Yesterday, we noted the FBI investigation of Nevada Gov. Jim Gibbons (R) and one particuarly troublesome email exchange in particular between Warren Trepp, the software exec who's being investigated for showering Gibbons with illegal gifts, and his wife:

On March 22, 2005, days before Mr. Trepp and his wife embarked on the Caribbean cruise with the congressman and his family, Jalé Trepp sent a reminder to her husband. "Please don't forget to bring the money you promised Jim and Dawn," referring to Mr. and Mrs. Gibbons.

Minutes later, Mr. Trepp responds, "Don't you ever send this kind of message to me! Erase this message from your computer right now!"

Yesterday, Gibbons released a statement to the media in which he protested his innocence, but also provided an explanation of sorts for the email (which I'll note without comment):

In a statement issued Thursday... he said e-mail messages quoted by [The Wall Street Journal] were probably references to campaign contributions, which he said were lawful and reported in accordance with campaign finance laws.

Behold! We've updated our reference entry on Rep. Duke Cunningham (R-CA) to include every personal check, commode, laser shot shooting simulator, Sea-Doo Speedster, mortgage payment, and prostitute (allegedly) offered Cunningham over the course of his over-long and thoroughly disgraceful congressional career. Enjoy.

BusinessWeek provides a glimpse into what you might call the dark side of lobbying (OK, maybe the darker side). Teaser: it involves a blue-chip Republican lobbying firm, a "private intelligence" firm backed by conservative heavy-hitters, and a former British agent thieving secret corporate documents under a fake name.

Now that's what I call muck.

From The Seattle Times:

Two months after John McKay was fired as U.S. attorney for the Western District of Washington, the reason for his dismissal remains a mystery.

One of the most persistent rumors in Seattle legal circles is that the Justice Department forced McKay, a Republican, to resign to appease Washington state Republicans angry over the 2004 governor's race. Some believe McKay's dismissal was retribution for his failure to convene a federal grand jury to investigate allegations of voter fraud in the race.

Zeyad at IraqSlogger reads the Iraqi press and finds word that U.S. forces took two more Iranians into custody.

The Iranians were apparently visiting SCIRI official and hardline Shiite cleric Jalaleddin al-Sagheer, who's also a prominent Iraqi member of parliament. No word as of yet from the U.S. as to the veracity of the report, but Iranians have been detained at SCIRI compounds in the past.

Sometimes bamboozlement can boomerang.

The slow burn from the administration’s big briefing in Baghdad on Iranian weaponry in Iraq just won’t stop. Briefers refused to allow journalists to record the presentation, a measure explained as necessary in order to protect intelligence sources and methods. Unfortunately for the White House, for the entire week, senior officials have been all over the place in describing what exactly the administration is alleging about Iran, and now intelligence officials have claimed that Sunday's briefers mischaracterized the underlying intelligence.

Caught in the crossfire is poor Tony Snow, who, without a transcript of the briefing, has been unable to get the White House -- and the press corps -- back onto a single page of sheet music:

Q Have you been able to reconstruct the transcript of the briefing in Baghdad on Sunday?

MR. SNOW: No, but I think the general purpose of the briefing in Baghdad was to outline Iranian activities in terms of supplying weaponry, or weaponry that had made its way from Iran into Iraq that had been used to kill coalition forces, among others.

One of the most prominent parts of the briefing were the EFPs, the explosively formed projectiles, which are a new form of IED. And so that's basically what was laid out at the briefing. I have not been able -- we're still working on trying to come up with some sort of rendering so that we can find out precisely what the briefer said.

Q Why wouldn't you offer a transcript?

MR. SNOW: Because it wasn't transcribed at the time. People are looking for a tape to see if they can rebuild it just for you guys.

Most likely, Snow is just blowing smoke. But if a transcript of the briefing mysteriously surfaces, it'll probably be yet another embarassment for the administration -- why weren't reporters allowed to tape or video the presentation in the first place? And why all the administration disharmony if there was a recording all along of what was in fact said in Baghdad?

Three days after landing two historic indictments, the U.S. Attorney for California's Southern District Carol Lam is moving on to be senior vice president and legal counsel for QUALCOMM.

Note: Thanks to TPM Reader JS.

Iraq Auditors Count $10 Billion Wasted
"About $10 billion has been squandered by the U.S. government on Iraq reconstruction aid because of contractor overcharges and unsupported expenses, and federal investigators warned Thursday that significantly more taxpayer money is at risk. The three top auditors overseeing work in Iraq told a House committee their review of $57 billion in Iraq contracts found that Defense and State department officials condoned or allowed repeated work delays, bloated expenses and payments for shoddy work or work never done." (Associated Press)

Read more »

After holding a closed-door hearing on Iran yesterday, House intelligence committee chairman Silvestre Reyes (D-TX) suggested that -- surprise, surprise -- the Bush administration is misrepresenting the available intelligence on Iran:

I regard Iran as a threat to U.S. interests. By its actions, Iran clearly wants a nuclear weapon. Iran clearly supports international terrorism. And Iran clearly wants to undermine U.S. objectives in Iraq.

That said, we need to be very careful in our rhetoric. We don't want to get into a situation where hyped intelligence leads us into another invasion and another conflict....

