Michael Scherer in Salon:

At the heart of the Justice Department’s case is a quaint, if not naive, claim that is unlikely to take hold in Washington, even after the last indictment is handed out. “Government officials and government action are not for sale,” Fisher declared at the afternoon press briefing. It is a statement that is often repeated, and universally aspired to, but that is demonstrably false. In recent years, billions of dollars have been spent by lobbyists and wealthy interest groups to buy access to politicians, pad their war chests, and pay for grass-roots political outreach. In nearly every major bill that faces Congress — whether it be for defense spending or another tax code rewrite — big spenders find success at exponentially greater rates than those who eschew political spending. As Abramoff once explained to the New York Times, back when he still maintained his innocence, “Eventually, money wins in politics.”

In taking on individual lawmakers and their staffs, prosecutors will seek to demonstrate a clear quid pro quo between the money, trip or meal Abramoff gave and political favors his clients received. “It’s a very difficult line to draw,” former federal prosecutor E. Lawrence Barcella Jr. said of the legal barriers to bribery or corruption cases. “Intent on both sides is necessary.” The more lasting effects of the Abramoff case are likely to come from Congress itself, where a number of proposals to stiffen ethics laws and restrict lobbying have been introduced. On Wednesday, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, a man once beset by ethics scandals of his own, is even set to announce his own prescription for lobbying reform.

Imagine. Newt Gingrich, lecturing us on ethics reform. Boy, this is going to be some year.