« previous | MUCK HOME | next »
The Daily Muck
By the end of this year, the U.S. military will have delivered fewer than half of the blast-resistant vehicles it promised would go to Iraq. The explanation? The first delivery estimate didn't account for the time spent adding amenities like radios and armaments to the vehicles. Defense Secretary Gates has referred to these vehicles as the top priority for military acquisitions. (NY Times)
Silence is golden. It seems to be the case in the court martial of Steven Jordan, the only officer being charged in the Abu Ghraib scandal. That's because every witness for the prosecution seems to bolster the defense' case; none has any reason to believe Jordan played a part in the scandal. Yesterday, one of the judges gave this advice to a prosecution lawyer: "Don't speak." Taking the hint, the prosecution rested its case yesterday. (Washington Post, Associated Press)
Lobbying reforms are motivated in part by the industry habit of financing expensive trips for lawmakers. Thank goodness those rules don't apply to executive officials, who have been traveling on the dime of companies and trade associations overseen by their agencies. Some of the highlights include free trips to Geneva to attend conferences and an all-paid weekend in Vegas. (USA TODAY)
A new administration plan will require charities and non-profits that do work outside the country to provide detailed information on all key personnel, in order to ensure that these organizations are not aiding terrorists. The government also reserves the right to reject certain organizations based on its findings. To be clear, the source of the evaluations will remain secret, standards will not be published, and the government has final say on whether an organization can exist. Trust them. (Washington Post)
Call it a Freudian slip. Rep. Tom Latham (R-IA) requested a $2 million earmark for the development of a specific anthrax antibody. But instead of Latham including the name of the company that would research the antibody, Latham's earmark indicated that the funds should go the company's lobbying firm. Latham has since written in to correct the error. (Congressional Quarterly)
Army Major Cockerham, his wife and his sister were indicted yesterday for defrauding the government and bribery charges. Cockerham, as you may remember, was a contracting officer working in Kuwait who took almost $10 million in bribes from businessmen seeking to get in on the lucrative Iraqi reconstruction action. (Reuters)
A legal system wasn’t built in a day, but the Bush administration certainly did try. As the administration tries to build a military commission system for suspected terrorists, there are many legal snags and questions arising. This week, for example, the new U.S. Court of Military Commission Review, ostensibly responsible for the fate of 80 Gitmo detainees, will have to decide whether it is even legal for the court to exist. (AP)

Comments (7)
Jane wrote on August 23, 2007 11:24 AM:The Administration plan for details of organization of charities working overseas is unconstitutional on multiple levels. For starters, the demand is for an unreasonable search of the effects(papers) of the citizens organizing it. It is also an affront to the rights of free speech and and assembly.
Techinically, it calls for the entire roster of the Catholic Church! (Overseas charity, hmmm.)
nj progressive wrote on August 23, 2007 11:29 AM:Have you seen the latest at the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration? The NY Times has a blog post [http://wheels.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/08/22/whats-off-the-record-at-nhtsa-almost-everything/] up that NHTSA officials can no longer speak to reporters except on background. Only the Administrator can speak for attribution.
theswan wrote on August 23, 2007 11:39 AM:If you gave the troops on the front lines the striped down models, they would see to it that they had all the gagets needed to protect themselves. And it wouild take then days or hours to do so.
parrot wrote on August 23, 2007 12:22 PM:Private enterprise seems to fail in this instance.
About the foreign aid groups thing...where does it say in the Constitution that the Executive has the right to track foreign aid workers? Sounds like considerable overreaching. Is there any law that gives them any legal standing to do so?
This draconian rule seems designed to 1) stop programs that the current administration doesn't support and 2) provide assistance in warrantless monitoring of aid groups in general. The lights are going out on our democracy with every move these thugs make.
johnnydoughey wrote on August 23, 2007 2:45 PM:" in order to ensure that these organizations are not aiding terrorists. "
Our learned leaders will, of course, personally approve any nonprofits who support righteous terrorists working for us... so not to worry.
"fewer than half of the blast-resistant vehicles it promised "
These little upgrades are a million dollars a piece, folks. If they produced them too fast, we wouldn't think we were getting our money's worth.
I'm just glad Congress put all those war profiteering laws in place. Any of us feeling better?
I believe you....NOT wrote on August 23, 2007 2:53 PM:"Latham's earmark indicated that the funds should go the company's lobbying firm"
Remember this when one of our illustrious, honest congressmen or senators tell you that lobbiest have no influence over them....
JT in SC wrote on August 23, 2007 5:05 PM:Yesterday, I heard on the news here that a company was laying off hundreds of employees. The company had previously been in the news for growing rapidly because they made vehicles for the war and they couldn't produce them fast enough. Now they are laying off workers because they don't have contracts to keep them busy.
Seems strange.