It's late Friday afternoon, and yet, Howard "Cookie" Krongard still appears to be in office as the State Department inspector general. (His voice is still on his office voicemail, at least.) His spokeswoman says he has no intention of resigning, even as the likelihood of a congressional perjury investigation increases. So if he won't resign, who can fire Krongard?

In the final analysis, it would be up to President George W. Bush. Only a handful of federal inspectors-general can be fired by their agency chiefs, and State's is not among them. That's a good-government measure: after all, it's probably not conducive to integrity in governance if top officials can dismiss their internal watchdogs. (Only top U.S. allies can do that.) Savor the irony: by not firing a supposedly-independent public servant, President Bush is helping the cause of transforming the U.S. into a banana republic.

There are, however, procedures to be followed for cashiering Cookie. The first is to refer a complaint to the Inspector Generals' inspector -- Kenneth Kaiser of the FBI, who runs the integrity committee of the President's Council on Integrity and Efficiency. His committee is presumably the one State Department spokesman Sean McCormack meant when he said yesterday that State has "asked the overseer board of inspectors general to look into the work of the State Department Inspector General Office." However, when I called the State Department to confirm that, and to find out when the referral occurred, a charming State flack told me that it was after 5 p.m. on Friday and he had "a million things to do." I left a message with Kaiser's spokeswoman, and I'll bring you more as soon as I have more to report.

However, in the event that Kaiser thinks Cookie's gone a bit stale, Kaiser's boss might be more sympathetic. That would be famed Bush crony Clay Johnson III, who vetted such Bush administration luminaries as Mike Brown and David Safavian. If Krongard wants to fight on to the bitter end, he might have a friend in a very convenient place.

We're that much closer to a perjury investigation. Buzzy Krongard has told House oversight committee staff what he told TPMmuckraker on Wednesday: that he told his brother, State Department Inspector General Howard "Cookie" Krongard, about his decision to join the advisory board of State Department contractor Blackwater. Cookie Krongard told the committee on Wednesday his brother had told him no such thing.

Waxman says he'll hold a hearing the week of December 3 to determine if Krongard lied to the committee under oath. Both Krongard brothers will be invited to testify. And you thought your last family reunion was awkward. But will Howard Krongard resign before then?

Here's what Buzzy Krongard told Waxman's staff, according to a just-released Waxman memorandum:

Buzzy Krongard stated that Howard Krongard called him specifically to ask about any relationship he had with Blackwater “in preparation for his testimony” to the Committee. Buzzy Krongard stated: “He asked me whether I had any financial interest or any ties to Blackwater, and so I told him ‘I’m going on their Board.’” According to Buzzy Krongard, “He responded by saying, ‘Why would you do that?’ and ‘Are you sure that’s a good idea?’” Buzzy Krongard then said, “I told him that was my decision, not his, and that we just differed on that.”

Buzzy Krongard stated that during the Committee hearing, he was at home watching it live. He listened to Howard Krongard’s prepared opening statement. Then, he heard Howard Krongard offer spontaneously the comment that his brother had no connection to Blackwater. Buzzy Krongard said: “You could have blown me over.” During the hearing, he attempted to reach Howard Krongard by telephone. Before he could reach him, Buzzy Krongard received a call from Howard Krongard and explained again that he was a member of the Board.

Apparently Buzzy called the committee after receiving a letter from Waxman yesterday. As Waxman reiterated at the hearing, lying to committee staff -- even if not deposed under oath -- is a potential criminal offense, and Buzzy offered this account without being subpoenaed.

Update: Just got off the phone with Cookie Krongard's spokeswoman, Diane Quest. Quest says she just saw Waxman's letter and has taken it in to Krongard for review. "I don't see us having any comment on it," she says. No word yet on whether he'll go back to testify at the just-announced hearing. And, for the record: Will Krongard resign? "As far as I know, no."

The version of the surveillance bill that came out of the Senate Judiciary Committee yesterday (and that was approved in a do-over vote today) strips out the hotly-debated immunity provision for telecommunications companies. But several other proposals disliked by civil libertarians remain. For instance: like the Senate Select Intelligence Committee version that served as its template, there isn't a role for the FISA Court in approving surveillance of foreign-to-domestic communications. That power, formerly in the hands of an independent court -- to approve quaint things like "warrants" -- would reside with the Attorney General and the Director of National Intelligence.

Comments Kate Martin of the Center for National Security Studies:

"Even with the substantial improvements made by the Committee yesterday, the bill still authorizes unconstitutional surveillance of Americans' international communications; the bill eliminates the prior judicial approval for such surveillance that was contained in FISA before the Protect America Act and is required by the Fourth Amendment."

So no matter what Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) brings to the floor, it looks like lights-out for the FISA Court here.

Sure enough, Rep. Henry Waxman wrote yesterday to Buzzy Krongard to sort out whether or not his brother, State Department Inspector General Howard "Cookie" Krongard, truthfully testified to Waxman's committee that Buzzy never told him about joining the advisory board of State Department contractor Blackwater.

Waxman didn't subpoena Krongard, but asked if he'd consent to a "transcribed interview" by November 30. He also wants a couple pieces of documentation. From Waxman's letter (pdf):

1. All documents reflecting communications to or from (a) Erik Prince, (b) Blackwater USA or any parent companies, subsidiaries, or affiliated companies thereof (collectively, "Blackwater"); or (c) any officers, employees, or other persons affiliated with Blackwater.

2. All documents, including phone records, relating to communications with Howard J. Krongard regard Erik Prince or Blackwater.

3. All other documents relating to Blackwater or your relationship with Blackwater.

Look out Anchorage Daily News (and maybe others)! Sen. Ted Stevens (R-AK) is gonna get ya! He's not saying how, but he's gonna get ya.

Just because two oil executives have pleaded guilty to bribing Stevens, his son, and a handful of Alaska state lawmakers, and a grand jury is hearing evidence against Stevens and his son, the Daily News keeps on reporting that Stevens is mixed up with the wrong crowd. And probably just to sell more papers, whenever one of those Alaska state lawmakers gets convicted of taking bribes from the executives (Bill Allen and Rick Smith of Veco), the Daily News feels compelled to mention Stevens and his son. Stevens spoke his mind to the Daily News in an interview:

"Your papers print (the names of) those people who have been convicted and my son's name and mine at the same time. As far as the public is concerned, it's all the same ball of wax," Stevens said. "I'm not going to comment on that ball of wax."

Just for example, take the trial of former state pol Vic Kohring for taking Veco bribes. The paper reported comments by both Kohring's lawyer and jurors that Stevens and his son were really the ones who should be on trial. And during former Alaska lawmaker's Pett Kott's trial, the paper reported when Veco exec Bill Allen admitted that he'd paid for renovations on Stevens' Alaska home. Now, is that fair?

And is it really that big of a deal that one the most powerful, longest-serving senators in the Senate's history is under investigation?

"I don't see any reason why we should have had this massive press interest in what's going on," Stevens said. "It's just an investigation of a federal agency. They go on all the time. No one else talks about them the way they talk about the one involving me."

So put two and two together: 1) the paper has been unfairly tying him to crooked locals and 2) the investigation isn't that newsworthy anyway. Clearly, the ADN is on a smear campaign. As Stevens said before, the paper's trying to "assassinate" him. And that's a crime that will not go unpunished:

Read more »

Glenn Kessler of The Washington Post and Warren Strobel of McClatchy unearth a gem I missed from Wednesday's Cookie Krongard hearing. Apparently, the Justice Department has a criminal probe open into the construction of the Baghdad embassy. That would explain Rep. Henry Waxman's (D-CA) focus on Krongard's alleged non-cooperation with Justice on the embassy contracting issue. Kessler:

The probe came to light Wednesday during a House Oversight and Government Reform Committee hearing into the actions of State Department Inspector General Howard J. Krongard. Though lawmakers appeared careful not to mention names of people under investigation, Krongard mentioned two people during his testimony, both of whom are key figures in the building of the embassy, as he defended his practice of meeting with people under investigation.

