Prosecutors dig a deep hole; work cut out for Traficant

As the prosecution in the racketeering and bribery trial of U.S. Rep. James A. Traficant Jr. prepares to rest in Cleveland, it appears that Traficant has his work cut out for him.
His nightly "they haven't laid a glove on me" declarations for the TV cameras have been less than convincing. The prosecution's witnesses have painted a picture of a congressman who could be conniving, petty and vindictive, a man willing to accept a pittance or a king's ransom, a master of bartering his influence for a contractor's asphalt.
End is near: The prosecution's last witness is likely to be businessman J.J. Cafaro, who will testify to giving Traficant nearly $40,000 in cash and in payments for repairs to Traficant's houseboat. In exchange, Traficant carried water for one of Cafaro's business ventures, a laser-guidance system for private aircraft. At the time, Traficant was on the House Transportation and Infrastructure Subcommittee on Aviation.
It appears that the government is opening and closing its case against Traficant with two of its strongest witnesses. The first witness was R. Allen Sinclair, who testified that he paid Traficant kickbacks of $2,500 a month for 13 months. Sinclair was on the congressman's staff and was also, indirectly, the landlord for Traficant's local office.
In between those two damning witnesses, came a parade of characters telling stories of how Traficant pressured bankers to make a bad loan to a contractor, threatened state and federal employees in efforts to protect contractors, and interceded with a foreign government to get payment for a developer.
A congressman might claim he was doing nothing more or less than providing an extraordinary level of constituent service. But in this case, the congressman also received extraordinary expressions of appreciation from those he helped: construction work, paving, building materials, the use of heavy equipment, transportation of horses from one place to another, a welding machine. There was apparently nothing so big or so small that Traficant couldn't ask for it and receive it.
The testimony in the federal courtroom of U.S. District Judge Lesley Brooks Wells should make anyone who ever voted for Traficant feel cheated and ashamed.
The big lie theory: Traficant's defense so far, based on his questioning of witnesses, his statements in interviews and the initial list of defense witnesses is that he is being framed.
All the witnesses against him are lying because the government has offered them sweetheart deals to avoid long prison terms, he says. That, of course, begs the question: If none of the witnesses did anything wrong -- if some of them hadn't bribed a congressman -- what would the government have had to hold over their heads?
As to Traficant's claim that he is the victim of a government vendetta, given the shopping list of transgressions and the brazenness with which the congressman accepted favors, the FBI would have been derelict had it not investigated.