the scope" of a criminal investigation -- he said he wouldn't go beyond what he had just told me.

Burns and his staff are adamant that the Senator is not a "target" of the Justice Department. They won't say if he is a "subject." Does it matter? Not according to noted Attorney Stanley Brand who has vast experience dealing with corruption cases:

Brand said that distinctions in a federal criminal manual between a "target," someone the Justice Department has decided to seek charges against, and a "subject," someone under investigation who could be upgraded to a target, are largely meaningless in a practical sense.

"You can't take these distinctions to the bank, because the Justice Department can change your status whenever it wants to," Brand said. "To me, it is academic. Burns is under investigation."

Burns might not be a "target' but he was named one of the most corrupt members of Congress in "Beyond DeLay."

For the next few weeks, Citizens Blogging will take an in-depth look at each of the members of Congress featured in "Beyond DeLay."

Today's spotlight will shine on Montana Senator Conrad Burns. On September 15, 2006, Time Magazine reported that Burns may be the next member of Congress indicted in the Abramoff scandal:

A source close to the investigation told TIME that scores of US prosecutors and FBI agents continue to examine the activities of other sitting members of Congress and prominent individuals who could face prosecution, though not necessarily before the November 7 election. The source confirmed previous public reports that particular scrutiny is being paid to Sen. Conrad Burns, a Montana Republican who faces a tough campaign for reelection.

"A lot of the conduct to which Ney has pleaded guilty is similar to the alleged conduct of Senator Conrad Burns and his staff," points out Melanie Sloan, Executive Director of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), a non-profit watchdog group.

Burn's earned the designation as one of the most corrupt members of Congress primarily because of the his tangled relationship with lobbyist Jack Abramoff:

Sen. Burns' campaign committees have received substantial contributions from former Republican lobbyist Jack Abramoff, Mr. Abramoff's associates and Mr. Abramoff's tribal clients. In fact, Sen. Burns received more money from Mr. Abramoff than did any other Member of Congress. Between 2000 and 2002, these donors contributed a whopping 42% of the total money received by Burns' political action committee, totaling more than $137,000.

In apparent exchange, Sen. Burns applied pressure to the Interior Department to direct a $3 million federal grant intended for poor tribal schools to the Saginaw Chippewa tribe of Michigan, one of the wealthiest tribes in the country (each member of the tribe receives $70,000 annually) and a client of Mr. Abramoff's. When that failed, Sen. Burns earmarked the money for the Saginaw Chippewa in a 2004 Senate appropriations bill.

By trading legislative assistance for campaign contributions, Sen. Burns may have violated federal laws prohibiting bribery and honest services fraud as well as Senate rules.

In an article that appeared in Vanity Fair in April of 2006, Burns was described as "Abramoff's point man in the Senate for federal goodies." In that piece, Abramoff spoke of the close relationship he had with the Montana Senator:

"Every appropriation we wanted [from Burns's committee] we got," he says. "Our staffs were as close as they could be. They practically used Signatures as their cafeteria. I mean, it's a little difficult for him to run from that record."

So what is the alleged corruption by Burns? If, as it appears, Senator Burns accepted campaign donations in exchange for his actions on behalf of Abramoff's client, the Saginaw Chippewa Tribe, he may have violated the federal bribery statute. Also, if, as it appears, Senator Burns accepted a donation to his political action committee in exchange for opposition to increased regulation of the Mariana Islands garment industry (another Abramoff client), he may have violated the federal bribery statute.

In addition, Senator Burns may have used his position as a member of Congress to financially benefit Mr. Abramoff and Mr. Abramoff's tribal clients. By doing so, Burns may be depriving his constituents, the Senate, and the United States of his honest services in violation of 18 U.S.C. section 1341.

Then, there is the trip to the 2001 Super Bowl as reported in "Beyond DeLay":

Two of Sen. Burns’ key staff members, Appropriations Committee staffer, Ryan Thomas, and chief of staff, Will M. Brooke, flew to the 2001 Super Bowl on a corporate jet leased by Mr. Abramoff, accompanied by several staffers from House Majority Leader Tom DeLay’s office. These staffers also visited a SunCruz gambling ship, partly owned by Mr. Abramoff, during the same junket. At the end of 2003, Mr. Brooke left Sen. Burns’ office to work for Mr. Abramoff.

