The Asylum Private Messages Options Search Blogs Images Chat Cam Portals Calendar FAQ's Join  
Asylum Forums : Powered by vBulletin version 2.2.8 Asylum Forums > Políticás der Monde > Hookergate / Porter Goss Resigns
  Last Thread   Next Thread
Author
Thread [new thread]    [post reply]
memdink
spasm of violence

Registered: Aug 2000
Location: b0ulder
Posts: 5128

Watergate Hotel Prostitution Ring

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/4/28/94455/5569

Prosecutors May Widen
Congressional-Bribe Case

Cunningham Is Suspected
Of Asking for Prostitutes;
Were Others Involved?
By SCOT J. PALTROW
April 27, 2006; Page A6

Federal prosecutors are investigating whether two contractors implicated in the bribery of former Rep. Randall "Duke" Cunningham supplied him with prostitutes and free use of a limousine and hotel suites, pursuing evidence that could broaden their long-running inquiry.

Besides scrutinizing the prostitution scheme for evidence that might implicate contractor Brent Wilkes, investigators are focusing on whether any other members of Congress, or their staffs, may also have used the same free services, though it isn't clear whether investigators have turned up anything to implicate others.


In recent weeks, Federal Bureau of Investigation agents have fanned out across Washington, interviewing women from escort services, potential witnesses and others who may have been involved in the arrangement. In an interview, the assistant general manager of the Watergate Hotel confirmed that federal investigators had requested, and been given, records relating to the investigation and rooms in the hotel. But he declined to disclose what the records show. A spokeswoman for Starwood Inc., Westin's parent company, said she wasn't immediately able to get information on whether the Westin Grand had been contacted by investigators.

Mr. Cunningham, a Republican from San Diego, was sentenced March 3 to more than eight years in federal prison after he admitted taking $2.4 million in bribes. The bribes were taken in exchange for helping executives obtain large contracts with the Defense Department and other federal agencies. Mr. Cunningham, who resigned from Congress in November, pleaded guilty to two criminal counts, one of tax evasion and one of conspiracy.

In documents filed in federal court in San Diego, prosecutors listed four "co-conspirators" in the bribing of Mr. Cunningham. The two who allegedly played the biggest role, listed as co-conspirators No. 1 and No. 2, have been confirmed by Justice Department officials and defense lawyers to be Mr. Wilkes and Mitchell Wade, the founder and former head of MZM Inc., a software and computer-services firm that Mr. Cunningham helped to gain federal contracts.

The charges against Mr. Cunningham had alleged that "Co-conspirator #1" -- Mr. Wilkes -- had given the congressman more than $600,000 in bribes, including paying off a mortgage on Mr. Cunningham's house.

Mr. Wilkes hasn't been charged with any crime, and people with knowledge of the investigation say he recently decided he would fight any charges that might be filed rather than plead guilty and cooperate with the investigation. Michael Lipman, Mr. Wilkes's lawyer, denied his client had been involved in procuring prostitutes. "There was no such conduct. It did not happen," Mr. Lipman said. The lawyer added that "Mr. Wilkes and ADCS strongly believe that all of their actions have been proper and appropriate. They are confident that the government will come to the same conclusion."

Mr. Wilkes, of Pohway, Calif., founded a series of companies that obtained federal contracts, including ADCS Inc., which won contracts to convert paper military records to computer images.

Mr. Wade in February pleaded guilty to giving bribes of more than $1 million to Mr. Cunningham, including cash, antiques and payment for yachts. Mr. Wade, who hasn't been sentenced yet, is cooperating with prosecutors. According to people with knowledge of the investigation, Mr. Wade told investigators that Mr. Cunningham periodically phoned him to request a prostitute, and that Mr. Wade then helped to arrange for one. A limousine driver then picked up the prostitute as well as Mr. Cunningham, and drove them to one of the hotel suites, originally at the Watergate Hotel, and subsequently at the Westin Grand.

Mr. Wade told investigators that all the arrangements for these services had been made by Mr. Wilkes and two employees of Mr. Wilkes's company, according to people with knowledge of his debriefing. He said Mr. Wilkes had rented the hotel suites and found the limousine driver, who had "relationships" with several escort services. Mr. Wade told prosecutors that sometimes Mr. Cunningham would contact him to request these services, and he would pass on the request to Mr. Wilkes or his employees, who then made the actual arrangement. Mr. Wade said that other times Mr. Cunningham called Mr. Wilkes directly to make the requests.

If investigators find that any other members of Congress or their staffs received services at so-called hospitality suites, that could help make a case that they had illegally taken action to benefit Mr. Wilkes in return for favors from him. Mr. Wilkes, his family members and his employees were heavy campaign contributors to several members of Congress. But prosecutors so far apparently haven't found any evidence that other members of Congress had been bribed.

Mr. Wade told investigators that he had knowledge only of the service being provided to Mr. Cunningham, not anyone else, and has said he doesn't know whether Mr. Wilkes may have provided prostitutes or other free entertainment to anyone besides Mr. Cunningham.

K. Lee Blalack II, Mr. Cunningham's lawyer, said, "I have no comment on that" when asked about his client's alleged use of prostitutes. Mr. Cunningham, 64 years old, currently is undergoing a routine medical evaluation at the Butner Federal Correctional Complex in North Carolina.

