« | »

Ex-Murtha Aide, Dem Fundraiser Indicted

From the Wall Street Journal:

Big Democratic Fund-Raiser Indicted

August 6, 2010

WASHINGTON—A major Democratic lobbyist and fund-raiser was arrested Thursday and indicted on charges of making hundreds of thousands of dollars of illegal campaign contributions to members of Congress.

The 11-count indictment by the Department of Justice against Paul Magliocchetti, the founder of the now-defunct lobbying outfit PMA Group, brings for Democrats new and unwelcome attention to continuing ethics controversies ensnaring some of the party’s lawmakers.

Is someone keeping track of all of the Democrat fundraisers who have been recently nabbed? Or would that require a super computer?

Of course if they were Republicans, our watchdog media would be running a body count at the top of every TV news show and above the fold on the front page of every newspaper.

Mr. Magliocchetti appeared Thursday in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia and was released after he surrendered his passport and provided a $2 million bond. He is living at a psychiatric facility in Baltimore, the court said

Well, he is a Democrat, after all.

From 2003 to 2008, Mr. Magliocchetti and his lobbying firm successfully steered millions of government dollars to clients by relying on close relationships with members of the House Appropriations Committee—mostly Democrats and particularly the late Rep. John Murtha (D., Pa.).

The same John Murtha who won the Kennedy family’s prestigious ‘Profiles In Courage’ award for libeling the Marines in Haditha?

The same John Murtha who was caught red handed in Abscam? Who would have ever thought he would be corrupt?

The financial ties between Mr. Magliocchetti, Mr. Murtha and other members of the House panel’s subcommittee on defense spending were at the center of an investigation by House ethics investigators at the time Mr. Murtha died in February.

In fact, Mr. Magliocchetti had worked as a senior staffer on the House Defense Appropriations Subcommittee under Mr. Murtha for the ten years prior to forming his ‘lobby outfit.’

After Mr. Magliocchetti’s departure from the defense subcommittee, PMA and its clients established themselves as "major contributors to Murtha’s campaign committee," donating well over $200,000 to the 2002, 2004, and 2006 campaign cycles, for a total of $2.37 million.

Consequently, PMA’s clients have received notable benefits from Murtha’s earmarks. In 2006, for example, PMA clients were given "at least 60 earmarks totaling $95.1 million."

Federal prosecutors alleged Mr. Magliocchetti prodded family members, employees and acquaintances to make political donations to particular lawmakers by promising that he would reimburse them for the contributions, which is illegal.

The Justice Department said Mr. Magliocchetti paid people back by writing personal and corporate checks, or giving employees bonuses and raises to cover the contributions. In one instance, two of his acquaintances were put on the board of the lobbying firm and paid a salary to cover the costs of their donations, even though neither had experience as lobbyists and didn’t attend board meetings, according to prosecutors

In connection with the probe, prosecutors said Mr. Magliocchetti’s brother Mark pleaded guilty to making between $120,000 and $200,000 in illegal donations

House ethics investigators had conducted a probe into Mr. Magliocchetti’s ties to House lawmakers on the defense-spending panel, which was headed by Mr. Murtha. Investigators recommended the full ethics panel start a probe of ties between Mr. Magliocchetti’s firm and Reps. Peter Visclosky (D., Ind.) and Todd Tiahrt (R., Kan.).

After Mr. Murtha died in February, the panel said it had closed its inquiry into Mr. Magliocchetti and lawmakers.

But Messrs. Visclosky  and Tiahrt are presumably still alive. As is Congressman Jim Moran (D-VA).

In 2007 and 2008, Democrat Congressmen Murtha, Visclosky, and Moran directed $137 million in government purchasing to PMA’s clients. PMA’s clients donated $1.36 million to Mr. Visclosky and $997,348 to Mr. Moran over the past ten years.

So it looks like the swamp could stand a little more draining.

This article was posted by Steve on Friday, August 6th, 2010. Comments are currently closed.

