12 out of 536 ain't good

SPENDING SPREE
Amid the war and high deficits, Congress speaks conservatively but wields a big credit card for pork.
Copyright 2005 Houston Chronicle

Shopping on the federal fuel tax is a gas, gas, gas, and rare are the members of Congress who didn't tote home some cash-wrapped projects for their constituents in the $286 billion transportation bill President George Bush signed into law last week. While some measures are justified, such as Houston Metro's long-sought federal funding for its light rail and bus expansion plan, others among the 6,000-plus individual projects are monuments to profligacy that have little or nothing to do with improving transportation.


It just goes to show that no matter how earnest the rhetoric in Washington about reining in spending and shrinking big government, few elected officials can resist the opportunity when the dinner bell rings to line up at the trough for generous slices of pork.

In President Bush's last campaign he railed against wasteful congressional spending, but last week he was singing a different tune.

"I'm proud to sign this bill," the president declared, "because our economy depends upon having the most efficient, reliable transportation system in the world." Unfortunately, much of the money allocated in the legislation benefits individual lawmakers' political health more than it bolsters the U.S. economy.

Much of the bloated budget in the transportation bill results from so-called earmark requests by which elected officials attach favored projects to the legislation, which is funded by federal gasoline tax revenues. Alaska, whose Rep. Don Young chairs the House Transportation Committee, received nearly a billion dollars in allocations.

This includes the now infamous $315 million bridge to nowhere connecting Ketchikan and Gravina Island, which has a small airport and approximately 50 residents. Young also managed to finagle $229 million for another bridge between Anchorage and Point MacKenzie.

Alaska wound up with over $1,500 allocated for every man, woman and child in the state. Tiny Vermont didn't do badly either, coming in second with 55 projects totaling $331.4 million, or $544.33 for each resident.

Arizona's representatives somehow found the will to resist, with Sens. John McCain and Jon Kyl and two Arizona congressman among the 12 members of Congress to vote against the transportation bill. They refused to play the earmark game. As a result, Arizona ranked dead last in the amount of money it will receive from the bill's projects: a piddling $137.6 million, or less than $27 per resident.

McCain, a possible presidential contender in 2008, rightly labeled the bill "a monstrosity" and criticized the administration for supporting it. That stance should appeal to a national audience alarmed by unfettered federal spending.

It remains to be seen how Arizonans will react to missing out on the transportation banquet because their representatives refused to get their hands greasy bringing home the bacon.

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/editorial/3310162

Sad how principle doesn't pay, but AZ is a growing state and will probably do OK.

Cool.

If they had any guts they would tell Feds to shove their mandates and keep the Federal gas taxes for themselves.

They would have to forego them for at least a year, and impose their own to make up for that, if they wanted the $ but didn't want the mandates. Right?

Certainly would not have to wait....

This is the part that was throwing me off:

Someday in the chain pays it, looks like it is at the distribution level, looks like there is already some underpayment going on (that is a big surprise) so AZ comes in light for the foreseable future. If AZ has a refinary they are golden (looks like there is not an active refinary in AZ)

Yeah, like we need to donate a bit more for the big dig.

I guess we're already last for pork, how much worse could it be?

There hasn't been anything fiscally responsible about Republicans since 1980.

Could say the same about the citizens they represent.

Including in the late 90s when the Rs in Congress "balanced" the budget.

Democratic leader asks about impeachment procedure for convicted Ohio governor
Associated Press

COLUMBUS, Ohio — Ohio's House Democrats are considering impeachment proceedings against Republican Gov. Bob Taft, who pleaded no contest last week to four ethics violations.


House Minority Leader Chris Redfern said Sunday that Democrats had made no decision yet about whether to seek Taft's ouster — impeachment would be difficult if not impossible with Republicans controlling both houses of the Legislature.

But he said they had asked the Legislature's legal research arm to outline the impeachment process so they understand it when they meet Tuesday to discuss a response.