People close to the case said prosecutors had hoped that Mr. Wilkes, like Mr. Wade, would plead guilty and turn over information relevant to the investigation. Now that he has indicated he won't do so, prosecutors are hunting for evidence to bolster any potential case against him.

Meanwhile, prosecutors are looking at whether they can make corruption cases against other lawmakers based on Mr. Wilkes's campaign contributions to them. But lawyers expert in campaign-finance and criminal law say such cases are far more difficult to prove than those involving outright bribery. The government must show a direct "quid pro quo" that a lawmaker has taken action on a particular bill solely because of a campaign contribution.

Proof of the prostitution scheme, on the other hand, could provide potentially damaging evidence that Mr. Wilkes had taken illegal steps in exchange for legislative favors, people involved in the investigation said.

Write to Scot J. Paltrow at scot.paltrow@wsj.com1

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 04-28-2006 04:13 PM
memdink is offline Click Here to See the Profile for memdink Click here to Send memdink a Private Message Find more posts by memdink Add memdink to your buddy list [P] Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Paint CHiPs
Viva Le Me

Registered: Jul 2000
Location: Location Location
Posts: 26420

There's a CIA angle to this, too. More on that here. Porter Goss, and the CIA middle manager he elevated from obscurity to be his #3 man at the agency (a guy who also happened to be good friends with all the main figures in this). Interesting stuff.

__________________

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 04-28-2006 10:12 PM
Paint CHiPs is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Paint CHiPs Click here to Send Paint CHiPs a Private Message Visit Paint CHiPs's homepage! Find more posts by Paint CHiPs Add Paint CHiPs to your buddy list [P] Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
memdink
spasm of violence

Registered: Aug 2000
Location: b0ulder
Posts: 5128

Is Goss' resignation any sign of the impending assault on his character?

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 05-05-2006 07:06 PM
memdink is offline Click Here to See the Profile for memdink Click here to Send memdink a Private Message Find more posts by memdink Add memdink to your buddy list [P] Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Smug Git
Arrogance Personified

Registered: Aug 2001
Location: Hilbert Space
Posts: 35658

Woah.

__________________
I want to live and I want to love
I want to catch something that I might be ashamed of

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 05-05-2006 07:49 PM
Smug Git is online now Click Here to See the Profile for Smug Git Click here to Send Smug Git a Private Message Find more posts by Smug Git Add Smug Git to your buddy list [P] Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Smug Git
Arrogance Personified

Registered: Aug 2001
Location: Hilbert Space
Posts: 35658

Podhoretz at the Corner is asking, sensibly, how likely it is that Bush would have appeared with Goss to announce this, if it was linked to the Duke Cunningham/hooker dealy. He suggests that it was Negroponte who got him fired because they couldn't get on. I can't comment much on the likelihood of that, although it seems reasonable that if he had to pick to keep only one of them, Negroponte would be the guy.

__________________
I want to live and I want to love
I want to catch something that I might be ashamed of

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 05-05-2006 08:27 PM
Smug Git is online now Click Here to See the Profile for Smug Git Click here to Send Smug Git a Private Message Find more posts by Smug Git Add Smug Git to your buddy list [P] Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Paint CHiPs
Viva Le Me

Registered: Jul 2000
Location: Location Location
Posts: 26420

That Negroponte hated his guts isn't news, and was the case from the get-go. Bush doesn't fire cronies who other people hate and think are incompetent. If that was the case, Rumsfeld would have been gone two years ago.

I was blindsided by the resignation, and the only possible explanation I can have, given the timing, is that it's probably related to a number of investigations that are circling in on him. It was only a matter of time before he became ground zero for one or all of them; and probably more than a few of them are true.

I'll give the quickie analysis from two liberal whackjob blogs, that I agree with nonetheless. First is dailykos:

quote:

This isn't part of some White House shake-up. This is a scandal-plagued Bush appointee resigning just as an investigation into another Republican corruption scandal hits too close to home.

Former Republican lawmaker and current CIA Director Porter Goss's name has surfaced time and time again in the Republican bribe scheme, which began with a focus on disgraced Republican Congressman Duke Cunningham and his Republican lobbyists (hmm, do I think I mentioned "Republican" enough in that sentence?).

It is Goss's hand-picked #3 man at the CIA, Kyle "Dusty" Foggo who is under serious investigation in connection with a massive bribery scheme that touches on sweetheart deals, million dollar contracts, and yes, even hookers.

You will recall that Ken Silverstein, based on a source, noted that the prostitution scandal could touch a former lawmaker "who now holds a powerful intelligence post." Speculation abounded that Porter Goss fit that description perfectly.

It may not be the hookers. It may not be his possible participation in a million-dollar bribery scheme affecting our national security. It may be that he hated his job, and the CIA hated him. Or it may just be that Goss decided to spent time with his family.

But the press has a duty to find out why one of our nation's top intelligence officials just up and quit all of sudden on a Friday afternoon.