"I would like to tell you exactly what I was doing, both with Mr. Golden and Ms. French," Krongard told lawmakers.

James L. Golden is a Washington-based contract employee of the State Department who oversees the project, though earlier this year the U.S. ambassador to Iraq barred him from returning to that country after he was suspected of altering evidence after a mortar attack. Mary French is the embassy project coordinator based in Baghdad.

Justice isn't commenting. But perhaps this probe is why the FBI paid Krongard a recent visit?

In the middle of a story in the Baltimore Sun about the sibling tension between State Department inspector general Cookie Krongard and his brother Buzzy, there's this revelation: apparently, in the phone conversation where Buzzy told Cookie he was going over to Blackwater, Cookie tried to talk his brother out of it.

Buzzy Krongard was watching that testimony at home in Lutherville and said he was "flabbergasted" by his brother's remarks. The pair had talked about three weeks earlier, Buzzy Krongard said. "I told him I was going on the advisory board, and he then said, 'I don't think that's a very good idea,' and I said that was for me to figure out."

Cookie Krongard, as we reported yesterday, is not saying another word about the incident. But Buzzy's latest revelation -- which he did not mention to me when TPMm broke the story -- suggests even more trouble for Cookie. If true, then Cookie clearly acknowledged that the appointment of his brother to Blackwater's advisory board would create a conflict of interest for him as the State Department inspector general.

Read more »

He probably called it a working vacation.

TPMm friend Nick Schwellenbach at POGO highlighted this a couple weeks back, but it's never too late to bring to your attention the travel photos of Howard "Cookie" Krongard, the embattled State Department inspector general.

To the left and above, Cookie hangs out with his security detail. "Not too worried about the bad guys at the moment," the caption says. Unfortunately, those guys weren't around for Cookie's Congressional hearing earlier this week.

To the right, see him kick back in what he calls the "V V I P lounge" of Kabul airport on what appears to be a leopard-skin chair! He must be tired from a hard day of thoroughly investigating waste, fraud and abuse in Afghanistan all by himself.

Below, a sporty-looking Cookie climbs the ruins of what he claims is a Taliban armored personnel carrier! (They had those?)

The Justice Department is bringing new attention to the "potential criminal activity," poor planning, and faulty construction in the massive $736 million development of the U.S. embassy in Baghdad. During testimony at the House Oversight Committee, State Department Inspector General Howard Krongard revealed that one of the individuals under investigation is James L. Golden, who oversees the embassy construction project but was barred from Iraq earlier this year after he was suspected of altering evidence after a mortar attack. Meanwhile, Krongard has recused himself from involving himself in any investigation in the matter. (Washington Post)

The State Department has dropped its plan to force diplomats to take assignments in Iraq. Despite the fact that some diplomats called the “directed assignments” “potential death sentences,” volunteers have filled all of the empty 48 positions. (AP)

Watchdog groups are accusing the Democrats of attempting to reverse a White House policy of ensuring the timely public release of Congressional budget information. A newly released House-Senate conference report reveals Democratic plans to delay by several months the release of spending priorities. (ABC’s “The Blotter)

Read more »

Hear that? Those are the hosannas of civil libertarians.

The Senate Judiciary Committee, by a single vote, passed a surveillance bill yesterday. And it doesn't include retroactive legal immunity for telecommunications companies that complied with the Bush administration's warrantless surveillance programs. Since the Senate intelligence committee's version of the FISA Amendments Act of 2007 does have the immunity provision, Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV), the majority leader, has the discretion to choose which bill to bring to the Senate floor for a vote.

It's more than clear by now that the White House wants the immunity provision badly. AT&T whistleblower Mark Klein says that the reason isn't to spare the telecoms financial indemnity, or a matter of "fairness," as administration officials claim. Rather, it's to stop some 40 class-action suits against the companies from revealing how massive, how domestic and how illegal warrantless surveillance was between 2001 and 2007. Revelations from those suits could even, hypothetically at least, lead to criminal charges against administration officials and telecom companies. So needless to say, the White House is none too pleased with the Senate Judiciary Committee right now. And it won't be pleased with Reid if he brings the judiciary committee's bill to the floor.

The New York Times reports that an immunity compromise pushed by Rep. Arlen Specter (R-PA) has some support:

Senator Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, the ranking Republican on the panel, is pushing a plan that would substitute the federal government as the defendant in the lawsuits against the telecommunications companies. That would mean that the government, not the companies, would pay damages in successful lawsuits.

Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, Democrat of Rhode Island, said in an interview after the vote Thursday that he would support a compromise along the lines of the Specter proposal.

Mr. Whitehouse was one of two Democrats who voted against an amendment proposed by Senator Russ Feingold, Democrat of Wisconsin, that would have banned immunity for the companies. “I think there is a good solution somewhere in the middle,” Mr. Whitehouse said.

Perhaps, but that assumes the White House wants a compromise. In another headache for President Bush, the House passed its companion surveillance bill, the Restore Act, yesterday, and that doesn't include telecom immunity either. We'll see who blinks first.

Elaborating on today's gaggle discussion of the State Department's faith in Howard "Cookie" Krongard, here's what spokesman Sean McCormack had to say at the formal press briefing:

QUESTION: Okay. And just the second thing, you've been asked several times if you could say that the Secretary or the building has confidence in him and you have declined --

MR. MCCORMACK: Look, he's still --

QUESTION: -- to say that.

MR. MCCORMACK: He's still -- he is still doing his job as Inspector -- as Inspector General. He has --

QUESTION: (Inaudible) that you have confidence in his ability to do the job --

MR. MCCORMACK: Look, it's not --

QUESTION: Do you have confidence in his --

MR. MCCORMACK: It's not for me to judge, Matt, the job the Inspector General is doing. The Congress can do that. The Secretary can do that. There have been questions that he has had to answer. He has answered those with Chairman Waxman. There have been some issues that have been raised with respect to the Inspector General's office. As appropriate, we have asked the overseer board of inspectors general to look into the work of the State Department Inspector General Office. These are -- this is all strictly according to the book. Howard is continuing his work as Inspector General. It's important work, the Secretary believes it's important work, and clearly, the Congress believes it's important work.

QUESTION: (Inaudible) -- but the word, confident -- you can't use the word, confidence, or give me a yes or no answer to the question, do you have confidence?

MR. MCCORMACK: (Inaudible) you can play the Washington games with people. Howard is still working as Inspector General here at the State Department.

In case you haven't heard it enough times, it's not the crime, it's the cover-up. Or in this case, the lesson is not to make sweeping statements under oath that can be easily debunked. And for that, you can thank Housing and Urban Development Department Secretary Alphonso Jackson.

After Jackson boasted to an audience that he didn't give contracts to critics of the President, the department's inspector general and Congress pounced. Jackson, eager to clear his name, proclaimed, "I don't touch contracts."

Unfortunately, that appears not to be true, as the National Journal first reported last month. Now a grand jury is digging deep into Jackson's help for his friends:

Behind the scenes, Jackson has helped to arrange lucrative contract work running into the hundreds of thousands of dollars for friends and associates who went to work at HUD-controlled housing authorities in New Orleans and the Virgin Islands, according to people familiar with his actions. Indeed, one of Jackson's good friends, Atlanta lawyer Michael Hollis, appears to have been paid approximately $1 million for managing the troubled Virgin Islands Housing Authority. Before landing at the authority, some sources said, Hollis had no experience in running a public housing agency.

Jackson's past efforts to aid his friends are causing him no end of headaches. For several months, a federal grand jury, Justice Department prosecutors, the FBI, and the HUD inspector general's office have been exploring Jackson's role in contracting decisions at the housing department. According to people familiar with the investigation, federal agents are focusing on Jackson's relationship with one friend in particular, William Hairston, a stucco contractor from Hilton Head Island, S.C.

Read more »

Here's what Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA) meant yesterday when he said Howard "Cookie" Krongard's deputy was in the dark about the State Department's inspector general's familial ties to Blackwater.

