Congress and Other Cesspools

By Rodney Stich

Congress and Other Cesspools is a documentary on frauds perpetrated over the years upon the American people by members of Congress and other groups. These include members of Congress, medical profession, credit card companies, and others.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Rodney Stich
• Release date: Nov 4, 2010
• ISBN: 9780932438515

Rodney Stich

Navy Patrol Plane Commander in World War II and pilot instructor in PBY Catalina aircraft.International airline captain, incluiding captain with Japan Airlines, flying planeloads of Muslim pilgrims from throughout the Middle East to the holy cities of Mecca and Medina. Key FAA airline safety inspector; guest on over 3,000 radio and TV shows since 1978; author of over a dozen highly documednted books on corruption throughout government. See site at www.defraudingamerica.com and www.rodneystich.com.

Book preview

Congress

And Other

U.S. Cesspools

Captain Rodney Stich

Congress and Other U.S. Cesspools

Captain Rodney Stich

Published and copyright by Silverpeak Publisher, Inc., a Nevada Corporation, POB 4, Alamo, CA 9407, at Smashwords.

All rights reserved. Short segments of this book may be reproduced or transmitted, with reference to the book.

Digital ISBN 978-0-932438-51-5

Print ISBN 978-0-932438-29-4

1. Congress-United States-

Congress and Other U.S. Cesspools

Table of Contents

Congress, the Most Obvious Cesspool

K-Street Lobbyists, Bribes, and Congress

Savings & Loan Fraud

Medicare, Lobbyists, Bribes and Congress

Credit Car and Student Loan Frauds

Bankruptcy Court Fraud, Lawyers, and Bribes

DOJ: The Greatest Danger to All Americans

Federal Judiciary: the Most Unrecognized Cesspool

Retaliation for Reporting Corruption in Government

Last Attempt Before 9/11

Preventable Consequences On 9/11

Post 9/11 Judicial, DOJ, and Congress Obstruction of Justice

Suing Members of Congress on Basis of Corruption

Priests’ Sex Crimes Against Children

History of Political Sex Scandals

The Great U.S. Housing Debacle

Start of Ripple Effects

Making It All Possible: Media People, Congress & Bribes

Introduction

This is the documented story of greed by members of Congress and some of the closely related entities in government. It is written by a former federal agent who personally discovered the corruption, first as a key federal aviation safety agent and then as an activist outside of government to expose the arrogance and corruption that most people are unaware of. Nor are the people aware of the constant series of tragedies arising from the corruption.

Other books written by former federal agent Rodney Stich go much deeper into the corruption. For those who really want to know the corruption that exists in government, and why they never hear about it, start reading them, starting with Defrauding America. By putting the name of the author, Rodney Stich, into an amazon.com book search list, the list of books show up.

Contributing to the facts that Stich personally discovered were a long line of other insiders, including agents of such government agencies as the CIA, ONI, FBI, DEA, FAA, Customs, Secret Service, former drug smugglers, working for government agents, and also former Mafia figures.

Stich initially discovered a culture of arrogance and corruption in certain key areas of the government’s aviation safety offices that caused and made possible many airline disasters. Starting in what would be over 40 years of David versus Goliath battles, Stich discovered, personally and from the many insiders who came to him, areas of corruption and related tragedies that are almost unknown to most Americans.

This book focuses on what could be called some of the lesser corrupt activities, initially the corruption in Congress and then in some other areas directly affecting the lives of most Americans. The congressional corruption described in this book are serious, but the far worse congressional corruption and consequences are in his other books.

So serious was the corruption in Congress that Stich even sued members of Congress in federal court on the basis of their cover-ups.

The corruption or misconduct in other areas affecting the lives of most Americans is usually made possible by the endemic practice of lobbyists and corporate interests bribing members of Congress, either openly or discretely.

Congress

And Other

U.S. Cesspools

Captain Rodney Stich

CHAPTER ONE

Congress: the Most Obvious Cesspool

Members of Congress have for decades misused their office and positions of trust to benefit themselves while harming national interests. Many books have been written about the corruption in Congress, some by former members. My experience with members of Congress started while I held a key position in the government’s aviation safety offices of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and uncovered a pattern of corrupt activities that were resulting in deadly airline disasters.

For years I had been exposing, documenting, and writing about the utterly corrupt nature of members of Congress that I had discovered, starting while I was a federal agent seeking to expose the corruption related to a series of airline disasters. Later, I documented their cover-ups (i.e., obstruction of justice) related to others areas of criminality in government. In every instance, the cover-ups and obstruction of justice became worse. I even filed lawsuits against members of Congress on the basis of their criminal cover-ups.

My early contacts with members of Congress sought to have them exercise their responsibilities to receive my evidence related to these continuing airline disasters. Never did they respond in a meaningful manner. Some replied, expressing concern about the gravity of the charges, but claimed the matters were not in their area of responsibilities, when they most definitely were. Their refusal to act enabled the corrupt culture—and the crashes and deaths—to continue.

As I describe in several of my books, the conditions that allowed four groups of terrorists to hijack four airliners on September 11, 2001, were the result of the corrupt culture that I had brought to the attention of many members of Congress.

Over many years, as other government agents and insiders brought information to me about corruption in other areas of government operations, I continued to bring these matters to the attention of members of Congress. Again, despite the gravity of the misconduct, I found it literally impossible to get members of Congress to respond to their responsibilities. As a result, the tragic consequences from the continuation of the misconduct continued. I include these matters in the various books that I have written over the years.

In the early 1990s, I filed two federal lawsuits against members of Congress on the basis of their cover-ups of corrupt and criminal activities. In both cases, the defendant members of Congress responded in their briefs that they knew of my charges, that they took no action, but that they were immune from the consequences under the speech and debate clause.

There were others who reported the problems in Congress, including the writing of books. Columnists Drew Pearson and Jack Anderson wrote, in 1968, an expose book called, The Case Against Congress. Among the statements made in that book:

Explosive story of the nations biggest scandal―the misconduct of the men and women who are sent to the nation’s capital to write America’s laws but who all too often abuse their power and privilege by placing their own interests ahead of those of the American people.

Here are the Congressmen who do the bidding of their campaign contributors, who pad their payrolls with friends and relatives, who use federal public works projects to reward their allies and punish their enemies, who promote their own financial interests―and those of clients of their law firms―through their votes at closed-door committee sessions and on the floor of the Congress itself. This is a world where conflict-of-interest is a way of life, where private pleasures and conveniences come before the national welfare, where the best find themselves compromised by a venal system―and the worst defy, with impunity, the laws of the land.