Josh Marshall and his team at TMP and subsidiaries (TPMCafe, TPMMuckracker) have been all over Goss' nuts lately in relation to these scandals, and have done as much investigative journalism on these issues as probably anybody else (legit media outlets included):

quote:

As I said a short time ago, we don't know definitively yet that Porter Goss resigned over the Wilkes-Cunningham Hookergate story. But on the assumption that that is the case, let me give you a bit of background on what we've been following in recent weeks.

The hookers in Hookergate are, of course, the sizzle. But there's a bigger story. It stems directly from the Randy "Duke" Cunningham bribery scandal, which many had figured was over. But it's not. You may have noticed that while Duke Cunningham is already in jail and Mitchell Wade has already pled guilty to multiple charges, Brent Wilkes has never been touched. Wilkes is the ur-briber at the heart of the Cunningham scandal, you can see pretty clearly by reading the other indictments and plea agreements. Wade was Wilkes' protege.

Now, on the surface one might surmise that the prosecutors are just taking their time, putting together their best case.

I hear different.

Wilkes has deep ties into the CIA. The focal point of those ties is to Kyle "Dusty" Foggo, the man Porter Goss appointed to the #3 position at CIA when he took over the Agency last year. Remember, Wilkes' scam was getting corrupt contracts deep in the 'black' world of intelligence and defense appropriations, where there's little or no oversight. Foggo was in the contracting and procurement field at the CIA. So you can see how he and Wilkes, who have been friends since high school, had plenty to talk about.

The CIA wasn't the only place Wilkes and his protege Wade plied their corrupt trade. There were also in the mix contracting on the Bush Pentagon's extra-constitutional spying operations. And I am told that senior appointees at the DOD knew about their corruption but overlooked it.

Now, since the Cunningham scandal got under, and particularly of late, there's been a big tug of war between federal law enforcement and the CIA over whether to really go after Wilkes. Probably a little more specificity is in order there, folks at CIA in the orbit of Foggo and presumably Goss.

Now, how does Goss know Foggo?

That's how we get into the other part of this story -- those 'hospitality suites', that moveable feast of food, poker and love, Brent Wilkes ran in Washington for maybe fifteen years. We hear that's how Goss got to be friends with Foggo, whom he later promoted to executive director of the CIA, the number 3 post at the Agency.

Now, last week, Goss denied he had attended any of Wilkes' parties, in answer to a question from TPMmuckraker. Foggo admitted attending the parties but claimed he'd never seen the hookers.

Now, corrupt contractors saucing up Agency officials and members of Congress to get contracts and free money. Hospitality suites where the saucing takes place. Hookers in the mix. It's going on for more than a decade, various members of the key committees in the mix. Goss, former member of one of those committees, appoints one of the key players in all this mess as the number three guy at CIA? The feds leaning hard on the limo company owner who probably knows all the details and already has a long rap sheet and can't afford another conviction?

There's a lot going on here, a lot we don't know, what's connected and what's coincidence. But this is the backstory. And why this story is likely to turn out to be a very big deal.


It's all speculation, but that the people smelling blood in the water on this have been uncovering new details on a weekly basis that put Goss closer and closer to it, and that his surprise resignation comes on the heels of a particularly fruitful investigative fortnight, may well not be just a coincidence.

__________________

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 05-05-2006 10:15 PM
Paint CHiPs is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Paint CHiPs Click here to Send Paint CHiPs a Private Message Visit Paint CHiPs's homepage! Find more posts by Paint CHiPs Add Paint CHiPs to your buddy list [P] Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Paint CHiPs
Viva Le Me

Registered: Jul 2000
Location: Location Location
Posts: 26420

If you want the best updates on this and Goss specifically, go here.

__________________

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 05-06-2006 07:05 PM
Paint CHiPs is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Paint CHiPs Click here to Send Paint CHiPs a Private Message Visit Paint CHiPs's homepage! Find more posts by Paint CHiPs Add Paint CHiPs to your buddy list [P] Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Paint CHiPs
Viva Le Me

Registered: Jul 2000
Location: Location Location
Posts: 26420

quote:
Originally posted by Smug Git
Podhoretz at the Corner is asking, sensibly, how likely it is that Bush would have appeared with Goss to announce this, if it was linked to the Duke Cunningham/hooker dealy. He suggests that it was Negroponte who got him fired because they couldn't get on. I can't comment much on the likelihood of that, although it seems reasonable that if he had to pick to keep only one of them, Negroponte would be the guy.


Slate's got an interesting take on the actual ceremony of the goodbye, and how weird it was.

quote:

It was a day for goodbyes in Washington. Press Secretary Scott McClellan held his last briefing. Reporters applauded him and held a party in the windowless offices of their basement hovel. "We're losing our piñata," said one correspondent, "and we never got any candy." Fittingly, McClellan's valedictory briefing didn't contain the most extraordinary piece of news candy of the day, namely that CIA Director Porter Goss was resigning after less than two years on the job.

Perhaps the veil of secrecy around Goss' departure was fitting for the exit of the country's chief spymaster. Immediately before announcing his move to the press, Goss met with a delegation from the Council on Foreign Relations. He talked about long-term planning for the agency and then walked out and went over to the White House for the announcement. According to an account of the meeting, those who met with him had no idea he was about to resign. Perhaps Goss could have gone one better and left his resignation on a tape that self destructs after five seconds. Instead, he sat in the Oval Office with the president in the stock manner usually reserved for the exchange of platitudes between the president and a foreign dignitary.