Contained in a just-released House oversight committee report (pdf) put together by the Democratic staff is this exchange between staff members and Deputy Inspector General Bill Todd:

Q: Do you know whether Mr. Krongard has any relationship with Blackwater or any individuals affiliated with Blackwater?

A: I asked him about it. He says no. ...

Q: Do you know whether his brother, Buzzy Krongard, is affiliated with Blackwater in any way?

A: I have no knowledge of that. I asked him that.

Q: And what did he say?

A: Absolutely not.

It's unclear when Todd was deposed, though I'm checking that with the committee staff. The timing is significant: Buzzy Krongard says he told Cookie Krongard he was joining Blackwater's advisory board about two to three weeks ago. Did Cookie Krongard misrepresent himself to Todd? Indeed, what occasioned Todd's inquiry into Krongard's ties to Blackwater in the first place? I have a call out to the State Department Inspector General's office to try and figure all this out as well.

Similarly, I'm hearing State will release a prepared statement this evening about Condoleezza Rice's ability to fire Krongard. Apparently I wasn't the only reporter today curious about how firing an inspector general works.

Update: Turns out the interview with Todd took place on October 12. That would be before Buzzy told Cookie he was taking the Blackwater position, according to Buzzy's timeline.

We've noted Sen. Ted Stevens' (R-AK) knack for helping out friends and family before. His son Ben for instance, relied on dear ol' dad to channel millions to fishing companies that in turn channeled hundreds of thousands on to him. His former aide Trevor McCabe partnered up with his son Ben and benefited from his relationship with Uncle Ted in other ways that have caught investigators' attention.

Though Alaska's a huge state, the billions Stevens brought home make the state seem quite small. Somehow projects tend to benefit people close to him. Roll Call takes a look (sub. req.) at just one of those, Stevens' recent earmark for $20 million for a ferry project in the state. Stevens has inserted "nearly $50 million for the project into appropriation bills from 2002 to 2006," Roll Call reports. The ferry would connect Knik Arm to Anchorage, cutting down travel time from two hours to 15 minutes. And look who had the foresight to invest:

Several current and former members of Stevens’ staff — including Chief of Staff George Lowe and former top aide Lisa Sutherland — as well as Rep. Don Young’s (R-Alaska) son-in-law Art Nelson own undeveloped land on the Knik Arm....

Along with her husband, Scott, a lobbyist for Ducks Unlimited, Sutherland owns slightly less than four acres on Knik Arm. The value of the land went from $38,400 in 2005 to $65,000 in 2006, according to the borough assessments.

A second former Stevens aide, Trevor McCabe, also owns land on Knik Arm along with Young’s son-in-law, Nelson, and Yardarm Knot Fisheries LLC executive Alan Chaffee through the company Point Bluff LLC, according to public records. Nelson owns a 10 percent stake in the company, according to the Anchorage Daily News....

McCabe and his wife also own a separate 3.7-acre parcel on Knik Arm. The value of that property went from $37,800 in 2005 to $62,400 in 2006, according to the property assessment.

Sounds to me like something the old Tammany Hall pol George Washington Plunkitt would recognize as "honest graft." They seen their opportunities and they took 'em.

How to get Baghdad cars out of the way of diplomatic motorcades? The old answer -- an escalation of force beginning with thrown water bottles and ending with rifle fire -- clearly isn't in the cards after Nisour Square. So what's left to try?

The State Department is experimenting with an idea to make the Baghdad streets both safe and stylish. Convoy drivers will be fitted with -- yes -- laser helmets able to emit a beam of bright light to blind errant and potentially dangerous motorists.

Seriously, from ABC's The Blotter:

Security experts say the lasers, emitting a green beam and already in use at some U.S. military checkpoints in Baghdad, overload the optic nerve but, if used from at least 10 feet away, will not cause any permanent eye damage. ...

"I've had them tested on me, and while it is certainly uncomfortable, like a flashbulb going off in front of your face, there is no permanent damage whatsoever," said Tony Diebler, a former State Department security official who now works at Cohort, International, the company providing the lasers and helmet cameras to the State Department.

Huh. A former State Department security official who now sells security equipment to the State Department. I'd say that might be something the inspector general should look at, but, you know....

That's one fewer corruption case Howard "Cookie" Krongard will investigate. The embattled State IG says he'll step aside from the Baghdad Embassy construction scandal.

In addition to removing himself from all queries related to Blackwater, Inspector General Howard Krongard has given up his role in looking into corruption allegations involving the construction of the new U.S. embassy in Baghdad, State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said.

The move came at the request of a congressional oversight committee chaired by Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., which Krongard testified before a day earlier. During the hearing he learned, apparently for the first time, that his brother is a member of Blackwater's advisory board.

"That was at the request of Congressman Waxman's committee because they are doing their own inquiries into the new embassy compound," McCormack said. "Because of the reporting relationship between the IG and the Congress, of course, Howard honored that request."

How does State feel about Krongard remaining on the job? Here's AP's dry wit:

Despite the fact that he has now recused himself from the State Department's two main internal investigations in Iraq and has come under heavy pressure to resign, Krongard has not offered to step down and is, for the moment, continuing as the inspector general, McCormack told reporters. He did not, however, offer Krongard a ringing endorsement.

"He is still doing his work as inspector general," McCormack said. "Obviously, if there weren't support for his doing his job as inspector general, then he wouldn't be doing that job."

Update: There's quite an irony here. As Paul reported, Krongard stopped his staff from investigating corruption in the embassy construction contract -- preferring to personally collect a blanket denial from the contractor after speaking to hand-picked employees and closing the file. Maybe now the IG's office can actually get some work done here.

For months, the Senate Republican leadership have worked to block a Senate bill that would make campaign contributions to Senate candidates immediately and easily searchable. Perhaps figuring that honey works better than vinegar, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) wrote Sen. John Ensign (R-NV) yesterday to ask if he would compromise on the latest effort to sink the bill. We've pasted the letter below.

All the bill would do is require Senate campaign reports to be filed electronically. That's it. The House started doing that six years ago, and journalists, watchdogs, and others constantly rely on the House's easily searchable records to see who's giving to campaigns. The speed of that reporting is especially crucial near the end of campaigns, when Senate candidates' voluminous paper filings, often hundreds of pages long, can make it much harder to figure out a candidates' supporters.

The bill has forty co-sponsors, including sixteen Republicans. Time is running out for the bill to affect the 2008 elections.

But Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) has worked to block the bill for months. And Ensign, coincidentally also the chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee (which works to get Republicans elected to the Senate), stepped up this September to employ a canny strategy of attaching a "poison pill" amendment to the bill. We'd laid out the whole scheme here.

In her letter yesterday, Feinstein asks Ensign to be flexible on his offered amendment, which would require all non-profits that file ethics complaints against senators to disclose all donors who gave $5,000 or more.

Last week, a group of watchdogs from left and right wrote Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) and McConnell to ask that they defeat Ensign's amendment, calling it "a clear attempt to intimidate the public from seeking enforcement of Senate ethics rules."

Read more »

Smell that in the air? It's the bouquet of communications wafting from sender to recipient outside of a wire. E-mail. Skype. That one with the hint of oak? VOIP.

Today's a huge day for the future of the U.S.'s surveillance laws. The Senate Judiciary Committee marks up the intelligence committee's surveillance bill -- which mostly has the support of the White House -- while the House reintroduces the Restore Act. Both bills attempt, to varying degrees, to roll back or amend the Bush administration's Protect America Act. That law, enacted in August, largely removed the FISA Court from government surveillance of foreign-to-domestic communication.

In the Senate, Rep. Patrick Leahy (D-VT) will attempt to enhance the minimization provisions of the so-called FISA Amendments Act -- which protect the anonymity of U.S. persons swept up in a surveillance net -- and clarify that any surveillance in the U.S. outside of FISA is illegal. Those two changes don't impact the bill's major provisions: 1) removing the FISA Court from the process or 2) granting retroactive legal immunity to telecommunications companies for participation in the Bush administration's warrantless surveillance program. Yet the White House still opposes them. New Attorney General Michael Mukasey urged President Bush to veto the bill if Leahy's changes are enacted.