Read more »

Newsweek has an interesting investigation into the Qods Force presence in Iraq. Contrary to the Bush administration's claims this week that the Qods Force is in Iraq to sow chaos and sponsor attacks on U.S. troops, Iraqi Shiites from the SCIRI party -- whose leader President Bush hosted at the White House in December -- are saying that Qods operatives arrested by the U.S. were attempting to reign in Moqtada Sadr's Mahdi Army:

Read more »

Ousted! Tim Griffin, the former aide to Karl Rove whom the administration installed as a U.S. Attorney in Arkansas, is out, reports the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette:

“I have made the decision not to let my name go forward to the Senate,” Griffin said Thursday evening....

Griffin on Thursday blamed “the partisanship that has been exhibited by Sen. [Mark ] Pryor [D-Ark. ] and other senators on the Senate Judiciary Committee in the recent hearing” for his decision to bow out....

Griffin said Thursday that if he were to go through the confirmation process, “I don’t think there is any way I could get fair treatment by Sen. Pryor or others on the judiciary committee.”

He said he will continue to serve in the top law enforcement position in the state’s eastern district as long as the White House keeps him there under the interim title or “gets someone else that I can help transition into this job.

“But to submit my name to the Senate would be like volunteering to stand in front of a firing squad in the middle of a three-ring circus.”

It's been a rough couple weeks for Griffin, who was the most egregious case among the seven prosecutors purged in December. Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty admitted to the Senate last week that Griffin's predecessor had been forced out for no other reason than to make room for Griffin. And this morning, The New York Times revealed that Griffin had been installed as per the wish of White House counsel Harriet Miers.

There does seem to be some question, though, as to why Griffin is bowing out...

Pryor’s spokesman, Michael Teague, told the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette on Thursday, after Griffin said he was withdrawing his name from consideration, that [Attorney General Alberto] Gonzales himself had called Pryor earlier Thursday “and told the senator he was not going to submit Tim Griffin’s name.”

It seems clear that the threat of Senate confirmation ended Griffin's tenure -- but who it spooked more, the administration or Griffin himself, is not so clear.

But remember: it's probable that the only reason that Griffin was facing Senate confirmation at all is because of pressure from the press, public and the Senate. Otherwise, thanks to that law slipped into the PATRIOT Act last year, Griffin might have stayed in place for as long as he, and the administration, wished.

Update: A couple commenters have made a good point -- that Griffin says that he'll stick around until the White House names a replacement, which could be... forever, under current law (thanks to Sen. Jon Kyl (R-AZ)). The Justice Department has declared that the administration will put forth nominees for all of the spots cleared in December's purge, and the ADG reports that Gonzales says that he's already working with Rep. John Boozman (R-AR) to find a replacement for Griffin. But it's certainly something to keep an eye on.

Bear with me here, because it's a tangled web.

The Wall Street Journal reports today that TPMmuckraker favorite Gov. Jim Gibbons (R-NV) is under federal investigation over whether he "accepted unreported gifts or payments from a company that was awarded secret military contracts when Mr. Gibbons served in Congress." The feds, concentrating on Gibbon's relationship wtih Nevada software entrepreneur Warren Trepp (the Zelig of scandals), are also probing whether any of those gifts were bribes, John Wilke reports.

The Journal first reported on the two's closeness back in November. But since then, more revealing evidence has come out:

On March 22, 2005, days before Mr. Trepp and his wife embarked on the Caribbean cruise with the congressman and his family, Jalé Trepp sent a reminder to her husband. "Please don't forget to bring the money you promised Jim and Dawn," referring to Mr. and Mrs. Gibbons.

Minutes later, Mr. Trepp responds, "Don't you ever send this kind of message to me! Erase this message from your computer right now!"

But that's not even the most interesting part of the case.

Read more »

Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY), speaking on the Senate floor this afternoon, vowed to "get to the bottom" of the administration's December purge of federal prosecutors, and said that if they found that the prosecutors had indeed received positive job evaluations from the Justice Department before being booted, "there will be real trouble."

Democrats had sought to push through a bill today that would restore the law on U.S. Attorneys back to its earlier form, before a change was slipped into the USA PATRIOT Improvement and Reauthorization Act last year. That change effectively allowed the administration to permanently appoint U.S. Attorneys without Senate confirmation. The bill would set a 120 day deadline to those appointments, when a federal judge would appoint a permanent replacement if the president hadn't nominated one for the Senate to confirm -- which is the way the law was for twenty years before last year's change.

But the bill was blocked by Sen. Jon Kyl (R-AZ), who, along with the administration, argues that having judges appoint federal proscutors raises separation of powers issues.

In response, Sens. Patrick Leahy (D-VT), Schumer and Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) all gave speeches, Feinstein offering a prolonged tribute to U.S. Attorney Carol Lam, the prosecutor who sent Duke Cunningham to prison, and indicted the former #3 at the CIA on Tuesday. Lam is one of the seven ousted prosecutors; her last day is today. Portions of Leahy's remarks are below, and we'll try to get you a transcript of Feinstein's remarks soon.

Update: Feinstein's remarks have been added below.

Read more »

Patriot Act's Provision on U.S. Attorneys to Come Under Scrutiny in Senate
"Congressional Democrats and some Republicans are trying to change part of the USA Patriot Act that allows the Bush administration to fire and replace federal prosecutors indefinitely without Senate confirmation. Freshly briefed by the Justice Department on the forced resignations of some of the seven U.S. attorneys since the act took effect, Senate Democrats planned to bring a bill to the floor Thursday that would impose a 120-day deadline on the amount of time a replacement could serve without Senate confirmation." (Associated Press)

Read more »

House Democrats, led by Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D-IL), are pushing for U.S. Attorney Carol Lam to continue to preside over the Duke Cunningham investigation as outside counsel. Two days after Lam's office brought two historic (and incredibly detailed) indictments, she's on her way out, one of the seven federal prosecutors forced out by the administration in December.

