Gary Secondino: Legal

U.S. Justice Dept. Super Slow To Investigate Fraud Cases

Thu, 03 Jul 2008 13:26:44 GMT

From the Dept. of You Get The Government You Vote For:

More than 900 cases alleging that government contractors and drugmakers have defrauded taxpayers out of billions of dollars are languishing in a backlog that has built up over the past decade. Many of the cases involve the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, rising health-care payouts, and privatization of government functions -- all of which offer rich new opportunities to swindle taxpayers.

Halliburton, KBR, Others - Fraudulent War Profiteering

Tue, 17 Jun 2008 12:29:48 GMT

Army contracts overseer tells of being forced out of his job of 31 years for refusing to approve paying more than $1 billion in questionable charges to KBR. The Good Friday Massacre A lawsuit was brought on behalf of KBR drivers whose fuel convoy was ambushed on April 2004 in what's known as the Good Friday Massacre. Six drivers were killed. One is still missing and presumed dead. Fifteen were wounded. More on this at Law.com Department of Defense Oversight - The waste will make any sane American furious. The Web of Cover Ups Much more at American Chronicle Example:

"Constitution in Crisis," a book by Congressman John Conyers, details the Bush Administration's response when contract abuse is made public: "Bunnatine Greenhouse was the chief contracting officer at the Army Corps of Engineers, the agency that has managed much of the reconstruction work in Iraq. In October 2004, Ms. Greenhouse came forward and revealed that top Pentagon officials showed improper favoritism to Halliburton when awarding military contracts to Halliburton subsidiary Kellogg Brown & Root (KBR). Greenhouse stated that when the Pentagon awarded Halliburton a five-year $7 billion contract, it pressured her to withdraw her objections, actions which she claimed were unprecedented in her experience. "On June 27, 2005, Ms. Greenhouse testified before Congress, detailing that the contract award process was compromised by improper influence by political appointees, participation by Halliburton officials in meetings where bidding requirements were discussed, and a lack of competition. She stated that the Halliburton contracts represented "the most blatant and improper contract abuse I have witnessed during the course of my professional career." Days before the hearing, the acting general counsel of the Army Corps of Engineers paid Ms. Greenhouse a visit and reportedly let it be known that it would not be in her best interest to appear voluntarily. "On August 27, 2005, the Army demoted Ms. Greenhouse, removing her from the elite Senior Executive Service and transferring her to a lesser job in the corps' civil works division . As Frank Rich of The New York Times described the situation, '[H]er crime was not obstructing justice but pursuing it by vehemently questioning irregularities in the awarding of some $7 billion worth of no-bid contracts in Iraq to the Halliburton subsidiary Kellogg Brown Root.' The demotion was in apparent retaliation for her speaking out against the abuses, even though she previously had stellar reviews and over 20 years of experience in military procurement."

If you want more click here and here and here. Remember Obama's statement about an "oil company windfall profits tax"? Sounds good to the average guy, right? What is the story behind that message to the oil companies? Get the story here.

Comcast and your internet

Wed, 16 Apr 2008 22:42:29 GMT

http://www.scripting.com/stories/2008/04/16/aNewReasonToHateComcast.html Please read. This is classic anti-customer service.