Read more »

It's not hard to imagine: while Harry Reid launches into his tryptophan-fueled nap after Thanksgiving dinner, President Bush makes a flurry of recess appointments.

The Senate majority leader doesn't want that to happen. So, Roll Call reports (sub. req.), Reid is mulling using a little procedural jujitsu. He could keep the Senate in what's called "pro forma" session, where official recess is avoided by having certain Senate floor personnel show up every three days. No recess, no recess appointments. Reid and Bush struck a deal in August in order to avoid that; Bush got a couple nominees through, but agreed to make no recess appointments. But:

Since then, however, tensions have risen between the two branches, and on Wednesday sources said Reid doesn’t seem willing to negotiate with the White House this time. Also, several Senate aides suggested that Bush is increasingly likely to exercise the option since the clock is ticking on the second term of his presidency.

“I don’t think it should surprise anybody,” said one GOP leadership aide.

The chief candidate for a recess appointment would be surgeon general candidate and gay rights foe James Holsinger, but there would assuredly be others. With two days to go until the break, time is running out for a deal.

So much for those questions. Diane Quest, spokeswoman for State Department Inspector General Howard "Cookie" Krongard, says Krongard is "not commenting any further than what was said at the hearing." Asked if Krongard stands by his testimony in light of its direct contradiction by his brother, Quest repeated the no-comment.

Will Krongard stay on the job? Quest says she's heard of "no announcements" by the State Department on Krongard's future.

Howard "Cookie" Krongard, the State Department inspector general, has some explaining to do. Yesterday he told Congress that his brother, A.B. "Buzzy" Krongard, never told him that Buzzy joined the advisory board of State Department contractor Blackwater. Only Buzzy told me that he told Cookie precisely that in a phone conversation about two or three weeks ago. It's going to be a fun Thanksgiving for the Krongards.

Cookie Krongard pledged at yesterday's House oversight committee hearing to recuse himself from any Blackwater investigations. But here's the question: if Buzzy is telling the truth -- and he has much less motive to lie than his brother does -- why didn't Cookie recuse himself as soon as he learned of Buzzy's ties to Blackwater? Buzzy's timeline puts Cookie's knowledge of the family Blackwater ties near the time when Amb. Patrick Kennedy was reviewing the State Department's relationships to security contractors. Did the inspector general's office contribute to that review?

Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA) said at the hearing yesterday -- but did not elaborate -- that Krongard concealed his brother's ties to Blackwater from his own deputy. How did the deputy learn of the concealment?

Furthermore, with Blackwater remaining a central focus of State Department internal inquiry, how can State function with an inspector general who can't take part in the probes?

We've got calls out to the State Department and to Krongard's office to learn the answers to these questions. Updates to come.

The U.S. military's operating manual for the Guantanamo prison camp was leaked on Wikileaks.org yesterday, revealing that visitors from the International Committee of the Red Cross were denied access to some prisoners (something the military has repeatedly denied). The manual was not classified and the military has confirmed its authenticity. (Reuters, Wired)

Meet representative Ric Keller (R-FL). According to Evangelical leader James Dobson, Keller was “the obvious choice for those who care about the biblical values upon which our nation was founded.” The only problem, as Harper’s points out, is that Keller has proven to be a “true, unreconstructed, all-American family values hypocrite.” Check out the details of his apparent affair with a 23 year old staffer, his suspect payments to her, his divorce from his ill wife, and then his subsequent marriage to that staffer. (Harpers)

President Bush is getting serious, or is seriously worried about his legacy. His new executive order calls for a system of imposing accountability on federal agencies. Each agency must appoint a "performance improvement officer,” measure progress, and set goals. The objective is to ensure that "no dropped batons” – except maybe Iraq -- go “from this administration to the next administration." (Washington Post)

Read more »

There are rare moments when you, the citizen, can feel like you've really made a difference.

Not since Scooter Libby has a devoted, loyal public servant been in such need of your help. Alberto Gonzales was set upon by hordes of journalists and Democrats and finally stepped down for the good of his beloved Justice Department. But his ordeal is not over. Because his enemies misrepresented certain carefully-chosen phrasings as lies, he is being investigated by that same department. "But what can I do?" you ask?

Contribute to the Alberto R. Gonzales Legal Expense Trust:

David G. Leitch, a Gonzales friend and general counsel at the Ford Motor Co., wrote in an e-mail solicitation to potential contributors last month that Gonzales is "innocent of any wrongdoing" but does not have the means to pay for his legal defense after a career spent mostly in public service.

"In the hyper-politicized atmosphere that has descended on Washington, an innocent man cannot simply trust that the truth will out," Leitch wrote. "He must engage highly competent legal counsel to represent him. That costs money, money that Al Gonzales doesn't have."

Leitch also wrote that Gonzales's attorney, George J. Terwilliger III of White & Case in Washington, "has substantially reduced his fees to represent Al Gonzales, but the costs will likely be high nonetheless." A contribution form asking for donations to the Alberto R. Gonzales Legal Expense Trust suggests amounts from $500 to $5,000.

Sure, the business elite, former administration officials and ambassadors (and then finally the President) came through for Scooter Libby. But Gonzales is still exposed to the forces of injustice. Won't you do your part?

You might never have a similar chance again. The Washington Post notes that "legal defense funds are common in Washington, but not for attorneys general." So act now!

Things get worse for Rep. Don Young (R-AK). The feds are chasing Young for his ties to the corrupt oil company Veco (among other things), and he's already blown $450,000 in campaign funds on criminal defense lawyers. But it looks like investigators pulled out all the stops.

FBI agents recorded former Veco president Rick Smith's phone calls with Young, the AP reports today. In September, the AP reported that Veco's CEO Bill Allen had recorded his calls with Sen. Ted Stevens (R-AK).

Young was close to Smith in a couple ways. Smith, who pleaded guilty to bribing a number of lawmakers, arranged Young's annual mega-fundraiser pig roast (see picture above) at a cost of about $10,000 to $15,000 for a decade. But the feds are investigating whether there was another, shall we say, more informal arrangement, according to the AP:

The Justice Department is investigating whether an Alaska oil contractor used golf tournaments to funnel cash to Rep. Don Young, people close to the corruption investigation said....

...[T]he events at the Moose Run Golf Course just outside Anchorage were informal and the prizes were cash. There is no record of them on the campaign or personal financial reports that federal lawmakers are required to file.

"That tournament had nothing to do with the campaign or anything official. It was just people getting together to play golf," said Young's campaign spokesman, Mike Anderson, who declined to discuss the tournaments or how often Young won.

So was Young unusually lucky? It's unclear. The piece doesn't say how much cash Young took away, only saying that between sixteen to twenty-four people generally played in the tournament, each paying $100 each. But for some reason people tend to get suspicious when executives hand large amounts of cash to politicians.

Howard "Cookie" Krongard might have just perjured himself before the House Oversight Committee.

Earlier today, the State Department inspector general repeatedly told the panel that he was unaware his brother, A.B. "Buzzy" Krongard, had joined the advisory board of State Department security contractor Blackwater. Krongard said he had a single phone conversation with his brother about the issue, in October, in which Buzzy didn't tell Cookie he was joining the board.

Only Buzzy says that's not true.

In an exclusive interview with TPMmuckraker, Buzzy Krongard says that in that phone conversation, he specifically told Cookie Krongard he had agreed to join Blackwater's advisory board. "I had told my brother I was going on the advisory board," Buzzy Krongard says. "My brother says that is not the case. I stand by what I told my brother."

Buzzy Krongard says the phone conversation was more recent than Cookie Krongard indicated to the committee. Cookie said it took place about five or six weeks ago. Buzzy says it was about two or three weeks ago. Both men say there was just one phone conversation. How to reconcile the two accounts?

"I told him I was going on this board. He claims I didn't tell him," Buzzy Krongard says. "So what can I tell you?"

Read more »

Finally, evidence suggesting that the White House knew that Bernie Kerik had much more than a nanny problem.

