Scrubbers

Buried Under a Blizzard of Bullshit

Bob Fertik — Sat, 12 May 2007 08:40:49 -0400

Kagro X notes A year has passed. Are you getting your oversight?

Well, we're not getting any answers from DoJ, even though the answers appear painfully obvious. And next week is the deadline for compliance with the subpoenas for Karl Rove's U.S. Attorneys e-mails and Condi Rice's testimony on pre-war intelligence and "the sixteen words."

Anybody think the committees are going to be fully satisfied after next week?

Of course not. We've watched how the Busheviks treat Congressional hearings - they secretly scrub the key documents while publicly sending witnesses to Congress to bury it in a blizzard of bullshit - or as Kyle Sampson wrote in a famous email, "gum this to death."

So what should Democrats do next? Kagro suggests reading Article 3 of the Articles of Impeachment against Richard Nixon:

In his conduct of the office of President of the United States, Richard M. Nixon, contrary to his oath faithfully to execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has failed without lawful cause or excuse to produce papers and things as directed by duly authorized subpoenas issued by the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives

To spell it out for dimwitted Democrats: I-M-P-E-A-C-H !

Miersgate: Harriet Played Key Role in Texas Lottery Scandal

Bob Fertik — Sun, 09 Oct 2005 20:01:56 -0400

Bush's nomination of Harriet Miers is widely seen - on both the left and the right - as an act of crude cronyism, a payback to an utterly loyal aide.

But is that all there is to the story? Or is the nomination a reward for crimes Miers committed on Bush's behalf? Worse yet, did Miers actually force Bush to nominate her through blackmail?

These are the shocking implications of this shocking report by tas at Loaded Mouth, which is based on the reporting of Greg Palast.

The heart of the question is Miers' role in a no-bid contract bribe to silence former Texas House Speaker Ben Barnes. Barnes is the man who got Bush into the Texas Air National Guard (TANG) in 1968 ahead of a waiting list of 500 other applicants, many of whom had far superior qualifications for a coveted pilot's slot.

(Barnes admitted his role on 60 Minutes on 9/8/04 - the same show which featured the infamous "Killian memos" that were most likely forged by Karl Rove's dirty trickster Roger Stone. Because of the Rove-manufactured blogstorm over the "Killian memos," Barnes' explosive revelation received virtually no coverage.)

When Bush ran for Texas Governor in 1994 against incumbent Ann Richards, everyone wondered how Bush dodged Vietnam and got into TANG. They assumed, naturally, that Bush's powerful family pulled strings. During a TV debate, journalist Jim Moore asked Bush whether his father had used influence. But Bush adamantly insisted that he got in on his merits alone, and no strings were pulled for him.

But Ben Barnes knew the truth, and decided to cash in on their little secret by blackmailing Bush.

After several decades in Texas politics, Barnes had become the lobbyist for the company that managed the Texas Lottery - a Rhode Island lottery company called GTech. GTech was corrupt and was overcharging Texas for its services, and many Texans wanted the contract rebid. Bush supported rebidding during the 1994 campaign.

But thanks to Barnes' lobbying/blackmail, Bush ended up renewing GTech's no-bid contract in 1996. And to thank Barnes for his priceless service, GTech paid Barnes $23 million in 1997 as they eased him out the door amidst a GTech scandal in New Jersey.

And who was Bush's appointed Chairwoman of the Texas Lottery Commission from 1995 through 2000? Harriet Miers.

Miers' role was revealed in an anonymous whistleblower letter to the Justice Department that Greg Palast received and reported on in 1999.

Several months ago many of us felt that the Lottery Commission should rebid the GTech contract when it came up for renewal. Leaders of the Republican Party strongly supported rebidding and I believe the Chair of the Commission also wanted to rebid. It is now time to disclose at least one reason why it was not rebid. Governor Bush thru Reggie Bashur made a deal with Ben Barnes not to rebid because Barnes could confirm that Bush had lied during the 94 campaign.

Bashur was sent to talk to Barnes who agreed never to confirm the story and the Governor talked to the Chair of the Lottery two days later and she then agreed to support letting GTech keep the contract without a bid.

This was not the end of Miers' efforts to silence Barnes. In 1998, when Bush was running for re-election as Texas Governor, Karen Hughes was laying the groundwork for a 2000 Presidential campaign. To make sure there were no skeletons in Bush's closet, Hughes hired Miers to "scrub" any potential problems. Miers sent Bush's top fundraiser, Don Evans, to see Barnes to make sure the $23 million bribe was still in effect. As Newsweek's Michael Isikoff wrote on 7/20/2000:

The Bushies' concern began while he was running for a second term as governor. A hard-nosed Dallas lawyer named Harriet Miers was retained to investigate the issue; state records show Miers was paid $19,000 by the Bush gubernatorial campaign. She and other aides quickly identified a problem--rumors that Bush had help from his father in getting into the National Guard back in 1968. Ben Barnes, a prominent Texas Democrat and a former speaker of the House in the state legislature, told friends he used his influence to get George W a guard slot after receiving a request from Houston oilman Sid Adger. Barnes said Adger told him he was calling on behalf of the elder George Bush, then a Texas congressman. Both Bushes deny seeking any help from Barnes or Adger, who has since passed away. Concerned that Barnes might go public with his allegations, the Bush campaign sent Don Evans, a friend of W's, to hear Barnes's story. Barnes acknowledged that he hadn't actually spoken directly to Bush Sr. and had no documents to back up his story. As the Bush campaign saw it, that let both Bushes off the hook. And the National Guard question seemed under control.

Will "Miersgate" destroy Harriet's chances of getting on the Supreme Court? That depends on how aggressively Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee investigate this scandal - and the many other Bush scandals in which Miers has played a key role.

