« previous | MUCK HOME | next »
Waxman: State IG Threatened To Fire Whistleblowers
Looks like Cookie isn't so sweet toward those who'd talk to the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee.
Earlier this month, committee chairman Henry Waxman (D-CA) wrote a scathing letter to State Department Inspector General Howard "Cookie" Krongard, accusing him of scuttling inquiries about corrupt contractors working on State's dime in Iraq and Afghanistan. The basis for Waxman's claims came from former employees John DeNona and Ralph McNamara, who resigned after Krongard slow-walked or obstructed their investigations. But Waxman was also assisted by current Krongard staffers who had a bad taste left in their mouths from Krongard's unorthodox approach to due diligence.
Those two staffers are Special Agent Ron Militana and Assistant Special Agent in Charge Brian Rubendall. Both are career federal investigators who agreed to go on the record with their accounts of Krongard's misconduct. And their boss held them in high esteem: Krongard called Militana "one of my best investigators." But after Waxman sent his letter to Krongard, his staff threatened their careers, according to a new letter to Cookie just released by Waxman's office.
On Tuesday, according to the letter, Krongard's congressional liaison, Terry Heide, sat Militana and Rubendall down with an attorney from the State Department counsel's office and warned them against cooperation with Waxman's investigation. Heide told them explicitly not to cooperate with the Democrats on the investigation, according to Militana's notes.
"The majority are not friends. The minority staff has been helpful. They advise that you should never do a voluntary interview in a million years."
When the two investigators protested that they had whistleblower protections against this sort of treatment, the liaison informed them that "You have no protection against reprisal. You have no whistleblower protections. Howard could retaliate and you would have no recourse. ... Howard can fire you."
Waxman's letter says this isn't an isolated instance. Former Krongard employees have apparently told the committee that the same aide threatened them against testifying to the committee. Waxman says he's "appalled" by the apparent pattern -- which is potentially illegal.
You should be aware and you should advise your staff that Congress has passed civil and criminal prohibitions against threatening and tampering with witnesses, retaliating against whistleblowers, and providing false information to Congress. If Special Agent Militanas and Assistant Special Agent in Charge Rubendalls accounts are true, some or all of these provisions may be implicated.The Committee will not tolerate any intimidation of potential witnesses. I direct you to instruct your staff, including your congressional affairs liaison and attorneys, to suspend all communications (other than those necessary to collect responsive documents) with employees the Committee is planning to interview. I also warn you against any further efforts to intimidate witnesses or prevent truthful communications with Congress.
Comments (29)
drew wrote on September 28, 2007 3:56 PM:absolutely despicable behavior.
I have outrage fatigue.
I think the biggest problem we have now is no bandwidth left to investigate and prosecute these criminals. The cancer may be just too widespread to reverse its course.
M M wrote on September 28, 2007 4:15 PM:that's just the way the cookie crumbles...
EH wrote on September 28, 2007 4:21 PM:Look, he's just trying to simplify things before he goes off to spend more time with his family. Nothing sinister going on.
seamus wrote on September 28, 2007 4:24 PM:Gee, another tough letter. I bet they're shaking in their boots over at State.
If Waxman, or any other chairman of a committee had backed up previous threats of action with real consequences this would be good news. As it now stands, its business as usual.
seamus wrote on September 28, 2007 4:25 PM:Gee, another tough letter. I bet they're shaking in their boots over at State.
If Waxman, or any other chairman of a committee had backed up previous threats of action with real consequences this would be good news. As it now stands, its business as usual.
Anonymous wrote on September 28, 2007 4:28 PM:Here's the resolution.
Waxman has a hearing. Krongard doesn't show.
Waxman refers to Scott Bloch's office. Bloch either 1/has no money for investigation or 2/does investigation, recommends Krongard's removal, forwards recommendation to WH.
WH does nothing.
Mark Richards wrote on September 28, 2007 4:28 PM:"I direct you to instruct your staff, including your congressional affairs liaison and attorneys, to suspend all communications (other than those necessary to collect responsive documents) with employees the Committee is planning to interview."
Extraordinary, but weak. What is alleged is obstruction and witness tampering on a rather grand scale and it deserves immediate and strong protective action. Witnesses must be physically protected. Evidence must be secured. Suspects must be interrogated.
Waxman, like the rest of the Democrats, is apparently afraid to put the hammer down.
Why?
moondancer wrote on September 28, 2007 4:38 PM:He reads the letter, looks at the calendar, calculates the days left, tosses the letter in the trash and continues to gut the treasury for the GOP elite.
Samsara wrote on September 28, 2007 4:56 PM:Condi Rice has transformed State into just another ride at Bush World.
Mary wrote on September 28, 2007 4:57 PM:You know, the MSM hasn't even picked up on the references in Waxman's letter to Rice where he gives the example of asking an employee to respond to one of Rice's public quotes as being correct or not, and the guy says he can't answer because it would be classified [to call her a liar].
So surely getting upset over having an IG fire people in retaliation for telling the truth to the "majority" and using an attorney from the State Dept Counsel's office to reinforce the point that truth and cooperation should be offered or withheld along partisan - surely getting upset over that is "off the table."