It took only a week for President Bush's nomination of Kerik to replace Tom Ridge as secretary of the Department of Homeland Security to fall apart. And its abruptness -- and the reason given -- has always been cause for suspicion.

On December 2, 2004, President Bush announced that his pick to replace Tom Ridge as secretary of the Department of Homeland Security was Bernard Kerik. On December 10th, a Friday, at 8:30 p.m., Kerik suddenly withdrew his nomination, explaining in a statement that he'd discovered that his former housekeeper and nanny might not be a legal immigrant and that he hadn't paid taxes on her. It was the sole reason given for his withdrawal, both in his statement and in subsequent comments by White House officials.

But Kerik's indictment last Thursday indicates that the White House was dealing with bigger problems: Kerik's ties to the mob.

Read more »

Tomorrow morning is the long-awaited mark-up of the surveillance bill in the Senate Judiciary Committee. And Russ Feingold (D-WI), who voted against the bill in the intelligence committee, is going to redouble his efforts to rid the bill of its provision granting retroactive legal immunity to telecommunications companies that complied with the Bush administration's warrantless surveillance program. From a statement, via ThinkProgress:

Granting retroactive immunity for companies that allegedly went along with this illegal program is unjustified and undermines the rule of law. Not only would retroactive immunity set the terrible precedent that breaking the law is permissible and companies need not worry about the privacy of their customers, but it would likely prevent courts from ruling on the President’s illegal warrantless wiretapping program. This program was one of the worst abuses of executive power in our history, and the courts should be able to rule on it once and for all.

Recently, AT&T whistleblower technician Mark Klein said the provision was a cover-up, designed to prevent the public from learning the extent of what Klein called unbounded and "massively domestic" surveillance. Committee leaders Pat Leahy (D-VT) and Arlen Specter (R-PA) have been critics of the immunity provision, so perhaps Feingold can quash the provision in Judiciary, even if he wasn't able to do so on the intelligence committee.

December: a time of carols, sleigh bells, and contempt citations.

The House Democrats were set to hold a vote this Friday on whether to find White House officials in contempt of Congress for ignoring subpoenas related to the U.S. attorney firings investigation, The Politico reports. But no more. The vote, already delayed since July, has been pushed to December, at the earliest. The reason? The Politico quotes a "top House Democratic leadership aide": "[Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D-NY)] has been saying that this week is not the time to do this, that it will step on our message on Iraq and FISA."

So at least former White House counsel Harriet Miers, who refused to even show up for a House Judiciary Committee hearing, can enjoy her Thanksgiving. Happy feasting, Harriet!

Leave aside the drama from today's House oversight committee hearing about State Department Inspector General Howard Krongard's brother joining the advisory board of a huge State Department contractor. Another issue that came up: Krongard is accused of improperly tipping off ex-Broadcasting Board of Governors chief Ken Tomlinson -- a close Karl Rove ally and muckly fellow -- in 1995 that Tomlinson was under investigation for double-billing the State Department for hours worked. The charge was included in Rep. Henry Waxman's bill of particulars (pdf) against Krongard issued in September.

Krongard initially told Rep. Chris Shays (R-CT) that he didn't have any contact with Tomlinson. But in follow-up questioning with Rep. John Yarmuth (D-KY), he said his temporary assistant accidentally faxed specific complaints about Tomlinson from a whistleblower over to the BBG's executive director. It was all a mistake, Krongard said, because he had just meant to send the BBG a letter from Congress alerting BBG to the investigation.

Only sending the letter from Congress is exactly what Waxman initially faulted. His bill of complaints against Krongard stated that sending the BBG the Congressional letter "was inconsistent with standard investigative procedures, and, according to multiple sources, jeopardized the investigation." What's more, Waxman didn't buy Krongard's distinction between sending the fax to the executive director and communicating with Tomlinson, which was the basis for his answer to Shays. Krongard, for his part, said there was no way he could have conducted any kind of inquiry if he hadn't reached out to the BBG executive director for basic information.

One of Krongard's chief defenders, Rep. Chris Shays (R-CT), found the timeline of the Krongards' relationship with Blackwater troubling. "To have your brother tell you he was not involved in Blackwater" and to only find out at the hearing that he's connected to the company "is a pretty outrageous thing," Shays said. Buzzy has done Cookie "tremendous damage" and suggested that Cookie should have taken further steps to ensure that he knew whether his brother was on the advisory board of a State Department contractor. Here's video:

According to Howard "Cookie" Krongard, his brother Buzzy didn't tell him in a phone conversation in early October that he had joined Blackwater's advisory board, though Buzzy "may have" mentioned he was approached by the company for the position. So when did Buzzy Krongard join the advisory board?

Blackwater's Anne Tyrrell says she doesn't know the exact date. But "it would be accurate to say that he was invited in late July and accepted soon after," she says.

Howard "Cookie" Krongard said he's just learned that his brother is on Blackwater's advisory board and has formally recused himself from investigating the company.

Rep. Stephen Lynch (D-MA) asked when Krongard learned his brother, A.B. "Buzzy" Krongard was on Blackwater's board. Krongard said that he just learned about his brother's position, and had a single phone conversation with him in early October -- "about five, six weeks ago" -- in which Buzzy told Cookie that he didn't have "a significant financial interest" in Blackwater. Blackwater has multi-million contracts with the State Department.

Company spokeswoman Anne Tyrrell told me the advisory board was formed in the summer. I'm still trying to learn the exact date Buzzy joined up, but that would be before Buzzy's phone conversation with his brother. Cookie Krongard told Rep. Lynch that his brother didn't mention taking a position on the advisory board, although Buzzy "may have said" that Blackwater approached him about one. "I am not my brother's keeper," Cookie Krongard said.

Here's video:

Update: Cookie has certainly changed his tune from the beginning of the hearing. There, he said that his brother had told him that he wasn't on Blackwater's advisory board. Here's what he said:

"I can tell you very frankly, I am not aware of any financial interest or position [my brother] has with respect to Blackwater. It couldn’t possibly have affected anything I’ve done, because I don’t believe it. And when these ugly rumors started recently, I specifically asked him. I do not believe it is true that he is a member of the advisory board, as you stated, and that is something I think I need to say."

Late Update: Rep. Lynch's first name is Stephen, not Patrick. I regret the error.

That's settled. Blackwater spokeswoman Anne Tyrrell confirmed in an e-mail today to TPMmuckraker that A.B. "Buzzy" Krongard, brother of State Department Inspector General Howard "Cookie" Krongard, is a member of Blackwater's advisory board.

Howard Krongard testified this morning that he doesn't know if his brother is on Blackwater's advisory board, but if Buzzy is, Howard would recuse himself from any Blackwater-related investigations.

Krongard might not know if his brother is a member of Blackwater's advisory board. But Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-MD) read from a July, 2007 letter from Erik Prince, the company's CEO, inviting A.B. "Buzzy" Krongard to join the board as "a stellar opportunity to support security, peace and freedom." Howard Krongard said he still didn't know if his brother has in fact joined the board, but that if A.B. Krongard has, Howard Krongard would recuse himself from any investigations into Blackwater.

We'll show you the letter as soon as we have it.

Rep. Cummings also said that there's a Blackwater advisory board meeting in a Virginia hotel right now. Rep. Diane Watson (D-CA) followed up, saying that A.B. Krongard has, in fact, checked into that hotel, which is in Williamsburg, Virginia.

Howard Krongard replied that he didn't know if, perhaps, his brother traveled to Williamsburg to decline membership on the board. Here's video:

Update: Here's the letter. (pdf)

Late Update: Rep. Elijah Cummings represents Maryland, not Georgia. I regret the error.

Why didn't Howard Krongard cooperate with a Justice Department investigation of whether Blackwater smuggled weapons into Iraq? One explanation, that Krongard denied, is that his brother has ties with Blackwater. (It's still unclear. We have requested comment from Blackwater. We'll see.)

