ETA - ah, post #9.
Glorious. Small glory, but I'll take it.
Once again, no idea what he did/failed to do, so I will ask: is there anything chargeable? If so, does it appear he will be charged?
One of the neat side benefits of this is that it screws the pants off whatever family he might have. This is how it should be for "public servants". They should all think a hundred times before stepping outside the ranks of boyscouts. Let them crap themselves with worry for violation of the public trust and let them rat their fellows out in the knowledge that any failure to do so will result in things like this, and worse. That is what America needs in its servants - a low-intensity, creeping, constant, stomach-eroding dread that they will have committed a violation, or failed to have committed an act of correction in the name of the public trust that, when discovered will result in what could amount to a lifetime's work reduced to ash, not to mention prison time. I am thinking that civil forfeiture pro-rated from the time of the first offense, defining the proportion of career time tainted by the act would also be very much motivational. For example, if you have twenty years in and committed an unconfessed violation in year 6, you would forfeit 60% of all your holdings, which would stand to have seriously deleterious effects on your family's interests.
Note "unconfessed". That is the carrot in this scheme. If you transgress and immediately come clean prior to having been discovered, certain consequences would come off the table. Depending on the offense, particularly if it happened accidentally, one might even retain his position. Ratting out all those involved, however, would be an unconditional requirement for not going to prison for a lengthy stay at hard labor.
Leave the architecture to me and I would have government workers so straight, so fast, America would not even be able to wrap its shriveled little brains around the new reality.