16 Responses to “Ex-Murtha Aide, Dem Fundraiser Indicted”

  1. Reality Bytes says:

    “I’m Shocked! Shocked that gambling is going on here!”

    “Your winnings sir.”

    “Oh! Thank you thank you very much.”


    Pretty much sums it up I think.

  2. GetBackJack says:

    After thirty years actively pointing out, denouncing and railing against the American press oligarchy for its blatant and shocking lopsided alignment with those forces that mean the destruction not only of America itself but ipso facto, their own industry …. I’ve run out of steam. My well of outrage is almost tapped out.

    If these were Republicans, the press would be in mad-dog form.

    It’s not, so business as usual.

  3. proreason says:

    Crime and corruption.

    It’s the new normal.

    Along with, of course, reverse racism.

    And we would be remiss not to mention the Ruling Class living in taxpayer-funded regal splendor as the country crumbles in on itself.

    And, of course, ruling against the will of the people.

    And…..oops, there’s that doorbell again.

  4. Rusty Shackleford says:

    I read someone’s post somewhere, might’ve even been here, that the coming election may not change things significantly. One commenter noted that having the republicans and the democrats in our government is simply an extrapolation of the Bonano and the Gambino families.

    I still have hope that the republicans will do what’s right. Yet, it has been noted that a large number of RINO’s support amnesty.

    I think the problems go to a basic level and I still have to say that the article in American Spectator about the ruling class will forever reverberate in my head. People like Lindsey Graham, I mean, what is this guy’s perpetual problem? He now invokes the name of Jesus to justify his voting to put a time-bomb in a supreme court justice seat. He obviously has no clue about consequences or planning ahead. Also, his apparent desire to be liked by the opposition has him clearly in their camp.

    In other words, he-just-doesn’t-get-it. And many (most?) of them don’t.

    I have become less fascinated by what happens to the mental faculties of elected officials than I am by the obvious dismal and catastrophic results. Affirmative action, welfare, public housing, ever-more “programs’ designed to help people that have all had the overwhelmingly opposite effect and have buried us in debt.

    Yet the socialists still think that’s what’s necessary to make the nation survive. Perhaps that’s the point. They have a “survival” mentality versus a “thriving mentality”…and that thriving mentality includes the possibility of individual failure.

    When I heard the boy who sits in the president’s chair speak about the “rescue” of the US-based auto industry, I damn near blew a gasket. His gloom and doom predilection for Chrysler and GM was predicated on-had they not dumped billions of dollars at it, it would have put millions out of work.

    This is patently false.

    Bankruptcy would have been a far better solution.

    I work for a major corporation, an airline and after 9/11 all airlines were hurting. By 2002, we had to declare bankruptcy. What did that do? We slimmed down, got rid of waste and frivolous expenses (which is why food and drinks are no longer complimentary, BTW) and focused on doing things less expensively and more efficiently. And yes, every union involved went to the table and accomplished SALARY NEGOTIATIONS….many times, in fact, in order so that we could keep our jobs.

    Some people lost their jobs…but….I can say that the vast majority are still employed, at a lesser income but not horribly so. There were layoffs, but I can also say that the vast majority are all working again.

    By dumping the people’s money into Chrysler and GM, this corrupt administration has done two things (at least). 1)wastefully blew that money to accommodate union thugs and empower them even more, and even encourage them to build crap because they know their retirements and wages will never suffer and 2)made them accomplices to the will of the government, which is socialism.

    Of course, all this is by design. I am glad that in 2002, my company was unable to secure federal financial help, so that when the time should come when the government comes knocking with an “offer we can’t refuse” we will actually refuse it.

    But the current mindset of corruption is transcendent into a couple of generations now and I don’t know the root cause, nor do I care. Ever since I was a kid, I have noted how the number of cases of high ranking officials involved in graft and corruption has increased year-by-year and it disturbs me.