"Impeachment is such a serious thing, and it's not something to be careless about," Redfern said. "But we would all do well as members of the House to understand what the process is."

The House Democrats will also consider other alternatives, including asking Taft to resign, Redfern said.

Taft issued a public apology after entering his plea last week, but he said he would not step down as governor. He was fined $4,000 for failing to report golf outings and other gifts.

The governor's press secretary, Mark Rickel, reiterated Sunday that Taft will not resign. Rickel declined to address the prospect of impeachment.

An article of impeachment would have to be approved by a majority of the 99-member House, something the Democrats — who hold 39 seats — couldn't achieve without the votes of at least 11 Republicans. If passed, an impeachment trial would be held in the GOP-controlled Senate.

Senate President Bill Harris said Sunday that talk of impeachment is unwarranted.

"Unless some other types of charges develop, I don't think there will be an attempt to impeach the governor," said Harris, a Republican. "I think he'll continue to do his best and continue to work hard."

The troubles surrounding Taft, the great-grandson of President William Howard Taft, are the latest blow to the GOP in the Republican-controlled state that won President Bush re-election.

A scandal that began with a prominent GOP contributor's investment of state money in rare coins has ballooned to include 15 state and federal agencies investigating allegations of risky investments and illegal campaign contributions to Bush.


http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/nation/3319523

George Bush LIED to us and he knew he was LYING.

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/article.php?s...=nested&order=0

Impeach em all, replace none of them.

Just you Inyer.

Taft is a bum and so are Ohio's senators.

George Bush LIED to us and he knew he was LYING.

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/article.php?s...=nested&order=0

President Chicken-heart and the bereaved mother

The right-wing, mud-slinging machine simply hasn't matched the grit of the unyielding Sheehan.

"My son died for nothing," Sheehan raged, "He was sent to fight in a war that had no basis in reality and was killed for it....I say my son died for lies. George Bush LIED to us and he knew he was LYING.



Why are our young people fighting and dying in Iraq? What is this Noble Cause you are sending our young people to die for?...Why did you lie to us? Why did you lie to the American people? Why did you lie to the world? Why are our nation's children still in harms way and dying every day when we know you lied?"

Sheehan is untouchable. The Bush propagandists haven't laid a glove on her and they've savaged their own credibility in the process.

The media has tried to connect Sheehan to the mythical "American Left" suggesting she's a pawn of Michael Moore.

Ridiculous. It only shows their frustration.

Attacking the mother of a dead soldier is like putting out a camp-fire with your hands.

It can't be done and it's crazy to try.

No one's buying Bush's palavering anymore.

The last time the Crawford chicken-hawk appeared in a crowd of Americans who weren't "hand-picked" by Republican staffers was 9-11.

Think about that.

No president in the history of this country has been so widely reviled that he couldn't show his face in front of the American people. That is, not until the deserter-in-chief took office.

Come out, come out, George Bush.

Come out from behind the concertina wire and your phalanx of security thugs.

You ran away from the Texas National Guard and now you're running away from a wretched 48 year old woman.

Come out of your bubble-world and see the misery you've caused, you chicken-hearted phony.

Sheehan took on the world's most powerful man and left him running for cover.

Bush has been beaten and he knows it.

Now, he should do the right thing and bring the troops home.

Turning blue yet?

I don't think there's been anything fiscally responsible about them since at least Goldwater, if not Dewey.

Sure, they've talked a mean game, but results are what count.

Giving the people what they want......

What about the repuslickans in 1980 was fiscally responsible? That wasnt pure talk anyway.

Giving the people what they want......

bush approval 36%

Ds controlled House where all spending originates.

Minority rules, rule!

He thought all Ds were like Texas Ds...

Abramoff Cited Aid Of Interior Official
Conflict-of-Interest Probe Is Underway

By Susan Schmidt
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, August 28, 2005; Page A01

Indicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff claimed in e-mails sent in 2002 that the deputy secretary of the interior had pledged to block an Indian casino that would compete with one of the lobbyist's tribal clients. Abramoff later told two associates that he was trying to hire the official.