Today, Emanuel, along with Rep. Howard Berman (D-CA), House Judiciary Chairman John Conyers (D-MI), and Rep. Linda Sánchez (D-CA), sent a second request to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales that Lam stay on the case as outside counsel. Apparently Emmanuel's first request went unanswered.

The full letter is reproduced below.

Read more »

For those haven't read it, don't go a minute more without reading Brent Wilkes' fiery declaration of innocence released yesterday (here it is in full (pdf)).

Reminiscent in tone of Mel Gibson's rallying speech in Braveheart, Wilkes' statement railed against thuggish prosecutors (outgoing U.S. Attorney Carol Lam chief among them) and slippery newsmen out to smear his reputation and make his children cry:

My family--immeasurably and irreversibly wounded by an 18 month Lam-led vendetta-- has been the source of my strength , but nothing in life prepares you for the helpless feeling of trying to comfort a child who cries in anger or fear resulting from a false 'news' story or a cruel comment from a classmate....

The indictments themselves reflect the tawdry nature of the so-called 'investigation,' partly phony tabloid journalism, partly the handiwork of prosecutors more interested in forcing me to plead guilty to something I did not do than in learning the truth.

Apparently consciously, Wilkes' statement echoes Duke Cunningham's earlier letter from prison (in full here) to the reporters at The San Diego Union-Tribune who landed him there, which came to them in an envelope addressed to “Copley News tabloid” with the word “tabloid” underlined (Copley is the SDUT's parent company).

As Cunningham did, Wilkes promises his ultimate vindication. The difference between the two, of course, is that Cunningham pled guilty, and Wilkes' apparently wants everything -- the pay-offs, the prostitutes, etc. -- aired before a jury.

From The San Diego Union-Tribune:

When Poway defense contractor Brent Wilkes heard that the United States was going to go to war with Iraq, he was ecstatic, say several former colleagues.

“He and some of his top executives were really gung-ho about the war,” said a former employee of his now-defunct firm ADCS Inc. “Brent said this would create new opportunities for the company. He was really excited about doing business in the Middle East.”

One can only imagine that Wilkes let fly a "boom shaka-laka," maybe even a "yeah, baby!"

It's not exactly a state secret that the Bush administration did a shoddy job of planning for postwar Iraq. But in today's New York Times, Michael Gordon shows just how bare Gen. Tommy Franks's cupboard was at U.S. Central Command:

When Gen. Tommy R. Franks and his top officers gathered in August 2002 to review an invasion plan for Iraq, it reflected a decidedly upbeat vision of what the country would look like four years after Saddam Hussein was ousted from power.A broadly representative Iraqi government would be in place. The Iraqi Army would be working to keep the peace. And the United States would have as few as 5,000 troops in the country.

Military slides obtained by the National Security Archive under the Freedom of Information Act outline the command’s PowerPoint projection of the stable, pro-American and democratic Iraq that was to be.

The general optimism and some details of General Franks’s planning session have been disclosed in the copious postwar literature. But the slides from the once classified briefing provide a firsthand look at how far the violent reality of Iraq today has deviated from assumptions that once laid the basis for an exercise in pre-emptive war.

Just so he didn't feel left out, Admiral Bill Fallon, the incoming head of U.S. Central Command, gave an interview to the Associated Press telling the press to stop talking about a possible war with Iran:

“Some in the world are talking some fear of alleged imminent attack by the U.S. on Iran,” Fallon said. It “serves no good purpose, (is) unhelpful, distracting and just serving to up the ante of fear and uncertainty.” ...

Fallon reiterated U.S. allegations that Iran is responsible for supporting some of the violence in Iraq. But he expressed hope Tehran would change course and start to play a constructive role.

“Of significant note, I believe, is the role that Iran is playing directly or indirectly, in fomenting, perpetuating, instability inside Iraq,” Fallon said.

Fallon said he believed Iran could help lower violence in Iraq and Afghanistan – countries on either side of Tehran's borders – but he hadn't yet seen any sign Iran was willing to lend its assistance.

“I believe that Iran could and should be playing a significant part. How that comes about remains to be seen,” Fallon said. “But the idea that we have yet another conflict in this region strikes me as not where we want to go, and not what we want to be engaged in.”

At Brookings just now, Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns went beyond what President Bush said this morning about official Iranian culpability for Iranian munitions used in attacks on U.S. forces in Iraq. Responding to Warren Strobel of McClatchy's efforts to get Burns to define the relationship between Qods and higher echelons of Iranian leadership, Burns said:

I'll resist the temptation to draw an organizational chart, for obvious reasons. They're part of the Iranian defense and intelligence establishment. They're a major part of the Iranian government. Therefore, the actions of that force are the responsibility of that government. If that force is supplying technology for Shiite militants, that government is responsible.

Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns is at the Brookings Institution right now discussing Iran. While he said that U.S.-Iranian conflict is "not inevitable, not desirable," Iran is "the most disruptive, negative force in the Middle East."

Al Qaeda, apparently, is yesterday's news.

