« previous | MUCK HOME | next »
The Daily Muck
Last year, the government made 20.5 million decisions to classify government secrets, despite the fact that the Information Security Oversight Office (ISOO) says that more than 10% of the reviewed classifications lacked any justifiable basis. The ISOO is also supposed to receive data from executive agencies about how much material they classify and declassify, but Cheney’s office stopped sending information in 2002. (Associated Press)
After changing his mind about a presidential run, ex-Governor Tom Vilsack (D-IA) decided to support Hillary Clinton in her bid for presidency. A few weeks later, Vilsack's now-defunct presidential campaign fund received about $90,000 from some of Clinton's major backers, of which most went to pay back the loan he gave his own campaign. Clinton's campaign maintains she merely wanted to help a friend to close out his campaign without debt. (LA Times)
Barack Obama may be talking the talk on the campaign trail as he attacks special interests and lobbyists in Washington, but last year Senator Obama introduced bills-at the request of lobbyists-that would save foreign companies millions in customs fees and duties. (The Blotter)
Former Rep. Bill Tauzin (R-LA) loves his leftovers, including the remaining cash in his congressional campaign committee’s bank account. Tauzin, now a pharmaceutical lobbyist, used his campaign money to donate to vulnerable GOP candidates on the Energy and Commerce Committee, which oversees pharmaceutical interests. With nearly $100,000 left in his campaign account, Tauzin could spread the love to other candidates in the 2008 election cycle. (CQ Politics)
Republican lawmakers are splurging on legal defense as they are investigated by the feds, according to the latest FEC filings. Reps. John Doolittle (R-CA) and Jerry Lewis (R-CA) have shelled out thousands of dollars to law firms amid corruption probes. (The Politico)
Speaking of legal defense costs, it is getting more and more expensive to be an Arizona politician. Former Rep. J.D. Hayworth (R-AZ) has confirmed that he is cooperating with a federal investigation involving Jack Abramoff. Hayworth has already spent $170,000 in legal fees from his campaign fund. Meanwhile, Rep. Renzi (R-AZ) is running low on campaign funds; he currently has just $20,000 in the bank after raising a fraction of last year’s money. (Arizona Central, Associated Press)
New senate ethics rules that require lawmakers to claim responsibility for their earmarks are still drifting aimlessly in halls of Congress. The result is that approximately $7.5 billion in earmarked projects are currently unclaimed by any senator. (The Hill)
Comments (14)
dzman49 wrote on July 17, 2007 9:41 AM:"...approximately $7.5 billion in earmarked projects are currently unclaimed by any senator."
Unless unclaimed earmarks are dropped from bills to which they're attached, so-called "ethics rules" are a charade.
Security code: soap
Guy wrote on July 17, 2007 9:44 AM:(as in: Clean It Up, dammit!)
Here I was thinking Vilsack was also a Dem....
Sarah wrote on July 17, 2007 9:46 AM:Vilsak was and IS a Dem... please correct the typo!
Guy wrote on July 17, 2007 9:49 AM:Vilsack was and IS a Dem... please correct the typo!
Done. :)
Mrs Panstreppon wrote on July 17, 2007 11:02 AM:Paul,
I did a TPM Cafe post about a fake DoD story that you might want to take a look at - link below. On its Defend America news website, the DoD reported that 77 refurbished Hungarian Soviet-era tanks were delivered to an Iraqi army base in the week ending 11/14/05.
But at the same time, Defense Industry Daily was reporting that the delivery of the tanks had been held up in Kuwait over a payment dispute. The vendor, btw, is Curt Weldon's firm, Defense Solutions LLC.
I suspect that the photos on the Defend America are tanks that were used by the Iraqis for training and not the refurbished ones. You can only see two tanks in the photos.
I think the Hungarian tanks were ultimately delivered but not when the DoD reported they were delivered but the point is that the DoD put out a fake news story.
The 77 refurbished tanks were a big deal. Condi Rice, the head of NATO and some othe big shots had talked them up so I assume someone at the DoD was under pressure to report their arrival.
The delivery of the refurbished tanks is a relatively minor story yet the DoD still faked it. Makes you wonder what other DoD news is fake, doesn't it?
Mrs P
I
TheraP wrote on July 17, 2007 11:09 AM:Mrs P
Remember the Iranian IED's?
Weren't those supposedly "new" photos (from Iran) shown to be "old" - and not really from Iran?
"Mission Accomplished"
"keep" digging, Mrs P!