Parochial Self-Interest Before National Interests

The history of congressional misconduct is a sordid history of self-serving parochial misconduct that misuses the political positions for self-gains, and uses the American public and the treasury as a profit center for all types of schemes. The sad part of this is that the information has been available for decades for the American public to recognize, and not a thing has been done to correct the problems.

Years of Media Cover-Up of Congressional Corruption

In Above the Law,¹ author James Boyd described the influence peddling and buying of votes in Congress. Vested interests pass money under the table, bribes, disguised as honorariums, speech-fees, loans that never come due, and other thinly disguised graft. In its book review the Christian Science Monitor² said, Only the completely cynical can read Mr. Boyd’s book without mounting distress.

The review described the indifference, or felony cover-up, by the FBI, the Lawyer General, and the live-and-let-live philosophy of Congress for their peers. The book review addressed the press cover-up stating, The press doesn’t smell too sweet either. It rushed into the kitchen only after the kettle boiled over. Ironically, the Christian Science Monitor knew of my allegations from 1965 through 1988, and continued to keep the lid on the scandal. I contacted the Monitor in the 1960s, and then several times in the late 1980s. They expressed concern, followed by cover-up. While covering up, the Christian Science Monitor editor-in-chief Earl Foell stated the Monitor organization has a moral mission to support socially responsible journalism. (Business Week September 26, 1988.) I again wrote in 1990 to ask what they were doing in response to my charges. They never answered. So much for moral missions!

A Washington Post article dated September 4, 1969, stated that Committees in Capital Run Like Swiss Banks. The article continued: The devious ways that Congress used the District of Columbia [for a] haven for committees that can be used by senators and congressmen to hide embarrassing contributions."

A three-page U.S. News & World Reports article (November 10, 1969), captioned, Scandals in Congress: The Record, stated: Activities of a staff member have put the office of the Speaker of the House high in the headlines. The result is one more entry in the record of scandals that have dogged the U.S. Congress for years. Two decades later the corruption by government officials is worse.

Government corruption has been uncovered in almost every agency in the executive branch, as well as in Congress and in the federal judiciary. Why shouldn’t the FAA and the NTSB be guilty of the same? Members of the Senate and House pressure high FAA officials to ignore the safety requirements at certain airlines who contribute heavily to the congressional members. Just as in the savings and loan scandal.

A New York Times article³ had the apt heading: Everybody in D.C.’s Doing the Scandal Shuffle. The same basic articles appeared twenty years earlier. There is no change.

Public Has Short Memory

Many books have been written about the deeply ingrained misconduct by members of the House and Senate. But the misconduct continues, made possible by the public’s indifference. The public reelects almost every Senator and Representative, resulting in a reelection rate for incumbents in the high ninety-percent range, even when the elected officials are associated with corruption. The public appears more interested in what their representatives can do for them, than in the criminal acts perpetrated by their elected members of Congress.

After over 30 years informing the people of the corruption, through over 3,000 radio and television appearances and numerous books that I have written, the American public has been indifferent and in denial.

An editorial in U.S. News & World Reports (May 22, 2006) stated of the American people:

The American public, not to speak of its elected officials, has been stunningly indifferent to our reckless fiscal course of the past five years. President Bush inherited a budget surplus estimated at $5.6 trillion over 10 years. He has converted that giant plus into a giant minus—deficits estimated at $5 trillion over these same 10 years.

Partial List of Prior Congressional Scandals

Some of the earlier publicized Congressional Scandals included the Teapot Dome scandal in Wyoming, Abscam, HUD, the Savings and Loan scandals, Koreagate, and others.

Congressional Involvement in the HUD Scandal

California Representative Tom Lantos led a congressional investigation into the HUD matter, and called it influence peddling of the tawdriest kind. Former Attorney General John Mitchell received large sums for his connections. The Wall Street Journal called the corruption a system of spoils and favoritism.

The scandal at HUD is one of the most complex national scandals that we have seen in decades, said Representative Tom Lantos, of San Mateo. There is a degree of mismanagement, fraud, abuse, waste, influence-peddling that we have just barely begun to touch, he said. Representative Charles Schumer, a subcommittee member said: Like picking up a large stone only to discover that bugs and slime have grown in the darkness. This investigation has exposed the corruption which flourished unchecked under Secretary Samuel Pierce‘s HUD.

Certain members of Congress tried to block the HUD exposure by blocking confirmation of those government officials expressing intent to expose the HUD scandal. After Jack Kemp took over HUD and stated his intent to prosecute those involved, Congress blocked confirmation of Kemp’s management team; a common tactic used by members of the Senate and House to sequester scandals.

When the Department of Justice started an investigation into HUD, members of Congress then investigated the Justice Department, and threatened to cut back its funding. The Justice Department investigation stopped.

The two houses of Congress ignored warnings of the HUD and other scandals as they profited by protecting those committing the misconduct. The same happened in the FAA when other inspectors and I sought to force a particular airline to comply with the law. Members of the Senate and House put pressure on upper FAA management, and the pressure comes down the line within the FAA, with everyone profiting who plays the game.

When the Chapter 11 corruption threatened to expose the powerful judicial involvement, the Justice Department fired the U.S. Trustee in Indianapolis, another one in the Washington, D.C. area, and assistant U.S. Trustee Gregg Eichler in the San Francisco office. In this way the criminal acts against the public continue.

Referring to Representative Jim Wright‘s arrogant blocking of corrective actions to stop the HUD corruption, a Wall Street Journal editorial dated April 17, 1989, stated:

What is most disturbing ... is the obvious pattern of so many violations extending over so many years. ... the brazenness is amazing. Obviously, Mr. Wright felt assured there was no prospect that he ever would be called to account for his actions. ... When Congress is so powerful it can intimidate the Justice Department from another Abscam case, who should be surprised at corruption?

Investigations showed that House speaker Jim Wright obstructed investigation of the HUD corruption, and accepted $145,000 in unreported gifts from savings and loan officials after blocking an investigation into their corrupt practices.

The House Committee investigating Wright’s dealings with the HUD scandal quickly dropped the investigation after some House members reminded them that an investigation would implicate many other members of Congress. After pressuring Jim Wright to resign on the relatively minor charge of ethics violations, the HUD scandal then died down. The public still is left with the multi-billion dollar tab that must be paid.

Justice Department Stonewalling

Another Congressional committee, the House Judiciary Committee, requested on November 2, 1989, that the Department of Justice appointe an independent prosecutor to investigate the HUD scandal. Richard Thornburgh resisted, accusing the committee of introducing partisan politics into the HUD investigations. Representative Charles Schumer of New York replied at a news conference:

There’s ample evidence of wrongdoing at HUD, but there’s stonewalling at the top. And the only way to get to the bottom of the mess at HUD is through the appointment of an independent counsel. Instead of attacking us, the Lawyer General should be focusing on making sure that high-ranking officials at HUD don’t get away with breaking the law.