    Some say, “Well, that’s the way the world is” but I don’t like it and I don’t accommodate it in my day-to-day activities. I have seen it firsthand and it’s repulsive. Double-standards and special favors….it bugs me no end. Maybe it is human nature….but it’s a side of humanity that is pretty ugly.

    And then, those who get caught versus those we KNOW are engaged in same but it never sees the light of day.

    So, how do we fix it?

    • proreason says:

      The problem is that after 230 years, the professional criminal self-styled ruling class has finally figured out how to circumvent the Constitution. The Constitution was more than strong enough when everybody in the country was engaged for most of their lives in making a living. That meant that government was indeed operated by citizens who had achieved enough success in their lives to genuinely desire to serve the country that had enabled their success. But for the last 60 years, the wealth of the country has grown so enormously that we now have a sizable sub-culture of people who have never had to work in their lives and have turned instead to an effort to cement themselves as an unimpeachable aristocracy.

      The criminal ruling elite are fairly diverse, ranging from race hustlers like the contemptible Al Sharpton, to ex hippies like Jane Fonda, to crime family trust babies like Nancy Pelosi, to committed and sponsored revolutionaries like the boy king……but they all share a few things in common….notably, a desire to eliminate the educated, self-reliant and, hence, threatening middle class; the usage of marxism as the political tool of choice; a lock-step allegiance to radical thinkers like Saul Alinsky and Cloward / Piven; and a contempt for people of all races and classes. Their shared goal is to implement a totalitarian socialist system with them as the unassailable rulers. They all flirted with violence in the past, but realized along their path to power that Alinskey was correct; the least risky path to dominance is to use the system against itself. (note, by the way that Hitler came to the same conclusion after he was jailed by his attempted coup in Munich).

      All of this has been hugely abetted by the nature of American culture, which is live-and-let-live. Americans are only aroused to action when the threats are extreme. Consequently, the political criminals have been careful to first control the means of propaganda, the education system and media, and to subvert the country at a relatively gradual pace, so as not to alarm the rubes. It has only been since the narcissistic and contemptuous hard-core Marxist, Barack Obama, was granted the leadership of the cabal, that they have come out of the shadows and revealed the extent of their corrupt and evil plans. This, of course, has now sparked an overwhelming percentage of the country to action and it is now clear that 70% oppose the regime, with perhaps 30% enraged to the point they will willingly support measure well beyond the ballot box if necessary.

      Thus, we will deliver a resounding blow to the criminals at the ballot box in November. But even in that lies danger, because the type of people who burrowed into our system for over 60 years are not the type to shrink away because a group of non-professionals reject what they are doing. In their minds, they are on the brink of total victory, and one they believe can remain in place for centuries, not just in the US, but globally.

      November’s ballot box victory CANNOT be a reason to relax. We have to make substantial structural changes to the system, or this crime syndicate will arise again in short order. The Constitution, as written, has been a brilliant defense for centuries, but the scum have clearly demonstrated that it is simply not strong enough to protect our freedoms from a professional class of trained, hard-core, immoral gangsters. We HAVE to strengthen it significantly…..not rewrite it, but make its safeguards more powerful, particularly in the areas of blocking the criminal sub-culture from again seizing control of the mechanisms of power.

      Here is my list of suggested Congressional Amendments.

      I’m aware that this is a radical approach, but my personal conclusion is that nothing short of major structural changes can prevent the kind of dedicated subversion to which we are all now witnesses to and victims of. The criminals have imbedded themselves too deeply into the infrastructure of the country to be stopped simply by electoral victories. Obviously, this particular list is too unwieldy, and I don’t doubt that there are many others that are more powerful antidotes to the professional criminals. I present the list simply as a sample of the kinds of changes that must be enacted to prevent the vermin from scurrying out from the baseboards as soon as November and the follow-up victory in 2012 are complete.

    • proreason says:

      One follow-up to this.

      I know that comparisons to Lenin and Hitler are said to undermine credibility, since they were obviously people who ended up responsible for the deaths of millions of people as they attempted to inflict their sick visions on the world.