The Pigs Pay Up

Sun, 25 Nov 2007 13:03:43 GMT

Oral Roberts University President, Facing Accusations He Misspent College Funds, Resigns JUSTIN JUOZAPAVICIUS AP News Nov 23, 2007 23:38 EST The president of Oral Roberts University, facing accusations he misspent school funds to support a lavish lifestyle, resigned on Friday, officials said. Richard Roberts' resignation is effective immediately, according to a statement e-mailed from George Pearsons, chairman of the school's Board of Regents. Roberts and the evangelical university have come under fire since three former professors sued last month, alleging wrongful termination. The lawsuit includes allegations of a $39,000 shopping tab at one store for Richard Roberts' wife, Lindsay, a $29,411 Bahamas senior trip on the university jet for one of Roberts' daughters, and a stable of horses for the Roberts children. Roberts, son of school founder and televangelist Oral Roberts, had been on temporary leave from the university, fighting the accusations against him. The Board of Regents had ordered an outside probe of the school's finances. In a recent interview, Roberts and his wife denied wrongdoing. He has said the lawsuit amounted to "intimidation, blackmail and extortion." On Friday, he said in the statement that he loved the university, of which he became president in 1993. "I love ORU with all my heart," he said. "I love the students, faculty, staff and administration and I want to see God's best for all of them." The school will not provide additional comment until next week, spokesman Jeremy Burton said. A message left for Roberts' personal attorney wasn't immediately returned. Gary Richardson, the attorney for the three professors, said, "Those who have seen what we have seen won't have any surprise about the fact that Richard has stepped down." He later said, "There was no option, period." One of the plaintiffs, John Swails, said Roberts "could have spared the university and the students by going ahead and stepping down and admitting his wrongdoing." The professors also alleged in their lawsuit that Richard Roberts required students in a government class to work on 2006 mayoral candidate Randi Miller's campaign. Roberts publicly endorsed Miller, but said then that he was doing so as a private citizen and not as an ORU representative. He has denied the lawsuit's claims that he ordered students to work on Miller's campaign. Professor Tim Brooker, one of the lawsuit plaintiffs, accused the school of forcing him to quit after he warned Roberts that requiring students to work on Miller's campaign jeopardized ORU's tax-exempt status. In the weeks since that lawsuit was filed, others have cropped up, including one from a former senior accountant who alleged that the Robertses ordered him to help them hide improper and illegal financial wrongdoing from the authorities and the public. "This is good news for the university," said Donald Vance, a professor of biblical languages and literature. "It's time for the Board of Regents to step forward with a strong choice, and I hope they will involve the tenured faculty in the process." Two weeks ago, Vance joined the majority of tenured faculty in a vote of "no confidence" in Richard Roberts as president, regardless of the outcome of the lawsuit. Cornell Cross II, a senior government major, said the resignation is "an excellent step to fix the university," but believes the school's most trying days lie ahead. "This is not over, there a lot of things that need to continue," Cross said. "The culture of fear that has been allowed to fester at ORU has to be looked into. "We still haven't heard any admission of wrongdoing or any kind of humility or contrition," he said. The school's regents will meet Monday and Tuesday to determine action in the search process for a new president, Pearsons said in the statement. Executive Regent Billy Joe Daugherty will assume the president's administrative responsibilities, working with Oral Roberts until the regents' meeting, the college said. Former ORU Regent Harry McNevin, who quit the board in 1987 because of the misspending he alleged he witnessed, called the resignation "inevitable." "You can't take the sacrifices of God's people and use them any old way," he said. "It's been 20 years that they've been doing the same things that I became aware of." Source: AP News Background: "It's good to have faith"

It's good to have faith

Sun, 21 Oct 2007 14:45:53 GMT

It gives people comfort to have faith in a god and to believe in the unbelievable. But that also means the faithful believers are not completely understanding of the real world. It's an often told and still sad story that, when exposed, certain "leaders" have used religion to personally benefit themselves, their family, and friends. I urge all people of faith to demand transparency and accountability from their leaders. If the leaders are doing nothing wrong then there should be no reason to not be accountable. Is there? The Robert's family, like pigs at a trough. CBS News You can read or download the pdf titled:
Scandal Vulnerability Assesment, Oral Roberts University, Oral Roberts Ministries. It is an internal investigation of potential ares of leagal and/or financial issues in the university and ministry.

Why Bush Acts That Way

Sat, 04 Aug 2007 12:44:37 GMT

This morning I see a headline that says 'Dems sell out again, give Bush sweeping power to spy on you without a court order'. The author claims the Dems rolled over and they are pathetic. I must question that. One would think that a President with a 28% job approval rating is ripe for a setback from a stern opposition. It appears that is not the case. I will venture the Dems are not the opposition party. They see how much unilateral power has been grabbed by the Bush Administration and the Dems want it too. It's politics as usual at the expense of our Democracy. All Americans are diminished by empire building political power plays. Until the American people exercise their constitutional right of impeachment this situation will continue. To an end which I fear could fracture the United Staes of America. Mark Danner concisely sums up why Bush acts that way in 'US Power has made reality its bitch'. The long form is from Mark's commencement address at UCal titled 'Taking the Measure of the First Rhetoric-Major President'.

Does Cheney Expect US to Belive This?