Krongard's own explanation is that in early July this year, the special inspector general for Iraq reconstruction, Stuart Bowen, informed Krongard that he was reviewing two Blackwater contracts with the State Department and asked for help. Krongard said that he didn't think it was appropriate to cooperate with a "criminal" investigation until he could "deconflict" his role with Bowen's investigation: "It raised questions of parallel procedure." Here's video:

Waxman said that Krongard's explanation contradicts what he was told by both Krongard deputies and Justice Department officials, who say it's standard practice for inspector general investigators to cooperate with Justice Department requests.

Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA), playing his usual contrary role, said that none of Krongard's whistleblower accusers agreed to testify under oath. Waxman countered that the accusers were under oath in private interviews and GOP members were allowed to cross-examine them. The GOP wanted them to testify today and isn't satisfied with Waxman's promise to release the transcripts of their interviews.

At the beginning of today's House oversight committee hearing on State Department Inspector General Howard "Cookie" Krongard, Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA) dropped a bombshell: Krongard's brother, former CIA Executive Director A.B. "Buzzy" Krongard, sits on Blackwater's advisory board. Blackwater, of course, is a State Department contractor.

Calling Krongard's case one of seemingly "reckless incompetence," Waxman reminded the hearing that one of the charges against Krongard is that he squelched an investigation into a State contractor -- since named as Blackwater -- smuggling weapons into Iraq. According to Waxman, Howard Krongard concealed his brother's association with Blackwater from "his own deputy." Here's video:

Update: Krongard just said he is "unaware of any financial interest" in Blackwater by his brother. "I do not believe it is true that he is a member of the advisory board, as you stated," he told Waxman.

Late Update: To be clear, the issue seems to be that Blackwater invited Krongard's brother to join its advisory board, not its board of directors. This post has been changed to reflect this clarification.

Did State Department Inspector General Howard "Cookie" Krongard squelch investigations into waste and fraud in Iraq and Afghanistan? He'll at least get a hearing before the House oversight committee today. We'll be providing running updates (it's airing on C-Span3 this morning and streaming on the committee's website).

The panel's Republicans think Cookie is getting a raw deal. And right on time for the hearing, they've released a report defending him from charges of politicizing the office. Krongard, you'll recall, has been accused by committee chairman Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA) of scuttling numerous investigations into State Department contracting, as well as retaliating against whistleblowers who came to Waxman with their concerns.

The executive summary claims that the committee's investigation has "descended to governing by personal attack" and says that the allegations against Krongard "remain unsubstantiated." What's more: the Democrats' "expenditure of time and taxpayer funds spent proving that the State Department IG is abrasive and abusive is itself an abuse of the Committee’s authority."

You can read the full report here (pdf). I haven't, but The Washington Post has, and it found this morsel:

But even the minority report says it found "substantial support" for Waxman's charge that Krongard routinely belittled employees or treated them harshly. "Several witnesses observed that the IG had a poor regard for government workers," the report says, noting that one said he went through several secretaries. One secretary simply did not show up for work and told others that she would not return to the front office, a witness testified.

"It was common knowledge not to speak in the staff meetings because he was heavy-handed," Patti Boyd, a former deputy assistant inspector general, told the committee staff. "People were actually afraid to say anything. So they actually said nothing." She added: "It was my observation that he disliked everyone."

Judith Regan, one-time lover of Bernie Kerik, has filed a civil suit alleging that she was pressured by an executive at her previous job with News Corporation to lie about the affair when asked by White House investigators. The reason? According to Regan, the exec wanted to protect the potential Presidential run of one Rudy Giuliani. And though it is not disclosed in the filing, The Huffington Post notes earlier reports that Regan actually has recordings of calls between her and News Corp execs. (NY Times, Huffington Post)

The CIA videotaped at least three interrogations performed on senior al-Qaeda officials who were then being held in secret prisons abroad. Meanwhile, the CIA might be in trouble for its recent disclosure. The defense for Zacarias Moussaoui had long ago asked for interrogation transcripts of other detainees in lieu of their actual testimony, but the CIA said no such thing existed. (McClatchy)

Dr. James Holsinger, Bush's nominee for Surgeon General with a penchant for curing homosexuals, isn't too worried about Congressional obstruction. According to Kentucky's Bible Belt Blogger, Holsinger is telling folks that he will be recess appointed by Bush during the coming holiday season. Remind Congress not to turn the lights off over Christmas. (Think Progress)

Read more »

It's looking grim for Blackwater. Although the FBI hasn't finished its investigation into the September 16 shootings at Nisour Square -- in which 17 Iraqi civilians were killed -- The New York Times reports that the company's guards at the square, by and large, opened fire without provocation:

Federal agents investigating the Sept. 16 episode in which Blackwater security personnel shot and killed 17 Iraqi civilians have found that at least 14 of the shootings were unjustified and violated deadly-force rules in effect for security contractors in Iraq, according to civilian and military officials briefed on the case....

Investigators have concluded that as many as five of the company’s guards opened fire during the shootings, at least some with automatic weapons. Investigators have focused on one guard, identified as “turret gunner No. 3,” who fired a large number of rounds and was responsible for several fatalities.

Investigators found no evidence to support assertions by Blackwater employees that they were fired upon by Iraqi civilians. That finding sharply contradicts initial assertions by Blackwater officials, who said that company employees fired in self-defense and that three company vehicles were damaged by gunfire.

About the only bright spot for Blackwater: bureau officials appear inclined to give the guards the benefit of the doubt about the first round of shootings, in which Blackwater guards fired upon a white Kia sedan that didn't heed a traffic officer's order to stop at the square.

But so far, the FBI's account of the shooting is mostly in line with that of the Iraqi government and the U.S. military. In front of Congress and in a recent PR blitz, Blackwater owner and CEO Erik Prince has insisted that Blackwater guards were under attack. "There was definitely incoming small arms fire from insurgents," Prince told Wolf Blitzer last month. Blackwater has also consistently urged Congress, the press and the public to await the outcome of the FBI's investigation before passing judgment on the company.

Read more »

A new day at DoJ?

In February 2006, the Justice Department's Office of Professional Responsibility launched an internal investigation to see if the Department had properly reviewed the Bush Administration's warrantless wiretapping program. But President Bush made the unprecedented decision to deny investigators the necessary security clearances, and Attorney General Alberto Gonzales meekly assented.

But in a letter to Rep. Maurice Hinchey (D-NY) today, OPR chief Marshall Jarrett said that "we recently received the necessary security clearances and are now able to proceed with our investigation." You can see the letter here.

Attorney General Michael Mukasey, of course, was only sworn in Friday. It's not immediately clear if he's behind the reversal, but one assumes the two events must be related. Somehow the administration changed its position. (See update below.)

The investigation had been dead since the spring of 2006. The probe aims to determine whether Department officials (including both attorney generals) acted properly in approving and overseeing the program, and there was never a very good excuse for Bush shutting it down. OPR investigators were not seeking new documents from the National Security Agency, but only seeking to review documents already in the Justice Department's possession. Bush, arbitrarily, shut them down.

The move might actually be good news for Steve Bradbury, the acting head of the Department's Office of Legal Counsel; Democrats had been blocking his nomination until the OPR probe was completed, because Bradbury played a key role in reviewing the warrantless wiretapping program. Bradbury's nomination is sure to encounter other problems, of course, even if the OPR investigation clears him. He also authored still-secret memos in 2005 that, according to The New York Times, allowed interrogators to use a variety of "enhanced interrogation techniques" on detainees.

Update: ThinkProgress notes that Mukasey said two weeks ago in a written answer (pdf, see p. 126) to the Senate Judiciary Committee about the investigation that “It is my understanding this issue has already been decided. I have committed, however, to reviewing the over-all circumstances of this matter.”

There are two ways to read that. One is that Mukasey is referring to Bush's original decision to block the probe. The other is that Mukasey is saying that the decision had already been made to reverse that earlier decision. Which one is right? We're not sure.

This should be good for future defense contracts. Leading security-industry contractor DynCorp has hired the Army's former chief of staff, retired General Peter Schoomaker, to sit on the company's board of directors. From a DynCorp statement on Thursday:

“We are extremely fortunate to have someone of Gen. Schoomaker’s experience and caliber joining our board at this time,” said DynCorp International chairman Robert B. McKeon. “Pete’s leadership skills and in-depth knowledge of our nation’s security challenges will be a tremendous contributor to the continued growth of DynCorp International.”