A federal task force investigating Abramoff's activities has conducted interviews and obtained documents from Interior Department officials and Abramoff associates to determine whether conflict-of-interest laws were violated, according to people with knowledge of the probe. It can be a federal crime for government officials to negotiate for a job while being involved in decisions affecting the potential employer.


The two former Abramoff associates, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they are under scrutiny in the investigation, said Abramoff told them in late 2003 that he was trying to arrange for his firm, Greenberg Traurig LLP, to hire J. Steven Griles, then deputy interior secretary. Federal investigators are interested in those discussions and in job negotiations Abramoff may have had with a second department official, according to sources.

Abramoff told associates that he believed Griles was "committed" to blocking an effort by the Gun Lake Indian tribe to build a casino near Grand Rapids, Mich., according to the content of e-mail messages reviewed by The Washington Post. Abramoff said the blocking would involve an environmental challenge to the project, a tactic also proposed by Michigan business leaders opposed to the casino. Abramoff fought the project because it would draw business from a casino operated by his clients, the Saginaw Chippewas.

Environmental concerns ended up delaying action on the Gun Lake casino. The project was cleared last May by the Interior Department.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...5082701067.html

Woo hoo!!! Alright!!!! Pardons all around!! Republicans rejoice!! I just looooove these good old boy Republican so-called morals and values!!!



Kentucky Governor Pardons Aides Facing Charges


By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Published: August 30, 2005

FRANKFORT, Ky., Aug. 29 (AP) - On the eve of an appearance before a grand jury investigating his administration's hiring practices, Gov. Ernie Fletcher granted a blanket pardon on Monday night to current and former aides charged in the inquiry.

Mr. Fletcher also said that although he would appear before the grand jury, he would not testify.

In remarks televised live throughout Kentucky, the governor, a first-term Republican, said State Attorney General Greg D. Stumbo, a Democrat, was carrying out a political vendetta, and compared most of the charges that have been brought to violations of fishing laws.

"I cannot allow state government to continue to be consumed by this game of political 'gotcha,' paralyzing our ability to serve you, the people of Kentucky," the governor said.

The grand jury was impaneled in June and has charged nine current and former members of the Fletcher administration with misdemeanor violations of the state's personnel law, saying they based hiring decisions on politics rather than merit.

Dismissing a need for a criminal inquiry, Mr. Fletcher said anyone who had violated the law could face penalties imposed by two administrative agencies that are also investigating.

Scott Crawford-Sutherland, an assistant attorney general, had said the grand jury investigation would continue even if the pardons were issued. But, responding to Mr. Fletcher's decision, Attorney General Stumbo said the governor had "slammed the door on the public's right to know what wrongs his administration has committed."

Mr. Fletcher was also criticized by Democratic state legislators, with Representative Kathy W. Stein saying pardons would be grounds to consider impeachment.

"He is showing a broad disrespect for the criminal justice system that every other citizen in the commonwealth must live with," Ms. Stein said.


http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/30/national/30kentucky.html

This is the best part. Republicans have been playing their new game of gotcha since Newt and the Contract for America. Now they want to change the game.

The sheer hypocrisy is unbelievable.

FLETCHER PARDONS 9

Governor says he wants to end 'game of political gotcha'

By Ryan Alessi And Jack Brammer

HERALD-LEADER FRANKFORT BUREAU

FRANKFORT - On the eve of his scheduled appearance before a special grand jury, Gov. Ernie Fletcher issued blanket pardons to members of his administration who have been charged -- as well as those who could be indicted later -- in the state hiring investigation.

He insisted he would not pardon himself.

Fletcher, in an early-evening televised address, said that he never "knowingly violated any laws" and is exercising the power to pardon to end "what appears to be a political investigation" that has diverted the attention of government.

"Mistakes were made, but at no time was there a cynical scheme to displace thousands of hard-working state employees," Fletcher said. "I cannot allow state government to continue to be consumed by this game of political 'gotcha.'"