But if it wasn't theatrical, the departure was still mysterious. It was held in the late Friday afternoon slot reserved for unpleasant news—known in the trade as "taking out the trash"—and the two men had the perfunctory air of a two Little Leaguers shaking hands after a game. Goss didn't say why he was leaving and his successor wasn't named. The president didn't say he was sorry to see him go. When Goss' predecessor, George Tenet, departed, Bush made it clear it was hard to accept his goodbye. Flying to Rome on Air Force One the same day, Condi Rice came back to the press cabin to say of Tenet's resignation, "It's really a great loss." No one seems to feel that way about Goss.

At least he didn't say he was leaving to spend more time with his family, one of the stock euphemisms used to help a Washington actor off the stage. But there was still the big question that always hangs over these stage-managed departures: Was Goss fired, or did he go on his own? Or, was it as it seems: He went on his own, but with the president's hand pushing gently at the base of his back? An administration aide explained on background that Goss had upset too many people at the agency with his reform efforts and felt neutered by John Negroponte, the director of national intelligence who had been systematically draining his power. One senior official told the AP Bush and Negroponte had been discussing removing Goss for weeks. As if to codify that power shift and his ax-wielding role, Negroponte stood in the Oval Office for Goss' departure remarks, but outside the camera frame.


I'm still not buying that it's just a power battle with Negroponte, though surely that made it easier.

__________________

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 05-06-2006 07:13 PM
Paint CHiPs is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Paint CHiPs Click here to Send Paint CHiPs a Private Message Visit Paint CHiPs's homepage! Find more posts by Paint CHiPs Add Paint CHiPs to your buddy list [P] Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Paint CHiPs
Viva Le Me

Registered: Jul 2000
Location: Location Location
Posts: 26420

quote:
Originally posted by Paint CHiPs
If you want the best updates on this and Goss specifically, go here.


Seriously, go there. The stuff they're doing this week is on fire.

Anyway, a report on Goss's replacement, from American Progress Action Fund:

quote:

INTELLIGENCE -- General Discontent With Hayden

On Friday, Porter Goss unexpectedly resigned as head of the CIA, leaving behind an "utterly irresponsible" 18-month tenure at the agency and unanswered questions about his hurried departure. Today, the White House nominated deputy director of national intelligence Lt. Gen. Michael Hayden as Goss's successor. "Bottom line, I believe he's the wrong person, the wrong place, at the wrong time. We should not have a military person leading a civilian agency at this time," said House Intelligence Committee Chairman Peter Hoekstra (R-MI) yesterday on Fox News Sunday, voicing the bipartisan concerns of lawmakers. Hayden has demonstrated a fundamental misunderstanding of the Constitution and has misled Congress under oath. His close ties to Vice Presidency Cheney, Director of National Intelligence John Negroponte, and the Department of Defense have led many members of Congress to conclude he is wrong man to gain the trust of the intelligence community and clean up the CIA after the "chaos" left by Goss.

'UNDER THE SWAY' OF RUMSFELD: Over the weekend, a bipartisan group of lawmakers spoke out opposing the nomination of a military officer to a civilian agency. If Hayden is confirmed, "military officers would run all the major spy agencies, from the ultra-secret National Security Agency to the Defense Intelligence Agency." One former intelligence official said, "It seems to me the Pentagon grows even stronger now. . . . Every time there's a change, it moves in that direction." "I think...putting a general in charge is going to send the wrong signal through the agency here in Washington, but also to our agents in the field around the world," said Hoekstra yesterday, who also added that there will "be the perception in the CIA" that Hayden would be under the sway of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. One of Goss's largest challenges at the CIA was gaining the trust of career officers, who resented that he brought in a group of his unqualified aides -- called "the Gosslings" by CIA insiders -- and appointed them to top positions. Even if Hayden retires from the military, he is unlikely to be trusted as the committed independent advocate that the CIA needs. "Now, just resigning commission and moving on, putting on a striped suit, a pinstriped suit versus an air force uniform, I don't think makes much difference," said Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R-GA). Senate Intelligence Committee Pat Roberts (R-KS), who in 2005 called Hayden "outstanding," yesterday refused to offer his endorsement of the administration's nominee: "I'm not in a position to say that I am for General Hayden and will vote for him."


I'm not as critical of the nomination as that, for a variety of reasons, not least of which is because most anything is a step up from Goss. Goss was the Bernard Kerik choice for the CIA--though he was competent and had some experience (more of a "company man" than Hayden), his chief qualification was his unrelented sycophantic partisan cred; he was willing to rout the agency and staff it full of congressional aides, basically.

Hayden not being from the civilian side of things doesn't bother me; the continued wrapping of our intelligence structure under the Pentagon does. I've written before that I think perhaps one of the chief and most under-reported legacies of the Bush administration might be the institutional reshuffling of our national intelligence structure. Hayden seems even more a swing in that direction.

But, he'll still probably be better than Goss.

