House Intelligence Committee Stonewalling

by emptywheel

During the book salon chat on The Wrong Stuff yesterday, we discussed the House Intelligence Committee report on how Duke Cunningham managed to scam so much money for his friends. Lo and behold, the LAT has a long article on it today (hat tip Kentucky Jelly). The report, though, is pretty disappointing. If Congressional Intelligence Committees are good at one thing, after all, it is scoping investigations to hide the dirt.

The report's principal author said in an interview that the terms under which he was hired to conduct the investigation prevented him from examining lawmakers' roles.

"There was an agreement as to what they wanted to look at, and that was not anything that could be looked at under the sun," said Michael Stern, a former attorney in the House counsel's office who was hired by the committee to lead the internal probe. "The language did not include the culpability or potential involvement of other members."

Stern said that the full, 59-page report he prepared a year ago was classified, but that he also provided the committee a 23-page version that had been scrubbed of classified material. The Times obtained the declassified version.

Nevertheless, Pete Hoekstra throws a fit every time we get close to declassifying the complete report.

Congressional sources said Reyes and other Democrats had initially voted to let other members of Congress see the document, but reversed course after a fierce protest by the panel's ranking GOP member, Peter Hoekstra of Michigan.

Who uses lizard logic to claim the report shows nothing of interest:

Jamal Ware, a spokesman for Hoekstra, stressed that the investigation found no wrongdoing by staffers or other members, and said the findings were never intended to be released.

After all, if the report was scoped to exclude any inquiry into members roles, then it's not surprising that the report found no wrongdoing by staffers or other members, right?

Of all lawmakers, though, it seems clear the report stayed furthest away from Peter Goss' role.

For instance, the report avoids any scrutiny of former Rep. Porter J. Goss (R-Fla.), who was chairman of the panel when Cunningham's most egregious abuses occurred. Goss went on to serve as CIA director, from September 2004 to May 2006.

[snip]

Current and former intelligence committee officials said staffers facing such pressure would almost certainly call the issue to the attention of their elected bosses.

Goss does not remember staff ever bringing the issue to his attention, although he felt that Cunningham had become overly partisan for a nonpartisan committee, according to an individual close to Goss. The individual asked not to be named because of the sensitivity of the issue.

[snip]

The report makes only a glancing reference to Goss, saying that early in his tenure he "would make a point of saying that 'We don't do things for constituencies behind the closed doors' " of the intelligence committee. But this policy, the report concludes, "tended to atrophy over time."

[snip]

Largely because of Foggo's committee connections, Foggo was elevated to the No. 3 job at the agency after Goss became CIA director in 2004.

Gosh, you think maybe the Republicans don't want to admit that one of their own loaded the CIA up with people he knew to be bilking taxpayers?

I'm also interested whether the report would shine a light on others' involvement in this contracting. After all, Mitch Wade used to brag that he had Dick Cheney in his backpocket, right where his contract payments were going. Is Hoekstra protecting Goss ... or is he protecting Dick?

Comments

[Canuck Stuck in Muck]

I'm guessing the Demos went along with Hoekstra when they realized that one of their own, Jack Murtha, was one of the perps who would've been exposed by releasing the report, or be put in jeopardy should the investigation ever be expanded to include those "other members."

[William Ockham]

Is Hoekstra protecting Goss ... or is he protecting Dick?
Yes

[chris]

Hmmmm...

Even Bassett expressed discomfort with Cunningham's manipulation of the system. According to the report, Bassett told senior committee staffers that he had "no confidence that Mitch Wade or anybody he was connected with really knew anything about counterintelligence or could do a good job for the U.S. taxpayer in that area."

During yesterdays chat on FDL, Marcus Stern said

On the plus side, having MZM do the domestic spying meant not a lot of spying would get done. But those programs and contracts are still in place.

So, MZM may have been pretty crappy intel experts, yet they provided assessment on Sadaam Hussein's nuclear capabilities during the runup to the war. They had 3 staffers on the WH WMD Commission. And the Robb-Silverman commission employed 3 MZM executives as expert staff.

Is the undisclosed location Mitchell Wade's pocket?

[Boo Radley]

"Jamal Ware, a spokesman for Hoekstra, stressed that the investigation found no wrongdoing by staffers or other members....."

If there were no felonies "wrongdoing," there is no reason NOT to release the report.