The pardons immediately prompted words of support from some Republicans who praised them as "admirable," and strong rebukes from critics, some of whom called for Fletcher's resignation.

Attorney General Greg Stumbo said last night the investigation is far from over. He said his office will turn over evidence to the U.S. Attorney's office. In addition, Stumbo hinted that the pardon could be challenged by testing its "broadness" for seeming to cover unnamed people who haven't yet been charged.

Fletcher announced the pardons in front of several hundred of his supporters, political appointees and at least seven of the nine indicted officials.

He said he would answer a subpoena to appear before the special grand jury today but would not testify, meaning that he would invoke his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination.

'My conscience is clear'

The crowd, crammed into the Capitol Rotunda and along the railing of the second floor above the chamber, cheered on Fletcher throughout his 15-minute address, giving the event the feel of a campaign speech.

"I have never -- let me repeat, never -- knowingly violated any laws," he said to thunderous applause. "My conscience is clear."

In a brief question-and-answer period with reporters afterward, Fletcher wouldn't say whether he had broken laws without knowing it.

He also wouldn't say whether he conceived and ordered the "governor's personnel initiative," which has emerged as a central focus of the grand jury investigation.

Key officials from across state government -- who referred to themselves as 'The Disciples' -- discussed broad personnel strategies, as well as specific hirings of Fletcher supporters and Republicans in merit positions, prosecutors say. Rank-and-file merit employees are supposed to be hired based on qualifications, not politics.

'Unconditional' amnesty

The grand jury indicted nine former or current administration officials on misdemeanor charges. One, former Transportation Cabinet commissioner Dan Druen, faced 22 felony charges of tampering with a witness and with evidence.

The governor's pardon, filed last night with the Secretary of State's office, granted "unconditional" amnesty to all nine by name as well as anyone who "may be accused of committing" a crime related to the investigation.

Stumbo said last night, however, that the grand jury can continue to issue indictments.

Fletcher also said he will show up at the grand jury at 10 a.m. as affirmed during a brief court hearing earlier yesterday.

Fletcher's attorney, James Neal of Nashville, had asked to push back the date of Fletcher's appearance. Yesterday, though, he said in court that he made a deal with Assistant Attorney General Scott Crawford-Sutherland to allow Fletcher to go before jurors in exchange for delaying the submission of documents to the grand jury.

'Public's right to know'

During Fletcher's speech, staff from the attorney general's office distributed a statement to reporters admonishing the governor for having "slammed the door on the public's right to know what wrongs his administration has committed."

Fletcher has repeatedly said this month that he wants the chance to explain himself. He told reporters last night that he still plans to tell his side of the story through parallel investigations being handled by the State Personnel Board and the Executive Branch Ethics Commission.

Overall, he said in his remarks that the only difference between hiring in his administration and previous ones is that his aides used e-mail messages, whereas Democrats used the phone.

"Some of our senior executives made management mistakes, including inadequate oversight of young managers," he said. "Some of our overeager young managers made mistakes in judgement that in an age of e-mails is evident for all to see."

To thunderous applause, he added: "For those mistakes, the buck stops here -- no matter what the consequences."

Potential fallout

Political observers say the fallout could be substantial.

"When people hear the word 'pardon,' they think back to Gerald Ford pardoning Nixon in September 1974," said Larry Sabato, national political expert from the University of Virginia. "That decision alone cost Ford a four-year term as president. This is as big as it gets."

Fletcher already has seen his reputation dented throughout the four-month saga, Sabato said.

"This has been very costly," he said. "The obvious goal is to stop the bleeding, but this could be a self-inflicted wound that could drain one or two more pints from him."

Kentucky Democratic Party chairman Jerry Lundergan said Fletcher has revealed himself to be "a corrupt governor" by refusing to testify before the grand jury. He said Fletcher should resign.

"He basically said it's OK for him and his friends to break the law and no one else can," Lundergan said.

Impeachment?