Last week, the GAO singled out Philip Perry, chief counsel for the Department of Homeland Security, as an obstacle to effective oversight of the critical department. In the hot-off-the-presses Washington Monthly (full disclosure: I'm a contributor), Art Levine profiles Perry -- who just happens to be the son-in-law of VP Dick Cheney -- and his penchant for extreme friendliness to the chemical industry at the expense of homeland security:

By the summer of 2006, as various bills competed for attention, Perry’s services were in great demand. “Industry went back to the well,” says one DHS official.

Perry came through in a characteristically concealed manner. When it became clear that Collins-Lieberman was going nowhere, Perry went searching for a new vehicle to get more industry-friendly results. He would find it in a DHS appropriations bill in the Senate, to which had been attached an obscure amendment giving the DHS short-term regulatory authority over chemical security. Perry reworked the language and helped to get it added to the spending bill in a conference committee. Under the new amendment, the DHS would have nominal authority to regulate the chemical industry but also have its hands tied where required. For example, the DHS would be barred from requiring any specific security measures, and citizens would be prohibited from suing to enforce the law. Best of all for industry, while the bill didn’t mention giving the DHS preemption authority, it didn’t bar it, either, leaving a modicum of wiggle room on the subject. In other words, if Perry was sufficiently brazen, he could claim for the DHS the power to nullify the chemical regulations in New Jersey.

He was sufficiently brazen. When the DHS finally unveiled its proposed regulations in late December of last year, Hill staffers noticed that the department had effectively granted itself the power to set aside state laws, even though the new federal law didn’t expressly grant such authority. Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle were livid. “In order to please their cronies in the chemical industry, the Bush administration is willing to put the health and safety of millions of people at risk,” said Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.). Senator Collins, for her part, released a statement accusing the DHS of attempting to create regulatory powers “out of whole cloth.” It was indeed curious that Perry, who had been so cautious about allowing the EPA to claim regulatory authority in the Clean Air Act, should now be so bold in interpreting the language in an appropriations rider. Or perhaps it wasn’t so curious at all.

Read more »

CNN's Barbara Starr just reported that President Bush and General Peter Pace are on the same page about munitions in Iraq. In reality, they're not even in the same book.

Read more »

The Iran innuendo continues. In his press conference today, President Bush said that the U.S. knows "with certainty" that the EFPs coming in from Iran for attacks on U.S. forces originate with the Qods Forces -- a branch of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps. That's nothing new: Sunday's briefing made the same allegation. What came next is:

Read more »

Among the most surprising of the European Parliament's findings -- you can read a summary here -- is the reluctance of the inquiry to substantiate Dana Priest's report that Poland hosted a secret terrorism detention facility. It's a finding that appears underpinned by both a Polish stonewalling of the investigation and a political failure by the European Parliament to call a member-state actively complicit in the detentions:

In an amendment passed with a narrow majority (356 to 323), MEPs noted that, in light of the available "circumstantial evidence", "it is not possible to acknowledge or deny that secret detention centres were based in Poland." However, notes the report, "seven of the fourteen detainees" transferred from a secret detention facility to Guantánamo in September 2006 coincide with those mentioned in a report by ABC News (published in December 2005) listing the identities of twelve top Al Qaeda suspects held in Poland.

Regarding the testimonies gathered during their visit to Poland, MEPs conclude that the investigation carried out by the Polish Parliament was not conducted independently and that statements given to the Committee delegation were “contradictory” and compromised by "confusion about flight logs [...] which were first said not to have been retained, then said to have probably been archived at the airport, and finally to have been sent by the Polish government to the Council of Europe."

The Wall Street Journal notes that, given the torrent of detail in yesterday's indictments against Brent Wilkes, those lawmakers other than Duke Cunningham who were uncomfortably close to him should be feeling mighty uncomfortable right about now:

The indictment and its details would seem to heighten the risk to other members of Congress still under investigation; Mr. Wilkes also had dealings with several of them.

A separate federal criminal investigation of Rep. Jerry Lewis, the California Republican who until January 2006 was chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, is continuing in Los Angeles. Prosecutors in that case are looking at Mr. Lewis's relationship with Mr. Wilkes, which included campaign contributions from Mr. Wilkes and associates and the hiring by Mr. Wilkes of a lobbying firm founded by one of Mr. Lewis's closest friends, former Rep. Bill Lowery.

Government Contractor Dwarfs Competitors
One of the most well-endowed government contractors, the Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC), also stands as one the most secretive. Having provided support to the NSA's wiretapping program and the FBI's software update, both of which turned out to be "colossal failures," SAIC has receieved far less scrutiny than mega-contractors Halliburton and Bechtel. Nevertheless, with an employee payroll of 44,000 and a 2006 profit that reaced $8 billion, SAIC looks poised to continue its under-the-radar growth in the coming year. (Vanity Fair)

Read more »

In a Washington Post op-ed today, former Undersecretary of Defense Douglas Feith defends himself against the Pentagon inspector general's assessment that his office conducted "inappropriate" intelligence work in the lead-up to the Iraq war. It turns out, in Feith's view, that he's been vindicated after all.

As Feith tells it, his analysts were conducting no more than an academic critique of intelligence work, and to find fault with their effort is to accept the absurdity that policymakers must uncritically endorse the CIA's product. He goes so far to say that since now, after the invasion of Iraq, al-Qaeda and former Baathists have colluded in attacks on U.S. forces, the CIA was wrong and he was right -- even though what the CIA actually said was that there was no evidence of collusion before the war, and that the only thing that might bring on such cooperation was ... a U.S. attack.