__________________

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 05-08-2006 06:44 PM
Paint CHiPs is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Paint CHiPs Click here to Send Paint CHiPs a Private Message Visit Paint CHiPs's homepage! Find more posts by Paint CHiPs Add Paint CHiPs to your buddy list [P] Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Aydin
Rice King

Registered: Jul 2001
Location: China
Posts: 11795

If I were a politician wanting to meet a hooker in Washington, D. C., I would not ask them to meet me at the Watergate Hotel.

__________________
北京欢迎你

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 05-08-2006 06:52 PM
Aydin is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Aydin Click here to Send Aydin a Private Message Visit Aydin's homepage! Find more posts by Aydin Add Aydin to your buddy list [P] Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Smug Git
Arrogance Personified

Registered: Aug 2001
Location: Hilbert Space
Posts: 35658

But the views are great. Out the windows, I mean.

__________________
I want to live and I want to love
I want to catch something that I might be ashamed of

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 05-08-2006 07:08 PM
Smug Git is online now Click Here to See the Profile for Smug Git Click here to Send Smug Git a Private Message Find more posts by Smug Git Add Smug Git to your buddy list [P] Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
memdink
spasm of violence

Registered: Aug 2000
Location: b0ulder
Posts: 5128

quote:
Originally posted by Aydin
If I were a politician wanting to meet a hooker in Washington, D. C., I would not ask them to meet me at the Watergate Hotel.
The irony is thick with this one.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 05-08-2006 07:20 PM
memdink is offline Click Here to See the Profile for memdink Click here to Send memdink a Private Message Find more posts by memdink Add memdink to your buddy list [P] Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Paint CHiPs
Viva Le Me

Registered: Jul 2000
Location: Location Location
Posts: 26420

Marshall:

quote:

So why did Porter Goss resign as Director of the CIA?

Over the weekend there's been a lot of amorphous talk about turf battles between Goss and DNI John Negroponte. We've heard that the White House has long doubted Goss's leadership of the Agency. We're hearing that Goss's ouster is part of a planned overhaul of the entire beleaguered agency.

I don't doubt that each of these stories are true, in some measure.

From the start, however, I've never believed that any of these overlapping explanations explain the jagged and sudden nature of Goss's departure. And if you read the follow-on coverage closely you'll see the taint and awareness of the underlying scandal spreading like ink in tissue paper.

Newsweek, for example, has a quizzical piece which lays the Foggo story right next to the Goss resignation without quite connecting the two. Interestingly, though, Newsweek says that it was Dusty Foggo was at the center of the turf battle with DNI John Negroponte -- a point we'll return to.

We've heard too that while there was a power struggle between Negroponte and Goss, what tipped the scale was an intervention the president's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board. In its day one reportage, the Times said Goss's "departure was hastened because a recent inquiry by the President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board had found that current and former agency officers were sharply critical of Mr. Goss's leadership."

By Sunday, though, Richard Sisk of the New York Daily News, was reporting that the FIAB's concerns centered on Foggo ...

" Bush had already gotten an earful from Director of National Intelligence John Negroponte on the shortcomings of Goss, but the final push came from the "very alarmed" President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board, intelligence and Congressional sources said.

Alarms were set off at the advisory board by a widening FBI sex and cronyism investigation that's targeted Kyle (Dusty) Foggo, the No. 3 official at the CIA, and also touched on Goss himself.

Now, successful cover stories must always contain at least a partial version of the truth. Otherwise, they can't be credible. The issue is what they leave out. As we move forward, I think you can see that the official narrative intentionally leaves out the key details. And the White House's inability to provide any reasonable explanation for the manner and timing of Goss's departure points unmistakably the criminal investigation that began with Duke Cunningham and has now made its way into the CIA.

Let's review what we know now about Dusty Foggo to provide context.

The Executive Director of the CIA runs the day to day operations of the Agency. It's the third-ranking position in the organization. In corporate parlance, he's the COO. Foggo was a career CIA officer. But before Goss's arrival, he'd never had a leadership position in the organization. He worked in logistics and procurement.

Newsweek says Foggo was "a logistics expert well known to junketing congressmen who visited Frankfurt, Germany, where Foggo was based." Foggo was in Frankfurt earlier in this decade, I believe. But a deeper look would reveal that he played a similar role in Central America in the 1980s. As the San Diego Union-Tribune reported last December, back in the mid-1980s one of Wilkes' jobs was "was to accompany congressmen ... to Central America to meet with Foggo and Contra leaders."

When Goss tapped him for the #3 job, it surprised everyone, as you'd expect, given the background I just described.

Now, some are suggesting that the real actor here is one of the congressional staffers Goss brought with him to CIA. And I think there may be something to that. It's quite possible that the only thing Goss did wrong was allow his staffers to make some very bad decisions on his behalf. There's been a lot of chatter about whether Goss was at the Wilkes parties or whether he profited in any way from the Wilkes' related corruption. To date I've seen no credible claims of either. But, politically and simply in terms of accountability, Goss is on the line for what his chief staffer does.

In any case, you have this lingering question of what prompted Goss to put Foggo in the number three job.