State Rep. Mary Lou Marzian, D-Louisville, said the House should consider all possible responses, ranging from a committee investigation to impeachment proceedings.

"Clearly we can't just sit here and do nothing," Marzian said. "He wasted taxpayer money by hiring political cronies in violation of the merit law, and now he has obstructed justice by trying to cover it up."

House leaders, however, are not yet talking about impeachment because Fletcher has the constitutional authority to issue pardons, said House Democratic Caucus chairman Bob Damron, D-Nicholasville.

Spencer Noe, general counsel of the Kentucky Republican Party, called the pardons "a great decision" that provides justice for officials whose reputations had been sullied. He also praised the governor for the "admirable" decision not to pardon himself.

"He weighed all these options, and frankly he felt like in good conscience he could not pardon himself," he said.

Few other Republican officials who were contacted yesterday -- including Reps. Hal Rogers, Anne Northup and Ron Lewis -- would comment publicly about the governor's move.

And, although Fletcher's executive cabinet and top aides walked into the Rotunda alongside the governor, there was one notable exception: Lt. Gov. Steve Pence.

Pence was attending a Louisville fund-raiser for U.S. Sen. Mitch McConnell, who also has stayed mum throughout the investigation.

Pence's spokeswoman, Jeanne Lausche, wouldn't say last night whether Pence supported the pardons. Instead, she released a brief statement from him.

"The power to grant pardons is a privilege the governor has every right to utilize," Pence said. "I am sure he feels, as most Kentuckians do, that it is time to get back to doing the state's business."

http://www.kentucky.com/mld/kentucky/news/...cs/12510692.htm

That's 'cause he doesn't have one.

Q&A
Pardon issues aren't all definite




THE POWER TO PARDON

Under Section 77 of the Kentucky Constitution, the governor "shall have power to remit fines and forfeitures, commute sentences, grant reprieves and pardons, except in case of impeachment, and he shall file with each application therefor a statement of the reasons for his decision thereon, which application and statement shall always be open to public inspection."



Question: What does it mean to be pardoned?

Answer: "It means the charge or the conviction disappears for purposes of the criminal justice system," said William G. Ross, professor of law at Cumberland School of Law at Samford University in Birmingham, Ala.

William Johnson, a Frankfort defense lawyer, said, "The charge or conviction becomes a nullity. It would be the same as if the court dismissed the case."

Q: Is a pardon the same as an expungement?

A: No. Ross said that to expunge a conviction refers to deleting that case from public records. He said that, barring some unusual circumstances, a pardon does not result in removing a case from public court files.

Q: Is it common to pardon before a trial?

A: The vast majority of pardons in recent Kentucky history were of people who had been convicted. But an exception was Gov. Paul Patton's pardon of his chief of staff, Andrew "Skipper" Martin; Patton's labor liaison, Danny Ross, and two Teamsters union officials on campaign finance charges before they stood trial.

Q: Can someone pardoned be prosecuted later for a merit law violation?

A: Bill Johnson, a Frankfort defense lawyer, said, "It would depend in part on exactly what the pardon documents say. Any defense attorney would argue any future indictment for a merit law violation would be covered, but the other side would argue that a governor could not pardon anyone for any future acts."

Don Cetrulo, a Lexington lawyer who is the former director of the Administrative Office of the Courts and of the Legislative Research Commission, said, "Any pardon would have to apply to past conduct. I know of no precedent for pardoning anyone for future conduct."

Q: Now that Fletcher has issued pardons, under what circumstances can someone be prosecuted for alleged violations of the merit system laws?

A: According to the pardon, the amnesty now invoked covers all alleged violations, up to yesterday, of the merit system that stem from the current grand jury's investigation.

Q: Could those who received pardons be indicted by a future grand jury for another crime related to the merit system?

A: The governor's office refused to answer that question. Fletcher spokeswoman Carla Blanton said it was "hypothetical." Attorney General Greg Stumbo said future crimes are not covered by the pardons.