Representative Schumer characterized the lawyer general’s objections as a political response.

Congress quickly shifted the investigation away from HUD to avoid implicating other House members, and concentrated on trivia, calling it an investigation into ethics. In truth it was something akin to investigating the Mafia for parking violations, and ignoring the hard-core crimes. The investigators then held that the problem was solved and halted further investigations. As in the tragedy-riddled air safety federal offenses, the Pandora’s box stayed closed.

The time-honored way that Congress stonewalls sensitive investigations is to reduce the funding that finances the investigations. This is occasionally done when the Department of Justice attempts to investigate congressional misconduct. It is done by the Department of Justice to stonewall investigation of the Chapter 11 judicial corruption that the Justice Department uses in its bag of tricks. This was done to halt further FBI investigations of congressional wrongdoings in Abscam. (As the FBI’s continuing investigations became too threatening to members of Congress, they responded by dragging Justice Department officials in for grueling oversight hearings that made it clear the budget for the Justice Department was in danger if the probes into congressional wrongdoings did not cease.)

Life of Ease for Political Crimes

What happened to those implicated in scandals? Congressman Jim Wright, for instance, whose activities cost the taxpayer several billion dollars in the HUD scandal, retired on $115,000 a year, receives $120,000 yearly office expense, has three paid staffers, $67,000 for stationery and telephone expenses, continued use of the franking privilege, and enjoys other benefits. His staff answers his downtown Fort Worth phones, Speaker Wright’s office. In addition, he has a rich book contract. Not too bad. Former Congressman Tony Coelho landed a million-dollar job on Wall Street.⁴

Koreagate Lobbying Scandal

In the 1970s one of the lobbying and congressional bribing scandals became known as Koreagate. It involved a lobbyist for South Korea, Tongsun Park. He was charged with representing an Iraqi-American businessman, Samir Vincent, relating to the United Nations oil-for-food program. That program was established to permit Iraq to sell oil to purchase medicine, food, and other items for the Iraqi people who were suffering due to the embargo after Iraq had invaded Kuwait. That program was created in April 1995.

The Justice Department charges against Park included failure to register in Washington as a foreign agent, conspiracy to commit wire fraud, and money laundering. Park disappeared after the indictment, but was arrested in Houston, Texas on January 6, 2006.

Congressional Bribes in Abscam Scandal

Among the many congressional scandals was Abscam. It broke in February 1980 when the FBI released for television video pictures of members of Congress⁵ taking bribes from an FBI agent posing as an Arab Sheik. The intent of Abscam was to expose political corruption. A United States senator and seven members of the House of Representatives, as well as a number of private lawyers and state and local officials, were implicated as a result of the videotaped sting operation.

Operation Abscam commenced in 1978 and continued for two years before handing down indictments. During this period the FBI set up bogus companies, used yachts, apartments, houses, and fake Arab sheiks and associates, contacting elected representatives to document the common practice of exchanging legislation for money. The media dubbed the operation Abscam after the name of the company.

The FBI set up Abdul Enterprises, Ltd. and Olympic Construction Corporation in 1978, and FBI employees posed as Middle Eastern businessmen in videotaped talks with government officials, where they offered money in return for political favors to a non-existent sheik. Melvin Weinberg, a convicted con artist who was hired by the FBI for that purpose, directed much of the operation. It was the first major operation by the FBI to trap corrupt public officials; up until 1970 only ten members of Congress had ever been convicted of accepting bribes. On February 2, 1980, reports surfaced that FBI personnel were targeting members of Congress in a sting operation.

FBI agents posed as representatives from these bogus companies, some posing as associates of an Arab sheik, Abdul. Meetings were set up with elected representatives where money was offered for legislation that would help move money out of the United States and, to obtain asylum in the United States.

Normally, lobbyists engaging in this form of criminal activity would not be acting in a manner that could be documented as a criminal act, although the intent would be. The Abscam operation sought to record that relationship. Each of the members of congress that were approached agreed to perform the legislation in exchange for the money.

The videotaped encounters resulted in 1980 indictments against four members of the House and one member of the senate on bribery and conspiracy charges. Several of the indicted were removed from their elected positions and spent time in prison.

Rep. Richard Kelly of Florida is notorious for a January 8, 1980, videotape showing him stuffing $25,000 worth of bribes in his pockets and then turning to one of the agents and saying Does it show? Kelly was lucky enough to encounter a judge sympathetic to the entrapment excuse and, sadly, his conviction was overturned.

Angelo Errichetti was not as lucky. In 1981, New Jersey State Senator Errichetti was sentenced to six years in prison and fined $40,000 for his involvement in Abscam. Representative Frank Thompson used $24,000 of campaign funds for his legal fees related to his Abscam trial. This was actually legal at the time but showed in the minds of many just how unethical some of these entrapped defendants were. On May 1, 1981, Senator Williams was convicted and on March 11, 1982, Senator Williams of New Jersey resigned rather than have his colleagues vote him out.

One of the Abscam figures was quoted on one of the videotapes as claiming that then Hempstead Town Supervisor Al D’Amato was definitely taking contributions; he’s on the take. D’Amato, who would be no stranger to scandal over the coming decades, later became a three-term Senator for the state of New York. Ironically, he held investigations into the Whitewater affair in the mid-90s.

Abscam Aftermath

Although a repeat of Abscam would doubtless net dozens if not hundreds of convictions today, don’t expect the Justice Department or the FBI to conduct such a sting operation ever again. The political appointees to Justice are well aware their party faithful were not amused by Abscam. For a brief moment in our nations history starting with Watergate and ending with Abscam, the American people learned what scoundrels their elected officials were. One can only hope that future generations will recognize this.

Details of the Abscam scandal, appearing in The Trentionian, written by Paul Mickle, stated:

On the afternoon of Feb. 2, 1980, two FBI agents showed up at the Washington home of one of the most powerful Democrats in America, Congressman Frank Thompson, and the political landscape of Greater Trenton was changed forever. The agents told Trenton’s own Thompy he was the target of a federal bribery investigation and that the Arab sheik who gave him a briefcase holding $45,000 four months earlier actually was an undercover G man.

By year’s end, Trenton’s representative in Congress would no longer be a veteran Democrat known for standing up for the working classes, but a 27-year-old Republican named Chris Smith who came out of the anti-abortion wing of the party.

