wouldn't have happened without a Pittsburgh hustle.
Mel Weinberg, the swindler behind the movie's main character, became a government informant when federal investigators in Pittsburgh broke up his scam.
When they did, he tried to talk them out of it.
As FBI agents showed up at his Long Island, N.Y., house with a search warrant, Weinberg did some quick research and called James West, the assistant U.S. attorney in Pittsburgh who authorized the investigation.
“I've been involved in hundreds, if not thousands, of cases, and that was the only time I had a defendant get on the phone and try to talk to me,” West recalled on Thursday. “He was quite persuasive, in that he was able to get ahold of me and make rapid arguments about why we should call this whole thing off.”
A grand jury indicted Weinberg in February 1977 on wire fraud, mail fraud and conspiracy counts. He pleaded guilty and was sentenced to three years in prison.
Only then did he agree to work for the FBI, eventually leading to the “Abscam” scandal and prosecution of a U.S. senator, six House members and other politicians and businessmen for taking bribes from people they thought were Arab sheikhs.
“For the first time in his life, Weinberg knew that there was no way out,” t he late investigative journalist Robert W. Greene Sr. wrote in his book, “
The Sting Man
.” “Nobody could be bought. No political connection could fix things. Nobody could be conned. He had no place to hide.”
Weinberg, now in his late 80s, lives in Florida, according to Slate.com. The Trib could not reach him.
Before his Abscam involvement, Weinberg scammed a Pittsburgh real estate developer, Lee Schlag, who needed money to purchase a dairy.
Schlag, who died several years ago, never married and had no children. Several distant family members talked about his life but told the Tribune-Review they had no idea about his connection to Weinberg.
Schlag's father developed Ross farmland into the White Oak Heights neighborhood, and the family ran North Hills Dairy on McKnight Road, his cousin Walter Schlag said.
Weinberg ran a classic advanced fee swindle, West said. For an upfront payment of several thousand dollars, he would offer to help an investor borrow money from overseas banks.
The banks did not exist. After months of stringing along a victim, or “mark,” Weinberg would say the loan application was rejected.
Schlag paid $3,564 to apply for a $1.9 million loan, Greene wrote. When the money never came, Schlag turned to the FBI.
As an informant, Weinberg was brilliant. Convicted politicians were caught on tape taking bribes from people they thought were Arab sheikhs.
In perhaps the most famous line uttered in a public corruption case, former Rep. Michael “Ozzie” Myers, a Philadelphia Democrat, was captured on tape saying, “Money talks in the business, and b--- walks.” Myers was sentenced to three years in prison .
The late Rep. John Murtha, a Johnstown Democrat, testified against the other lawmakers.
West, who wonders if the movie is as good as the true story, became a court-appointed U.S. attorney in Harrisburg. He oversaw public corruption cases that included a Pennsylvania lottery-rigging scandal and an investigation of state Treasurer R. Budd Dwyer, who killed himself during a 1987 news conference.
“I think Mel Weinberg was surprised somebody hadn't come for him long ago,” said West, who retired from private practice a year ago and lives in Sacramento, Calif. “He just figured, ‘The jig is up, and I'm going to have to cooperate.' ”
Andrew Conte is a Trib Total Media staff writer. Reach him at firstname.lastname@example.org. Staff writers Adam Smeltz and Brian Bowling contributed.
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.