Q: Are pardoned people obliged to testify fully to a grand jury if called?

A: Johnson said yes. "If an individual is pardoned, he could not be tried for that crime again and could not claim a Fifth Amendment right to not testify about that matter."

Q: Will these pardons end the criminal investigation?

A: Maybe not. Stumbo said last week that he would have to review the wording of any pardon to see whether the grand jury investigation should continue, and he said there is a chance that some matters could be referred to federal prosecutors for possible prosecution in federal court.

Q: Would pardons prevent a lawsuit from being brought?

A: Stumbo also said last week that, if pardons were issued, he still has an option under the state merit system law to file civil lawsuits to recover state funds if those funds were spent as a result of a violation of state law.

Q. What happens to the evidence gathered in the investigation? Would it be released publicly, sealed or destroyed?

A: That is up to the grand jury, Stumbo said.

Q: What gives Kentucky governors the authority to issue pardons?

A: Section 77 of the Kentucky Constitution gives the governor broad authority to issue pardons for any reason. Similar power is held by the president and other governors.

Q: Why does the governor have that power?

A: The writers of the federal and most state constitutions felt it was important to give the chief executive the power to correct an injustice, Ross said. "It's part of the attempt to balance the powers among the three branches of government to act as a sort of check on the judicial branch. And most experts agree that implicit in the granting of this power is that the executive use it sparingly," Ross said.

Q: Can a governor pardon someone not yet indicted for a crime?

A: Experts say he probably can. "I'm not aware of it ever having been done by a governor of Kentucky, but my instinct tells me yes because the pardoning power of our governor is broad, and the text of the constitution does not limit his power in that way," said Paul Salamanca, associate professor of law at the University of Kentucky College of Law. Johnson noted that former President Gerald Ford pardoned former President Richard Nixon for matters related to Watergate when Nixon had not been charged.

Q: Can a governor pardon himself?

A: Johnson and Salamanca said they believe so. "The section of the constitution does not prohibit him from doing so," Johnson said.


http://www.courier-journal.com/apps/pbcs.d.../508300369/1008

Posted on Mon, Aug. 29, 2005

Stumbo challenges legitimacy of Merit task force; Fletcher schedules address

JOE BIESK

Associated Press

FRANKFORT, Ky. - Gov. Ernie Fletcher's task force charged with recommending changes to the state's Merit System is flawed and "cannot deliver meaningful results," Attorney General Greg Stumbo said Monday in a letter announcing his resignation from the panel.

In a letter addressed to Fletcher, Stumbo said he had "grave concerns" with the governor's task force and questioned its legitimacy. The panel was meeting Monday in Frankfort.

Stumbo's resignation from the panel came hours before Fletcher issued blanket pardons to everyone who has been or might be charged with breaking the state's merit law.

Stumbo's office has been investigating the Fletcher administration since May for alleged violations of the state Merit System. So far nine current or former members of the administration have been charged with misdemeanors stemming from the investigation; one is facing multiple felony charges for alleged witness tampering.

Fletcher has been subpoenaed to appear Tuesday before a special grand jury investigating the personnel practices. Fletcher said he intended to appear before the body but would not answer questions.

The Merit System was designed to protect rank-and-file state employees from political influence. Fletcher convened the task force last month and asked its members to propose an overhaul of the system to allow governors the ability to "advance his or her vision" while also protecting state workers.

"The potential for bias and the conflicts of interest of task force members make it likely that the findings of the task force will be given little weight by Kentucky's lawmakers," Stumbo wrote in the letter. "I must decline to continue my involvement in a process that cannot deliver meaningful results for Kentucky's citizens.

Fletcher spokeswoman Carla Blanton said Stumbo's letter was delivered to the general counsel's office Monday morning. Blanton said she thought Stumbo's decision to leave the panel showed he "is not serious about improving the Merit System."

Personnel Cabinet Secretary Erwin Roberts, who is heading the task force, said he was surprised because Stumbo had not raised the concerns in previous discussions about the panel and its work.

