Consider the following sentence:

> 
> その大臣は**政治家にあるまじき発言**で、辞任に追い込まれた。
> 
> 
> 

I would like to know in particular how the section in bold should be parsed. For example:

* Since まじき is the attributive form of まじ, does まじき bind to 発言?
	+ eg: 政治家にある［まじき発言］
* Alternatively, does ある bind to まじき first?
	+ eg: 政治家に［［あるまじき］発言］
* Or is it that the whole left side be attached together?
	+ eg: ［政治家にあるまじき］発言
	+ And if so, is it ［政治家にある］まじき, or 政治家に［あるまじき］? Or...?

My bet right now is on 政治家に［あるまじき］, since まじ is an auxiliary verb. In this case, it is an auxiliary for ある, therefore I think that まじき makes あるまじき an attributive form as a whole. However, I'm not sure what exact role に plays in this interpretation.