Sat, 23 Jun 2007 17:24:56 GMT

Cheney and Bush are liars. Let's see if "anyone" in the media or Congress will ask the questions below to these two "executives". via TPM:

For a White House that has offered a bountiful stream of substantive scandals for six years, the latest dust-up might be the most bizarre.

The background details are surprisingly straightforward. In 1995, the Clinton White House issued an executive order establishing uniform rules for protecting classified information. In 2003, the Bush White House revised it. The order plainly includes any executive-branch agency, any military department, and "any other entity within the executive branch that comes into the possession of classified information." The entire branch of government, the order said, is subject to oversight.

This week, however, in light revelations about the White House ignoring its own E.O., the Bush gang started spinning like a top.

The White House said Friday that, like Vice President Dick Cheney's office, President Bush's office is not allowing an independent federal watchdog to oversee its handling of classified national security information.
An executive order that Bush issued in March 2003 -- amending an existing order -- requires all government agencies that are part of the executive branch to submit to oversight. Although it doesn't specifically say so, Bush's order was not meant to apply to the vice president's office or the president's office, a White House spokesman said.

Look, I can appreciate the fact that the White House is in a jam here. Bush, Cheney, and the rest of the gang repeatedly mishandled classified materials during a time of war, got caught, ignored their own rules, and is now struggling to rationalize their conduct. When the federal agency responsible for oversight tried to do its job, the Vice President reportedly tried to abolish the agency. This isn't a fact-pattern that's easy to spin.

But the explanations thus far have been transparently ridiculous, up to and including the notion that the Vice President, as defined in Article II of the Constitution, isn't actually part of the executive branch of government.

Perhaps it's best to take a moment to summarize the questions that need answers:

* Why did Bush and Cheney abide by the executive order in question in 2001 and 2002, and then stop in 2003? Is it a coincidence they started ignoring the E.O. on handling classified materials just as they started mishandling classified materials?

* Why did Cheney abide by the E.O. in 2001 and 2002 if he's not part of the executive branch?

* Why did the President exempt the Vice President from an executive order he was already following? Why did he later exempt himself?

* When, precisely, did the White House decide that Bush and Cheney should exempt themselves from their own rules?

* Does Bush consider Cheney part of the executive branch? Why has the White House thus far refused to respond to this question? Does the President consider this a trick question?

* In its response to questions about the E.O., why did the White House point to a provision of the E.O. that doesn't exist?

* The White House insists, "There's no question that [Cheney] is in compliance" with the E.O. If there is no oversight, and Cheney is unaccountable, how does the White House know?

* In yesterday's press briefing, the president's spokesperson dismissed the oversight provision of the E.O. as "small" six times. Does the White House believe only "big" provisions need to be followed? How does the administration make the distinction?

Senate Majority Whip Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.) said yesterday, "Vice President Cheney is expanding the administration's policy on torture to include tortured logic. In the end, neither Mr. Cheney nor his staff is above the law or the Constitution."

At this point, I think they might quibble with that assertion.

-- Steve Benen

TPM digging into US Attorney Scandal

Sat, 05 May 2007 13:14:37 GMT

Fired US Attorney John McKay telling how it felt getting threatened not to talk about his firing and whether he thinks Alberto Gonzales told the truth in his testimony before the senate. It appears the Bush Republican Neo-Conserative Whitehouse was fully engaged in directing the firings and replacement of the US Attorney's. Here's some links: http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/013984.php and http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/013980.php and http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/013970.php and http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/013973.php

A Clear Reason To Impeach

Sun, 29 Apr 2007 13:30:37 GMT

Sen. Durbin Drops Bombshells on the Senate Floor I like being right and I like that other people agree. But it's disturbing that about 29% of Americans still have faith in Bush and the Neo-Con administration. I do know the full 29% aren't all on the Republican payroll. However, I can only guess why the others are faithfull and none of my guesses are complementary. The Bushies are liars, thieves, thugs, and murderers. Yes, murderers! What else would you call someone who lies to you and then puts you in harms way to serve their purpose and you get killed as a result? Think about it.

