Calling Podesta Brothers operation "a public affairs firm" is an extreme euphemism for what it really is. Both of the Podesta brothers should resign from DC, go somewhere else, and learn to earn a productive income via value added to the locale and nation.
At any rate, the WaPo item, in opening, explains:
Powerful lobbyist Tony Podesta steps down amid Mueller’s Russia probe
By Marc Fisher and Carol D. Leonnig October 30 at 9:54 PM
[...] On Monday, hours after the first indictments in the investigation into ties between President Trump’s campaign and the Russian government, Podesta abruptly quit his post atop the Podesta Group, the capital’s eighth-wealthiest lobbying firm.
Podesta’s departure came as the indictments of former Trump campaign chief Paul Manafort and his business partner, Rick Gates, raised questions about the work Podesta’s firm did with Manafort to buff the image of the Ukrainian government. Podesta, 74, said he was quitting because of the barrage of criticism he’s been getting as special counsel Robert S. Mueller III pursues the investigation.
Calling what Tony Podesta did against the public interest, for money, "a public affairs firm" is like calling a stinking gull-infested garbage dump "an environmental adaptation location."
And not just "for money." Most often, for lots of money. Obscene amounts of money. "For sale" does not mean for sale cheap.
So --- Is it, "Watch the doorknob, Tony;" or is there a golden parachute with a stay out of jail free card appended?
If sincere, he should disband the firm, burn his shares at the Lincoln Memorial, and then go into the wilderness to do grave penance.
Brother John being Tony's companion for that mea culpa and penance pilgrimage is a warming thought. A hypothetical, clearly, but it is the thought that counts.
What do you figure the guy who got the plea might have, to testify against Tony Podesta? And that is aside from the bigger question, what may be testimonial and documentary evidence against Donald Jr. and Jarad?
A separate WaPo item, this link, states in regard to a possible campaign-Kremlin get-together:
"Make the trip, if it is feasible,” Sam Clovis wrote in an August email to George Papadopoulos.
Papadopoulos was in contact with several senior Trump campaign aides about his efforts to broker a relationship between Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin, the court papers show. In addition to Clovis, who now serves as senior White House adviser to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Papadopoulos wrote to campaign manager Corey Lewandowski and campaign chairman Paul Manafort, the newly released documents show.
The campaign officials are not identified in court documents, but [...]
In a statement, Papadopoulos’s attorneys Thomas Breen and Robert Stanley said they would refrain from commenting on the case.
“We will have the opportunity to comment on George’s involvement when called upon by the Court at a later date,” they said. “We look forward to telling all of the details of George’s story at that time.”
Can it touch Mike Pence, and if so, is he tefloned against any of it sticking? It appears much of the fan loading up as described in court papers happened after Pence was selected. That selection process might have been a real hoot to have observed as if the proverbial fly on the wall. Reporting much like The Wrap, here, was widespread enough to raise questions and to make that fly-on-the-wall hypothetical appealing in terms of knowing rather than conjecturing who said what to whom?.
Mike Pence seems to have shown a Chauncey Garderner career trajectory, out of Being There. But a narrow and ill-tempered one where his actual gardening skills would raise questions.
_____________UPDATE_______________
Two web searches, here and here, indicate Podesta Group and Mercury, of which Vin Weber is a principle, had substantial income from Ukraine government lobbying work without disclosure of such foreign government services as required by law. If the Mueller effort can bring down the Podesta brothers and Vin Weber in one big net of slime, much good may result from any such stable mucking. Example coverage, here, here, here and here, (noting that some pre-indictment coverage is included).
From The Hill; link in original:
In the wake of Podesta’s departure, a new firm will be formed without his name, CNN reported, citing an unnamed source. The Hill has confirmed that there will be a new entity, with a source familiar with the developments saying that the roll out will likely take place before the end of the week.
"They've been thinking about it and planning it for awhile; it'll be quick," the source told The Hill, asking for anonymity to discuss the events.
A source at the firm told The Hill that a small group is "now working to salvage as much of our current business as possible," saying that the response has been positive thus far. The person asked for anonymity in order to discuss the sensitive topic.
"There are a bunch of people here who just want to get back to doing what we do best," the person from Podesta Group told The Hill.
"... what we do best ..." is nothing to be proud of; but it pays well and somebody would do it, so why not Podesta Redux? A lot of DC inner-beltway types with knives and forks on the table, gotta eat something ...
_____________FURTHER UPDATE_____________
Politico ended an Oct. 30 report:
Podesta Group did not respond to a request for comment for this story.
Podesta has long been a larger than life figure on K Street, growing his business from a boutique firm into a massive lobbying and public relations operation. He is well known for his flashy dressing, vast art collection, generous campaign donations across all levels of Democratic politics and, of course, for his brother John Podesta, Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman.
Podesta Group has struggled in the wake of the Mueller investigation. More than a dozen of its lobbying clients have cut ties with the firm this year, according to lobbying filings. Revenues have also declined: The firm brought in an estimated $4.8 million in the third quarter of 2017, down from $5.2 million in the second quarter of 2017 and from $6.1 million in the third quarter of 2016.
Attitudes may differ but I find it hard to tear up over a lobbying megalith losing clients. The lobbyists, the clients, the influenced officials all could be cast adrift mid-Pacific in a dinghy with short rations, and tearing up over that might be equally difficult. Other lobbyists, when Podesta loses clients, would they tear up for Tony? Would the Clintons?
