Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: State Department security chief recuses self amid Iraq/Blackwater scandals

  1. #1
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    14,741
    Post Thanks / Like

    State Department security chief recuses self amid Iraq/Blackwater scandals

    Same story over and over.

    [QUOTE]State Department security chief recuses self amid Iraq/Blackwater scandals

    WASHINGTON (AP) - In a stunning move, the State Department official responsible for ensuring the agency operates ethically recused himself Wednesday from any investigations related to Blackwater Worldwide after admitting to lawmakers that his brother is a member of the embattled security contractor's advisory board.

    The revelation by Howard Krongard, the department's inspector general, came as Republicans on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee were defending him from what they said were politically motivated attacks.

    Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., and other Democrats on the committee seized on the admission as further evidence Krongard has politicized his office and undermined inquiries that targeted Blackwater or that might embarrass Bush administration officials.

    Waxman said Krongard's tenure as the State Department's inspector general reveals a pattern of "reckless incompetence."

    Krongard first told the committee his brother, Alvin Krongard, had assured him several weeks ago that he had no financial interest or connections to Blackwater, which is the subject of several federal investigations related to its work in Iraq.

    After the committee returned from a brief break, however, Krongard said he had just called his brother, a former top official at the CIA, and was told otherwise. Howard Krongard said his brother had attended a Blackwater strategic planning meeting Monday and Tuesday in Williamsburg, Va.

    "I reached him at home; he is not at the hotel," Howard Krongard said. "But I learned he had been at the advisory board meeting yesterday. I had not been aware of that. I want to state on the record right now that I hereby recuse myself from any matters having to do with Blackwater."

    The reversal put Republicans who supported Krongard on the defensive and gave additional ammunition to Democrats who contend he has impeded State Department probes to protect Bush administration officials from political embarrassment.

    "He has done you a tremendous damage," Rep. Christopher Shays, R-Conn., told Krongard. "I don't know what kind of conversation you had with him, but I would have been one unhappy guy."

    Krongard maintained he never interfered with any investigations, and he blamed allegations that he did on a dysfunctional office that he was attempting to transform.

    Krongard said he has no political ties and has never communicated with anyone in the White House since he took the job nearly two and half years ago.

    Before the break, committee Democrats produced a July 26 letter from Blackwater CEO Erik Prince inviting Alvin Krongard to join his company's advisory board. The board would offer advice on the paths Blackwater should take to expand its business.

    "Your experience and insight would be ideal to help our team determine where we are and where we are going," Prince said.

    Expenses for attending board meetings would be paid and board members would receive a $3,500 honorarium for each meeting attended.

    But Krongard said his brother had assured him he had no conflicts of interest.

    "I'm not my brother's keeper," Krongard said when he was pressed to explain how he could have been unaware of the connection.

    Blackwater, which has a major State Department contract to protect U.S. diplomats in Iraq, is the target of a probe into allegations that its employees smuggled weapons into Iraq. Federal investigators also continue to examine a Sept. 16 shooting in Baghdad involving Blackwater guards that killed 17 Iraqis.

    Waxman and others had suggested Alvin Krongard's ties to Blackwater were the main reason Howard Krongard sidelined the State Department's probe into weapons smuggling charges.

    Waxman has accused Krongard, a Republican political appointee, of politicizing the inspector general's office at the State Department by interfering with ongoing investigations.

    "At 65 years of age, I came to office with no aspiration for any further position and with no agenda other than to do the best job I could of carrying out the specific mission prescribed for me by senior management at the State Department at that time: namely, to restore the capabilities of an IG office that had fallen into disrepair, and was known to have dissension and rivalries, and to make it more efficient, more professional and more relevant to a dynamic post-9/11 world environment," Krongard said in his opening statement.

    [B]In September, Waxman sent Krongard a 14-page letter detailing serious accusations against him lodged by seven current and former officials from his own office. They accused Krongard of preventing his staff from cooperating with Justice Department probes and refusing to send his staff to Iraq and Afghanistan to look into allegations of fraud and wasteful spending involving the more than $3.6 billion the State Department has spent on contracts in the two countries.[/B]

    "I want to say in the strongest terms that I never impeded any investigation," Krongard told the committee.

    While Waxman and other committee Democrats have criticized Krongard's performance, the embattled inspector general has allies on the Republican side.

    In a report by the committee's minority staff, Republican members accused the Democrats of "governing by personal attack."

    The allegations against Krongard remain unsubstantiated and indicate only that Krongard had an "abrasive and abusive personality," they said.

    "The majority's expenditure of time and taxpayer funds spent proving that the State Department IG is abrasive and abusive is itself an abuse of the committee's authority," the Republicans said.
    On the Net:

    * State Department: [url]http://www.state.go[/url]
    * House Oversight and Government Reform Committee: [url]http://oversight.house.gov/[/url][/QUOTE]
    [url]http://www.wavy.com/Global/story.asp?S=7364020[/url]

  2. #2
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    6,159
    Post Thanks / Like
    The tempest in a teapot rages on.

  3. #3
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    14,741
    Post Thanks / Like
    Hey why not, it is not a big deal to politicize the DOJ, let's keep at it and do the same in the IG's office as well. Pathetic.

    I am sure CBTNY will be asking why this guy will not be charged with perjury as well.

  4. #4
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    7,280
    Post Thanks / Like
    State Department - The federal gov't workers that won't go to the embassy in Iraq.

    How can you expect any loyalty to the constitution from that department?

  5. #5
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    6,159
    Post Thanks / Like
    Guys, as a country the US is trying to prosecute [I]a[/I] war - and not prosecute [I]the[/I] war. Just because moveon.org & crew can't figure out the difference doesn't mean you guys can't.

  6. #6
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    14,741
    Post Thanks / Like
    Yea, you are right, why should we hold anyone accountable when it comes to spending tax dollars.




    [QUOTE=sackdance;2212813]Guys, as a country the US is trying to prosecute [I]a[/I] war - and not prosecute [I]the[/I] war. Just because moveon.org & crew can't figure out the difference doesn't mean you guys can't.[/QUOTE]

  7. #7
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    6,159
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=cr726;2213578]Yea, you are right, why should we hold anyone accountable when it comes to spending tax dollars.[/QUOTE]

    Why finish up national business when we can scrutinize it instead? Duh.

  8. #8
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    14,741
    Post Thanks / Like
    Ignorance is bliss.

    [QUOTE=sackdance;2213602]Why finish up national business when we can scrutinize it instead? Duh.[/QUOTE]

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us