In the Right

And Democrats made them pay.

As Naftali Bendavid of the Wall Street Journal wrote in "The Thumpin'," his chronicle of the 2006 campaign, Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee chairman Rahm Emanuel "ordered his staff to draw up a list of all Republicans who had taken money from DeLay or his former aide Tony Rudy, who had recently pleaded guilty to conspiracy charges. Emanuel also asked for the name of every House Republican who had voted to let DeLay stay on as majority leader even after he was indicted. 'And just go after them,' Emanuel told his staff."

"Go after them" they did, with a vengeance.

Now Sessions -- chairman of the NRCC -- seeks to use Murtha against Democrats the way Emanuel used DeLay against Republicans.

The NRCC just opened this web site to drive a point about Murtha's narcissistic pork barrel spending on a little-used airport that bears his name, and will soon begin tying Democrats across the country to Murtha with radio ads linking their votes in support of the stimulus package to Murtha's airport.

Meanwhile, the guy who ran against Murtha last time and is spoiling for a rematch is adding a new layer of allegations on top of everything already in the Murtha record.

Retired Army Lt. Col. William Russell alleges that Murtha's chief of staff, John Hugya, threatened to have Russell recalled to active military service.

At this point the episode is just a partisan he said/no he said dispute, but it has the potential to grow legs, as we say too often in campaigning, and run away on Murtha.

The episode took place on March 14, at a benefit dinner for the Friends of the National Rifle Association in Washington County, Pennsylvania. According to Russell, he was working the room when he approached a table at which Hugya sat.

"To my face, (Hugya) said, 'What are you going to do when we get the new Secretary of the Army seated and have your (expletive) recalled to active duty,'" says Russell.

The Johnstown Tribune-Democrat first reported on the allegations, and Politico today reports a Murtha spokesman calling the accusations spurious.

Russell's doing his best to establish authenticity for allegation, offering an email from his former commanding officer, Col. Gregory Ritch.

Ritch writes in the email about a January 2009 telephone conversation with Murtha's chief of staff: "John Hugia [sic] began pontificating about many things as he usually does and that is when he stated that there was going to be a recall to Active Duty, on the 'carpetbagger' that ran against Murtha. ... I would swear to this if needed. Just wanted to let you know."

Different conversation, similar tone and, in Russell's view, similar threat.

But Melanie Sloan of the Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) points out that if it was a threat, it was probably an empty threat, since using the powers of one's congressional office to try to prevent someone from challenging the Member would be a violation of 18 USC 245(B)(1)(a), which prohibits interfering with someone who's trying to engage in federally protected activities -- like campaigning for office."

And, Sloan suggested in a conversation Tuesday afternoon, a real stickler for the rules could try to make the case that the January phone call itself may have been an improper use of government resources for campaign purposes.

If Hugya was making that phone call from his congressional office, using a telephone that was paid for by the taxpayers, while sitting in a chair paid for by the taxpayers, while sitting under lights that were paid for by the taxpayers, while breathing air that was filtered at the taxpayers' expense ... well, you get the drift.

But it might not matter whether these allegations lead to investigations, either criminal or ethical -- not if this gives Democrats a reason to pull back from Murtha.

They could start to distance themselves from him, by not using him as a major spokesman on issues in his area of expertise.

They could advise candidates not to accept donations from him.

They could stop gathering in "Murtha's corner" on the House floor, where Murtha holds court like a feudal lord.

They could even make clear that Murtha is not to be protected in the next round of redistricting in Pennsylvania, as he was in the last round.

He could stand for re-election in 2010 from a diminished position, and those strategizing on how to win House elections for Murtha's party could see their position diminished, too.

Stay tuned to this one.

DISCLAIMER: When I write about the politicians in my past, CQ Politics says I have to turn the cards face-up. I worked for a candidate who ran against Murtha back in my campaign operative days.