Pay-to-play Dem lobbyist indicted

This is not good news for Dems; you can hear the über-righteous ringing the alarm already. But the deeds are classic and wrong, and if the lobbyist is found guilty, he deserves what he gets.

He's accused of funneling campaign money to congressional earmark kings through family and friends, including a "hotel sommelier" (go ahead, look it up) and a "golf marketing director", then reimbursing the contributors — one of the few clear no-nos in the bribe-a-congressman, win-a-prize game. The numbers are large, as defense numbers tend to be.

From the Washington Post (h/t Ken Silverstein at his Harpers digs, my emphasis):

On Thursday, the former defense lobbyist stood accused by federal prosecutors of orchestrating one of the largest campaign-finance frauds in U.S. history. He faces devastating testimony from his son and has checked himself into a Baltimore clinic for anxiety.

Magliocchetti, 64, the founder and owner of the now-closed PMA Group, was charged in U.S. District Court in Alexandria with eight counts of illegal campaign contributions and three counts of making false statements. . . .

PMA's clients gained more than $200 million in federal earmarks from a roster of lawmakers, who received hundreds of thousands of dollars in contributions from the lobbyist, his family and associates.

Members of the House defense appropriations subcommittee were exempted in the indictment:

That is good news for lawmakers on the powerful House defense appropriations subcommittee who have been the focus of inquiries related to PMA. Reps. James P. Moran Jr. (D-Va.) and Peter J. Visclosky (D-Ind.), along with former subcommittee chairman John P. Murtha of Pennsylvania, were the largest recipients of donations from PMA lobbyists and their clients, according to campaign records. . . . Moran, Visclosky, Murtha and four other lawmakers were cleared of wrongdoing in December by the House ethics committee[.]

Because we all know what babes in the woods these guys are.

And check the numbers — as always in these cases, the ROI (return on investment) for earmark recipients is 100:1. $200,000 in bribes (ish) gets you $200 million in goodies (not counting cost overruns). All beasts want money, but this is where the big beasts play.

GP