"I think I would be dishonest if I didn't say that I was somewhat relieved that he's no longer on the task force," Roberts said. "Because he's had a disruptive effect on it from the beginning."

Still, Stumbo said that among his concerns are what he termed "clear conflicts of interest" among at least two panelists. Stumbo said he's "dismayed" that the panel is looking into the voter registration data of rank-and-file merit employees.

Stumbo said he was concerned the task force heard testimony from Bob Wilson, deputy secretary of the Personnel Cabinet and one of the people indicted. He called it a "serious lapse in judgment" and said it suggested the process was "fatally flawed."

In the letter, Stumbo also disputed the notion that Kentucky's personnel law was vague, and questioned whether a complete overhaul of the system was needed. Stumbo also chastised the panel for not allowing non-management merit employees a vote on its decisions.

State Sen. R.J. Palmer, D-Winchester, said he shared Stumbo's concerns, particularly with compiling the political registration of state employees. Compiling such a report "undermines the spirit of the merit law itself," Palmer said.

"There are a number of us on this committee who have grave concerns with the direction the committee seems to be going right now," Palmer said.

Roberts said the report would go back for the last five years but would not attach names to political parties.

"I don't see the concern with that report," Roberts said. "We're doing everything we can to ensure the protection of sensitive information."


http://www.kentucky.com/mld/kentucky/news/local/12508251.htm

This is really funny. I read the speech he gave defending the pardons. Read it all, but here's a sample:




http://www.wkyt.com/Global/story.asp?S=3780499

Surprise, surprise. Fletcher is an evangelical Christian.



Mooooooorals and valuuuuuuuuues!!!!!!

"I cannot allow state government to continue to be consumed by this game of political 'gotcha,' paralyzing our ability to serve you, the people of Kentucky," the governor said."







HOWL!!

That'll get ya picked up on obscenity charges in Bammy.

I just love Sen. Grassley.

Pentagon Investigator Resigning
Joseph E. Schmitz, the Defense Department's inspector general, is suspected of blocking investigations of senior Bush officials.
By T. Christian Miller
Times Staff Writer

September 3, 2005

WASHINGTON — The Pentagon's top investigator has resigned amid accusations that he stonewalled inquiries into senior Bush administration officials suspected of wrongdoing.

Defense Department Inspector General Joseph E. Schmitz told staffers this week that he intended to resign as of Sept. 9 to take a job with the parent company of Blackwater USA, a defense contractor.

The resignation comes after Sen. Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa) sent Schmitz several letters this summer informing him that he was the focus of a congressional inquiry into whether he had blocked two criminal investigations last year.

Grassley, chairman of the Finance Committee, accused Schmitz of fabricating an official Pentagon news release, planning an expensive junket to Germany and hiding information from Congress. Schmitz is the senior Pentagon official charged with investigating waste, fraud and abuse.

"I am writing to inform you that I intend to conduct an oversight investigation into allegations that you either quashed or redirected two ongoing criminal investigations last year," Grassley said in a July 7 letter obtained by The Times.

Grassley's office said Friday that the inquiry was continuing.

"Many questions need to be answered," spokeswoman Beth Levine said. Grassley has long acted as a watchdog over the inspector general.

The inspector general's office denied any connection between Schmitz's resignation and the inquiries, saying Schmitz had previously said he intended to leave after President Bush's first term.

A Schmitz spokesman, Gary Comerford, declined to comment on the allegations in Grassley's letters, saying: "This is a matter between the senator and the inspector general."

The first of the criminal investigations in which Schmitz allegedly intervened involved John A. "Jack" Shaw, the former deputy undersecretary of Defense for international technology security.

Shaw, who was the subject of a series of articles in The Times last year, tried to manipulate a lucrative contract in Iraq in 2004 to favor a telecommunications company whose board included a close friend, according to whistle-blowers who worked for the U.S.-led Coalition Provisional Authority in Iraq.

