Skip to main content

A commentary I posted here last Wednesday about a harsh news report concerning Stuart Bowen seems to have helped to generate some controversy. I thought I should alert you to the criticisms of my argument—though I also believe that these have lost sight of the central issues, as I framed them.

On May 2nd I drew attention to the highly suspicious timing of a Reuters report that cast negative light upon Bowen, the Special Inspector General for Iraq (SIGIR). It revealed the existence of an investigation begun many months earlier into alleged improprieties by Bowen, most of which sounded fairly inconsequential. The investigation is being conducted by the President's Council on Integrity and Efficiency (PCIE), which is headed by George Bush's long-time friend Clay Johnson, a notorious political hack. Indeed, Reuters quoted both Johnson and a WH spokesperson about the investigation.

The Reuters story appeared only one day after SIGIR released to Congress a quarterly report on reconstruction projects in Iraq that was getting a lot of bad press for the administration at a most inconvenient time. As I commented on May 2, SIGIR "investigated 8 large reconstruction projects in Iraq that recently were declared successes. The study found that 7 of the 8 were not operating as designed any longer because of incompetence and looting." News stories were highlighting those findings at the very time that Bush & Co. were criticizing Democrats in Congress for failing to recognize the "progress" that's been made recently in Iraq.

Although none of the initial news reports commented on the issue, I argued that the leak of information to Reuters at precisely that time was unlikely to be a mere coincidence. It looked like the WH had decided to try to undercut Bowen, or at least change the topic to his own alleged failings.

Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

The following day, on May 3rd, WH spokesmans Tony Snow was pressed about the matter. Snow denied that either the White House or Clay Johnson were involved in the investigation of Bowen in any way.

The White House has no role in this, zero...Clay [Johnson] is not, in fact, involved in the process, nor was he involved in the referral [to PCIE].

That appears to sidestep the broader question of why Johnson and the WH spokesperson were talking about Bowen now.

Ken Silverstein wrote an informative post the same day at Harper's, though he too ignored the question of the timing of the leak.

From what I hear, the investigation, based on a complaint that former SIGIR employees filed last year with the President's Council on Integrity and Efficiency, concerns possible misspending by Bowen himself. Bowen is also accused of lesser crimes like dating on government time. A second senior SIGIR employee is accused of cooking the books as well as sorcery and sexual harassment.

The most serious allegation is that Bowen, a former aide to President Bush, may have violated waste and fraud rules in commissioning a print run of about 4,000 copies of a 4-color book telling the history of the SIGIR. The printing cost of the project is said to be roughly a quarter-million dollars, but it is alleged that the true cost is in the millions as a number of agency employees were assigned to work on the book. SIGIR also is said to have retained the Center for Strategic and International Studies to assist with the project, increasing costs even more.

A question that arises here is why taxpayers should be footing the bill for this sort of self-congratulatory project. Bowen, I’ve heard, has expressed interest in running for congress in Virginia down the road; if he does, the book could be quite helpful in boosting his public profile. Bowen is also accused of long, frequent and unexplained absences from work, and doctoring time sheets to cover up the absences. Former employees accuse him of taking non-work related trips to Texas and France, but counting it as paid time...

Among the charges is that [Bowen's advisor, Ginger] Cruz pressured an employee to come up with bogus numbers proving that SIGIR’s work had saved taxpayers some $10 billion, a figure that was used to justify the agency’s request of $30 million in the Fiscal Year 2007 budget. The true savings were said to be only in the tens of millions at best.

It’s hard to know what to make of some of the allegations I’m told are in the report; it’s possible that they are being made by people out to get Bowen...But Bowen is apparently charged with spending many hours on www.match.com and arranging dates during work hours...

SIGIR has done some excellent work and it’s possible that some of the allegations are coming from disgruntled employees. But some of the charges, especially those regarding the book project, look bad.

