You're watching...
“Capitol Punishment” author Jack Abramoff on the Solyndra scandal and lobbyists’ influence in Washington.
Also in this playlist...
Auto-advance: ON
Auto-advance
This transcript is automatically generated
Culture of corruption.
Defining at various points both political parties.
When in power in Washington DC in my next guest knows all too well -- rampant corruption can be in our nation's capital.
And how rampant it is he's a former Capitol Hill lobbyist himself businessman his name is synonymous with.
Corruption lobbying.
Some considerable.
Penalty for doing so.
He was sentenced to prison 2006 convicted -- product conspiracy.
Joining me now Jack Abramoff he's the author of the autobiography capital punishment the hard truth about Washington corruption.
From America's most notorious lobbyist Jack great to have you here and -- it's a bit peculiar to be talking.
To someone about the ins and outs of -- corruption in Washington -- -- -- just ignored.
But now with so many scandals facing the White House.
There was so many.
Charges being levied in the Republican race for the party's nomination.
We watcher or expert to review and we appreciate you being here pleasure being here you've been following excellent.
It.
I mean that it is an extraordinary case in which.
The Department of Energy the White House both were warned by -- the government's own analysts.
That that company would be bankrupt it's one of the best forecasts I've ever seen.
-- in financial analysis they -- within one month of pinning down the date that the company would go belly up.
Yet they rushed through.
This deal your thoughts well.
I think what happens in that world is that they get in their mind they're gonna do something whether they're doing -- per donor of the doing for folks are lobbyists are.
They're doing because they believe that then once they get it in their head they're gonna do -- they're gonna start ignoring.
Reasonable analysis and just bull headed push forward and do it I.
And and do you make a distinction do you think a distinction should be made -- between those who have just -- the -- -- -- were true believers.
Absolute devoted.
Of followers.
Polite.
And those -- doing it for money because the result is often the same that there is corruption.
Just different motivation.
Well -- -- the country's hurt by about.
For the taxpayers and citizens of the United States what's the difference why they're doing at the fact is that they did it.
But I did period the American people -- correctly so that there's an extra odious nature to the fact that somebody is doing perhaps.
For improper motivations campaign contributors or whatever it is that -- that angers people for more.
Sixteen of twenty companies.
-- have been identified as.
Being either financed by -- led by.
Associated with.
Principal fundraisers.
-- -- bond -- rather the president for the Democratic Party.
Is a reporter which it's fairly easy for anyone to say.
This goes beyond coincidence that there's this kind of monetary relationship and political relationship and affiliation.
When we look at how much money was moved to these people.
Well people need to understand that their bottlers in the fund raisers the lobbyists in the rest have the inside track in all the discussions the average citizen out there is a running a company that may be.
Doing a decent job in this kind of space isn't gonna have access in the way that these insiders do and so naturally and unfortunately.
In our system of government -- the folks who get all the money.
You would you know there's one candidate that's going to be on that Fox News debate stage tonight.
-- -- former speaker.
Being accused by some of of money being moved around amongst.
Campaigns.
I'd like to know what you know about that approach.
Those charges if anything you know the speaker.
And worked with the speaker of course.
In the idea the suggestion that he could be hired as a historian.
-- by Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae.
Pretty fancy stop.
For -- story.
Well certainly probably increase the enrollment in colleges in the history department inspects the kind of pay scale historians again one point six million -- yeah that's pretty good for historians.
You know I I think the problem is that the influence industry -- a lot of former congressman and senators don't like to call themselves lobbyists.
But they're involved in the influence industry and their involvement cashing in on their previous government experience in public service.
And that bothers Americans and it should bother Americans can we stop -- the issue of what it my question on new thing.
-- We can absolutely stop and I think one of things are proposed for example my book is that the revolving door that goes between public servicing cashing in he closed permanently.
They have what they have now is a joke it's basically a cooling off period -- you get the colors of the strategic advisor -- history professor in the case of the former speaker.
That kind of revolving door is -- undermining the credibility of congress and our -- -- And ironically enough for.
Pitifully enough this administration promised it would be bringing that wall.
Reason that wall it seems to look if you gates.
We appreciate your being with -- try to --