Read more »

It's looking grim for CIA operations in Europe. The European Parliament has just concluded a year-long inquiry into European complicity with U.S. renditions -- the extra-legal abduction and transfer of terrorism subjects. Ever since Dana Priest of the Washington Post reported the presence of CIA "black sites" -- off-the-books detention facilities -- in two EU countries, it's been a source of furious controversy.

Today's report apparently doesn't give definitive proof that European countries colluded in the maintenance of secret prisons, but it does single out specific countries for complicity in renditions, and also alleges over 1,000 "undeclared flights" by CIA aircraft over European airspace, which is meant to suggest transfers of detainees to Guantanamo Bay or Afghanistan:

Read more »

James O'Beirne, get ready to meet Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA).

As part of Waxman's ongoing hearings into cronyism at the Coalition Provisional Authority in Iraq, the chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee today demanded that Defense Secretary Bob Gates provide the committee with pertinent information relating to O'Beirne. O'Beirne, as readers of Rajiv Chandrasekaran's Imperial Life in the Emerald City know, was the Defense Department official who screened potential candidates for CPA jobs on such mission-critical qualifications such as whether or not they voted for George W. Bush or agreed with Roe v. Wade. Apparently, Waxman's earlier requests to interview O'Beirne were "mislaid," according to Defense Department officials.

In a letter to Gates (PDF), the chairman hopes to avoid "compulsory measures" to learn more about O'Beirne. Gates has until next Tuesday to turn over documents; the staff of Waxman's committee wants to interview O'Beirne by March 2.

OK, you knew they'd make an appearance.

Among the staggering laundry list of bribes of ex-Rep. Duke Cunningham (R-CA) listed in the second indictment issued today, there's one that's bound to get a lot of ink.

The indictment alleges that, during a trip to Hawaii, Wilkes paid for a prostitute for Cunningham. I'll just excerpt the indictment here, since it displays the prosecutors' fetish for detail (no bribe goes undescribed):

On or about August 15, 2003, at approximately 6:30 p.m., [Wilkes] provided [Cunningham] and assorted other guests with a dinner served on a private lawn outside the Hapuna Suite [approximately $6,600 per night at the Hapuna Beach Prince Hotel on the Island of Hawaii]; which consisted of Seafood Gyozas of Kona Lobster, shrimp, scallops, seared hawaiian snapper, "Manoa" lettuce leaves, and an open bar featuring fine wines;

On or about August 15, 2003, at approximately 11 p.m., Prostitutes "A" and "B" and their "driver" arrived at the Hapuna Suite. Persuant to [Wilkes'] instructions, an ADCS [Wilkes' company] employee escorted the prostitutes into the Suite and paid the driver $600 in cash;

On or about August 15, 2003, after approximately 15 minutes in the suite, [Wilkes] and [Cunningham] escorted Prostitutes "A" and "B" upstairs to separate rooms. At approximately midnight, Wilkes tipped Prostitute "A" $500 for the services;

...and the next day, after a catered breakfast, a cocktail party, a lavish dinner...

On or about August 16, 2003, at approximately 11:00 p.m., [Wilkes] arranged to have Prostitute "A" and Prostitute "C" available for himself and [Cunningham]. Pursuant to Cunningham's request, Wilkes arranged for the Congressman to get a different prostitute for the second evening;

On or about August 16, 2003, at approximately 11:00 p.m., Prostitutes "A" and "C" and their "driver" arrived at the Hapuna Suite. Persuant to [Wilkes'] instructions, his employee paid the driver $600 in cash and escorted Prostitute "C" (who had not previously been to the suite) to [Cunningham's] room. At apprroximately midnight, Wilkes again tipped Prostitute "A" $500 for the services;

Although Shirlington Limousine does make an appearance in the indictment, it's not connected to prostitution -- rather, it's just mentioned that Wilkes paid Shirlington to ferry Cunningham around Washington, DC.

Update: CREW has uploaded a copy of the indictment here (pdf).

Dusty Foggo, while he was a contracting officer at the CIA, helped his best friend Brent Wilkes land multimillion dollar contracts with the agency, and in return....?

Well, Foggo had a job waiting for him at Wilkes' headquarters. But that wasn't all.

Here's our preliminary accounting of all the goodies Brent Wilkes threw Dusty Foggo's way, while he was a contracting officer at the CIA, all culled from the indictment:

August 3, 2003 - Wilkes paid for Foggo and family to join Wilkes and family on a vacation to Scotland - $12,000 in private jets, $4,000 in helicopter ride to a round of golf at Carnoustie, $44,000 for a stay at Pitcastle estate, which included trout fishing on hill lochs, salmon fishing on the River Tay, clay-pigeon shooting, archery, and a seven-person staff

December 27, 2003 - Foggo joined Wilkes on a vacation to the "Sullivan Estates" in Haleiwa, Hawaii, for which Wilkes paid approximately $32,000

January 28, 2004 - Wilkes treated Foggo to a dinner at the Capital Grille, for which Wilkes paid $1,195.96, of which Foggo's pro-rata share was approximately $398.65

November 20, 2004 - Wilkes treated Foggo to a meal at the Serbian crown restaurant, for which Wilkes paid $773.65, of which Foggo's pro rate share was approximately $257,88

November 20,2004 - Wilkes gave Foggo an Ellie Bleu cigar humidor, which Wilkes Subordinate X had purchased for $2,307.38 at Wilkes' direction

November 21, 2004 - Wilkes treated Foggo to a meal at the Capital Grille in Tyson's Corner, Virginia, for which Wilkes paid $712.15, of which Foggo's pro rata share was approximately $237.38

November 22, 2004 - Wilkes treated Foggo to a meal at Ruth's Chris Steak House in Fairfax, Virginia, for which Wilkes paid $902.33, of which Foggo's pro rata share was approximately $225.58

Maybe Wilkes and Foggo were in the wrong business in Iraq.