Mrs Panstreppon wrote on July 17, 2007 11:31 AM:Thera,
LOL - You mean the "Iranian" IEDs that were dated using the American date form, XX/XX/XXXX? That was pretty funny.
The Defend America story (link below), "Iraqi Army Takes Delivery of Tanks, Vehicles" by Sgt. Lorie Jewell, is a hoot. It has quotes from U.S. Army Lt. Col. Kevin Meredith, Iraqi Lt. Col. Saleem and Iraqi Gen. Bashar about how great it was to get the tanks.
I should qualify in that I am not 100% sure that the Defend America story is fake but Defense Industry Daily ran at least three different stories about delivery of the tanks being held up in Kuwait on the dates that the DoD reported them delivered.
Defense Industry Daily even interviewed Col. Tim Ringgold, Defense Solutions LLC CEO, who verified that delivery had been held up until the Iraqi Ministry of Defense paid the bill. I'm going with Defense Industry Daily's reporting here.
I linked to some other info about the tanks in my TPM Cafe post. I'm no mechanic but reading between the lines, I suspect the tanks were hunks of junk and the Iraqis got screwed.
If you haven't done so yet, read through my TPM Cafe post. I think you'll find some other unrelated info there that might be useful to you.
Mrs P
nffcnnr wrote on July 17, 2007 11:45 AM:RE: Disputed date on the refurb tanks - Perhaps the DoD was using Halliburton's definition of "delivery of services." That being, for accounting purposes, the goods were delivered when they were ready to be shipped, not when they were actually physically delivered to the client.
TheraP wrote on July 17, 2007 11:49 AM:Codeword: fact
Mrs P
I wish tpm had a list of all the fake and phoney news releases - from each and every department.
Remember the fake reporters?
And the fake news reports they sent out to local tv stations?
Remember how in Iraq they (probably DoD) also did that, putting out fake news releases - on their own tv station?
I wish someone could dig into David Brooks. The man has to be employed under the table. I wonder how many different checks he gets...
There are so many sides to what you are pointing out here!
Mrs Panstreppon wrote on July 17, 2007 12:07 PM:Thera,
The Defend America tank story is a condescending pile of crap and, in a small way, underscores why we are so hated in Iraq.
Look at the happy Iraqis playng with their new toys! They are ever so grateful to receive 77 tanks that have been sitting in a warehouse rusting for more than twenty years!
Yeah, I'll just bet the Iraqis were delighted to shell out for a few tons of useless junk. I wonder how many of them can be started today.
I think the tank deal was a scam to generate revenue for the company that refurbished them and for Defense Solutions LLC.
I am particularly offended by the likes of Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice touting something as a good thing that I bet she knows nothing about.
Fozzetti wrote on July 17, 2007 12:12 PM:What has Senator Obama *done* that would make him a good President? So far, I am only aware of a few good speeches.
molly wrote on July 17, 2007 12:39 PM:What Sen. Obama has done....(1) Made some good speeches about hope....I would not go to the trouble to vote for him. If they can't be bought , they can't get as far as the front runners have.
TheraP wrote on July 17, 2007 12:41 PM:What struck me was the "new flag." Remember how the US made up a flag for them? And then had to "remake" it - because of some problem?
How would we like it if somebody invaded, gave us old stuff (that we already had anyway), and then made up a new flag to paint on it?
Honestly, a flag on a tank - does that sound like it makes good sense? Is that common practice?
You're right. Condescension! And the "happy people."
Then you've got so many people here - ready to buy into the fiction that we're so great and everything here is so great!
Mrs P, don't get me started!!!
Mrs Panstreppon wrote on July 17, 2007 1:06 PM:Thera,
The Defend America article stated that the Iraqis had some T-72 tanks on hand for training. I suspect that they are the ones in the photo.
I linked below to some correspondence about the flags being painted on the tanks before shipment. Apparently the vendor painted the wrong flag on a sample tank.
The shipping instructions specified that the Iraqi flag had to be painted on the tanks before shipping but then covered up. I hae no idea why.
Nor do I have any idea if flags are generally painted on tanks. I assumed that the Iraqi flag on the tank in the Defend America photo is accurate.
If the tanks in the photo are ones used for training and not the refurbhished ones, the DoD went to a lot of trouble to fake the photos.
Reading through the correspondence I linked to below, I got the idea that a certain delivery date was important to the DoD or NATO or both.
Mrs P