Thompson had been watching his beloved Wake Forest University men’s basketball team on television the day agents knocked at his home in the coveted Washington suburb of Alexandria. When asked about the game that evening, Thompy didn’t know his alma mater had beaten Virginia 79-77.

The allegations were that worrisome and dumbfounding: Thompson had been told the FBI had videotapes of him and five other congressmen, including Sen. Harrison Williams of New Jersey, accepting money from either the phony sheik or his supposedly Arab representatives.

The next day, news about the FBI’s Abscam sting was front page in Trenton and across the country. The stories told how other Jersey politicians Camden Mayor Angelo Errichetti, who was also a state senator, and state Sen. Joseph Maressa of Camden County, had set up Thompson to meet a sheik interested in building a casino in Atlantic City.

The stories said the affable Thompson had bragged to the bogus Arab bigwig that he had influence with a member of Jersey’s new Casino Control Commission, lawyer Kenneth McDonald of Haddonfield, and would be able to help the businessman get a gaming license and land for a gambling hall.

A congressman since 1954 who had been close to sainted Jack Kennedy and had risen to the powerful post of House Democratic Whip, Thompson promised to contest the FBI charges in court and to fight for re-election.

Some observers thought he could win both battles. None other than New Jersey Attorney General Robert DelTufo, for instance, raised questions about the FBI’s investigative tactics and admitted he had recommended dropping the case against Williams on the ground the senator had been illegally entrapped.

Trenton’s old Democratic hands suggested Thompson could win the political battle more easily. Thompson, after all, was a darling of union members and other working people who had helped JFK and LBJ push through civil rights legislation. Washington insiders had dubbed him the liberal’s liberal.

An unpretentious man who was frugal with his own money, if not tax dollars, Thompson liked it when Trentonians remarked about the holes in the elbows of his lucky tweed sports jacket or the old cars he preferred to drive.

And Thompy’s staff for constituent services was phenomenal, a Thompson fan remarked last week. If you lost your dog and called Thompy, he’d send out somebody to help you.

Still, in the weeks after the story first broke, America’s newspapers and nightly television news reports were filled with new details of the probe. And that didn’t bode well for any politician involved.

Abscam was American political corruption at it most colorful, and it cast courtly Thompson with some crude characters. The congressman from across the river in South Philadelphia, Rep. Michael Myers, became infamous for telling the phony sheiks what no pol would say with the news cameras rolling: Money talks, bullshit walks.

Of course, the FBI cameras were rolling from behind a hidden mirror in a Washington townhouse where some of the money was passed to the congressmen. One room in the house was set up like a television studio, with a bank of video monitors.

One artist’s rendering played on television showed what the money exchanges might have looked like. It showed FBI agents with video cameras behind a one-way mirror recording a meeting between two men in suits and another wearing a suit and traditional Arab headwear.

That spring, as Thompson counted all the letters of support he reported coming to his congressional office, Mercer County’s Republicans were telling Jack Rafferty, Hamilton’s gregarious mayor, that Thompson’s congressional seat was his for the taking.

But Rafferty declined because his wife didn’t want to move to Washington with the children, then aged 6 and 7, and he didn’t want to become a weekend husband and father.

That left the GOP with boyish Chris Smith, whom the party had put up as a sacrificial lamb two years earlier when it could find no one else to challenge Thompy’s bid for a 13th term in Congress. Whatever Smith’s electoral weaknesses, they didn’t matter. On Nov. 4, Smith beat Thompson by 20,000 votes.

Days later, Thompson and another Congressman, Rep. John M. Murphy of Staten Island, went on trial in federal court in Brooklyn. Their lawyers argued that all wasn’t what it appeared on the videotapes, that the congressmen dealt with the phony Arabs because they thought they would pump money into the economy.

On Dec. 2, Thompson was convicted of bribery and conspiracy and Murphy was convicted of just the conspiracy count. Smiling but expressing disappointment with the jury on leaving the courtroom, Thompson promised an appeal. But the appeals court rejected, and the U.S. Supreme Court later declined to hear, the entrapment and other arguments put forth by Thompson and other American pols snared in the Abscam investigation.

In 1983, Thompson was sentenced to three years in federal prison. He served two years before he was released and went to work as a consultant in Washington. Still maintaining he was innocent, Thompson died in 1989.

These days, Greater Trenton still is represented in Congress by Smith, the earnest Republican who came to office via the downfall of Frank Thompson. Last winter, Smith joined with labor leaders from across the country to protest management tactics outside the strikebound Delaval plant in Hamilton. Thompy would have been proud of him.

Of the thirty-plus targeted officials, one senator, Harrison A. Williams (D), and five members of the House of Representatives (John Jenrette (D), Richard Kelly (R), Raymond Lederer (D), Michael Ozzie Myers (D) and Frank Thompson (D) were convicted of bribery and conspiracy in separate trials in 1981. Another, John M. Murphy, was convicted of a lesser charge. While most of the politicians resigned, Myers had to be expelled and Williams did not resign until the vote on his expulsion was almost due. Five other government officials were convicted, including the mayor of Camden, New Jersey, Angelo Errichetti.

Defense Raised by the Guilty Congressmen

The FBI was accused of entrapment and in 1982 the conviction of Richard Kelly was overturned. (He had been memorably videotaped jamming $25,000 into his pockets.) The FBI and the Department of Justice were also accused of having political motivations in the politicians they targeted. The FBI agents also attempted to bribe US Senator Larry Pressler (R-SD), but he was the only official they approached who clearly and quickly refused the bribe offer.

The Abscam model of using a fake front company and concealed recording equipment served as the basis for a number of other investigations during the 1980s.

Before resigning, California Congressman Tony Coelho admitted on May 14, 1989, that he received a $100,000 bond from a California savings and loan executive, to be paid by a $50,000 unreported loan from the same savings and loan. Apparently to halt the congressional investigation into this and other shady practices, Coelho promptly resigned from his powerful seat in Congress.

Most of the media did not address Coelho’s irregularities or dishonesty, but instead lamented the loss of a powerful Congressman who produced benefits for California interests. Little was said of the debt inflicted upon the public by protecting corrupt practices. If it had been left to the constituents of Congressmen Jim Wright or Coelho, the national harm would be ignored as long as they received benefits from their Congressman.

This Form of Congressional Corruption

Could Not Exist in a Vacuum

People, including members of Congress, who engage in either overt or thinly veiled covert corrupt practices can be expected to engage in other forms of corrupt actions. For instance, for years, government agents, including myself, have offered to provide members of Congress with information and documentation on corrupt and criminal activities of key people in government and in covert government operations.