Granted, the charge against Cruz may be a sign of corruption and the alleged cost of the book does look exorbitant (though I fail to see how it would assist in a putative congressional campaign). I'm also prepared to believe that Bowen is doing little more than affixing his name to the investigations done by others. Still, I can't shake the feeling that this motley collection of charges resembles a circus parade.

Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

On the 4th, the NY Times examined the matter in detail (raising some of the issues I had done). The Times pointed out that Bowen was under investigation both by PCIE and by ranking Republican on the House Government Reform Committee, Thomas Davis.

Image Hosted by ImageShack.usThe involvement of the sublimely crooked Davis—one of the chief recipients of Jack Abramoff's dirty money and in his own right a shameless peddler of influence—makes me more, not less, suspicious that a political witch-hunt is afoot. Davis is a political hack of the first order. He's the clown who subpoenaed Terri Schiavo. Davis should be trusted about absolutely nothing, particularly in regards to oversight of Pentagon contracts. One of his first acts as the Chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform was to eliminate "Oversight" for the committee's name; and that is how he ran the committee. His refusal to permit oversight hearings on Iraq makes Davis one of the Republicans most responsible for the unfolding debacle there. Now, however, he's investigating the watchdog there. Isn't that just darlin?

Anyway, the Times says that the Bowen investigation...

originated with a complaint put together by roughly half a dozen former employees who appear to have left his office on unhappy terms, said several officials familiar with the case...

Both the White House and a spokesman for the Republican congressman, Thomas M. Davis III of Virginia, said yesterday that the investigations were not started in retribution for the work undertaken in Iraq by Mr. Bowen...

One of the former employees who filed the complaint, who spoke on the condition of anonymity out of concern that he would face reprisals, agreed that all of those who brought the misconduct accusations had been unhappy with demotions, terminations or other sanctions during their time in the inspector general’s office...

A letter from [PCIE] to the inspector general’s office dated May 8, 2006, and obtained by The Times says that the council decided that three of the accusations were credible enough to investigate.

Those accusations involve fairly narrow issues: a payment to a contractor that the employees believed was unjustified; a project to produce a type of report on reconstruction that they maintain is outside the Congressional mandate of the office; and what the employees contend is an inflated estimate of how much money investigations by the office have saved American taxpayers.

The Times also quotes a spokesman for Rep. Henry Waxman: “At this point, there isn’t any way to know whether there are credible allegations against Stuart Bowen or just frivolous attacks.” That was my original impression, too.

Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

Today, Ken Silverstein at Harper's responds to my observations.

Some bloggers are wondering out loud whether the Special Inspector is the target of a campaign by the Bush Administration to silence its critics. The New York Times has raised the same possibility, saying in a May 4 story, “A federal official whose investigations of waste and corruption in Iraq have repeatedly embarrassed the Bush Administration is now being investigated himself by an oversight committee with close links to the White House.”

I can understand why people are suspicious that the administration is behind the charges against Bowen–Bush does, after all, have a lengthy record of attacking his perceived enemies, as the current U.S. attorney scandal well illustrates–but in this case the allegation makes no sense.

I think that's putting the matter a bit too strongly, and in any case it misses the central point of my May 2nd post.

Silverstein points out (and I concur) that before his appointment as SIGIR, Bowen had a record as a disingenuous Republican ideologue.

Now, however, the argument goes that whatever Bowen’s origins, SIGIR put out a series of damning reports during his tenure, which embarrassed the administration and led it to retaliate against him. There’s some truth to the first part of that statement, but that doesn’t make the second part accurate.

People familiar with the story tell me that a group of SIGIR auditors in Iraq raised the first complaints against Bowen back in mid-2004. One problem was that Bowen rarely turned up for work. Instead, he spent as many as four days a week in his trailer, where he’d have staffers deliver his meals. Work meetings set up for Bowen were repeatedly canceled, because he claimed he wasn’t feeling well. Yet I’m told he never sought medical help, never took sick leave, and always billed the government for full-time services.