What they need is a credible witness - and they have one. His name is Lawrence Littwin, and he is the former director of the Texas Lottery Commission. He was hired in Feburary, 1997, and fired in October, 1997 - both while Miers was Chair. Best of all, Littwin is just waiting to be subpoenaed.

Bush's Guard service may affect Miers nomination
A former Texas Lottery official said he wants to talk to senators about the Supreme Court nominee's role in covering up his Bush's record

By Ken Herman
AUSTIN AMERICAN-STATESMAN WASHINGTON BUREAU
Tuesday, October 4, 2005

A former Texas lottery official, who claimed that then-Gov. George W. Bush's desire to cover up his National Guard record helped steer decisions about a key lottery contract, said he wants to talk to senators about Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers' possible role in that effort.

"If I were to be subpoenaed to come to the thing, I would come," said Lawrence Littwin, who filed a lawsuit after he was fired as the lottery's executive director in 1997. "I would say the committee, I think, would be interested."

Miersgate is a mirror-image of Bush's Funeralgate scandal, which Democrats.com first exposed in an article by Roses Prichard on February 8, 2001. Littwin, like Funeralgate's Eliza May, was fired for investigating crimes by Bush's cronies. Littwin, like May, filed a lawsuit for unlawful firing. Littwin, like May, received a 6-figure settlement. Littwin, like May, got the money on condition of permanent silence. But Littwin is willing to testify - as long as he is responding to a subpoena.

Under terms of the settlement, Littwin would have to forfeit $50,000 if he violates the confidentiality agreement. He said Monday that his lawyer told him he could testify if subpoenaed by the Senate.

In the coming hours, we will organize a campaign to lobby the Senate to subpoena Lawrence Littwin and investigate Miersgate - so stay tuned...

Update: Texas journalist Jim Moore knows more about this story than anyone, and tells the tale in the Huffington Post.

The Smoking Gun: John Roberts 'Lawyered' the Iran-Contra Scandal

Bob Fertik — Thu, 25 Aug 2005 10:55:18 -0400

We found the smoking gun in the Roberts nomination - the Iran-Contra scandal. PentaPost reports:

One file withheld, regarding the Iran-contra affair, was a draft memo from Roberts to his bosses with the heading "re: establishment of NHAO" -- referring to the Nicaraguan Humanitarian Assistance Office.

The office was one of the ways the Reagan administration got around what were known as the Boland amendments, which prohibited U.S. intelligence agencies from spending money to overthrow the Sandinistas. The office was a way the administration could get funds to the contras for nonmilitary purposes, but once there the money was used for all sorts of things.

In other words, John Roberts "lawyered" the Iran-Contra Scandal - one of the worst scandals in American history.

Now we know why Karl Rove is scrubbing Roberts' files!!!

In the 1990's, Senate Democrats let the architects of the Iran-Contra scandal escape without punishment. Oliver North became a media celebrity (and nearly a U.S. Senator), John Poindexter got hired by George Bush to create the Big Brother ("Total Information Awareness") office at the Pentagon. And Elliot Abrams took over Middle East policy at the National Security Council, where he played (and continues to play) a secret but crucial role in the Iraq War disaster.

Have Senate Democrats learned their lesson? Or will they let a key Iran-Contra lawyer become a Supreme Court Justice?

Tell your Senators to oppose John Roberts if he had anything to do with the Iran-Contra Scandal.

They're Scrubbing John Roberts' Files!

Bob Fertik — Wed, 10 Aug 2005 01:56:05 -0400

Red Alert!!!!

The Busheviks are scrubbing John Roberts' files. Just read between the lines in this Pentagon Post article:

Thrown on the defensive by recent revelations about Supreme Court nominee John G. Roberts Jr.'s legal work, White House aides are delaying the release of tens of thousands of documents from the Reagan administration to give themselves time to find any new surprises before they are turned into political ammunition by Democrats...

White House aides are exerting full control over the documents still under their authority. Under an executive order signed by Bush in 2001, the White House has the right to review, and in some cases block, the release of presidential papers from previous administrations. White House lawyers have been dispatched to the Reagan library in Simi Valley, Calif., where they are combing through documents that have not been released.

This is not a stonewall, as Armando claims on Kos. When will Democrats - and progressive bloggers like - wake up to the fact that the Busheviks always scrub incriminating documents from the files???

Didn't anyone learn this crucial lesson from the AWOL story - that Karen Hughes in 1997 removed all of the Texas Air National Guard documents that proved Bush was AWOL? Bill Burkett watched TANG officials throw the documents in the trash, and he was telling the truth.

They did the same thing in Plamegate, when Alberto Gonzales gave White House officials 67 days to scrub incriminating documents.

Now they are scrubbing Roberts' file to make sure Democrats don't get their hands on any documents that expose Roberts' real thoughts.

Democrats and journalists should immediately file FOIA requests for all of Roberts' files. They should also send letters to the National Archives with detailed questions about how they will protect all of Roberts' files from unauthorized scrubbing.

"Galloway's Senate Testimony Scrubbed from Official Subcommittee Website!"

Ted Kahl — Fri, 20 May 2005 22:18:05 -0400

From Brad Blog:

The stunning testimony given by British MP George Galloway before the U.S. Senate subcommittee on Investigations is apparently so hot that it seems to have "gone AWOL" from the subcommittee's website according to the British newsite VNU Network.

The BRAD BLOG can confirm that all witness testimony -- except that of Galloway's -- from last Tuesday's extraordinary hearings is available in PDF format on the subcommittee's webpage on the hearings.

At those hearings, Galloway blasted subcommittee Chairman Sen Norm Coleman's (R-MN) investigation into the U.N. Oil-for-Food "scandal" which Galloway referred to as "the mother of all smokescreens".