The evidence that we sought to provide to members of Congress included, for instance, (a) information about corruption in the government’s aviation safety offices that were resulting in a continual series of fatal airline disasters; (b) information on drug smuggling by CIA personnel that met the definition of subversive actions; and the many other criminal activities described in my books, including Defrauding America, Drugging America, and Unfriendly Skies. Despite the great harm and threat of additional catastrophic consequences, never once did any member of Congress that I contacted, or the other government insiders contacted, other than cover-up.

I was so incensed by their obstruction of justice offenses that I filed two lawsuits against certain members of Congress. In their response, they admitted knowing of my charges, of doing nothing in response, and then claimed they were totally immune under the constitution’s speech and debate clause.

States Have Similar Problems, Plus the Spoils System

Typical example of what goes on at the state level was revealed in a New York Times article (April 5, 2006) addressing the spoils system in New Jersey medical schools. The article stated:

The history of American political patronage is as old as the nation itself—from George Washington’s marginally qualified Federalist Party appointees to George Washington’s Plunkitt’s minions at Tammany Hall to the politically connected federal administrators who were slow to respond when Hurricane Katrina devastated New Orleans.

Tactics Used by Members of Congress to Enrich Themselves

Members of Congress have many ways to enrich themselves. These pay-to-play tactics include, for instance:

Donations, overtly, or by implications, political contributions and other benefits to promote legislation favorable to corporations.

Donations to pressure administrative bodies to block investigations or prosecution of a particular corporation.

Donations to block pending legislation.

Donations to approve legislation favorable to a particular corporation or group.

Donations including money, perks, such as prepaid lavish jet transportation and trips to resort locations for themselves and their families.

Placing wives or other close relatives on the payroll of the corporations seeking favors.

Purchasing large numbers of books written by members of Congress.

Endemic Bribery Hard to

Document For Criminal Prosecution.

Bribery is very difficult to document for the purpose of criminal prosecution, and this is what keeps most members of Congress from being criminally prosecuted. By body language, or innuendo, or standard practice, lobbyists and the clients they represent recognize that it takes payment of money to members of Congress to get favorable legislation, to block unfavorable legislation, or to contact various executive departments to obtain government contracts of favorable rulings.

Then there is the chicken-or-egg situation. Are members of Congress shaking down lobbyists and clients or are lobbyists and clients offering to contribute political donations that are clearly bribes in exchange for influencing government actions.

Using Congressional Position as Personal Piggy Bank

Many members of Congress use their positions as personal piggy banks. For instance, Utah Representative Christopher Cannon used his congressional position to provide financial benefits to his lobbyist brother according to an Associated Press article (August 20, 2006). The article stated:

Utah Rep. Cannon pressed Congress to intervene in a business dispute over a contract, at sibling’s request. Three times this year, a lobbyist sought help from Rep. Christopher Cannon for his clients and got it. The lobbyist was the congressman’s brother, Joseph Cannon.

The Utah lawmaker acknowledges helping his brother’s clients, including pressing Congress last month to intervene in a business dispute over an Internet contract estimated to be worth as much as $1.3 billion.

Cannon has a financial interest in his brother’s success: The lobbyist owes him more than $250,000, according to the lawmaker’s financial disclosure reports.

It’s an obvious conflict of interest, said Wendell Rawls Jr., acting executive director at the Washington-based Center of Public Integrity, a nonpartisan watchdog group. It’s an obvious use of an insider position to further the best interest of a family member.

Blocking Legislation—For A Price

Another tactic used by members of Congress is to secretly block legislation. This practice was described in a Cox News Service article (August 27, 2006), with the heading, Secret senator blocks bill, creating classic ‘whodunit. The article stated:

Something may be afoot as legislation that would provide database to track federal spending could lose chance to be voted on.

In an ironic twist, legislation that would open up the murky world of government contracting to public scrutiny has been derailed by a secret parliamentary maneuver.

An unidentified senator placed a secret hold on legislation introduced by Sen. Tom Coburn and Barack Obama, that would create a searchable database of government contracts, grants, insurance, loans and financial assistance, worth $42.5 trillion last year. The database would bring transparency to federal spending and be as simple to use as conducting a Google search. Now the bill is in political limbo. Under senate rules, unless the senator who placed the hold decides to lift it, the bill will not be brought up for a vote.

It really is outrageous to do this in the dead of night as Congress is recessing, said Gary Bass, executive director of OMB Watch, a budget watchdog group based in Washington. The public has a right to know how the government spends money.

The secret hold has prompted conservative and liberal government watchdog groups to band together to smoke out the senator responsible.

Porkbusters.org, for example, has posted photographs of all senatorial suspects underneath a bold-faced headline asking, Who is the Secret Holder?

Somebody has something to hide, said Ellen Miller, executive director of the Sunlight Foundation, a new Washington nonprofit devoted to helping the public understand Congress through the Internet.

Pay-To-Play Through Another Scheme

The non-profit corporation in Union City, New Jersey, North Hudson Community Action Corporation, paid Senator Robert Menendez over $300,000 in rent, for a small house, while it was receiving millions of dollars in federal grants. According to a New York Times article (September 9, 2006), the rent to Senator Menendez continued even after the house was sold to another party.

The Price of Gaining or Maintaining Political Office

The cost of running for office plays a role in the requirement to request donations from special interests. In 1990, House challengers spent an average of $282,000 to beat sitting lawmakers. That number skyrocketed to $1.6 million in 2004, largely because of the spiraling cost of TV ads.

So disturbed about the misconduct of members of Congress were members of the Bar Association of New York that, in October 1967, the Executive Committee of The Association of the Bar of New York adopted a resolution creating a special committee to investigate the misconduct in Congress. The report of the committee was made into a book called, Congress and the Public Trust.

Scandals involving misconduct by members of Congress continued to be reported by the media, year after year, the most recent being in 2006, when the corruption, especially among the Republican members of Congress, caused major election losses.

Congress Passing Late-Night Special-Interest Legislation

One practice by members of Congress to pay for donations is to insert, at night when there are virtually no members of Congress present, into already briefed legislation, additional legislation that favors a particular financial contributor.

Bribes and Obstructing Justice

Referring to how members of Congress pressure people in various government agencies, a New York Times article (August 23, 2005) stated:

The Associated Press uncovered no fewer than 33 lawmakers from both parties who suddenly pressed the Interior Department for special consideration of a relatively obscure Abramoff tribal cause. They did so, it turns out, while at the same time receiving more than $800,000 in campaign donations from Mr. Abramoff’s elaborate lobbying and fund-raising machine.