A steady stream of other complaints ensued from SIGIR employees in Iraq and Crystal City, Virginia, the U.S. headquarters for the Special Inspector. The most serious allegation, as I noted the other day, is that Bowen may have violated waste and fraud rules in commissioning a glossy, expensive history of the SIGIR. Other complaints included cronyism and retribution and wrongful termination of people who ran afoul of Bowen.

The current investigation was triggered when six former SIGIR employees filed a complaint in February 2006 with the President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency, which polices Inspectors General offices. Thus the origins of the case are not political pressure from the White House, but action by whistleblowers. And I’m confident that these whistleblowers are not a cabal of Republicans doing the administration’s bidding. I’d also note here that while the SIGIR reports are politically embarrassing, the general news out of Iraq is so relentlessly negative that it’s hard to imagine at this point that Bowen’s work is a chief concern to the administration.

I'm willing to take Ken's word that he knows from his contacts that the allegations are not politically inspired (he was similarly emphatic last week in private correspondence). But even if the charges are entirely true, that doesn't mean the leaking of the allegations now was not politically inspired. That is where Ken Silverstein and I diverge.

Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

Ken tells me that reporters learned of the investigation some time ago. Again, even granted that, no news reports were filed until last week. That suggests that those who were talking to the Reuters reporter (Andrea Shalal-Esa) this time were either revealing more information, or putting the allegations more insistently.

We know that people working for Bush were prepared to be quoted on the record. Shalal-Esa also spoke to a former SIGIR employee, perhaps one of the whistleblowers, but she identifies no further sources for her details regarding the investigation.

Looking at this from a distance, it still appears to be a politically inspired hatchet-job on Bowen (even if he's guilty as charged). Over the years many members of the Bush administration, guilty of the most astounding mal- and non-feasance, none the less have been protected fiercely and (yes) even promoted. But for several years, by contrast, this administration has been waging an "undeclared war" against Bowen (as I commented in my first post).

I think Ken Silverstein may have missed some of the implications of the news stories about the latest SIGIR quarterly report (PDF). They gave striking prominence to the 8 recently completed projects SIGIR investigated for "sustainment". They pointed out that, though declared "successes", nearly all were crumbling. The point, clearly, was that the administration's alleged successes in Iraq are, at best, fleeting if not illusory or falsified. Here for example is the opening paragraph to the NY Times story on the quarterly report:

In a troubling sign for the American-financed rebuilding program in Iraq, federal inspectors have found that in a sampling of eight projects that the United States had declared successes, seven were no longer operating as designed because of plumbing and electrical failures, lack of maintenance, apparent looting, and idle equipment.

Now, one thing that struck me, as I read the SIGIR quarterly report, was this: Though fact-filled, it does not emphasize the significance of those 8 "sustainment" investigations in remotely the same way nor to the same degree as the news stories based on the report did. Indeed, they aren't so much as mentioned in any of the introductory or summary sections to the SIGIR report. You have to read through nearly the entire report before you get to the relevant information, which all the news stories treated as the centerpiece of the report.

I would theorize that journalists were given a briefing on the SIGIR report, at which the significance of those 8 "sustainment" investigations was emphasized. If true, that implies a certain kind of willfulness on the part of somebody at SIGIR, looking perhaps to rough up the White House a bit.

Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

Whether or not the WH was looking to push back against an overly stroppy Inspector General, the ultimate goal is to rebuff Democratic attempts to force a withdrawal from Iraq. If Bush & Co. left the SIGIR report unchallenged, then they would lose one of their few remaining weapons—the claim that Democrats are intervening just at the moment that successes in Iraq start to become a reality.

It would be one thing to argue that attacking the messenger who shatters their fantasy-world makes "no sense". But that's very far from saying that Bush & Co. do not resort to savaging those who spill the beans. That has in fact been their modus operandi for years.

crossposted from Unbossed

Originally posted to smintheus on Mon May 07, 2007 at 06:46 PM PDT.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Great diary! (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Nightprowlkitty, Statusquomustgo

    "Prepare to withstand political upheaval" - D. Kyle Sampson, former Chief of Staff to Alberto Gonzales.

    by bejammin075 on Mon May 07, 2007 at 06:58:59 PM PDT

  •  Great diary. (4+ / 0-)

    Recommended.