      But this is a different era, and having seen the destruction of the mass murderers in the last century, no intelligent and ambitious tyrant will propose a violent approach for his megalomania for centuries if not millenia.

      So I don’t doubt for a second that Barack Obama sees himself as a cultured heir to Vladimir Lenin. I’m also sure that he would completely reject any comparison to Hitler……who he certainly views as far too crude and uneducated to fit the boy king’s self-image; too uncool as well.

      At the heart of it, Obama is Vladimir Lenin….1000% convinced that he is on the planet to redesign the world, and unconcerned in any way that the effort will have tragic consequences for millions, or in Obama’s case, for billions of people. For both of them, their noble goals and uncontrollable megalomania justify any means.

    • Rusty Shackleford says:


      Clear, very well-defined, easily understood.

      Thanks for posting that.

    • JohnMG says:

      …….”since they were obviously people who ended up responsible for the deaths of millions of people……”

      …….”no intelligent and ambitious tyrant will propose a violent approach for his megalomania for centuries if not millenia……..”

      Ordinarily I would agree, Pro. And your premise is sound. I would suggest that his approach is STILL to bring about the deaths of millions, but his methods more benign. If the destruction and bankrupting of Medicare, if the ruination of the most efficient healthcare system extant, if the rationing or outright denial of medical treatment to a distinct class of the population isn’t designed to exterminate millions of American citizens, I don’t know what is. Unfortunately, those who will enable him in this endeavor don’t look far enough down the path to see themselves as the next generation of targets.

      That’s why, as you and others say, it is imperative that WE reclaim our birthright starting in November. In another two years, the country will be irretrievable and the Constitution meaningless.

    • proreason says:

      Constitutional remedies will have a difficult time dealing directly with subversion, so here is an amendment proposal designed to deal with “ruling against the will of the people”. The biggest problem we have had with the criminals is that we had to wait 2 years to get rid of them. But that can be easily solved:

      Amendment 46:

      “If at any time 30% of the people who voted in the prior election for a federal elective office agree by petition to have a no-confidence re-election for that office, then a special election must be held within 60 days of the completion of the petition. Between the completion of the petition and the special election, the office-holder is suspended. In the case of the President, he will be replaced by the normal succession chain during the 60 day period.”

      The petitions will have to be maintained by the local election boards, and there will need to be extremely rigid provisions to prevent fraud. Fraud will be the first thing the criminals begin working on.

      Ordinarilly, I am opposed to direct democracy in this country, but the last 18 months have demonstrated that the danger from the professional subversives (i.e., the ruling class) far exceeds the danger from recall elections. If office-holders con the public, we have to have a way to get rid of them quickly. In 2 years this time they have done damage that will take 20 years to correct.

      We also need a way for the people to impeach judges directly. It should be a majority over 50% to prevent frivolous recalls. We should have a way to get rid of the judge who just ruled in favor of queer marriage within a couple of months. (over 50% for judges, not regular office holders)

      JohnMG, I agree with your point. Lftists would love to see the population of the planet reduced by 4 billion, and they don’t care how it is done.

    • Rusty Shackleford says:

      We’ve run headlong into knowing that socialists want those who disagree with them erased from the face of the earth. Their disagreement is often their biggest problem. And so it is today with our current socialists in power. We are but a whisper away from enforced doctrine and “correct-speak” in all places where you can be overheard.

      To counter that, there will be bloodshed, I’m afraid. After looking at history, there can often be a very long waiting period until the people are finally fed up and aroused enough to counter their oppression.

      The current socialists are accounting for that and are actually installing laws that will have far-reaching effects in the years to come.

      But one thing is for certain is that their goal is obvious and dangerous. They want, and are getting, socialism. And Pro is right, as are many people here, that it’s insidious, though not very subtle. That’s the part that infuriates me the most that Americans seem oblivious to what their actions entail and how they will affect every-single-American in the worst way.