Golf and Expensive Gifts

The spike in scandals paralleled the rise in the number of registered lobbyists in Washington. There were nearly 33,000 registered lobbyists in Washington in 2005, or about 60 lobbyists for every member of Congress. The amount of reported money that they donated in 2005 was over $2 billion. That is b as in billion. These sums include money paid to members of Congress for transportation, all-expense paid trips, and donations.

Luxury Jet Travel to Members of Congress

In the five-year period ending in 2005, over $18 million was spent by lobbyists to provide over 6,000 free transportation trips to both Republicans and Democrats in Congress. A Financial Times article (June 6, 2006) addressed that practice:

Congressional ‘junkets’ cost almost $50M. Members of the US Congress and their staff took nearly 23,000 privately sponsored trips between 2000 and 2005, at a cost of almost $50m, according to a study released yesterday.

The report comes as a series of lobbying and corrupts scandals have shaken Washington, spurring the public to question the influence that wealthy private interests have over lawmakers, and prompting Congress to move—albeit slowly—towards enacting ethics and lobbying reforms. [None of which corrected the problems!] Critics say the jaunts are a form of soft bribery.

The report, based on thousands of congressional travel documents, found that three-quarters of the trips, some of which cost more than $25,000, were taken by lawmakers’ aids.

The report also questioned the educational merit of trips to exclusive resorts, picturesque European capitals and sunny locales.

Among the most controversial episodes detailed in the report were former House majority leader Tom DeLay‘s much-publicized $28,000 educational trip to Scotland in 2000 with his wife, which included a golf outing at St. Andrews and was paid for by an organization tied to lobbyist Jack Abramoff.

Bribes to Wives of Members of Congress

Another tactic used by members of Congress in the pay-to-play games was addressed in a Wall Street Journal article titled, "Lobby Probe Looks at Payments to DeLay‘s Wife:

The Justice Department’s congressional lobbying-and-bribery investigation is looking into whether former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay‘s wife received money from a lobbying firm for a no-show job, recent FBI interviews indicates.

The two-year investigation is examining whether lobbyist Jack Abramoff and others sought legislative favors for their clients by offering expensive meals, sports tickets, golf outings and other gifts to about a dozen lawmakers and congressional aides.

In the last few weeks, Federal Bureau of Investigation agents have interviewed several people at the Alexander Strategy Group lobbying firm to determine if Christine DeLay was being paid $3,200 a month—a total of $115,000 over three years—but not earning it. In a series of interviews last month, investigators questioned people who used to work at Alexander Strategy as well as people who worked in the same building as the now-defunct firm. They wanted to know how often she came to the office? What did she do there? How long was she there? said one person who was interviewed by the FBI.

Alexander Strategy was run by a pair of Mr. DeLay‘s former aides: Tony Rudy, who pleaded guilty to bribery charges in March; and Edwin Buckham, who remains under investigation. The firm also shared clients with Jack Abramoff.

In last month’s interviews, investigators also asked about $144,000 that Mrs. DeLay received from one of Mr. DeLay’s fund-raising committees, the Americans for a Republican Majority Political Action Committee, which was housed at the lobbying firm’s offices. Investigators also inquired about fees paid to Mr. DeLay’s daughter, Dani DeLay Ferro, a longtime political consultant to her father.

[The FBI questioning] also shows that prosecutors might target his wife in order to force a guilty plea from Mr. DeLay. Federal prosecutors used that tactic earlier this year to secure a guilty plea from Mr. Rudy, who admitted in March to accepting bribes when he worked for Mr. DeLay and later conspiring to bribe other lawmakers when he was a lobbyist.

As part of the plea deal, Mr. Rudy told prosecutors that he sabotaged an Internet-gambling bill on Capitol Hill in exchange for $40,000 in payments to his wife. In return for his cooperation, federal prosecutors agreed to give Mr. Rudy a lighter sentence and not to prosecute his wife.

Mr. DeLay was indicted in Texas last fall on unrelated charges concerning his role in the 2002 election there. The combination of the Texas and Washington investigators forced Mr. DeLay to step down from his job as majority leader and announce that he wouldn’t run for re-election to his House seat this fall.

The federal investigation has already netted guilty pleas from a number of former confidants of Mr. DeLay, in addition to Mr. Rudy. Mr. Abramoff, a top fund-raiser and adviser to Mr. DeLay, pleaded guilty in January to charges that he tried to bribe lawmakers. DeLay aide Michael Scanlon pleaded guilty to similar charges.

Neil Volz, a former chief of staff to Rep. Bob Ney (R., Ohio), pleaded guilty to trying to bribe Mr. Ney when he was a lobbyist working for Mr. Abramoff. Soon after, Mr. Ney announced that he wouldn’t seek re-election. David Safavian, another former lobbyist at Mr. Abramoff’s firm, was found guilty in June of lying and obstructing justice in the federal corruption investigation. [Safavian was the former top procurement officer in the Bush White House.] Ney pleaded guilty in November 2006 to influence-peddling.

Ney acknowledged using his legislative position to do favors for Abramoff and a Syrian businessman using the nickname, The Fat Man. Ney entered prison for a two and a half year prison term in March 2007.

The House ethics committee remained mute throughout the scandals, compounding their do-nothing with obstruction of justice. After the publicity from the corruption passed from media pages, the House and Senate ignored the needed oversight by outsiders.

Removing Effective Ethics Committee Members

House Speaker Hastert removed Representative Hadley from chairman of the House Ethics Committee after the committee recommended censoring Representative Tom DeLay. The speaker of the house is selected by the predominant political party, and that speaker selects who will be on certain congressional committees. The assignment to favored committees is primarily influenced by how much money that particular congressperson generates for that political party.

Generating the Need for Bribes by Starting Hearings

Members of Congress have their own schemes for generating political contributions or bribes. Simply starting to investigate a particular subject, or starting hearings, causes lobbyists and corporations on both sides of the issues to give money to members of Congress, especially to those on the committees that have direct control over how the hearings progress and what the outcome will be.

Republican Congressman Jerry Lewis

In 2007, the investigations that had not been halted by the Bush administration continued to show how bad the corruption had been. Investigations showed that Representative Lewis, chairman of the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee and Chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, had a long history of receiving money from lobbyists and corporations while responsible for them receiving huge military and other government contracts through earmarks and other methods.

Lewis was closely aligned with the Lobbying firm of Copeland, Lowery, Jacquez, Denton & White. Congressman Bill Lowery was a partner in the lobbying firm from 1993 to 2006. The lobbying firm received hundreds of millions of dollars from clients, as the firm, through Lewis, was able to get huge defense and other contracts for their clients.