The Senate Gifts Rule restricts members and staff from accepting “gifts of personal hospitality” from registered lobbyists. Moreover, members and staff are only permitted to accept reimbursement for officially related travel. In addition, Senators are required to sign staff members’ forms, authorizing staff to accept reimbursement for travel. The Senate Select Committee on Ethics should investigate why no travel forms were filed and whether Senator Burns authorized staff members to take a trip clearly prohibited by Senate rules.

Conrad Burns is especially worthy of being named as one of the most corrupt members of Congress. If press reports are accurate, he may be the next member indicted. In any event, the Senator's unethical behavior definitely warrants an investigation by the United States Senate Select Committee on Ethics.

Rest assured, CREW will continue to monitor the case of Conrad Burns.

The Jack Abramoff scandal continues to dog Conrad Burns. He's trying to distance himself from the investigation underway by the Department of Justice by maintaining he's not a "target:" 

Iverson announced that the senator's criminal lawyer had confirmed with the Justice Department that "Burns is in fact not the target" of its investigation.

But what exactly does that mean?

Not much, said Stanley M. Brand, a lawyer in Washington with decades of experience in defending prominent officials charged with corruption. He represented former White House aide George Stephanopoulos in the Whitewater investigation and former representative Dan Rostenkowski, the Illinois Democrat who pleaded guilty to mail fraud in 1996.

Brand said that distinctions in a federal criminal manual between a "target," someone the Justice Department has decided to seek charges against, and a "subject," someone under investigation who could be upgraded to a target, are largely meaningless in a practical sense.

"You can't take these distinctions to the bank, because the Justice Department can change your status whenever it wants to," Brand said. "To me, it is academic. Burns is under investigation."

Burns was named one of the most corrupt Members of Congress last week by CREW in "Beyond DeLay."

Conrad Burns has no sense of propriety. Just yesterday, the Washington Post ran an extensive article about the long relationship Burns had with Jack Abramoff.

Then yesterday, we also learned that Burns flew to Montana aboard the private jet of a corporation for whom he had just pushed legislation:

Montana Sen. Conrad Burns, a Republican in a tight re-election race, flew on a private plane chartered by Vonage Holdings Corp., just days after he pushed legislation that the company has advocated for more than a year.

Burns accompanied Vonage lobbyist Frank Cavaliere on the company's chartered plane to and from the ''13th Annual Burns Classic Golf Weekend'' in Bigfork, Mont., on Saturday. Cavaliere and a Burns spokesman both confirmed the plane trip to The Associated Press on Monday.

Campaign finance rules allow members of Congress to fly on corporate aircraft as long as they reimburse the company for the equivalent of first-class airfare. Jason Klindt, a spokesman for Burns, said the senator will reimburse the company.

The fundraiser was held two days after the Senate passed a Burns-sponsored amendment that was pushed in various forms by Vonage and several public safety groups. The amendment was added to a port security bill that the Senate approved 98-0 on Sept. 14.

And to keep it really interesting, there's a revolving door aspect to this story. One of the top lobbyists for Vonage used to have the top job with Burns:

 

Among the lobbying firms working for Vonage has been Gage, a group founded by Burns' former chief of staff Leo Giacometto.

That's what Time Magazine is reporting we learned Think Progress:

“A source close to the investigation told TIME that scores of US prosecutors and FBI agents continue to examine the activities of other sitting members of Congress and prominent individuals who could face prosecution, though not necessarily before the November 7 election. The source confirmed previous public reports that particular scrutiny is being paid to Sen. Conrad Burns, a Montana Republican who faces a tough campaign for reelection.”

CREW named Senator Burns (R-MT) one of the 13 most corrupt members of Congress in Beyond Delay:

Sen. Burns's ethics issues are based on campaign contributions he accepted in apparent exchange for exercising his authority as Chairman and on a trip some of his staff members took to the 2001 Super Bowl.