« previous | MUCK HOME | next »
State Dept Stonewalls Waxman on Iraq Corruption
A new letter from House oversight committee Chair Henry Waxman (D-CA) to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice charges that State Department officials have refused to answer Congressional investigators' questions about corruption in the Iraqi government unless the committee agrees not to disclose their answers.
That's not all. In the letter, Waxman charges that State has instructed Blackwater not to cooperate with the committee's inquiry into its operations in Iraq (more on that soon), and that Condoleezza Rice herself has refused to testify about either corruption within the Maliki government or any aspect of the Blackwater controversy.
Oversight investigators identified two State Department watchdogs, Vincent Faulk and Christopher Griffith, whom they sought to interview about corruption in the Maliki government. (David Corn recently unearthed some evidence for that contention.) A State Congressional liaison informed Waxman that the department had no objection -- provided that their answers not be released to the public.
In an e-mail yesterday, State's Joel Starr said that in the interests of retaining positive ties with the Maliki government, there were just a few things that couldn't be aired publicly:
Broad statements/assessments which judge or characterize the quality of Iraqi governance or the ability/determination of the Iraqi government to deal with corruption, including allegations that investigations were thwarted/stifled for political reasons.Statements/allegations concerning actions by specific individuals, such as the Prime Minister or other [Iraqi] officials, or regarding investigations of such officials.
Waxman calls State's position "absurd" and "ludicrous." It means that Faulk couldn't give an unclassified answer to investigators if they asked whether Maliki's government is corrupt. For good measure, State subsequently classified a whole bunch of documents the committee had asked for, including internal assessments of Iraqi corruption.
Finally, Rice herself, through staff, told Waxman that she won't testify about her role in Iraqi reconciliation -- which, after all, is supposed to be what ends the war. Apparently Rice's aides told the committee that she has some "other interest" in testifying before a different congressional panel, thereby precluding an appearance before the House oversight committee. Waxman, again, isn't having it: he requested Rice to order her staff to cooperate with the corruption investigation; release Blackwater from its gag order; and to pencil in some time for the committee next month.













Maybe Waxman will attend the Stern Letters School of Writing Excellence and take in a few refresher courses from it's headmaster, Sen. Leahy. Hot air don't mean shit to anyone and Rice knows it.
September 25, 2007 4:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Didn't he subpoena Rice before, and she blew him off? And nothing ever came of it?
September 25, 2007 4:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Now can we get inherent contempt charges filed? Or is the whole f*cking thing a kabuki to keep us from seeng how corrupt and useless the government is?
September 25, 2007 4:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Let's see if Waxman does anything besides sending strongly worded letters. ...
September 25, 2007 4:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
The next time she tries to go on a shoe shopping trip at taxpayer expense, turn the plane STRAIGHT TO GITMO and drop this moron off.
September 25, 2007 5:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Where are the subpoenas Senator?
September 25, 2007 5:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
If this were the Jena six, the mainstream media would be all over it without mercy. But because it's the Bush regime, the mainsteam media blows it off.
And when the Justice Department itself refuses to acknowledge the authority of Congress, what the hell else is there to do?
You don't have to be a blind conservative not to see it, just an ignorant one to deny it.
September 25, 2007 5:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
How about this...
We get the democratic congress to vote for support of having these clowns testify.
those who vote positive will be on the ballot next time for the public to see. Those who vote no will be left off the ballot to protect their identiy from the public..
This is absolutely sickening. Anyone still believing this is a government "Of, By, and For" the people have their heads in the sand, leaving an important part of them still vulnerable.
We are now no more free than Iraq... both our democracies extend to local issues only. They certainly do not encompass the leadership of the nations
September 25, 2007 5:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hey now, don't dis Waxman. He's doing amazing work--exactly what his brief is, according to his position in the House. And he's forcing a lot of people to resort to pretty desperate and lame tactics to get out of revealing what crooked, underhanded, and dodgy things they've been up to.
I would hope that the Administration's consistent after-the-fact classification of documents--only when there's a chance something bad might be revealed--will be argued as invalidating the classification.
If documents are not immediately classified when they are written, or at least as soon as they get to their recipients, doesn't this speak to their not deserving to be classified? What, did they forget to classify them, and Waxman's investigation suddenly reminded them that they had a whole bunch of documents that should be classified?
I know I hate it when I don't get around to classifying my documents before they get subpoenaed, but, hey, I take my licks about it. Take your licks, State!
September 25, 2007 6:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
.....because it's the Bush regime, the mainstream media blows it off.
Hows about somebody slaps some matching bracelets on some of these pricks & hauls them off to the pokey. Then we might see some mainstream media coverage.
September 25, 2007 6:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
if they ever brought one of the subpoenaed no-show @ss-clowns in via inherent contempt, the media would howl like stuck pigs, the repukes would call for censure and the president would label them traitors and have them jailed.
but aside from that the system appears to be working.
kill me now.
September 25, 2007 6:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
You do wonder what the next president's plan is for a truth and reconciliation commission. These guys can't hide forever--unless the Democrats hear, see and speak no evil.
That would suck.
September 25, 2007 6:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
A year from January, I plan to issue a blanket pardon to all individuals who ever worked in my administration. That will stop this democrat witchhunt!
September 25, 2007 7:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
The arrogant anti-Constitutional views of this Administration are like no other in history. Do not expect cooperation when cooperation will expose the incompetence and poor judgement of this administration. Subpoena Rice, Blackwater, and the others and be prepared to cite them for Contempt of Congress when they don't appear.
September 25, 2007 7:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
We need to elect some replacements for Waxman and Levin and Leahy and all those other blow hards who won't use their power to confront the corrupt Bush synchophants. MoveOn.net has the right idea; let's clear those Democrats out and find new more effective representatives. Until then, it's letter-writing, jaw-flapping blowhard time.
September 25, 2007 7:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Unless I'm really misreading, the passages quoted by Waxman pretty much seem to say that Crocker was on the wrong side of "truthy" when he testified.
State says we can't give truthful answers to quesions on corruption, funding of insurgents, etc. bc those things might be embarassing to Bush and Maliki - so they are "classified"
Waxman says well then why wouldn't all Crocker's answers before Congress on those kinds of questions have been classified.
State says - um, no, bc he wasn't going to say things that embarassed Maliki.
Implication or just outright admission: Even if they were the truth - bc the truth is classified and Congress can't hear it.
September 25, 2007 7:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Go easy on Waxman. He's already taking flak from Rush Limbaugh, at least on the website. I can't bring myself to listen to the guy.
Still we need more than stern letters.
September 25, 2007 7:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Has anyone given any thought about how the Blackwater private army is going to be dismantled ? It seems that this well armed mercenary force creates an undeniable problem for the world that will be difficult to regulate or control. The problem faced is similar to that of the Romans who feared that an Army inside the gates of Rome would negatively impact the political process. Who controls Blackwater ?? The people with the most guns and the highest technology win - what is to stop a well-armed, well funded, and well paid Blackwater private army from impacting the political process in the US or anywhere else in the world ? Is anyone else concerned ?
September 26, 2007 12:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
The Democrats could not get enough votes from their own caucus to bring contempt of congress charges against any member of this administration. This is fact.
September 27, 2007 8:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
Re; GeorgeBush43... I do not think the President (or pResnitwit) can pardon anyone for crimes they have not been tried and convicted of .
November 17, 2007 3:40 AM | Reply | Permalink