From Justin Rood at TPM Muckraker:
We've been hearing a lot about this guy "Nine Fingers," a CIA veteran who was a regular at Brent Wilkes' poker parties. On Sunday, Newsweek identified him as Brant Bassett, who had a career at the CIA before he went to work as a staffer for then-chairman Rep. Porter Goss (R-FL) at the House Intelligence Committee in 2000. Well, now here's another weird thing about Bassett: Just before he went to work for Goss at the committee, Brent Wilkes cut him a check for $5000. It's right there on his financial disclosure forms. In fact, his forms actually show two payments -- but it seems he may have reported the same check twice.Harpers.org also has more on "Nine Fingers" and Foggo. Continue reading
A Political Screen for HUD Contracts?
The big story for the day, reported initially in the Dallas Business Journal -- and picked up here and here -- is that the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Alphonso Jackson has made clear that he isn't giving government contracts to businesses that don't support the president. Has the Bush administration really put out a political screen for who it awards contracts to?! As ThinkProgress notes: that would be illegal.
Continue readingSenator Calls For HUD Secretary to Resign:
Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) called on HUD Secretary Alphonso Jackson to resign in the wake of his comments regarding the politicization of HUD contracting. Lautenberg: "If Secretary Jackson really said this, then President Bush should ask for his resignation. Government contracts must be based on merit, not on political favoritism." UPDATE: Waxman and Frank call for hearings into HUD contracting, according to Reuters.
Continue readingHUD Secretary Only Gives Contracts to Bush Supporters:
President Bush's Housing and Urban Development Secretary Alphonso Jackson seems to not understand the federal contracting process. You see he believes that only supporters of President Bush should get contracts. From the Dallas Business Journal courtesy of David Sirota:
After discussing the huge strides the agency has made in doing business with minority-owned companies, Jackson closed with a cautionary tale, relaying a conversation he had with a prospective advertising contractor. ‘He had made every effort to get a contract with HUD for 10 years,’ Jackson said of the prospective contractor. ‘He made a heck of a proposal and was on the (General Services Administration) list, so we selected him. He came to see me and thank me for selecting him. Then he said something … he said, ‘I have a problem with your president.’ ‘I said, ‘What do you mean?’ He said, ‘I don’t like President Bush.’ I thought to myself, ‘Brother, you have a disconnect — the president is elected, I was selected. You wouldn’t be getting the contract unless I was sitting here. If you have a problem with the president, don’t tell the secretary. He didn’t get the contract,’ Jackson continued. ‘Why should I reward someone who doesn’t like the president?’”Aside from this being a violation of federal rules as Think Progress points out:
Government business shall be conducted in a manner above reproach and, except as authorized by statute or regulation, with complete impartiality and with preferential treatment for none. Transactions relating to the expenditure of public funds require the highest degree of public trust and an impeccable standard of conduct.Jackson's most egregious statement comes when he explains his understanding of the contracting process:
“Why should I reward someone who doesn’t like the president, so they can use funds to try to campaign against the president? Logic says they don’t get the contract. That’s the way I believe.”Josh Marshall explains Jackson's "logic":
political supporters get contracts so they can pump a percentage of the profits back into the political party. Standard machine politics, at best. Organized bribery, at worst. And whatever you want to call it, the guiding principle of all contracting and government spending in the second Bush administration.Unbelievable. Continue reading
Important Meeting: May 15 in New York
I rarely attend conferences. But there's one I wouldn't miss that is sponsored by the Personal Democracy Forum in New York next Monday, May 15. This meeting of some 400 -- see here for details and how to sign up -- brings together some extraordinary cutting edge thinkers and doers on how to use technoligy to advance political and issue organizing. It's truly a bipartisan affair. I attended the first two of these meetings in '04 and '05 and each time left with a lot more information and eye-opening knowledge of how to do my own work better and smarter.
Continue readingMeasures of Influence
The signature issue of the Sunlight Foundation is transparency--that the business of government should be conducted in as open a manner as possible. Secret provisions, appropriations inserted in the middle of night by unseen and unknown hands, are antithetical to our system of government. Banana republics operate with no transparency in the dead of night--not the United States. Or so one would like to think. Yet, as a new report from Public Citizen makes clear, a small clique of powerful members of Congress can, without the knowledge or approval of their fellow elected representatives, insert a provision with broad effects into a bill at the behest of and for the benefit of a narrow special interest (indeed, as the report shows, a provision that was largely designed by that interest).
Continue readingWho’s Next?:
The Washington Post article on former Bob Ney chief of staff Neil Volz's guilty plea has some key information:
Volz, who has been talking to prosecutors for three months, is providing information on other lawmakers and staff, according to a source close to the ongoing investigation.Emphasis added. So who else could Volz be dishing on? Brad Friedman at The Brad Blog has an idea. Continue reading
Murder and Corruption in Iraq:
A woman's rights advocate is slain by gunmen in post-invasion Iraq. A corrupt defense contractor dispensed large sums of money to her. The money is missing and the contractor cannot account for it. The New York Times has more on this sordid tale in Iraq ruled by the American Coalition Provisional Authority.
Continue readingTracking Earmarks
Via The Week in Congress and its publisher Robert McElroy comes these links to congressional earmarks: In the Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies and from the Transportation Equity Act. The Week in Congress offers a lot of useful news and analysis on the goings on on Capitol Hill, filling an important gap at a time when newspapers and television ignore the nuts and bolts of what goes on in Congress.
Continue readingWilliam Jefferson’s End Game
The Washington Post reports that a Northern Virginia investor wore a wire while meeting with Rep. William Jefferson (D-LA) as part of a federal bribery investigation. The information is derived from the release of a court order by the U.S. District Court of the District of Maryland:
The woman also recorded telephone conversations, as did the FBI through court-authorized wiretaps, the document said. The woman is identified only as a "cooperating witness" in the document, but people familiar with the case previously have identified her as Lori Mody, 42.Making Jefferson's situation even more precarious is the decision by the judge to release an affidavit "for a search warrant executed Aug. 3 at the Potomac home of Jennifer Douglas, a wife of Nigerian Vice President Atiku Abubaker." According to the Post:
The judge ruled that the affidavit would be unsealed Thursday unless someone appeals his ruling. The Washington Post had filed a motion to unseal the affidavit. Jefferson's attorneys opposed it, saying the release would "taint him for life and the harm done will not be remedied by the decision of a grand jury not to indict."Paul Kiel at TPM Muckraker has more information including the potential charges being considered against Jefferson: bribery of a public official, bribery of a foreign official, two fraud charges, and a conspiracy charge. The prosecution is in the end stages of the investigation as they "did not contest the unsealing of the affidavit, admitting that they had nothing to fear from its being made public. The investigation "is no longer in its preliminary stages," prosecutors wrote, adding "any danger that the government's access to potential witnesses might be affected by the unsealing of the affidavit is minimal, if existent at all." Looks like the end of the line for Jefferson. Continue reading
59063