Bush Political Interference in Prosecution of Big Tobacco

Thu, 22 Mar 2007 16:42:46 GMT

Isn't this clearly illegal if true? From the Washington Post: The leader of the Justice Department team that prosecuted a landmark lawsuit against tobacco companies said yesterday that Bush administration political appointees repeatedly ordered her to take steps that weakened the government's racketeering case. Sharon Y. Eubanks said Bush loyalists in Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales's office began micromanaging the team's strategy in the final weeks of the 2005 trial, to the detriment of the government's claim that the industry had conspired to lie to U.S. smokers. She said a supervisor demanded that she and her trial team drop recommendations that tobacco executives be removed from their corporate positions as a possible penalty. He and two others instructed her to tell key witnesses to change their testimony. And they ordered Eubanks to read verbatim a closing argument they had rewritten for her, she said. "The political people were pushing the buttons and ordering us to say what we said," Eubanks said. "And because of that, we failed to zealously represent the interests of the American public."

When Will Media Deeply Probe Corruption in Iraq Contracts?

Thu, 08 Feb 2007 17:19:58 GMT

Joe Galloway asks the question. My answer is most likely never. If the public can't be outraged over Bush sending $12 Billion american dollars in cash into Iraq with no controls, not even a reciept then I have no idea what will motivate them. Our country is being ruined by liars and thieves in the Bush administration and it seems that the general public is going along for the ride down.

My New Years Message

Tue, 02 Jan 2007 12:44:38 GMT

Tomorrow Never Knows: Lyrics, AMG, Wikipedia Whithin You Without You: Lyrics, AMG, Wikipedia

Sony root kit settlement

Fri, 22 Dec 2006 12:29:54 GMT

Sony rootkit settlement with states reaches $5.75M.

(InfoWorld) - Sony BMG Music Entertainment's botched attempt to stop unauthorized music copying has cost the company another $4.25 million.

Two days after reaching settlements worth $1.5 million with Texas and California, Sony agreed on Thursday to pay another 40 states the money to end investigations into its use of two copy protection programs: First 4 Internet's XCP (extended copy protection), and MediaMax, written by SunnComm International.

In a statement, Sony said it was pleased with Thursday's settlements.

More than 12 million Sony BMG CDs shipped with this software last year, according to a statement from the Massachusetts Attorney General.

Sony's trouble began in late 2005, when a computer science researcher disclosed that XCP used dangerous "rootkit" techniques to cloak itself after installation.

Later, investigators found that even users who declined to install the MediaMax program would have software placed on their computers, and one version of the program created a security issue, the Massachusetts statement said.

Sony has reportedly also reached a tentative settlement with the U.S. Federal Trade Commission in the matter, although nothing relating to that investigation was announced Thursday. Sony settled a class-action lawsuit over the software in May.

As with the California and Texas agreements, residents of the 40 states that settled with Sony are entitled to up to $175 in refunds for damages that may have been caused to their computers. The settlements also limit the ways that Sony can use copy protection software in the future and require that the company notify consumers if it uses this kind of software.

A list of the states covered in Thursday's settlement can be found in the Massachusetts statement.

Sony has set up a Web site with information for consumers on the matter. It is expected to eventually include information on how to file a claim under these latest settlements.

By Robert_McMillan@idg.com (Robert McMillan). [InfoWorld: Top News]

Dirty Double Dealers

Thu, 07 Dec 2006 12:32:32 GMT

Bush 'Privacy Board' Just a Gag. A White House board empaneled to protect Americans' civil liberties has its first public meeting. Reporters are barred from asking questions, and the panel won't tell the public what it's learned about warrantless domestic spying. With friends like these.... Ryan Singel reports from Washington. [Wired News: Top Stories]

George Carlin - Who Really Controls America

Tue, 05 Sep 2006 15:33:57 GMT

Get this video and more at MySpace.com In his forthright style punctuated with expletives George lays out the truth to round after round of applause. If you want the TRUTH watch and listen. Please wear your thinking hat.

Momentous NSA Injunction: Experts' First Impressions

Sun, 20 Aug 2006 14:04:20 GMT

The Sixth Circuit will likely clear its calendar to set up a panel to hear the government's appeal. If they uphold the ruling, the Supreme Court will likely hear the case immediately.

