Letting unscrupulous lawmakers off the hook is par for the course for the famously remiss panel charged with investigating corrupt members. Instead it prematurely dismisses cases or simply conducts sham probes that usually end in absolution. After all, the investigators are the friends and colleagues of the scrutinized subjects and often they’re financial beneficiaries.

Case in point; this week the Committee on Ethics cleared Alaska Republican Don Young for taking $60,000 in contributions from members of one Louisiana family for his legal defense fund. Under House rules for legal expense accounts no individual may contribute more than $5,000. To work around the rule, Young took $5,000 contributions from each of the 12 companies owned by a married couple and their five children.

A 2008 Judicial Watch Ten Most Wanted Corrupt Politicians honoree, Young needed the cash to fend off an influence peddling investigation that includes corrupt ties to an oil services company that bribed Ted Stevens, the Alaska Republican senator convicted of multiple felonies a few years ago. Young also tried to push through the $200 million “Bridge to Nowhere” that was supposed to connect the town of  Ketchikan, Alaska (pop. 8,900) to the island of Gravina (pop. 50) at a cost of $320 million to taxpayers.

In absolving Young the Ethics Committee acknowledges that the 12 companies that contributed to his legal expense trust were in fact owned by the same individuals but pointed out that each company has a “distinct legal entity.” Therefore Young did not violate any provision of the Code of Official Conduct or any law, rule, regulation or other standard of conduct with respect to the receipt of these contributions, the committee said in a statement.

This doesn’t mean the committee isn’t “concerned that the identical ownership of the twelve entities challenges principles of the contribution limits,” the ethics panel goes on to say in its statement. To that end, the committee has adopted “revised” regulations that clarify contributions by certain types of companies and their owners in the future. The new rules will become effective in 2012 and will apply to all existing and new legal expense trusts.

It was not that long ago that Frank assured his constituents that he would definitely run for re-election in 2012, mainly to defend his disastrous financial regulatory overhaul from Republican attempts to repeal it. He also said he needed to continue fighting for “full legal equality for all citizens” and to provide for the “housing needs of low-income people.”

But this week he threw in the towel after more than three decades in Congress, claiming in a statement posted on his House website that he would like to do some writing, though he remains concerned about “right-wing assaults” on his financial reform bill. Two of the nation’s largest newspapers followed up with puff pieces describing Frank as a victim of scorching partisan battles and a politician known for his sharp intellect and intense, rapid-fire delivery.

The reality is that Frank, the powerful chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, has been embroiled in two of the largest financial scandals in recent history. The first is the collapse of government-sponsored Fannie Mae and Freddie Mack, which triggered the nation’s financial crisis. Judicial Watch obtained internal government documents proving that members of Congress, including — and perhaps especially — Frank, were well aware that Fannie and Freddie were in deep trouble due to corruption and incompetence and yet they did nothing to stop it.

Judicial Watch also obtained internal documents from the Treasury Department that prove Frank helped steer $12 million in federal bailout funds to a Boston bank (OneUnited) that eventually got shut down by the government. Frank intervened on behalf of his equally corrupt friend, California Congresswoman Maxine Waters, who held shares in the failing bank that also listed her husband (Sidney Williams) as a board member.

The Treasury documents obtained by Judicial Watch through a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit suggest Frank personally called former Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson regarding a cash infusion from the government’s Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) for OneUnited Bank. On November 25, 2008, following Frank’s intervention, the Treasury Department awarded $12,063,000 in bailout funds to OneUnited, which is located in Frank’s district.

As if this weren’t bad enough, a mainstream newspaper reporter recently exposed Frank’s unethical relationship with the government-run mortgage giants he supposedly regulated by revealing that he got his live-in companion a job at Fannie Mae while Congress was writing legislation to improve oversight of the lender. Frank actually called up and asked that his companion be hired, according to the report, which also says that Frank aggressively defended Fannie Mae after it hired his live-in partner.