Shaw had signed an unusual agreement with Schmitz that gave him some investigative authority. Shaw told U.S. officials in Iraq that he was conducting investigations under that agreement during a trip to Iraq in December 2003. The results of those investigations were later used in his effort to push for contracts of firms tied to his friends and their clients, according to the whistle-blowers.

Shaw, who was forced out of office last year after refusing to resign, has denied any wrongdoing.

Schmitz referred the whistle-blowers' accusations to the FBI, despite the protests of senior criminal investigators in his office who had already found "specific and credible evidence" of wrongdoing by Shaw, according to Grassley's letter.

The FBI has not placed a high priority on the investigation, which has since stalled, according to one person with knowledge of the case.

Schmitz then helped craft a news release in which his office denied ever investigating Shaw, according to Grassley's letter. Grassley has repeatedly asked for an explanation of the news release, most recently in a letter Aug. 8.

"A formal investigation was conducted. The investigation was, in fact, completed and closed and referred to the FBI. How do you square that information with the press release?" Grassley wrote to Rumsfeld on July 27. "There is a paper trail that appears to show that Mr. Schmitz was personally and directly involved in crafting the language in this press release. And second, I understand that Mr. Schmitz was repeatedly warned by his own staff 'to take it down' because it was 'patently false.' "

The second investigation in which Schmitz allegedly interfered involves Mary L. Walker, the general counsel for the Air Force.

Grassley said in the July 7 letter that the information he had was "sketchy" but that the accusation appeared to involve Walker "lying under oath," possibly during investigations of either the Air Force Academy or Boeing Co.

The Air Force Academy has been rocked by controversies in the last few years, including allegations of the rape of female cadets. Separately, an Air Force procurement officer was sentenced to nine months in jail after receiving favors from Boeing officials during the negotiation of a $23-billion deal to lease refueling planes.

Grassley wrote that senior criminal investigators had "specific and credible evidence" regarding Walker but that the case was "allegedly shut down for unexplained reasons and possibly referred to the FBI." Grassley's letter said Schmitz was a "personal acquaintance" of Walker.

The Air Force said Friday that Schmitz's office had cleared Walker of wrongdoing.

Walker could not be reached for comment.

"Ms. Walker's conduct was looked at by the [Department of Defense inspector general] and … no negative findings were made," said Air Force spokeswoman Jennifer Stephens.

Grassley also expressed concern that Schmitz had withheld information from Congress on the Boeing investigation. Schmitz was criticized this year for redacting the names of top White House officials in his report on the Boeing deal. He first submitted his report to the White House for review.

"That decision … raises questions about your independence," Grassley wrote in his Aug. 8 letter.

Finally, Grassley reprimanded Schmitz this year for planning to take a ceremonial trip to Potsdam, Germany, that would have cost taxpayers $16,000. Schmitz later canceled the trip.

Schmitz — the son of John G. Schmitz, the fiercely conservative former congressman from Orange County — was approved by the Senate as inspector general in March 2002. He previously worked for the Washington law firm Patton Boggs.

Schmitz will go to work for Prince Group, the Virginia-based parent company of Blackwater USA, as chief operating officer and general counsel. Schmitz formally recused himself in June from any cases involving Blackwater, a private security company with millions of dollars in contracts in Iraq.

Still, Schmitz's departure to the private sector raised concerns among government watchdog groups.

"He's a person who did not put the appearance of ethics above all else," said Danielle Brian, the executive director of the Project on Government Oversight. "That is not the way the government should function. These are the kind of things that make the general public distrust government."


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/na...=la-home-nation

"Defense Department Inspector General Joseph E. Schmitz told staffers this week that he intended to resign as of Sept. 9 to take a job with the parent company of Blackwater USA, a defense contractor."


Yeah there is a ton of money to be made now that some mystery group has privatized the military as well as set the country up in I( R )aq.

Money money money.


Sure beats serving ones country and fighting for freedumb.

Sen. Grassley for President. He's the most ethical man in Congress. And he's cute when he's mad.