More charges in the Commonwealth of Corruption
By The Tribune-Review
Published: Wednesday, March 13, 2013, 2:03 p.m.
Another day and more allegations of political corruption in Pennsylvania, the Commonwealth of Corruption.
The state Attorney General's Office on Wednesday announced that criminal charges have been filed against three top former officials of the Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission, the Democrats' former leader in the state Senate, two other turnpike officials and two turnpike vendors.
They're accused of bid rigging, bribery, conflict of interest, conspiracy and theft — you know, all the usual behavior we've come to expect from so many Harrisburg “public servants.”
The latest charges center on Bob Mellow, the former Democrat leader already in prison for campaign corruption. A grand jury alleges he directed an aide to help key supporters obtain turnpike contracts. That, allegedly, in return for cash, travel, entertainment and political contributions.
Also charged, a who's who of former Turnpike Commission muckety-mucks — former chairman Mitchell Rubin, former chief executive Joe Brimmeier and former chief operating officer George Hatalowich.
Mr. Brimmeier, you'll recall, was said to be the top pick of Allegheny County Chief Executive Rich Fitzgerald to take over the Port Authority. And Mr. Rubin, you'll remember, was ousted and served time in another Harrisburg scandal involving convicted state Sen. Vince Fumo, also in the pokey.
At this rate, there soon won't be a Pennsylvania official not implicated in criminal behavior.
Show commenting policy
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.
- Keystone caper: Pipeline politics
- Saturday essay: Resurrection
- Easter 2014: Churches’ vital role
- All taken seriously
- Pittsburgh Laurels & Lances
- Paying the ObamaCare premium