Lieutenant General Aboud Qanbar, the Iraqi general in charge of locking down Baghdad, came out swinging today after the horrific bombing of the Shorja market yesterday. In order to stem the tide of sectarian violence, Qanbar's men are going to set up an elaborate series of checkpoints throughout the city, and haul whoever doesn't obey into "emergency courts," according to the New York Times. Only there's just one problem, observes a Baghdad resident:

“These checkpoints are useless,” said Ahmed Aboud, 45. “You can bribe them with 5,000 Iraqi dinars and bring in all the explosives you want.”

No word on whether the explosives dealers have gone into business with the checkpoint operators...

The prosecutors have unleashed a veritable flood of muck on Brent Wilkes today. In addition to the indictment based on his corrupt doings with CIA buddy Dusty Foggo, prosecutors have also unleashed a 42-page indictment on his extensive activities persuading Rep. Duke Cunningham (R-CA) and others (and yes, Shirlington Limousine makes an appearance).

I haven't even gotten my hands dirty with that one yet, but this bit jumped out at me: in March, 1999, according to the indictment, Wilkes, mad that he wasn't getting promptly paid for a Department of Defense contract, "attempted to intimidate" a DoD program manager in Panama City by "tellling him that people disappear in Panama all the time and never make it back home."

Charming.

We'll try and get a copy of the indictment up as soon as possible.

Boy, I bet the prosecutors' eyes just lit up when they saw this email.

It's from Dusty Foggo to a person called Wilkes Subordinate X in the indictment (he matches the description of Brent Wilkes' nephew Joel Combs). At the time, Foggo was helping Wilkes, through his nephew, land a subcontract for procurement services for the CIA. He sent the email just after Wilkes had hosted Foggo at a Hawaiian resort -- and can barely contain his giddiness at their scheme to land a contract for Wilkes' front company, the name of which Foggo apparently didn't even know.

From the indictment:

On or about January 7, 2004, immediately after his Hawaiian vacation with Wilkes, Foggo sent Wilkes Subordinate X an email with a subject line of "Re: Aloha," stating: "Had a great time - no diving, but still fun. I would like the 'President' or 'CEO' of '[entity]' to come visit. Brent told me that was you (smile), so lets [sic] get to it. I'll need to brief you a bit on how we need to play this, but that needs to be face to face, before you meet my people."

Twenty days later, the indictment notes, Foggo met with Wilkes, Wilkes' nephew, and the CIA contractor through which Wilkes was getting the subcontract at CIA headquarters.

Wow. Indictments can sometimes make for boring affairs, but this one is just popping with details.

The underlying allegation is that Foggo, while he was perched atop a key contracting position at the CIA, made repeated efforts to throw his best friend Brent Wilkes business. In return, Wilkes paid for swanky vacations to Scotland and other locales, dinners, and other perks, and kept open a post at his company for when Foggo retired. And the two concealed the whole thing from Foggo's CIA associates and ethics officials by using shell companies and flat out lying about their relationship.

The indictment is chock full of emails and other details that reveal the nature of Wilkes and Foggo's relationship. A selection:

As has been reported before, Wilkes "reserved an office for Foggo near Wilkes's own office in the executive suite" of his headquarters, "an offer which remained open and under consideration by Foggo," according to the indictment.

Accordingly, in December, 2003, Wilkes "introduced Foggo to a group of employees as a future executive in Wilkes' companies."

In September, 2004, Foggo wrote Wilkes after a CIA contractor had raised concerns about doing business with Wilkes: "I am now, have been in the past, and will continue to as long as I breath [sic] - be your partner... so what do you want me to do?"

And finally, In March, 2005, Foggo revealed to a bank loan officer that he already had a road map for cashing out. He wrote: "I plan to retire in circa 3 years... I have a big offer from a company in California...."

More details soon....

Indictments came down today from the U.S. Attorney for San Diego for Dusty Foggo and Brent Wilkes on counts of conspiracy, honest services wire fraud, and money laundering.

We'll have a copy of the indictment up for you in a moment.

Update: The AP reports:

The CIA’s former No. 3 official and a defense contractor were charged Tuesday with fraud and other offenses in the corruption investigation that sent former Rep. Randy “Duke” Cunningham to prison.

The indictment named Kyle “Dusty” Foggo, executive director of the CIA until he resigned in May, and his close friend, San Diego defense contractor Brent Wilkes, both 52, according to two government officials who spoke on condition of anonymity because grand jury proceedings are secret.

In a separate indictment, Wilkes was charged with conspiring to bribe Cunningham in return for government contracts. A man who was described as a co-conspirator in Cunningham’s 2005 plea agreement, John T. Michael, was also charged.

Update: Here's the indictment.

How sharper than a serpent's tooth, the loss of message discipline.