Now, fast forward to the present. We've known for more than six months that Duke Cunningham's chief briber Brent Wilkes was a life-long friend of Dusty Foggo's and that their careers were closely tied together. Given that the Justice Department claims that Wilkes gave more than $600,000 in bribes to a sitting member of Congress, the association, for better or worse, inevitably cast some taint on Foggo.

But now we know a lot more.

According to the Wall Street Journal and the New York Daily News, Foggo himself is now a target of the expanded Cunningham investigation and federal prosecutors in San Diego are trying to build cases against both Foggo and Wilkes. As the Journal explains, the "criminal investigation centers on whether Mr. Foggo used his postings at the CIA to improperly steer contracts to Mr. Wilkes's companies."

The #3 at the CIA is about to resign on Monday because he's being investigated for his role in one of the biggest congressional bribery scandals in decades. The Director hired him for the job and he quit last Friday. Do you think there's a problem?

__________________

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 05-09-2006 05:26 AM
Paint CHiPs is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Paint CHiPs Click here to Send Paint CHiPs a Private Message Visit Paint CHiPs's homepage! Find more posts by Paint CHiPs Add Paint CHiPs to your buddy list [P] Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Paint CHiPs
Viva Le Me

Registered: Jul 2000
Location: Location Location
Posts: 26420

The bad thing about being shallow and kind of simple is your psychological demons seem kind of evident. TPM Cafe, I'll quote the Salon article in a minute.

quote:

Sidney Blumenthal has a fine piece in Salon today that demonstrates that Bush and Cheney have essentially, and quite deliberately, destroyed the CIA.

Others have hinted at this, but the Goss debacle and the Hayden nomination add much to the story, and Blumenthal knits it all together well. But what he doesn’t touch on, and I’ve never seen mentioned in any previous discussion of Bush and the CIA is the element of parricide involved.


We all take it for granted that Bush’s feelings about his father had something to do with the compulsion to invade Iraq. It could have been the genuine loyalty of a loving son -- Bush supposedly said of Saddam, "he tried to kill my father," sufficient proof that Saddam was evil. Or it could be a lot more complicated, such as a desire to prove to his withholding father, after decades as the inadequate older son, that he could accomplish something, something that had eluded the father himself. Or perhaps to stick it to the father for his perceived loss of nerve in not finishing the job. It’s all fodder for the psychobiographer in every one of us.

But why wouldn’t a similar analysis apply equally, or moreso, to the CIA? The elder Bush was director of the CIA when W was in his late twenties, roughly the period when he had the legendary confrontation with his father over his drinking and general loser-ness, and challenged the father to fight him, "mano a mano." The CIA building is named after his father. And I believe there is some reason to think that the elder Bush’s connection to the Agency predates his appointment as director (without buying the LaRouchite theory that places Bush 41 on the grassy knoll in Dallas). The CIA is a presence in the Bush family life in much the way that Yale is, another institution toward which Bush 43 holds a weird hostility -- and, of course, those two institutions are themselves linked.

I don’t have a very specific theory here, but it seems natural to wonder whether this almost inexplicable hostility to the CIA as an institution has some deeper roots in Bush’s complex relationship to his father.

__________________

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 05-11-2006 09:40 PM
Paint CHiPs is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Paint CHiPs Click here to Send Paint CHiPs a Private Message Visit Paint CHiPs's homepage! Find more posts by Paint CHiPs Add Paint CHiPs to your buddy list [P] Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Paint CHiPs
Viva Le Me

Registered: Jul 2000
Location: Location Location
Posts: 26420

Killing the CIA
In Goss, Bush found the perfect hatchet man to take vengeance on a despised agency. Now Goss is gone, scandal looms -- and the CIA is ruined.

By Sidney Blumenthal

May. 11, 2006 | The moment that the destruction of the Central Intelligence Agency began can be pinpointed to a time, a place and even a memo. On Aug. 6, 2001, CIA director George Tenet presented to President Bush his presidential daily briefing, a startling document titled "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S." Bush did nothing, asked for no further briefings on the issue, and returned to cutting brush at his Crawford, Texas, compound.

In Bush's denial of responsibility after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, the search for scapegoats inevitably focused on the lapse in intelligence and therefore on the CIA, though it was the FBI whose egregious incompetence permitted the plotters to escape apprehension. Bush's intent to invade Iraq set up the battle royal that followed.

Tenet, an inveterate staff careerist held over from the Clinton administration, had ingratiated himself with the new White House tenant with salty stories, but it was in his eagerness to please Bush on Iraq that he ensured his tenure and made himself indispensable. At first, Tenet opposed including in the president's speech of October 2002 the disinformation that Iraq was seeking to build nuclear weaponry using yellowcake uranium Saddam Hussein supposedly sought to purchase in Niger, and the reference was knocked out. Yet, having already been discredited, the falsehood was inserted into the president's State of the Union address of January 2003, becoming the now infamous 16 words.

Tenet reassured Bush that the case for Saddam's possession of WMD was a "slam-dunk." At CIA headquarters in Langley, Va., Tenet promised then Secretary of State Colin Powell that for Powell's Feb. 6, 2003, speech before the U.N. Security Council, the information that would be used to prove Saddam had WMD was ironclad. Powell insisted that Tenet be seated behind him while he spoke as visual reinforcement of his statement's unimpeachable character. Yet every piece of it was false, and the humiliated Powell later said he had been "deceived." Tenet resigned on June 4, 2004, and shortly thereafter was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom.