It's not just that the Dems won't do anything and have no spine - it is that they will affirmatively sit back and let anyone who does stand up and demonstrate that they DO have a spine be sacrificed, all without a quibble.
Anonymous wrote on September 28, 2007 5:03 PM:Please note that Mr. Krongard is the brother of Alvin "Buzzy" Krongard, who, until circa 2004, was the Executive Director of the CIA, and the man replaced by "Dusty" Foggo.
paul wrote on September 28, 2007 5:07 PM:I can see the reason for Waxman not to rush forward with forcing a criminal investigation of Krongard and Rice -- who's he going to refer the prosecution to, Peter Keisler?
The corruption in this administration goes so deep that most of what Congress can do right now is establish a record of criminal behavior, with prosecution to come later.
don de drain wrote on September 28, 2007 5:08 PM:I am curious as to what Waxman is supposed to do to "put the hammer down." He is not a prosecutor. He can not issue a search warrant (as far as I know). He can issue subpoenas, but as a general matter, the Executive Branch must enforce them. And witnesses will claim 5th amendment or will not remember anything. Subpoenas for documents will not result in meaningful responses. Executive Branch won't enforce the subpoenas. Waxman's colleages seem too afraid to have the sergeant at arms go out and incarcerate those who fail to comply with subpoenas. And I am not aware of a Congressional "witness protection program."
I would love to see some meaningful action taken. Seriously, what else can Waxman do?
towanda wrote on September 28, 2007 5:32 PM:more cover up,more cover up,more cover up
Constitutionalist wrote on September 28, 2007 5:45 PM:Is this the soon to be released Godfather Pt. V script?
Paulbe wrote on September 28, 2007 6:17 PM:Wasn't "Buzzy" Krongard the man who the pre-911 Put trades traced back to. Something to do with Deutschebank and the CIA?
buckheaddad wrote on September 28, 2007 6:19 PM:I'd be surprised and worried if he did NOT threaten his subordinates!!!!!!!!
ONE OF THESE UNDERLINGS IN THE CHENEY ADMINISTRATION HAS THE "PROVEN" GOODS ON OUR CURRENT ADMINISTRATION, AND BOY! OH! BOY! WHEN THEY COME FORWARD, THERE WILL BE REAL FIREWORKS.
Hopefully this will be before Dick declares MARTIAL LAW, and INVADES IRAN.
Kimmer wrote on September 28, 2007 6:44 PM:Is he related to the Facist CIA kook Krongard who the 9/11 inside job short sells were traced to. In other words, he had inside knowledge of the "terrorist" attacks and profited from them.
Nin wrote on September 28, 2007 6:55 PM:Isn't that obstruction of Justice folks? Isn't it that simple?
So, what to do?
Dave Huntsman wrote on September 28, 2007 11:18 PM:And if Waxman's order is ignored, what will Waxman do: threaten to write another letter?
There has not been one truly serious attempt by the Congress - including the current majority - to truly, legally enforce the law. Until they do that......including impeaching some of these anti-American, anti-Constitution, disloyal political appointees......they are simply making things worse by flaunting their cowardly impotence.
JD wrote on September 29, 2007 1:06 PM:Will this nightmare never end? Not for decades. This kind of corruption doesn't end, it becomes entrenced. Federal agencies are being filled with loyal rightwingers whose loyalty is NOT to America but to the Republicon party.
gavin immerson wrote on September 29, 2007 8:30 PM:Long ago we all decided that there needed to be some "Laws" agreed to by all of us, in oder to keep some order in our affairs.
RickD wrote on September 30, 2007 11:14 AM:Rove, Bush, Cheney et al have unilateraly abrogated that fundamental social contract.
The only thing that remains to be seen is how+when the home of the brave will sort these little pissants out.
Read some recent Roumanian history.
Bonne chance,
From the GWN.
It's not illegal if nobody ever goes to jail, right? That's how things work these days.
Anonymous wrote on September 30, 2007 3:38 PM:Why would Krongard go to such lengths to prevent a thorough investigation into contracting in Iraq? Is he merely a Bush loyalist or is something larger at stake? If so, what?
Anonymous wrote on September 30, 2007 7:02 PM:What make you think these agents are not liars?
Joel Roache wrote on October 21, 2007 12:15 PM:Unless these agents are masochists who like the idea of having their careers disrupted (they don't avoid responsiblity by anonymity), I can't see why they would lie.
chisholm wrote on October 25, 2007 2:10 PM:I agree with Drew: I've reached outrage fatigue. The malfeasance, corruption and criminality is too widespread and too deep to be clearly understood, let alone prosecuted -- or even exposed. This is has enormous implications for our future.
TheraP wrote on October 25, 2007 2:14 PM:Thank you, Whistle Blowers, for your service to America!
Even though you risk your jobs, please, others who have the "goods" on this bunch of turkeys, think of the Constitution and your obligation to public service. And come forward.
Politicians, stand up and put the Constitution first! Your re-election is less important than your oath of office.
anonymousnewyorker wrote on December 4, 2007 1:50 PM:It isjust not enough to thank whistle
blowers for their service. We support
them politically, and morally ought to
open a whistleblowers fund the purpose of
this would be to support them materially:
could be just money if a job or benefits
were lost: could be by paying for a lawyer.
I'd like to hear from others about this.