Logical?

Richmond Times Dispatch has this little article about the FEC fining a local firm. Seems the PAC of McGuireWoods failed to file activity reports and received a $4500 fine. The firm cites 'extraordinary circumstances' for its failure to file the reports. The newspaper goes on

"McGuireWoods is part of the legal team for former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-Texas. McGuireWoods partner Richard Cullen of Richmond is advising DeLay on several fronts. The fine disclosed in a news release yesterday by the FEC did not involve matters tied to the law firm's representation of DeLay, charged in Texas with conspiracy and money laundering"

The PAC and the law firm's activities are two separate entities, but the paper links them. The statement does muddy things, doesnt it?

For one, the PAC? What does a law firm need with a PAC? Probably lobbies on behalf of the interests of McGuireWoods, which are probably similar to the interests of some of its clients. PAcs are regulated by the FEC.

Second, Delay is charged with criminal activities related to elections (however remotely), which of course are regulated by the FEC. The conclusion MAY be drawn: MW law firm is representing Delay in some capacity therefore their PAC must be lobbying on behalf of him somewhere.

Pure speculation of course, no factual basis at all for that conclusion except for the FEC link. I despise the type of journalism Richmond Times Dispatch employs in this article.