One of the things we've been highlighting since Sunday's briefing on Iranian meddling in Iraq is the reliance on innuendo instead of fact. Remember that Bush administration had delayed the briefing out of fear of overstating its case and calling attention to its past history of inaccurate statements about intelligence.

As a result, the administration relied on anonymous military officials to present Iranian-made weapons, but relied on a chain of inferences to make the case that "the highest levels of the Iranian government" were involved. So the problem is a lack of clarity as to the actual significance of what was presented. Hence Gen. Peter Pace's agnosticism.

Today in his briefing, Tony Snow saw the wages of all that.

Read more »

A number of TPM readers have been wanting to know: what's up with the fact that the Iranian weapons on display in Sunday's briefing have English markings on them? Isn't that fishy?

No, says John Pike of globalsecurity.org. "If they had Farsi markings on them, how would (the Iranians) sell them internationally?" English, after all, is "the lingua franca of the international arms trade."

In other words, there may be 99 problems with allegations of Iranian-directed attacks on U.S. forces, but English markings ain't one.

At 12:15 PM Pacific time, U.S. Attorney Carol Lam will hold a press conference on a "criminal matter," according to a press release.

She's expected to announce the indictment of Kyle "Dusty" Foggo, the former #3 at the CIA, and Brent Wilkes, a defense contractor accused of bribing Duke Cunningham and the prime benefactor of the secret CIA contracts that have landed his best buddy Foggo in trouble.

But there's some added drama in that Lam will holding the presser, since she is one of the seven federal prosecutors forced out by the administration in December. The Wall Street Journal earlier reported that she'd ordered her staff to have Wilkes and Foggo indicted before her last day -- this Thursday.

To buffer the defense's case that Scooter Libby just forgot the details of how Valerie Wilson's name was leaked, they've marshaled the testimony of John Hannah, currently Vice President Cheney's national security advisor:

John Hannah, who served as Libby's deputy in 2003 and 2004, described a workday that began with a highly classified CIA briefing and continued at breakneck speed from one top-level meeting to the next....

"On certain things, Scooter just had an awful memory," Hannah said.

He described briefing Libby on policy decisions and strategies in the morning, only to have Libby excitedly repeat them back to him that evening as if they were new.

"That's Scooter," Hannah said.

Following up on ABC's earlier report, CNN is now also reporting that an indictment is coming for Dusty Foggo today -- though (unlike ABC) they're curiously mum on the fate of Brent Wilkes, who's expected to be indicted along with him.

Washington Executive Skirts Lobbying Regulations
He’s a lobbyist’s lobbyist – a Washington insider whose central concern in past months has been poking holes in the Democratic Congress’ efforts to curtail the influence of lobbying in the capital. And by running a long campaign that successfully eased travel restriction in the new legislation, American Society of Association Executives president John H. Graham IV has been able to do just that. (The Washington Post)

Read more »

From Sean McCormack's State Department briefing yesterday:

QUESTION: I mean, Sean, sort of a follow-up on all these questions. In a general sense, the big (inaudible) at the moment we've seen, you know, cover of Newsweek, cover of Economist saying Iran could be next, a lot of speculation about military action. Can you give me any reaction to that?

MR. MCCORMACK: It seems to be the news media that is whipping up that storyline, not us....

...President Bush has made it very clear that we, as has Secretary Gates -- Secretary of Defense Gates has made it very clear that while we don't take option -- no President takes options off the table, our force protection actions are focused on activities inside of Iraq. We have no plans to attack Iran.

So I'll put it to you that it might be -- you might look amongst yourselves and your colleagues within the journalistic community in terms of people who are whipping this up. It's certainly not the U.S. Government.

McCormick is right, of course. It was the media that issued an order for the U.S. military to attack Iranian assets in Iraq; the media that's been raiding Iranian offices in Iraq; and the media that's deploying additional naval carrier groups to the Persian Gulf. How could anyone think otherwise?

As if on cue to play the ranting villain after Sunday's briefing on Iran's supply of weapons to Iraq, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad appeared on "Good Morning America" to stubbornly say nothing of substance to Diane Sawyer. He did, however, say that you shouldn't take it personally when he and his coterie say "Death To America":

Well, our position is clear: We are opposed to any proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and nuclear weapons. We believe that the time is now over for nuke weapons. It is a time for logic, for rationality and for civilization. Instead of thinking of finding new weapons, we are trying to find new ways to love people. And if talking about the "Death to America" slogans, I think you know it yourself, it is not related in any way to American public. Our people have no problem with American public, and we have a very friendly relationship.

Death To America: the new love movement.

Let us meditate on the words "performance related."

Before the Senate Judiciary Committee last week, Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty explained that six of the seven federal prosecutors who were suddenly dismissed last December were axed for "performance related" issues.

Today, McClatchy reports that of those six, five of them "received positive job evaluations before they were ordered to step down." But there's an explanation:

A Justice Department official who spoke on behalf of the administration said the dispute might simply be a matter of "semantics."

"Performance-related can mean many things," said the official, who asked to remain anonymous because the Privacy Act bars officials from discussing personnel decisions. "Policy is set at a national level. Individual U.S. attorneys around the country can't just make up their policy agenda."

So "performance-related" doesn't necessarily mean that the prosecutors performed badly -- it's just a coded way of saying they were not sufficiently lockstep with policy at the "national level" (although a number of them got no explanation for their dismissal).