Bush blasts court decision -- rules don't apply to him

Fri, 18 Aug 2006 16:52:05 GMT

AMERICAblog: We know we're in a war on terror. We want the President to do everything he can to stop it. Unfortunately, he has chosen methods -- invading Iraq and undermining our constitution -- which play in to the hands of terrorists. Iraq has made the situation worse on many levels especially by diverting the fight against the real terrorists. And, the President likes to remind us that terrorists hate our free society. He's making us less free when he usurps the constitution and rule of law. Bush said he thinks his wiretapping program is constitutional. But, he doesn't decide that. The courts do, whether he likes it or not.

Judge Orders Halt to Bush's Warrantless Surveillance

Thu, 17 Aug 2006 20:43:16 GMT

It's damn well about time! A federal judge in Detroit ruled Thursday that the government's warrantless wiretapping program is unconstitutional and ordered an immediate halt to it. AOL News Truth Out Update: NYT ...one judge in Michigan has done what 535 members of Congress have so abysmally failed to do. She has reasserted the rule of law over a lawless administration and shown why issues of this kind belong within the constitutional process created more than two centuries ago to handle them.

Net neutrality rejected in tie-vote by panel

Thu, 29 Jun 2006 13:06:26 GMT

Supportes of the bill predict that without a net neutrality law, large broadband carriers will block or degrade Web content from competitors, creating a slow lane for everyone but themselves and their business partners. Officials with AT&T and BellSouth Corp. have advocated a business plan that would allow them to charge extra fees for preferential delivery of some companies' Web content. The broadband providers need new business plans to pay for the roll-out of next-generation broadband networks, they argue.

These companies have huge profits from subscriber fees and are looking to protect and extend their Monopoly. I urge everyone to write, email, and call your representatives to express support for a law guaranteeing Net neutrality. The fight is still on.

AT&T Rewrites Privacy Policy

Sun, 25 Jun 2006 19:46:55 GMT

In a bold and imperialistic move telecom giant AT&T makes a profoundly anti-customer decision to claim full ownership of all the customers data on the AT&T system. And then AT&T goes further by analysing the customer data and monitizing (selling) it however they decide. Think about that, people.

AT&T

This privacy policy addresses the privacy of AT&T* family of companies retail customers and Web visitors in the United States - except for Cingular® Wireless and YELLOWPAGES.COM, which operate under their own privacy policies. More

Additional privacy policies apply to certain AT&T services, including AT&T Yahoo! Dial, High Speed Internet and Small Business, AT&T U-versesm services and AT&T | DISH Network. For more information on these services please see the AT&T Yahoo!® and Video Services & AT&T | DISH Network policies. More

AT&T rewrites rules: Your data isn't yours

AT&T: New privacy policy not 'knee-jerk'

Ma Bell's privacy problem

Just say "No" to AT&T

Cheney's Got a Gun

Mon, 13 Feb 2006 03:56:38 GMT

This just in from Roy Sekoff. And I wonder if this was another of Dick's Deals but one gone bad? Ya think Dick is sending out a message after he's been fingered by Scooter Libby? Do ya think Dick is a Tony Soprano wannabe?

Key Bush Briefing Kept From Hill Panel

Sun, 27 Nov 2005 15:50:04 GMT

Ten days after the 9/11 attacks, the CIA briefed President Bush that it had no evidence linking Iraq to the terrorist strike. The White House has refused to hand over the briefing memo and other highly classified materials to the Senate Intelligence Committee. The administration has refused to provide the Sept. 21 President's Daily Brief, even on a classified basis, and won't say anything more about it other than to acknowledge that it exists. On November 18, Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., said he planned to attach an amendment to the fiscal 2006 intelligence authorization bill that would require the Bush administration to give the Senate and House intelligence committees copies of PDBs for a three-year period. After Democrats and Republicans were unable to agree on language for the amendment, Kennedy said he would delay final action on the matter until Congress returns in December. The conclusions drawn in the lengthier CIA assessment-which has also been denied to the committee-were strikingly similar to those provided to President Bush in the September 21 PDB, according to records and sources. In the four years since Bush received the briefing, according to highly placed government officials, little evidence has come to light to contradict the CIA's original conclusion that no collaborative relationship existed between Iraq and Al Qaeda.

If the Bush administration has nothing to hide why won't they turn over the documents?

Why is Rove still at the White House?