    You took the words right out of my mouth with this one:

    Looking at this from a distance, it still appears to be a politically inspired hatchet-job on Bowen (even if he's guilty as charged). Over the years many members of the Bush administration, guilty of the most astounding mal- and non-feasance, none the less have been protected fiercely and (yes) even promoted. But for several years, by contrast, this administration has been waging an "undeclared war" against Bowen (as I commented in my first post). (emphasis mine)

    Bowen may well be guilty of all he is charged with.  But as you say, this Admin. has not only allowed but rewarded far worse behavior.  I think you are right about this.

  •  There's Crime & Then There's CRIME (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    smintheus, shirah

    Those accusations involve fairly narrow issues: a payment to a contractor that the employees believed was unjustified; a project to produce a type of report on reconstruction that they maintain is outside the Congressional mandate of the office; and what the employees contend is an inflated estimate of how much money investigations by the office have saved American taxpayers.

    Thank goodness this investigation is underway instead of an investigation into who leaked Valerie Plame's name, or who created the "Kill List" of USAs, or who took bribes, kickbacks, or pay-offs in exchange for political favors, or. . .

    They burn our children in their wars and grow rich beyond the dreams of avarice.

    by Limelite on Mon May 07, 2007 at 07:08:00 PM PDT

  •  Thomas Davis is a dry, humorless Representative (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    smintheus, shirah

    Seeing him on Stephen Colbert made me think of one thing...  Does this guy enjoy life at all?  I mean, Colbert was just poking a bit of fun at him yet Davis seemed to be a little wimp.  I kept waiting for him to at least try to come up with something remotely humorous but he never did it.  

  •  Whistleblowers (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    smintheus, Simplify

    Just the difference between the way whistleblowers are usually treated by anyone in this administration and this particular case gives pause for doubt.

    Normal case: Whistleblower comes forward.

    1)Crickets
    2)Retaliation against the whistleblower

    This case? A full blown investigation. Hmmm.

    A village in Texas is missing it's idiot. Will they please come get him?

    by dotsright on Tue May 08, 2007 at 07:54:11 AM PDT

  •  Thank you for this post (0+ / 0-)

    I saw Bowen on C-span's "Washington Journal" a couple of weeks ago and sent in an email which was read on air.  The email asked Bowen exactly how much money was being 'lost' in Iraq.  He answered (again, on air) that he had been informed that at least $5 BILLION PER YEAR was unaccounted for.

    So, in addition to his highlighting the failed projects (wasn't one of them the hospital that Laura Bush touted?), he was - further - talking about stolen monies.

    When I read, soon after seeing Bowen on TV, that he was the subject of 'investigations', I immediately knew that this was classic, Rovian WH smear.  These people are the lowest scum imaginable.

  •  Sorcery? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    smintheus

    The thing that stands out the most, to me, is the following:

    A second senior SIGIR employee is accused of cooking the books as well as sorcery and sexual harassment.

    Sorcery?  Is that against the law?  How do you "prove" that someone is involved in sorcery?  Leeches?  Dunking?  Poking moles with a needle?  Familiars?

    If we needed any more proof that Bush Co. is dragging us back to the middle ages, here it is.  He has created an atmosphere where people can accuse others of sorcery and not only will they not be laughed out of the room, their charges are treated as if they are somehow valid.

    As far as people wasting time and goofing off in Iraq goes, if Chandrasekaran's (sp?) book "Imperial Life in the Emerald City" is even slightly realistic (and all of his observations have been independently confirmed),   there were plenty of "thumbs in the bums" over there, and to single Bowen out for some sort of "special" treatment in this area positively reeks of political retaliation.

    "One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors." -Plato

    by Bcre8ve on Wed May 09, 2007 at 11:16:16 AM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site