And who sets policy at the national level? Well, according to The Washington Post, it's not the Department of Justice:

One administration official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity in discussing personnel issues, said the spate of firings was the result of "pressure from people who make personnel decisions outside of Justice who wanted to make some things happen in these places."

Unfortunately for the administration, this story just keeps on going. Tomorrow the Senate Judiciary Committee will be briefed again by McNulty behind closed doors, where he'll present the job evaluations.

Word comes down that tomorrow Sen. Chris Dodd (D-CT) and Sen. Bob Menendez (D-NJ) are going to introduce a bill to radically reform the constitutionally-challenged system of terrorism detainee prosecutions. Known as the Effective Terrorists Prosecution Act, the bill, according to Dodd, would reintroduce habeas corpus protections to Guantanamo Bay detainees; create an independent court review to military commission rulings; and bar information obtained through "coercion" (read: torture); among other provisions.

Whether Dodd and Menendez's legal fix will pass is unclear. It essentially reverses the Bush administration's favored Military Commissions Act of last year, which stripped habeas rights from terrorism detainees -- and passed the Senate with 65 votes.

The bill would almost certainly face a veto from the White House. But with civil liberties lawyers gearing up for a litany of legal challenges to the MCA's constitutionality, Dodd and Menendez might have an opening.

CNN has the audio released by Scooter Libby's defense team today of The Washington Post's Bob Woodward speaking with then-Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage:

From Eason Jordan at IraqSlogger:

...one of the three supposedly unnamed US officials apparently has been outed by an Iraqi news service, Voices of Iraq, whose report on the Baghdad news conference identified one of the three speakers as Major General William Caldwell, whose portfolio includes public affairs and who holds frequent news conferences and grants one-on-one interviews. So, if the VOI report identifying Caldwell is correct, why did every other news organization apparently agree to grant anonymity to the general who's the official spokesman of the US-led Multi-National Force in Iraq? Why would Caldwell insist on not having his name associated with these allegations today?

Via Editor & Publisher and Laura Rozen.

Fired CIA Official Files Lawsuit
“A federal judge has ruled that a CIA agent identified only as ‘Doe,’ allegedly fired after he gathered prewar intelligence showing that Iraq was not developing weapons of mass destruction, can proceed with his lawsuit against the CIA. The judge has ordered both parties to submit discovery requests–evidence they want for their case–to be completed by March 15, according to the CIA agent's lawyer and a spokesman for the Justice Department, which is defending the CIA in court.” (U.S. News & World Report)

Read more »

We've just added yesterday's briefing on Iranian EFPs in Iraq to our Document Collection. This is a 16-page brief presented to reporters, and not the transcript of the press conference itself, since the anonymous military briefers in Baghdad did not allow voice or video recordings into the room.

Two things to pay attention to: first, notice that the briefing just refers to Iranian support of generic "extremists," without specifying Sunni or Shiite, or who is allied to whom. Second, notice that there also isn't specificity about where in Iraq these EFP attacks on U.S. forces have occurred -- which might provide a sectarian hint as to who in Iraq is behind them.

Even now that the Explosively Formed Penetrators have been laid on the table in Baghdad, several questions remain unanswered. For instance: Why now, given that officials up to and including Donald Rumsfeld, have laid this particular charge at Iran's doorstep for years; and whether the influx of Iranian EFPs represents a deliberate attack by the Iranian government on U.S. forces.

On the second question, let me pass on something I heard in Iraqi Kurdistan last year from a knowledgeable source I'll call M. M has numerous contacts all throughout Kurdish and Arab Iraq and isn't beholden to any political faction. I can't vouch for the accuracy of the claim below, but for a year I've found it intriguing if elusive -- and, at the very least, not implausible. Take what follows with those caveats in mind: in the intelligence world, this is what's known as RUMINT, or "rumor intelligence."

Read more »

Finally, after weeks of delay, and presumably after it was made to "focus on the facts" and scrubbed once again by intelligence analysts, the administration's big slideshow on Iran's military ties to Iraqi insurgents was unveiled Sunday in Baghdad.

The PowerPoint presentation had a central purpose -- to prove that the most dangerous form of explosive being used against U.S. troops in Iraq, called explosively formed penetrators or E.F.P.s, were of Iranian manufacture. Roughly 170 (of the more than 3105) American casualities in Iraq were caused by EFPs, the briefers said. Serial numbers on the explosives were cited as the main piece of evidence linking the explosives to Iran.

The briefing took off from there:

The officials also asserted, without providing direct evidence, that Iranian leaders had authorized smuggling those weapons into Iraq for use against the Americans.... “We have been able to determine that this material, especially on the E.F.P. level, is coming from the I.R.G.C. - Quds Force,” said the senior defense analyst. That, the analyst said, meant direction for the operation was “coming from the highest levels of the Iranian government.”

And who gave the briefing?

The officials were repeatedly pressed on why they insisted on anonymity in such an important matter affecting the security of American and Iraqi troops. A senior United States military official gave a partial answer, saying that without anonymity, a senior Defense Department analyst who participated in the briefing could not have contributed.

And why now?

“The reason we’re talking about this right now is the vast increase in the number of E.F.P.s being found,” one official said. American-led forces in Iraq, the official said, “are not trying to hype this up to be more than it is.”

Just F.Y.I. And just another day of what Vice President Cheney's national security advisor John Hannah has dubbed “the year of Iran."

Note: The Washington Post reports today that the Army is scrambling to equip Humvees with the necessary armor to withstand EFPs.