After the brief interim appointment of CIA professional John McLaughlin, on Aug. 10, 2004, almost three years to the day after the Aug. 6 presidential daily briefing on bin Laden, Bush named Porter Goss the new director of central intelligence. The president was looking for someone to rid him of the troublesome agency. In Goss, he thought he had discovered the perfect man for the bloody job, but the nature of the task undid Goss, and in his unraveling another scandal unfolded.

In the absence of any reliable evidence, CIA analysts had refused to put their stamp of approval on the administration's reasons for the Iraq war. Vice President Dick Cheney and his chief of staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, personally came to Langley to intimidate analysts on several occasions. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and his then deputy secretary, Paul Wolfowitz, constructed their own intelligence bureau, called the Office of Special Plans, to sidestep the CIA and shunt disinformation corroborating the administration's arguments directly to the White House. "The administration used intelligence not to inform decision-making, but to justify a decision already made," Paul Pillar, then the chief Middle East analyst for the CIA, writes in the March-April issue of Foreign Affairs. "The process did not involve intelligence work designed to find dangers not yet discovered or to inform decisions not yet made. Instead, it involved research to find evidence in support of a specific line of argument -- that Saddam was cooperating with al Qaeda -- which in turn was being used to justify a specific policy decision."

But despite urgent pressures to report to the contrary, the CIA never reported that Saddam presented an imminent national security threat to the United States, that he was near to developing nuclear weapons, or that he had any ties to al-Qaida. Moreover, analysts predicted a protracted insurgency after an invasion of Iraq. Tenet, despite the lack of cooperation from the CIA's Directorate of Intelligence, acted as backslapper for the administration's policy.

The White House was in a fury. The CIA's professionalism was perceived as political warfare, and the agency apparently was seen as the center of a conspiracy to overthrow the administration. Inside the offices of the president, the vice president and the secretary of defense, the CIA was referred to as a treasonous enemy. "If we lived in a primitive age, the ground at Langley would be laid waste and salted, and there would be heads on spikes," wrote neoconservative columnist David Brooks in the New York Times on Nov. 13, 2004, citing White House officials and "members of the executive branch" as his sources. Reflecting their rage, he called on Bush to "punish the mutineers ... If the C.I.A. pays no price for its behavior, no one will pay a price for anything, and everything is permitted. That, Mr. President, is a slam-dunk."

Goss combined the old-school tie with cynical zealotry. A graduate of Hotchkiss and Yale (class of 1960) and married to a Pittsburgh heiress, he had served as a CIA operative, left the agency for residence on Sanibel Island, Fla., a resort for the wealthy, bought the local paper, sold it for a fortune, and was elected to the House of Representatives in 1988. There he struck up an alliance with Newt Gingrich and his band of radicals. And after they captured the House in 1994, Goss used his CIA credential to become chairman of the Intelligence Committee.

In that position, he proved his bona fides to the Bush administration time and again. "Those weapons are there," he declared after David Kay, head of the Iraq Survey Group, reported that there were no WMD. He blocked investigations into detainee abuse at Abu Ghraib and into prewar disinformation churned by the neoconservatives' favorite Iraqi exile, Ahmed Chalabi. "I would say that the oversight has worked well in matters relating to Mr. Chalabi," Goss said. He also derided the notion of investigating the outing of covert CIA operative Valerie Plame Wilson: "Somebody sends me a blue dress and some DNA, I'll have an investigation." Goss was on board with the cavalier way in which Plame was outed, a breach that revealed ingrained contempt for the agency as well as the supremacy of political objectives over national security.

On April 21, 2005, his mission dictated by Bush's political imperatives, Goss became CIA director. Immediately, he sent a memo to all employees, ordering them to "support the administration and its policies in our work." He underscored the supremacy of the party line: "As agency employees we do not identify with, support, or champion opposition to the administration or its policies."

He installed four political aides to run the agency from his offices on the seventh floor at Langley. Within weeks, an exodus of professionals began and then turned into a flood. In the Directorate of Operations, he lost the director, two deputies, and more than a dozen department and division directors and station chiefs out in the field. In the Directorate of Intelligence, dozens took early retirement. Four former operations chiefs, horrified by the carnage, sought to meet with Goss, but he refused.

As a result of hectoring by the 9/11 Commission, Bush established the position of national director of intelligence, a new layer of bureaucracy, but one that lacked operational or intelligence resources of its own. Suddenly, the CIA's preeminence was shattered. Since its creation by the National Security Act of 1947 at the onset of the Cold War, the CIA had dominated the intelligence community. But now the "central" part of the CIA was handed off to the new NDI, whose lines of authority and power were untested and uncertain.

The "global war on terror," meanwhile, was a boon to the concentration of power within the Pentagon, and that department gained control of more than 80 percent of the total budget for intelligence. Without its assigned place at the top of the pyramid, the CIA became disoriented and ever more peripheral. That suited Rumsfeld's empire building. And the CIA's plight was aggravated by the power grabs of the first NDI, John Negroponte (coincidentally an old Yale classmate of Goss'). Without natural functions of its own, Negroponte's office seized them from the CIA.

