They've got muck; we've got rakes. TPM Muckraker
His lawyer writes that Ring, as "a man who came to Washington, D.C. from modest means and who worked to put himself through school," was "admittedly swept away by access to an unlimited expense account and limitless tickets to the hottest events."
"As letters make clear, Mr. Ring enjoyed the perks of his job, and as trial testimony demonstrated, he willingly shared those perks with friends, including many whom he was simultaneously lobbying on client issues," Wise writes. "Mr. Ring steadfastly denies that he intended to offer and provide those tickets and meals as bribes, but he has never denied that he said 'yes' when asked and sought to maximize the advantages those perks gave him."
A total of 95 friends, family members and past and present co-workers wrote the judge in support of Ring, including Julie Stewart, president of Families Against Mandatory Minimums, who called Ring's thinking "instrumental in helping FAMM win reforms to crack cocaine laws last year."
That's a stark contrast from the man DOJ portrayed as a "callous, greedy, and self-entitled lobbyist" (in the words of his lawyer) who was only interested in money and joked about corrupting public officials by saying, "Hello quid, where's the pro quo."
Ring writes that he deeply regrets that his emails "contributed to a cynicism about how federal officials operate," especially because it was "a cynicism I do not share."
The filing and the letters are embedded below.
[Correction: TPM originally incorrectly reported the number of letters Ring submitted. The total was 95, not 73.]