[Boston1775]

Goss does not remember staff ever bringing the issue to his attention, although he felt that Cunningham had become overly partisan for a nonpartisan committee, according to an individual close to Goss. The individual asked not to be named because of the sensitivity of the issue
----------------------------
and Porter Goss went on to become director of the CIA...
Ah, well, that's comforting.

[chris]

Hoekstra is either a total dumbass or a willing co-conspiritor.

On June 21, 2006 Santorum and Hoekstra hold a press conference claiming that WMDs have been found in Iraq and that more are there.

Congressman Hoekstra and I are here today to say that we have found weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, chemical weapons. It's a document that was developed by our intelligence community which for the last two and a half months I have been pursuing.

And thanks to the help of the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, ultimately he was able to get it in his hands and I was able to look for and look at.

Santorum and Hoekstra were dissing the Kay report and Duelfor reports that had concluded that there were no WMDs in Iraq. They are trying to get the intelligence community and military to go look for more WMDs.

The report Hoekstra and Santorum cited came from the NGIC (National Ground Intelligence Center). In light of MZM and NGIC very cozy relationship, I suspect that the classified report Hoekstra and Santorum referred to was pure hokum. They were seeking to declassify it. Just another scene in Cheney's play, "How to Deceive the American People."

[tekel]

The more stories like this I read, the more I think that the chinese model of executing officials for public corruption is inherently better than the way we're doing things.

It speaks to priorities: which is a more egregious crime- murder, or betrayal of the public trust?

[victoria2dc]

Another amazing story about the congressional criminals and their love for the Rubber Stamp!

We need to start the noise machine and get this report unclassified and out. If Murtha goes down, too bad. Corruption is corruption and we can elect a great, young progressive to take this old man's place.

Sorry sir, I know you think you're safe because the media loves you, you military man you. However, it doesn't matter. Criminality is criminal!

[Markinsanfran]

Dick in his back pocket? Good motivation for protecting his ass, I would say.

[emptywheel]

chris

Yes, I think that's a possibility. That is, if MZM was intimately involved in gaming the post-war intell, then it would stand to reason that Hoekstra might not want all of this declassified.

[zhiv]

Pretty good news story from my hometown fishwrap today, but I was very unhappy that it didn't connect at least a couple of more dots and it did seem to aim the pointing finger slightly in the Democrats direction, when they did nothing except hedge on releasing the report. The whole thing is a big Republican window into doing bidness Dukestir-style.

But I just thought it would be nice, in all of this, if Carol Lam's name was mentioned once, as the USA prosecutor behind this whole investigation, and maybe just the simplest timeline matching up the dates of the report to Foggo-Wilkes-Goss and Lam's firing. The uninformed reader would never know that this is the same story, and it would be an interesting poll to see how many pieces and players of the Dukestir saga people know and understand.

Does this report slide nicely into a patented EW Timeline? And I'm still rusty after taking time off, forgetting the names of the other unresolved big thread in this scandal, with Rep. Lewis (Jerry?) or whoever he is and the Gibson signing bonus woman. Is he on this intelligence committee or are he, Murtha, and Cunningham all part of a different committee?

[Kentucky Jelly]

Six Questions for Seth Hettena on the Brent Wilkes Trials

http://harpers.org/archive/2007/07/hbc-90000494

Seth Hettena spent nine years with the Associated Press, where he broke stories about a terrorist suspect who was tortured to death by the CIA, revealed photos of Navy SEALs mistreating Iraqi prisoners, and exposed how the military secretly contracted planes for CIA rendition flights. He also reported extensively on the intimate ties defense contractor Brent Wilkes maintained with Congressman Randy “Duke” Cunningham ( now a federal inmate ) and CIA official Kyle “Dusty” Foggo. He tells that story in his new book, Feasting on the Spoils. With Wilkes soon to go to trial on charges that he bribed Cunningham and Foggo, I recently asked Hettena six questions about the upcoming court cases.

[nellieh]

The Democrats were given the majority in the House to stop this stonewalling bullshit. Hoekstra is NOT the chairman anymore. If Reyes is afraid for himself or any other member or former member of the committee and won't release the WHOLE report he should be replaced. Any Democrat who votes NOT to release it should be replaced and if the report indicates culpability even tacitly they should be investigated also. At least exposed for what they are; either crooks or wimps afraid to stand up to Cunningham. Where is the open government we were promised? where is the sunshine? This is the same shit we have had since 1994 from congress and the last 6 1/2 years of the administration. What the hell is it with Texas politicians? What did WE get for OUR money from these cretins?