      They are pouring the footings for a foundation of needing the government for all things. This has been their belief since youth and no one can change their minds because they know it all. Plus, the sensual arousal that having power provides is addicting to them. Once they have it, they want more. If it is threatened, they themselves cannot admit they are addicted to it.

      To add to Pro’s Constitutional changes, I would also insert that all actions that are private are to be paid for by the elected official. All activities are subject to a bi-annual revue and those things that are found to be not for or in the service of the public, are charged to the elected official. Meals are allocated for reimbursement on the basis of what was the cheapest possible meal available versus what they actually ate.

      And on and on. They must be held accountable…no wink, nod and secret handshake BS. I’ll bet the nation would save billions in the first year alone. And witches like Pelosi would have to pay their own way to flip flop and fly.

      When discovered that an elected official is determined to be guilty of wrongdoing, they are dismissed with extreme prejudice and can never hold public office again. Not on the school board, not on the board of city planners…..never…..ever. And that goes for stealing pencils or not paying taxes. It’s time elected officials realize they have to be adults.

      They work for the people. Not the other way around. And if an elected official is found at any time to fail to acknowledge that, they should also be dismissed. In fact, there can be a protocol arranged as to how elected officials address constituents. “How may I serve you today, (sir or madam)?”

      May sound a bit ridiculous but…by saying those words, they are reminded of their position.


      Elected officials may NOT at any time during elected office use their salaries to invest or otherwise “play the numbers” to increase their income. This would be in keeping with keeping conflicts of interest at bay. They cannot also have any activity in any investment resource other than fixed rate IRA’s or similar. No stocks, no bonds, nothing.


      They, the elected officials should be required to have health insurance. And, when they leave office, it ends. They must return back to “ordinary Joe citizen”.

      One more thing, they must have held a JOB prior to being elected to public office. And that job must have been held for not less than 5 years without disciplinary action or being fired.

      Just my 2c. I could go on.

    • tranquil.night says:

      Good thread. I haven’t looked at all the ammendments and generally worry about how the Left would use them against us as much as their perceived usefulness, but I agree that there should be more popular access to the courts, especially State and District Appointees.

      There just needs to be more accountability to the Constitution than any direct changes to it. Most of that comes down to getting Liberals out of all zones of power. An ammendment to address the issue of the Czars could be important though.

      Technology has changed the nature of subversion and tyranny just as it has evolved liberty. Pro outlined the Aristocracy’s plan accurately; the objectives remained the same, just executed more passively and with greater attention to the complexity of sociological change. Now we have a narcissistic revolutionary in the command chair that’s turned the festering cancer into a mortal tumor.

      It’s hard not to think beyond November because so much needs to happen, not the least of which is there needs to be strong Conservative voices firmly tearing down that elitist Washington bubble. If this election passes and we end up with 20 RINOs who will only vote on tax cuts if we’ll agree not to repeal ObamaCare or ‘insert ridiculous bipartisan compromise here’ – we’re toast. The cancer has to be taken from its food source. We have to attack it at the roots – the leftist institutions and bureaus of education, media, science, government..

      N-O. Two letters. Powerful idea.

    • JohnMG says:

      The changes to the judiciary should not end with provisions for removal of the judges themselves. I could endorse a complete abolition of all legal precedent–a total wiping clean of the slate. In such a manner, frivolous rulings would have no bearing upon new judgements and a return to common sense could prevail. Original intent would be the only yardstick needed for the handing down of verdicts and rulings.

      No more finding “rights” to such as partial birth abortion, same sex marriage, and the like.

    • proreason says:

      To reiterate my main point.

      It is plainly obvious to me that the Constitution is no longer enough. They are on the verge of defeating it.

      An unstated assumption of the Constitution is that it creates a government for people willing to adhere to the broad principle of governance by and for the people. Such is no longer the case in this country. 60% of us are willing adherants, 10% are dedicating their lives to conquering the rest and 30% will go with the highest bidder. The percentages may be optimistic.