Acting on the president's charge, Goss in effect purged the CIA. He was even conducting lie detector interrogations of officers to root out the sources of stories leaked to the press -- to the Washington Post, for example, in its Pulitzer Prize-winning exposé of CIA "black site" prisons where detainees are jailed without any due process, Red Cross inspection or Geneva Conventions protection. Last month, a CIA agent, Mary McCarthy, was fired for her contact with a reporter. Like others subjected to questioning, she was asked her political affiliation.

But Goss' purging weakened the agency and his own inherent bureaucratic strength in relation to his voracious rivals at the Directorate of National Intelligence and the Pentagon. The more he served as the president's loyalist, the less was his power. By fulfilling his mission, he diminished himself. The butcher's defense of the integrity of the CIA from the directorate and the Pentagon lacked all conviction.

Goss' attempt to run the CIA through his own band of loyalists proved his ultimate undoing. It turned out that the "gosslings," as they were known at Langley (after "quislings"), had unsavory connections that trailed them into the agency. An unintended consequence of Goss' dependence on his team of political hatchet men was that his future was dependent on their past.

As Goss parried with Negroponte and Rumsfeld, federal investigators began to close in on his third-ranked official, in charge of contracting, Kyle "Dusty" Foggo, for possibly granting illegal contracts to Brent Wilkes, the military contractor named as "co-conspirator No. 1" in the indictment of convicted former Republican Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham, now serving eight years in prison for accepting $2.4 million in bribes. Wilkes, who gave $630,000 in cash and favors to Cunningham, remains under investigation by prosecutors. Cunningham has confessed to accepting a $100,000 bribe from "co-conspirator No. 1." Wilkes' business associate, Mitchell Wade, has pleaded guilty to bribing Cunningham.

For years, Wilkes hosted "hospitality suites" at the Watergate Hotel for House members and other associates that involved poker games and, allegedly, prostitutes. That, too, is under investigation. Foggo has admitted his presence, but "just for poker." At least six House members, unnamed so far, are alleged to have participated. Goss has denied attending as CIA director, but not as an elected representative. Yet another hand at the poker table has been identified as Brant Bassett, aka "Nine Fingers." Bassett was Goss' staff director on the House Intelligence Committee and was hired as a consultant to the CIA's Directorate of Operations.

Foggo and Wilkes are best friends going back to high school in suburban San Diego. They were roommates at San Diego State, where they were members of the Young Republicans, were best men at each other's weddings, and named their sons after each other. Wilkes pays for a joint wine locker for them at the Capital Grille steakhouse favored by lobbyists and Republican legislators.

The White House announcement of Goss' resignation was incredibly abrupt, without advance warning or a named successor. White House aides frenetically briefed the press that the sole reason was an internecine conflict between Goss and Negroponte. But such an internal controversy could have been managed for a smooth transition. Something else appeared to be at work.

Indeed, in March, the CIA's inspector general had launched an investigation into Foggo's relationship with Wilkes, who had received CIA contracts in Iraq. Three days after Goss left, Foggo quit, too. In a highly unusual development, two days later, on Wednesday, the special agent in charge of the Defense Criminal Investigative Service's investigation in the "Duke" Cunningham case, Rick Gwin, spoke publicly: "This is much bigger and wider than just Randy 'Duke' Cunningham," he told Southern California's North County Times. "All that has just not come out yet, but it won't be much longer and then you will know just how widespread this is."

President Bush has nominated Gen. Michael Hayden, the former director of the National Security Agency and currently Negroponte's deputy, as the new CIA director. He has distinguished himself as a loyalist to the administration by using his uniform as a shield against the heat generated by the revelation of illegal domestic surveillance by the NSA.

Regardless of anodyne assurances offered in his forthcoming congressional testimony, Hayden will preside over the liquidation of the CIA as it has been known. The George H.W. Bush CIA headquarters building in Langley will of course remain standing. But the agency will be chipped apart, some of its key parts absorbed by other agencies, with the Pentagon emerging as the ultimate winner.

The militarization of intelligence under Bush is likely to guarantee military solutions above other options. Uniformed officers trained to identity military threats and trends will take over economic and political intelligence for which they are untrained and often incapable, and their priorities will skew analysis. But the bias toward the military option will be one that the military in the end will dislike. It will find itself increasingly bearing the brunt of foreign policy and stretched beyond endurance. The vicious cycle leads to a downward spiral. And Hayden's story will be like a dull shadow of Powell's -- a tale of a "good soldier" who salutes, gets promoted, is used and abused, and is finally discarded.

No president has ever before ruined an agency at the heart of national security out of pique and vengeance. The manipulation of intelligence by political leadership demands ever tightened control. But political purges provide only temporary relief from the widening crisis of policy failure.

__________________

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 05-11-2006 09:42 PM
Paint CHiPs is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Paint CHiPs Click here to Send Paint CHiPs a Private Message Visit Paint CHiPs's homepage! Find more posts by Paint CHiPs Add Paint CHiPs to your buddy list [P] Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote