especially egregious & conspicuous example of outright stinking corruption among the demagog party and their clients

WaPo Can’t Stop Running Op-Eds by Lobbyists Pushing Their Clients’ Weapons
Adam Johnson, AlterNet, May 26 2017

pasted image 0

The WaPo has published, without any disclosure, an op-ed by Podesta Group lobbyist Stephen Rademaker pushing for weapons made by Rademaker’s client Lockheed Martin. This is the third time in two months that the Post has published op-eds by defense industry lobbyists. Two previous op-eds were by staff columnist and BGR lobbyist Ed Rogers on behalf of Raytheon. In early April, after Pres Trump decided to bomb a Syrian air force base using Raytheon missiles, Raytheon lobbyist Ed Rogers took to the opinion section of WaPo to lavish praise on the president. Rogers’ lobbying firm BGR received $120k in 2016 for lobbying on “defense and communications procurement; defense appropriations and authorizations,” for Raytheon, Media Matters reported at the time. Rogers boosted Trump again on behalf of his clients (this time both Raytheon & the Toads) six weeks later in his post:

The upcoming international trip is an opportunity for Trump and his staff.

The column, while not directly addressing the weapons system, painted a glowing picture of a courageous Trump heading to the Middle East to make peace and forge relationships. Ed Rogers’ firm BGR was paid $500k by the Toads in 2015 to lobby on their behalf. In addition, the weapons deal finalized by the Trump administration on the trip greatly benefited Rogers’ other client, Raytheon, which has paid BGR $270k in the past two and a half years. Raytheon is also the primary sponsor of the WaPo’s corporate puff interview series, “Securing Tomorrow” hosted by Nat-Sec-friendly David Ignatius. The third and most egregious instance of the lobbyist-as-pundit practice was from Podesta Group pitchman Stephen Rademaker in a post last week on North Korea’s missile program, “The North Korean nuclear threat is very real. Time to start treating it that way. Not only did Rademaker generally push a war his client was helping arm, as Rogers did; he expressly lobbied Pindostan to procure two specific weapons systems made by his client, Lockheed Martin:

It’s time to take North Korea’s words and actions at face value: North Korea is a nuclear-armed state and is determined to remain one. The deployment of the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense, or THAAD, missile defense system to South Korea is a welcome first step to contain the threat, allowing us to shoot down short- and intermediate-range missiles fired from North Korea. As North Korean missile capabilities grow, THAAD needs to be augmented with more robust missile defense systems, including the ship-borne Aegis system, the Aegis Ashore system now being deployed in Romania, expanded interceptor capabilities in Alaska and the corresponding sensors necessary to maximize the effectiveness of all these systems.

Both the THAAD missile system and the Aegis Ashore system are made by Lockheed Martin, one of Podesta Group’s major clients. Lockheed Martin paid Podesta Group $130k in the first quarter of 2017 alone and $1.8m since 2014. According to Podesta Group’s own internal marketing collateral, one of its aims is to “Win key government projects” for Lockheed Martin. promotional material reads:

At a time when the federal government was seeking to reduce its spending dramatically, Lockheed Martin asked the Podesta Group to ensure one of its flagship programs continued to receive full funding.

Presumably writing op-eds pushing Lockheed products in the most influential newspapers in Washington fits neatly into this marketing effort. The WaPo mentions Rademaker is a principal at Podesta Group, but does not mention Podesta Group is a lobbying firm, nor does it mention that it’s a lobbying firm on behalf of the makers of THAAD and Aegis Ashore weapons systems being expressly hawked in the post. In April, Media Matters documented 12 separate times that WaPo columnist Ed Rogers didn’t disclose his conflicts of interest, ranging from Dodd-Frank to the Keystone Pipeline to climate change legislation. Podesta Group’s Rademaker had previously pushed Obama not to reduce the Pindosi nuclear arsenal in 2014 without disclosing his $200k/yr client at the time, Huntington Ingalls Industries, built nuclear weapons systems. The practice of allowing defense industry lobbyists to write opinion pieces that act as little more marketing pushes for their clients is an even more vulgar extension of the media’s habit of allowing defense industry-funded think tanks to push for increased military spending and saber-rattling, all without even the pretense of academic research or analysis.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s