Abramoff’s O.C. Pal: What’s He Thinking?

Is Orange County Congressman Dana Rohrabacher:

A) a sap;

B) a calculating rat;

C) a friend indeed?

Let’s consider the possibilities, in order, given that Rohrabacher felt the urge this week to offer a defense of longtime friend Jack Abramoff, the radioactive lobbyist who’s pleaded guilty to influence peddling and has agreed to cooperate with prosecutors as they probe his dealings with Congress.

Is Rohrabacher a sap?

When asked by a Times reporter if he would comment on Abramoff’s situation, Rohrabacher gladly obliged. Although saying he didn’t excuse any illegality, Rohrabacher told The Times’ Jean Pasco: “The last thing I’m going to do is kick a friend when they’re down.” He went on to say, “It’s just a sad commentary on democracy that when someone falls, there’s this feeding frenzy and people are abandoned by those they thought were their friends.”

I might have gotten weepy reading that if Abramoff had made a one-time mistake that had minimal reverberations. Rather, he was charged with conspiracy, fraud and tax evasion. An assistant U.S. attorney general said the corruption scheme “is very extensive,” and court papers already have drawn attention to an Ohio congressman on whom Abramoff allegedly lavished gifts in exchange for legislative support. The congressman, Bob Ney, has denied any impropriety and distanced himself from Abramoff.

Rohrabacher, elected in 1988 and now halfway through his ninth term, says he and Abramoff met more than 20 years ago. Aside from wondering about his judgment or instincts in friends, you can’t help but conclude that Rohrabacher may well have been taken for a ride by his longtime pal.

Is Rohrabacher a calculating rat? To put it bluntly, is he publicly defending Abramoff because he fears he might sing like a canary? If so, that would make Rohrabacher much worse than a sap.

Rohrabacher hasn’t been linked to any influence-peddling and insists Abramoff never gave him anything other than a legal campaign contribution. But their friendship is such that Rohrabacher once agreed to list himself as a reference when Abramoff needed a multimillion-dollar loan and that Abramoff hosted a baby shower for Rohrabacher, his wife and their triplets in 2004.

However odd it may seem that Rohrabacher cites the negative reaction to Abramoff as a sad commentary on democracy -- rather than Abramoff’s admitted corruption -- there’s no indication yet that Rohrabacher himself is a rat.

Which leads us to ponder seriously whether he is a friend, indeed. Certainly Abramoff is a friend in need. But the friends he needs now are in the U.S. Justice Department.

He may have to settle for Rohrabacher, and the congressman’s reputation as something as a maverick suits him well in his Abramoff defense. That is, Rohrabacher is just quirky and independent enough that a spirited defense of Abramoff, with no strings attached, doesn’t seem that implausible.

Small case in point: Rohrabacher is a staunch conservative but angered or confused many otherwise like-minded friends a couple years ago when they thought he was too sympathetic to Arab interests in the ongoing Mideast dispute with Israel.

That reinforced Rohrabacher’s history of speaking his mind and not always running with the crowd. Perhaps that same streak of contrarianism compelled him to take the unconventional tack of supporting Abramoff.

The answer to our quiz lies, ironically, with Abramoff. Prosecutors probably will perform a Heimlich maneuver on him until he belches out the name of every congressman he’s ever sought to buy off.

Unless and until Rohrabacher’s name is disgorged, we can acknowledge the virtue, if not the wisdom, behind his defense of an old friend.

Dana Rohrabacher -- a friend, indeed.

What a guy.

Dana Parsons’ column appears Wednesdays, Fridays and Sundays. He can be reached at (714) 966-7821 or at dana.parsons@latimes.com. An archive of his recent columns is at www.latimes.com/parsons.