by emptywheel
Boy. Lurita Doan can't catch a break. Just last month, Bill Frist avoided charges of insider trading by backing up his story with his crackberry files. (In the Bush Administration, narrowly avoiding insider trading charges apparently qualifies you to run the World Bank.) But Doan's own crackberry files apparently proved she was lying her ass off when she claimed to be distracted from Scott Jennings' political presentation at a GSA brownbag.
When questioned concerning Mr. Jennings' PowerPoint presentation, Administrator Doan testified that she did not remember seeing any of the slides from his presentation, nor did she recall any of the comments that were made by Mr. Jennings during his presenation. Ms. Doan alleged that she was not paying attention during Mr. Jennings' presentation for the following reasons: she dislikes PowerPoint presentations; she was uninterested in the topic; she does not care about polls; and, she felt the presentation had nothing to do with her or what she does on a daily basis at GSA. Lastly, Administrator Doan testified that she was on her Blackberry (personal digital assistant device) reviewing emails during Mr. Jennings' presentation and only periodically looked up and down.
[snip]
OSC attempted to corroborate Ms. Doan's testimony that she was on her Blackberry during the January meeting.
Specifically, OSC requested all of her private and government email records for January 26, 2007, in an attempt to establish that Administrator Doan sent, read, composed, deleted, or moved messages on her Blackberry during the January meeting.
[snip]
Thus, despite our efforts, OSC was unable to corroborate that Administrator Doan was utilizing her Blackberry or other personal digital assistant during the January 26 meeting.
The report continues like that, slapping down one after another of Doan's thinly veiled lies. There's a particularly delicious passage where the report rips apart Doan's claims not to understand the difference between testifying she did not remember making a statement (in this case, the statement asking how GSA could help Republican candidates) and testifying she didn't make that statement. The report cites Doan's own Government Reform testimony where she makes clear that she understands the distinction. In the end, though, Doan finally said she didn't remember making such a statement, which may be the only thing saving her from a perjury charge.
Though maybe Doan will actually get that perjury charge. When confronted with numerous accounts that differed from her own, Doan claimed all those testifying against her had "poor to totally inferior" performance--in spite of the fact that all had performance reviews recording that they met or exceeded expectations.
For her part, Doan plans to dispute the conclusions of the report.
Under the law, Doan has the opportunity to respond to the findings before they are finalized and a formal recommendation is sent to the White House for Bush's review.
In a statement, Doan said she fundamentally disagrees with the findings, which she called preliminary. "I have an opportunity, which I will take, to work with the Office of Special Counsel to correct the many inaccuracies before the final report is issued," she said.
And she complains that the report was leaked.
Her attorney, Michael J. Nardotti Jr., said he and his client "disagree with the report's conclusions," and specifically "have concerns about its approach and tone." He also said it was "tremendously unfair" that information in a confidential investigative process was leaked publicly.
I'll bet Doan and her lawyer are pissed this report got leaked--kudos to whatever person in OPC liberated this report, which was provided to at least the WaPo and LAT. As the report notes, only President Bush can implement the recommendation of the report, which is to fire Doan. Any bets on whether, by leaking the report, the chances are greater that Doan will actually be canned for her illegal political activities?
Making Ms. Doan pay a price for her illegal behavior is what Mr. Lundgren would call "criminalizing" politics. As a description of routine govt'l oversight, that's an overwrought whine; as a description of routine behavior by this administration, I'd say he's right on the money.
Posted by: earlofhuntingdon | May 24, 2007 at 09:41
Yet another case where I hope Bush sticks to his instincts. I hope he keeps ole Lurita in there till the cows come home. Same for AGAG. Let's keep the whole ship of fools front and center right up till November of '08.
Posted by: kaleidescope | May 24, 2007 at 09:49
If politicians commit crimes and get charged, is that "criminalizing politics"?
Saw a reference at TPM about voter identification with Reps being down to 26%, lower than Dems and independepents.
Perhaps our belief that Bush and his loyal minions are destroying the value of the Republican "brand" is being justified.
Posted by: Albert Fall | May 24, 2007 at 09:54
it's more like "politicizing criminals", or "How Karl Rove ascended to his lofty, delusionary status as a master manipulator...