Mon, 07 Nov 2005 11:58:01 GMT

Rove has full security clearance while he's under investigation for the naming of a CIA officer in time of war. We've already learned that Libby lied when Scotty asked about his involvement. Scotty asked Rove too and got the same answer. Liars one and all. From the top to the bottom. Investigators should keep the pressure up and the stonewall will fall. A government employee's security clearance has been removed in the past for much lesser reasons.

From the LA Times: An intelligence analyst temporarily lost his top-secret security clearance because he faxed his resume using a commercial machine. An employee of the Defense Department had her clearance suspended for months because a jilted boyfriend called to say she might not be reliable. An Army officer who spoke publicly about intelligence failures before the Sept. 11 attacks had his clearance revoked over questions about $67 in personal charges to a military cellphone. But in the White House, where Karl Rove is under federal investigation for his role in the exposure of a covert CIA officer, the longtime advisor to President Bush continues to enjoy full access to government secrets. That is drawing the attention of intelligence experts and prominent conservatives as a debate brews over whether Rove should retain his top-secret clearance and remain in his post as White House deputy chief of staff [~] even as Special Prosecutor Patrick J. Fitzgerald mulls over whether to charge him with a crime in connection with the operative's exposure. "The agencies can move without hesitating when they even suspect a breach of the rules has occurred, much less an actual breach of information," said Mark Zaid, a Washington attorney who has represented more than three dozen intelligence officers in security clearance cases, including those cited above.... Bob Barr, a former Republican congressman from Georgia and a former CIA official and federal prosecutor... said the Justice Department should examine Rove's actions, apart from the Fitzgerald probe, to determine specifically whether Rove's security classification should be stripped.... Retired Navy Adm. Stansfield Turner, who was director of the CIA during the Carter administration, said Rove's actions needed to be "fully aired" and reviewed by intelligence and Justice Department officials. Turner acknowledged that revoking or suspending Rove's secret clearance would "almost certainly end his usefulness as a top White House aide" and would be a "drastic step." But, he said, "you can't hold lower-level people accountable for possible leaks and not act when leaks occur at a higher level." Turner said that among other consequences, the unmasking of an operative makes it difficult for intelligence agents to recruit sources, who may be skeptical of confidentiality pledges.

Bottom line, Karl Rove must go.

Your Disappearing Privacy

Wed, 10 Aug 2005 11:05:26 GMT

The enemy within. Almost daily, every American's right to privacy is reduced by our own over-reaching American bureaucrats.

Washington, DC - Today the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) issued a (pdf) release announcing its new rule expanding the reach of the Communications Assistance to Law Enforcement Act (CALEA). The ruling is a reinterpretation of the scope of CALEA and will force Internet broadband providers and certain Voice-over-IP (VoIP) providers to build backdoors into their networks that make it easier for law enforcement to wiretap them. The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) has argued against this expansion of CALEA in several rounds of comments to the FCC on its proposed rule. CALEA, a law passed in the early 1990s, mandated that all telephone providers build tappability into their networks, but expressly ruled out information services like broadband. Under the new ruling from the FCC, this tappability now extends to Internet broadband providers as well. Practically, what this means is that the government will be asking broadband providers - as well as companies that manufacture devices used for broadband communications [^] to build insecure backdoors into their networks, imperiling the privacy and security of citizens on the Internet. It also hobbles technical innovation by forcing companies involved in broadband to redesign their products to meet government requirements. "Expanding CALEA to the Internet is contrary to the statute and is a fundamentally flawed public policy," said Kurt Opsahl, EFF staff attorney. "This misguided tech mandate endangers the privacy of innocent people, stifles innovation, and risks the functionality of the Internet as a forum for free and open expression."

This is one of the many dark sides of a reactionary government that mandates secrecy and deception at all levels. Shouldn't the public have hearings and be able to speak their mind? Shouldn't something as precious our privacy be given a vote?

Appeals Court Permits Energy Task Force Records to Remain Secret

Thu, 12 May 2005 23:54:46 GMT

It looks like the fix is in. This is typical for lying wrong-wing Republicans and it's so very bad for America.

"The American people have a right to know whether lobbyists became de facto members of the Energy Task Force, which helped to write our nation's energy policies. Today's decision means that now the public may never know the truth about how these policies were formulated."