Schoomaker retired from the Army in 2000, but Donald Rumsfeld brought him back to active duty to replace Army Chief of Staff Eric Shinseki, who famously clashed with Rumsfeld over the Crusader artillery system and the Iraq war. Never before has a retired general or admiral ever chaired a service. He stepped down in April, handing the reins of the Army to former Iraq commander General George Casey.

One Schoomaker angle that would be too obvious to exploit: his brother is commander of the Walter Reed Army Medical Center.

Old habits die hard, I guess.

Rep. Tom Feeney (R-FL) is under investigation for his ties to Jack Abramoff, who's still causing plenty of trouble for Republicans, Feeney and Rep. John Doolittle (R-CA) most of all. A Scottish golf junket with Abramoff in 2003 is the source of Feeney's problems. But even as Feeney tries to put Abramoff far behind him ("There's no relationship") with the help of a legal defense fund, he can't help himself.

Abramoff's old associate Todd Boulanger, The Orlando Sentinel reports, will be co-hosting a $500-a-person fundraiser for Feeney tonight. Boulanger, Abramoff enthusiasts might remember, was among Abramoff's coterie of go-getting young lobbyists at the firm Greenberg Traurig. And Boulanger's go-getting spirit was on full display in an email TPMmuckraker obtained last year, where he urged others in the office to pony up for Sen. Thad Cochran (R-MS), who was a fast friend to the firm's clients (he'd "never said 'no'"). In it, Boulanger allowed that Abramoff's team had already delivered thousands in contributions for Cochran, but that wasn't "good enough for the member who keeps the lights turned on here at Greenberg."

The Sentinel notes that Boulanger, who now works at the lobby shop Cassidy & Associates, represents among other clients Freddie Mac; Feeney sits on the House Financial Services Committee. Boulanger gave Feeney $1,250 in contributions in 2005. Though a number of Boulanger's former colleagues are either in prison or under investigation, Boulanger himself appears never to have been a focus of the investigation.

Saud Memon, a “long-sought” suspect in the brutal murder of journalist Daniel Pearl, died earlier this year. Memon was secretly interrogated by US and Pakistani officials. Making Pearl's case even uglier, there's reason to believe that the detention and interrogation played a role in his death. (Wall Street Journal)

The government holds a distinct advantage in the war crimes trial in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, in so far as it s lawyers may legally hide critical information and witness testimony. Neither U.S. criminal law nor the Uniform Code of Military Justice apply to the trials. But even with this “stacked deck,” the only conviction secured by the commissions was the result of a plea bargain deal with an Australian prisoner. (LA Times)

Though Norman Hsu once evaded a heavily muscled, dragon tattooed debt collector named “Shrimp Boy,” by telling police he was being kidnapped, he eventually ran out of excuses with law enforcement and wealthy investors. The Wall Street Journal has a colorful round-up of his schemes and scams, including how Hsu became a fugitive in a latex glove case. (Wall Street Journal)

Read more »

Get beyond the surge. Go further than the talk about population protection being the new basis for U.S. efforts in Iraq. The Joint Campaign Plan is the comprehensive strategy for Iraq employed by General David Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crocker. It's a fairly important document. And Congress can't see it, reports Rachel Van Dongen for Roll Call. (sub. req.)

In television interviews and press conferences, Gen. David Petraeus has described the Joint Campaign Plan as the key military and diplomatic strategy to stabilize Iraq.

Developed by the “big brains” on the ground, Petraeus points to a “unified” effort with U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker to achieve political and military security in Iraq by 2009.

Yet despite repeat efforts at the highest levels and Pentagon promises, Congress has been unable to get a current copy of the plan.

After persistent requests from House Armed Services Chairman Ike Skelton (D-Mo.), the issue has moved up the Congressional chain of command to Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.). According to an aide, Pelosi asked President Bush for the document several months ago in a White House meeting. Since then, Pelosi’s staff has “repeatedly” requested a copy, her aide said, but has not yet received one.

A spokeswoman for the House Armed Services Committee generously declined to attribute the stonewalling to partisan politics. Yet the committee's request for the plan has been outstanding since the Pentagon missed a March 30 deadline for it. What's more, even though Congress hasn't seen the document, the head of a Government Accountability Office unit mentioned in October 30 testimony that his team saw the plan on a recent trip to Iraq.

Nor is Congress the only one left in the dark about why it can't see the plan. Van Dongen called the White House for an explanation, and it sent her to the Iraq command, known as Multinational Force-Iraq. An MNFI spokesperson told her, "I do not know why the White House would refer you to us regarding these questions." The Pentagon didn't reply, either. Three cheers for openness in government!

Read more »

Looks like it's not just EPIC's Marc Rotenberg who finds Don Kerr's definition of privacy problematic. Rotenberg called for Kerr to be fired from his position as principal deputy director of national intelligence. Here's a reaction from Caroline Fredrickson, legislative director of the ACLU's Washington office, who doesn't go quite that far:

"What's frightening is Mr. Kerr's comments show how under siege our privacy really is -- the more intrusive technology becomes, the more protective our legal framework should become. The Bush Administration seems to believe that just because they can get information, they should be able to get it, keep it, and use it without oversight."

A significant portion of the federal criminal case against former New York City Police Commissioner Bernard Kerik involves alleged lies Kerik told White House officials in both written and oral statements when he was seeking positions in the Bush Administration.

So far, there have been no reports of the White House receiving, let alone complying with, grand jury subpoenas in the Kerik case. However, a review of the indictment suggests that the White House may have turned over a number of records to federal investigators in addition to perhaps making current and/or former officials available for interviews with federal investigators and possibly for testimony to a grand jury.

How extensive was the White House's cooperation with the federal criminal investigation of Kerik? Will we see White House officials testifying at trial about their conversations with Kerik?

The indictment lays out a number of alleged lies told by Kerik to White House officials. False statements comprise seven counts of the sixteen-count indictment, including statements Kerik made to three unnamed White House officials, identified in the indictment as White House Official A, B and C, respectively.

---On October 29, 2002, the indictment says, Kerik fibbed to a "White House Official A" when he was applying for a position on an advisory committee to the President’s Homeland Security Advisory Council. The feds say that Kerik lied about having no household help (the famous nanny) and about various shady deals (he left out that a mob-tied company paid to renovate his apartment and that a Brooklyn businessman had loaned him $250,000).

Read more »

Via Joseph Neff, the Raleigh News & Observer's Blackwater blogger, CBS reported on Friday that the Iraqi government has drafted a piece of legislation removing legal immunity for U.S. security contractors. (One of the final decrees of U.S. proconsul Jerry Bremer in 2004 was to exempt contractors from prosecution in Iraqi courts, something with which the Iraqis have to date complied.)

You can read the draft here. (pdf) It's short, and the operative language is simple: "All immunities granted to [security contractors] in accordance with any valid legislation shall be canceled."

The significance, if passed? CBS:

That law still must be ratified by the Iraqi parliament, and if and when it is, private security firms would almost certainly pull out of Iraq.

“There’s no question it’s a disaster if this got passed,” said Carter Andress, one of an estimated 8,500 private security contractors guarding diplomats, convoys and reconstruction sites for the U.S. He is not willing to let his employees be subject to arrest by an Iraqi police force he believes is riddled with corruption and infiltrated by enemy fighters.

“How do we determine in that situation whether or not it's legitimate use of the rule of law or whether or not this is someone trying to kidnap one of us and take advantage of the situation,” he said.

Is there anyone to match Rep. Don Young's (R-AK) earmarking abilities? Sure, Rep. John Murtha (D-PA) knows his way around an appropriations bill. But contractors know that the way to Murtha's heart is to open an office in his district. Convincing Young to dole out federal dollars, however, seems even easier.

Witness the $280 billion 2005 transportation bill, Young's masterpiece, the culmination of 30 plus years of experience. In it, Young not only tagged hundreds of millions for his home state -- including his own bridge to nowhere -- but he delivered for projects all over the country. Back in August, we gave a rundown of four states where contributors had ponied up for Young's attention, and this weekend, McClatchy took a step back to admire the full scope of Young's popularity outside of Alaska:

With money pouring in from transportation interests, Young amassed $6.5 million in political contributions from 2001 to 2005. Facing weak political opposition at home, he didn’t need much for his campaign. Instead, Young tapped his campaign fund to travel the country, often lavishly and in corporate jets, to meet with more developers and view their proposed highway projects....

Of the $6.5 million in contributions that Young collected — $5.5 million for his campaign and $1 million for his leadership political action committee (PAC) — about 85 percent came from people who didn’t live in Alaska and couldn’t vote for him.

And many of those contributors weren't disappointed. We've written often about Florida's Coconut Road project. But what about $5 million to help a developer build the largest shopping mall in America in Syracuse, New York? They're just two among many. Take a look.

It's official: embattled State Department Inspector General Howard "Cookie" Krongard will finally testify before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee on Wednesday.

Krongard, for the uninitiated, is the IG voted most likely to... not investigate waste, fraud and abuse. In September, Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA), the oversight committee chairman, accused him of scuttling investigations into corruption in State activities and contracts in Iraq and Afghanistan. Matters got worse when Krongard's subordinates told Waxman that his aides threatened retaliation against them for going public. Condoleezza Rice promised that Krongard would answer the charges. The FBI got involved. It's a whole to-do.

Come Wednesday at 10 a.m., Krongard will get a chance to explain himself. As of last week, the hearing focused primarily on the whistleblower-protection question. Aides to the committee said last week that there were no preconditions to Krongard's testimony, and lo and behold, the title of the current hearing is now the broad-brush "Assessing the State Department Inspector General."

Can't wait for Wednesday? Check out the Mighty Justin Rood's newest piece on the State Department's allergy to accountability in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Good catch from Pam Hess of the AP. At an intelligence conference last month, the nation's number-two intelligence official, Don Kerr, contended that you shouldn't expect the government to protect your anonymity. At least one prominent civil libertarian tells TPMmuckraker that Kerr should resign if his remarks reflect what he believes.

Kerr, the chief deputy to intelligence chief Michael McConnell -- he of questionable credibility concerning the Bush administration's surveillance programs -- contended last month that anonymity is an outmoded component of citizens' reasonable privacy expectations. Technology has influenced social interaction to such a point where people don't blanch at giving Amazon their credit card numbers or posting personal information on social-networking websites. While the government should protect privacy, shielding anonymity "isn't a fight that can be won." Kerr, it should be noted, was previously the director of the National Reconnaissance Office, which is in charge of the nation's spy satellites.

Some civil libertarians read Kerr's remarks as at odds with long-standing legal privacy protections. At least one tells TPMmuckraker that it's time for Kerr -- who was just confirmed as McConnell's deputy on October 4 -- to find a new line of work. "The Constitution protects the right of anonymity," says Marc Rotenberg, president of the Electronic Privacy Information Center. "If Mr. Kerr does not believe he can uphold the Constitution, he should resign."

Kerr shied away from teasing out the implications of his statement when asked. ("It's a personal question that everyone, in a way, has to answer for themselves," said Kerr -- who, remember, is a government official presumably not willing to allow 300 million people the leverage to decide, say, how much surveillance the government can perform.) But here's the heart of the argument (pdf):

Anonymity results from a lack of identifying features. Nowadays, when so much correlated data is collected and available -- and I'm just talking about profiles on MySpace, Facebook, YouTube here -- the set of identifiable features has grown beyond where most of us can comprehend. We need to move beyond the construct that equates anonymity with privacy and focus more on how we can protect essential privacy in this interconnected environment.

Read more »

Just last week Dyncorp’s CEO Herb Lanese distanced his employees from those of Blackwater by stressing his firm’s cautious rules of engagement. But according to several eyewitnesses, a Dyncorp guard shot an unarmed Iraqi taxi driver on Saturday and just “drove away.” A Dyncorp spokesman commented that “we knew that we had fired at the front of the vehicle,” but “we were kind of surprised that there was a death.” (NY Times)

We're a year away from the election, and you know what that means... soft money battles! Seems oddly fitting that this season, the first independent 501c(4)s to surface would be backing Sen. Campaign Finance Reform himself John McCain (R-AZ).

When Pete Kott, the former Republican speaker of the Alaska House of Representatives admitted, "I had to cheat, steal, beg, borrow and lie... Exxon's happy. BP's happy. I'll sell my soul to the devil," a lobbyist assured him that this “will stay in this room.” But this conversation was just one of the many corrupt Alaskan political deals caught on tape by the FBI. Nobody knows what the feds' extensive video collection will ultimately mean for other operators in the state, such as Representative Don Young (R-AK) or Senator Ted Stevens (R-AK). But according to Ray "Disco Ray" Metcalfe, a former Republican state legislator, "It was common knowledge that everything was corrupt," “but “nobody wanted to talk about it.” (Washington Post)

Read more »

Your typical wartime logistics operation: from supplier to vendor to transport to customer... oh, and corrupt warehouser who'll sell your weaponry to the insurgency while U.S. military officers look the other way.

Welcome to the operation to get guns to the Iraqi security services, circa 2004-2005. According to Government Accountability Office investigations -- and at least one criminal investigation -- over 190,000 weapons sent to Iraq for the Iraqi security forces disappeared almost as soon as they got off the C-17s. General Petraeus, who was in charge of the effort at the time, commented recently that he thought expeditious delivery of weapons was more important than proper bookkeeping. The New York Times details that his men truly internalized that message -- even to the point of opting not to notice when Iraqi warehousers would turn contractor-run armories into a private, for-profit arms dealership.

Two Army majors, John Isgrigg III and Timmy W. Cox, assigned to the equipping mission told the Times about racing against other military units to claim palletized guns off the planes delivering them. They and their colleagues are open about how they didn't care about keeping proper records of their cargo, claiming that fastidiousness in a complex procurement operation is a hindrance to the mission:

“We had folks getting killed because equipment wasn’t moving,” said Col. Randy Hinton, the majors’ superior officer. “Were there times when all the right forms were not signed? Probably. But we had a mission to do, and we were going to do it the best way we could at that time.”

An interesting approach to following the law. The trouble is that their negligence, in part, led to an atmosphere of tolerance for weapons smuggling.

Read more »

Ah, Illinois. Only this Wednesday ex-Governor George Ryan (R-IL) became prisoner 16627-424, convicted of racketeering charges in April. Now, the feds are looking closely at Rod Blagojevich (D-IL), who ran his campaign on the promise of cleaning up what Ryan left behind. With several recent indictments of the governor's political fundraisers, the feds have been closing the vise. The most troubling tie for Blagojevich these days is the relationship connecting him, his wife Patti, and Tony Rezko.

Rezko has been a longtime supporter of the Blagojevichs; The Chicago Tribune reported in 2005 that Rezko and Patti Blagojevich had a business relationship tracing back as early as 1997. In 2003, real estate deals with Rezko accounted for roughly one-quarter of Patti’s income (they have ceased their business deals since 2004). He also demonstrated what might generously be called a knack for getting friends appointed to state board positions.

But Rezko was indicted on extortion charges in 2006. And though the Governor has not been named by investigators, there is this revelation by the Associated Press:

But Antoin "Tony" Rezko, a Blagojevich political confidant and friend, is under indictment, accused of seeking campaign contributions from investment companies in exchange for getting them business with a state pension fund.

In one case, the indictment claims Rezko demanded a company make a $1.5 million contribution to "a certain public official." That was Blagojevich, according to a person familiar with the investigation, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the probe is continuing.

Rezko has so far not turned state’s evidence, but with a trial coming up in February, Blagojevich might very well have reason to be nervous.

Of course, if Rezko doesn’t float your boat, there are other investigations that might sink the governor.

Read more »