Posted by: JEP | May 24, 2007 at 10:14
Laurita Done? Something like Gone-zales?
Posted by: JEP | May 24, 2007 at 10:17
Kaleidoscope at 9:49
"Let's keep the whole ship of fools front and center right up till November of '08."
Is that why Pelosi was smiling when she announced the Democrat's acquiescence to Bush's demands? The Republicans know the longer Bush "wins" the more their waning 2008 opportunities diminish.
There's another possible consideration... just think about this one; maybe Bush has secretly agreed to everything the Dems are demanding, maybe Bush WILL withdraw our troops according to popular opinion, but he MUST be allowed to make it look like it was his own doing, just to maintain his delusions. So they (Congressional Dems) can't put it into writing or legislation. The last time they made such noises, Bush sent another 30,000 innocent Americans to Iraq his "surge."
And now they're talking about even MORE troops, makes one wonder when will they atop using the lives of our soldiers as their political trump cards?
So, maybe that was the deal... don't go public, and Bush will do what they want...
His choice for "War Czar" (is that akin to "Lord of War"?) certainly suggests Bush is leaning towards some sort of silent, serriptitious capitulation. It may be that Pelosi has accomplished everything she wanted, and she's wise enough to let Bush have his leadership delusions, as long as he ends this war sooner than later.
Every minute counts, especially for many military families in America and and every family in Iraq.
Posted by: JEP | May 24, 2007 at 10:34
the frist will not escape a real investigation. perfect candidate for the world bank no? he manipulates the stock market for his benefit, and has his friends absolve him. one can hope it will be different when a real investigation begins, if it begins. the world bank needs someone that isn't human scum in control. what a laugh to think that would ever happen.
Posted by: oldtree | May 24, 2007 at 10:52
That BushCo would even consider for a moment someone like Frist, who proved he lacks management skills as Senate leader and has no real finance background to head the World Bank after the Wolfowitz fiasco says volumes about their disdain for expertise and need for loyalty. Can't the Board of Governors reject Bush's pick? This REALLY doesn't speak well for Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson.
Posted by: Mimikatz | May 24, 2007 at 11:56
It's apparently more than consideration Mimikatz. Apparently Wolfie is now perhaps the leading candidates.
Posted by: emptywheel | May 24, 2007 at 13:14
aw, c'mon emptywheel, you know Lurita means well.
Posted by: Elliott | May 24, 2007 at 13:21
JEP: "Criminalizing politics" is exactly the same as, is the flipside of, and is intimately tied to "Politicizing crime." What's the difference? Perspective.
Posted by: EH | May 24, 2007 at 14:10
another repuglican who is incapable of telling the truth
does ANYBODY see a pattern here ??? (not you shit stain jodi, I know you can't recognize a pattern)
scooter libby, a lying fuck
abu gonzo, a lying fuck
sampson, a lying fuck
goodling, a lying fuck
wolfowitz, a lying fuck
is there a single member of the repuglican party who can actually tell the truth(we all know you're incapable of recognizing the truth shit stain, so don't even try)
Posted by: freepatriot | May 24, 2007 at 14:38
If Doan gets written up for Hatch Act violations, how can it be that Jennings and Rove aren't lumped in as part of the same enterprise?
Posted by: mayan | May 24, 2007 at 14:54
It would be interesting to watch Doan's testimony again armed with this new knowledge and identify all her tells.
Polticizing criminals is keeping them in office despite probably cause of criminal conduct. As Artur Davis pointed out on the NewsHour yesterday, that is a very low bar indeed.
Politicizing investigations and overnemnt oversight is trying to disrupt them or extinguish them rather than find the facts.
Criminlzing politics is impeaching the "vice" President for lying about a blow job - we can say blow job here, can't we?. Criminalizing politics is indicting on a meritless voter fraud case prior to an election.
Posted by: Neil | May 24, 2007 at 16:30
Waxman now wants to have a chat
http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/003296.php
Posted by: njr | May 24, 2007 at 18:30
To me, the most significant thing about this report is Jenning's demand that the conversation be taken "off-line." In other words, he didn't say that the conversation was inappropriate, and that government resources should not be used to advance a political agenda, he said it had to be done in secret.
Posted by: p.lukasiak | May 25, 2007 at 07:39