Two people on Congressman Lewis’s staff, Letitia White and Jeff Shockey, left to become lobbyists in the Copeland Lowery firm. In their new position, they earned millions of dollars from producing huge government contracts for the firm’s clients through their former position with congressman Lewis.

When Lewis was named chairman of the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee in 1999, the number of earmarks placed for lobbyists, especially those with ties to the Copeland firm and client corporations, skyrocketing with the money paid to him and his PAC. Taxpayers for Common Sense stated that Lewis brought us the biggest increase in defense earmarking in history.

Money to Lobbyists and Politicians

The lobbyists receiving money from special interests made it clear that money had to also go to certain politicians, such as Cunningham and Lewis. In addition, the lobbying firms gave money to the politicians carrying out the doling out of government money. For example, from 1997 to 2005, Congressman Lewis received nearly $1 million from the Copeland Lowery lobbyists and their clients, plus other money that was given by individuals, their family members, and employees. From 1997 to 2005, over $50 million was given by the clients of Copeland Lowery.

State Governments Paying Bribes

To Obtain Government Contracts

Huge lobbying fees were paid by government agencies in California to the Copeland firm, which resulted in government handouts through earmarks and other methods. One would think that a government entity in California, in Congressman Lewis’s district, would be able to obtain consideration for federal money without having to pay lobbyists, who in turn paid money to a congressman. For instance:

From 1998 through 2005, state and local governments and other agencies paid the lobbying firm of Copeland Lowery over $14 million in fees, to get Congressman Lewis to arrange for government handouts in his own district. In other words, government entities in Lewis’ district had to pay $14 million to get what they should have been able to get without bribing lobbyists!

The California state University at San Bernardino paid the Copeland lobbying firm about $500,000 between 2000 and 2005, for which the university received about $65 million in federal funding.

From 1988 to 2005, the Seventh-day Adventist school, Loma Linda University, with about 3,000 students, received over $160 million in earmarks, for which it paid the Copeland firm nearly half a million dollars.

The city of Redlands paid the Copeland firm over $100,000 in lobbying fees for which Congressman Lewis arranged over $35 million in federal funds.

Riverside County paid the Copeland firm, starting in 1999, $30,000 a month, for lobbying.

The San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District paid the Copeland firm, from 1998 to 2005, $160,000 in lobbying fees.

City of San Diego paid the Copeland firm nearly $1 million between 1998 and 2002 to obtain federal money for summer youth employment, transportation, sewage treatment, and various other projects.

The San Diego State University Foundation paid over $200,000 a year to Copeland for lobbying fees.

The University of Redlands paid Copeland nearly $700,000 lobbying fees from 1995 to 2005. Part of this money was bribe money for Lewis. Ironically, the university named one of its buildings after Congressman Lewis.

Keeping It In the Family

Keeping it in the family, Letitia’s husband, Richard White, had a huge increase in his income after he became a lobbyist for defense contractors, and of course, through his ties with Congressman Lewis’ office. Due to his wife’s employment in Lewis’ office, and Lewis being chairman of the Defense Appropriation Subcommittee, White gave up being a lobbyist for a tobacco company to become a lobbyist for the defense industry,

Control Over Lucrative Government Contracts

As chairman of the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee, Congressman Lewis had control over more discretionary spending than that of any other committee chairman. Lewis was so successful at obtaining money from lobbyists and corporations that he distributed some of it to other members of Congress. This distribution of money caused Lewis to be selected chairman for the National Republican Congressional Committee in 2003.

The raising of money for other House members helped Lewis to really make out in 2005: he was chosen chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, which controlled over $1 trillion a year in federal spending. Upon given that assignment, Jeff Shockey left the lobbying firm of Copeland Lowery to become deputy chief of staff for the House Appropriations Committee–where he would assist Congressman Lewis in directing contracts requested by well-paying lobbyists and corporations.

$2 Million Separation Bonus For Inside Contact

Anticipating the business he would be bringing to Copeland Lowery firm and their clients, the lobbying firm gave Shockey $2 million upon leaving the firm. The name of the firm was then changed from Copeland Lowery to Copeland, White.

Spreading the Spoils

Shockey’s wife, Alexandra, then became a lobbyist for the lobbying firm in a subcontract status, taking over many of Shockey’s corporate clients. Spreading the spoils, in a nepotism manner, one of Congressman Lewis’ stepdaughters, Julia Willis-Leon, was named head of a newly formed political action committee (PAC) called Small Biz Tech PAC. Almost half of the $114,000 in revenue received by the PAC the first year and a half went came from Letitia White and her husband, Richard White. Lewis had the government hire his wife, Arlene, as chief of staff.

Start of Criminal Investigations

The U.S. attorney started investigating Congressman Lewis and some of those who contributed money to him and his PAC, and who received government contracts. Realizing the criminal threat he faced, Congressman Lewis hired a high-profile team of lawyers from a law firm based in Los Angeles. The team consisted of such high-profile people as Ted Olson, the former Solicitor General of the United States (while wife was killed in one of the four airliners hijacked on September 11, 2001); former head of Customs and Border Protection, Robert Bonner; a former Democratic congressman from California, Mel Levine; and a former federal prosecutor, Joseph Warin. Lewis paid nearly $ 1 million in lawyer fees by the end of 2006.

Reporting Previous Omitted Income

Facing a criminal indictment, the Copeland lobbying firm amended over three dozen prior filings with the government to correct over $1 million in unreported income between 1998 and 2005. Nearly $800,000 of income from nonprofit organizations had been omitted from the reports, and about $700,000 in income from other clients.

Copeland and Jacquez Left the Firm

Because several of the partners were concerned about the irregularities, they left the lobby firm and formed their own firm. Lobbyists working primarily with Democrats, Copeland and Jacquez, formed a firm that was called CJ Strategies. The remaining Republican lobbyists, Lowery, Denton and White, renamed their firm, Federal Strategies.

Also receiving money from the Copeland firm were California’s two senators, Senator Boxer and Diane Feinstein. They were among the many members of Congress who for years covered up for corrupt and criminal activities in government operations that I and other former government agents reported to them.

Congressmen Lewis, Cunningham, and

Corporations Owned by Brent Wilkes

The investigations by U.S. attorney Carol Lam named Wilkes in November 2005 as co-conspirator number 1, with Congressman Cunningham the primary target. Cunningham admitted receiving over $2.4 million in cash and other gifts from Wilkes and other corporations. Wilkes also gave Congressmen Lewis over $88,000 from 1993 to 2004.

The Copeland-Lowery firm initially reported that it had received $160,000 from Wilkes, but after the criminal investigations started, it suddenly added over $225,000 to that figure. In August of 2006, when Wilkes stated to the Copeland-Lowery firm that he was thinking of dropping them, Lowery warned him that if he did, Congressman Lewis would cut off earmarks for the Wilkes firm, which would have caused the firm to shut down.

Toxic Jack Strikes Again was the heading on a Business Week article (May 14, 2007), which stated:

April was a cruel month for people once close to convicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff: Two members of Congress are being investigated by the FBI because of their dealings with him. Two of the lawmakers’ former staffers resigned from their current jobs in the wake of the scandal. A third former Capitol Hill aide pleaded guilty to a public corruption charge stemming from his job negotiations with Abramoff.

Meanwhile, the number of lower-level figures in the scandal who have agreed to cooperate with investigators has reached critical mass. And Abramoff himself, sitting in a federal prison in Cumberland, Md., continues to cooperate with prosecutors, giving the government numerous leads. The investigation thus far has resulted in the indictment or guilty pleas of 11 former officials and lobbyists, all Republican.

In addition to Representative Doolittle under investigation, there was Representative Tom Feeney, a Republican from Florida, being questioned about his trip to Scotland with Abramoff. Another Capitol Hill staffer, Mark Zachares, pleaded guilty in March 2007 to a public corruption charge.

Many Companies, and Even Government Entities,

Played the Pay-for-Handout Games

Some of the companies and government entities that paid the Copeland lobbying firm tens of millions of dollars included the following:

General Atomics (GA) paid the Lowery lobbying firm nearly half a billion dollars, plus money directly to Congressman Lewis and Cunningham and their PACs.

Orincon defense contractor paid over $700,000 to Copeland Lowery from 1998 to 2003.

Environmental Systems Research Institute (ESRI) located in Congressman Lewis’ district. ESRI paid the lobbying firm $320,000 from 1998 to 2005, for which it received nearly a quarter of a billion dollars in government contracts.

Isothermal Systems and Tessera Technologies paid Letitia and Richard White lobbyists over $300,000 between 2003 and 2005.

Trident Corporation of Virginia, between 2000 and 2002, paid about half a million dollars to White and Congressman Lewis. To fall under Congressman Lewis’ district, the firm opened a small office in Redlands, California.

Republican Congressman John Doolittle

Another congressman under investigation and involved with Congressmen Cunningham and Lewis, and the lobbyist, Jack Abramoff, was Republican Representative John Doolittle. He was also a member on the powerful House Appropriations Committee. It appeared that most of the members of congress on that committee were associated with recipients of money from lobbyists and corporate interests that received government funding.

Doolittle was under investigation because of his ties to the San Diego military contractor, Brent Wilkes, who was indicted on bribery charges related to, among others, Representative Cunningham.

Doolittle received tens of thousands of dollars from Wilkes while Doolittle was shepherding over $37 million in contracts for a company Wilkes owned. Federal authorities were seeking evidence that would show the agreement between Abramoff and Wilkes trading money for government contracts with Representative Doolittle.

Another Aspect of the Money Game: Using a Wife

One issue involving Doolittle was the role played by his wife, Julie, as a fundraiser for him. Acting as a fundraiser, Julie Doolittle kept part of the money donated for her husband’s political campaigns, which violated the distinction between campaign contributions and personal payments. Julie Doolittle, working closely with later convicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff, received money from Abramoff for planning events that involved her husband.

In April 2005, FBI agents searched the suburban Washington home of Representative John T. Doolittle. Doolittle’s lawyer, David G. Barger, said that the warrant for searching the home related to activities of Sierra Dominion Financial Solutions, which was a fund-raising business operated by Doolittle’s wife, Julie.

Julie Doolittle was her husband’s primary fund-raising consultant, and kept 15 percent on most of the donations. Over $90,000 was netted by Doolittle’s wife during an October 2006 fund-raiser while President Bush visited the district.

Relinquishing His Position

As the start of investigations by the U.S. attorney in San Diego continued, Doolittle relinquished his position on that committee (April 19, 2007). One issue involving Doolittle was his ties to the San Diego military contractor, Brent Wilkes, who was indicted for bribery to Representative Cunningham.

It was believed that Doolittle received money for earmarks that provided government contracts. Prosecutors had earlier, in February 2006, indicted a former high-level CIA official, Kyle Foggo, and Wilkes. Doolittle received tens of thousands of dollars from Wilkes while Doolittle was shepherding over $37 million in contracts for a company Wilkes owned. Federal authorities were seeking evidence that would show the agreement between Abramoff and Wilkes trading money for government contracts with Representative Doolittle.

Doolittle refuses to leave House as inquiry continues, stated the headlines on a McClatchy article (April 21, 2007):

Rep. John Doolittle said Friday that he won’t resign from his House of Representatives seat and will battle the federal government if it brings charges of political corruption in connection with his and his wife’s relationship with convicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff.

Doolittle‘s comments came after he stepped down Thursday from the House Appropriations Committee. He temporarily removed himself from the powerful spending panel after disclosures that the FBI searched his house last week and that a former aide who went to work for Abramoff, Kevin Ring, had suddenly resigned from his lobbying job the same day.

The two events have been widely regarded as the opening of a new stage in the Abramoff investigation, perhaps related to federal prosecutors’ offer last month to ask for a reduced sentence for Abramoff in a Florida case as he steps up his cooperation.

Abramoff s serving a seven-year sentence in the Florida case for the fraudulent purchase of a fleet of gambling ships. He hasn’t been sentenced in federal court in Washington yet on political corruption charges.

Doolittle implied that the search is part of an inquiry into whether Julie Doolittle has been paid for doing work for Abramoff and perhaps the congressman’s campaign committee, or whether the pay was a way to illicitly steer money into the family’s pockets for work she didn’t perform.

Among Others Being Investigated

Among other members of Congress under investigation at that time, or indicted, were:

Republican Representative Rick Renzi of Arizona. He resigned from the sensitive House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. The investigation centered to land-swap legislation that Renzi drafted that would enrich a political fund giver. Doolittle and Renzi resigned after FBI agents raided their homes and businesses.

Republican Tim Murphy incurred legal fees in defending against the charge that he used congressional staff to do political work, which violated the law.

Republican Representative Gary Miller was under FBI investigation for land deals and for lying concerning it.

Republican Representative William Jefferson continued to be investigated concerning the $100,000 bribe that he was videotaped as receiving, being called before a federal grand jury in April 2007.

Democratic Representative Alan Mollohan, the chairman of the House Appropriations Committee that provides funds for the Department of Commerce and Justice, was under FBI investigation