      The election cycle is too slow. The power of the executive has accumulated too greatly. The judiciary is too arrogant. The bureaucracy is too independent. Marxists have found hundreds of ways to subvert the brilliant framework.

      Now the people are the only remaining check and balance. The future hangs in the balance. An outcome that is not certain.

      And even if we succeed, as I expect we will, it is clear to me at least that the weaponry is inadequate for another assault, which will surely come in the next breath.

      I agree with tn that the criminals will certainly use everything at their disposal to subvert new protections, no matter how carefully thought out.

      So I view structural changes as an imperfect solution…..but still necessary.

      We can no longer depend on the integrity of the American people. When the enemy is in your house, to depend exclusively on principle will be a tragic a mistake. We see how insidious and devious they are, and they are in every house, not just one here and there. First, they must be crushed, then we must improve the defenses of the structures, based on what was learned in the attack.

      (PS: I know this is controversial. We are all conditioned to hold the Constitution as the absolute and final authority and trust that it can endure any attack. Me too. Except that I’ve been rethinking the endure any attack part.)

      Or else, ya know, we can wait for the next season of American Idol.

    • Petronius says:

      Pro, you have made some excellent suggestions. More important than your 44 proposals, however, is your underlying idea that there must be steps taken beyond an electoral victory in Nov. We need to think seriously about ways to stop the excesses. A good place to start might be to establish a private commission of conservative thinkers, perhaps within the Federalist Society, to identify Supreme Court decisions that have expanded Federal power at the expense of the people and of the States, and how those decisions need to be vacated or modified, e.g., U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark (1898), Wickard v Filburn (1942), Grutter v Bollinger (2003), Roe v. Wade (1973), cases restricting religion, etc.

      Especially liked your # 4, 5, 10, 11, 29, and 35. # 32 is clever and interesting. # 22 is redundant of existing law.

      I’d like to push your idea a bit farther with a Bill of Rights of my own :

      1. Federal Government shall have no authority to use public funds to make transfer payments, bailouts, or for the redistribution of wealth or property among groups or individuals.

      2. recognition of States rights expressly to include secession and nullification by referendum of the people (such as occurred recently in Missouri)

      3. Abolish Federal racial preferences, quotas, and set-asides.

      4. reaffirm the authority of the States to establish property, taxpayer, literacy, and citizenship qualifications for voting, for holding public office, and for jury duty

      5. a 25-year moratorium on immigration

      6. Federal Government shall have no authority to settle colonies of refugees within the United States without approval by referendum of both the State and communities impacted

      7. Abolish the death tax and exit tax

      8. affirmation of the right to acquire and own private property, to include right to take property abroad and to own property abroad without Federal Government restriction, interference, regulation, oversight, or penalty

      9. restore the money to pre-1965, with silver coinage and a currency that is backed by gold and silver

      10. States and localities expressly authorized to abolish public schools in favor of a voucher system.

      Reference your comment, “with perhaps 30% enraged to the point they will willingly support measure well beyond the ballot box if necessary.” I would dearly like to think it is as much as 30%. I believe the conditions we face today are far worse than those faced by the Founders and our colonial ancestors in 1775. At the outset of the first American Revolution, the people were about evenly divided, one-third Loyalists, one-third Patriots, and one-third fence-sitters.

    • proreason says:

      Pertinius: “the conditions we face today are far worse than those faced by the Founders and our colonial ancestors in 1775”. yes.

      It seems like a dream, but I believe you are absolutely right. The Founders would be stunned to see the situation we are in today.

      And I also agree with your point that it isn’t what it specifically done, but that something beyond a victory at the ballot box is necessary. They will view a victory in November with the same restpect that they treated the ringing bell of Scott Brown’s victory.

      We are in the midst of a civil war no less critical to the survival of this country than we were in 1775 and 1860. Again, it seems like a dream, but I believe it is true.

« Front Page | To Top
« | »