Spy vs. Lie: S. 2324 and the DoJ Inspector General's Report

While reading through the accounts of the FBI’s objections to so-called ‘enhanced interrogations’ (a.k.a. Torture) and the reports that the agency was concerned about participating in “joint interrogations of detainees with other agencies in which techniques not allowed by the FBI were used,” [TPMM-AP] pause for a moment and go back to a vote taken in the U.S. Senate on April 23, 2008.

“The Senate on April 23 approved, by unanimous consent, S. 2324, the Inspector General Reform Act of 2008. But the bill passed only after the lawmakers agreed to an amendment by Senator Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., which, among other items, deleted a provision giving the Justice Department's Office of Inspector General (OIG) jurisdiction to investigate misconduct allegations against department attorneys, including its most senior officials.” [NatlJrnl via TPMM] (emphasis added) Therefore, while Congress attempts to sort out who authorized the Bush Administration’s warrantless domestic wiretapping program, and perhaps who might have impeded investigations into the use of torture on detainees in U.S. custody, the Department of Justice’s Inspector General held he was prevented by statute from reviewing these matters. S. 2324 passed with “unanimous consent,” meaning no record was kept of each Senator’s position on the prevention of the DoJ’s Inspector General from investigating the investigators. The Kyl Amendment (CngRcrd-pdf/S3323) was also approved by unanimous consent. [CngRcrd-pdf/3328] S. 2324 is currently “held at the chief clerk’s desk” in the House. To make a long story short, it appears the only way to convince the White House not to veto the Inspector General Reform Act of 2008, was to insert Kyl’s amendment.

Whether the amendment will be a source of contention during deliberations in the House of Representatives remains to be seen, as will whether there will be conflict over a subsequent conference report. Items that Senate Democrats wanted to maintain in the bill (a shield for inspectors general from administration political pressure, and making audits and reports more accessible to the public) may have been protected by adopting the Kyl Amendment. However, there are significant differences between the Senate and House versions. The House version sets appointments at 7 year terms with removal only for cause, and would require independent watchdog bureaus to submit their budgets directly to Congress as well as the White House. The President promptly asserted that this provision would “encroach on the president’s constitutional authority.” [FAC]

So, tomorrow the Inspector General’s report will be released, [AP] [Reuters] and after the corporate press digests the material Matt Lauer may discover that more than just those in the “Far Left” are going to be concerned about the Bush Administration’s propensity to trample on American civil rights and liberties. One thing is certain – the debate over appropriate legislation, and the role of the current Administration in the perpetuation of injustices and the violation of civil liberties, may only be beginning.

Inspecting the Inspectors General: Frazier out, Cobb on the way?

Bush Administration Inspectors General are having a tough time of it these days. The Washington Post reports that Johnnie E. Frazier, Commerce Department Inspector General, announced his retirement yesterday, "in the face of multiple investigations and a formal report recommending that President Bush punish him for violating the whistle-blower protection law." Allegations persist that Frazier misspent money, abused government travel and retaliated against employees who raised concerns. The Office of Special Counsel says Frazier demoted Edward Blansitt, a top deputy, and Allison Lerner, his chief counsel, who refused to "sign off" on Frazier's travel expenses. [CFE] A third whistleblower has filed a complaint with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. [WaPo]

Mr. Frazier resigns amid questions about weekend travel at government expense to cities where the Inspector General has no offices, and about a $150,000 consulting contract awarded to a firm that was "connected" to a retiring employee of Frazier's office. [WaPo] Still lingering are inquiries into the remodeling projects at the Department of Commerce that may have cost more than $100,000. [WaPo]

But wait, there's more!

NASA's Inspector General Robert Cobb, appointed by President Bush on April 16, 2002, spent an uncomfortable time yesterday explaining himself to the Subcommittee on Space, Aeronautics, and Related Sciences of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. Former employees of Mr. Cobb didn't corroborate his high view of his own performance. [ComSen] Ms. Debra Herzog, who has moved on to the OIG for the Postal Service summed up her experience working with Mr. Cobb: "In closing, Mr. Cobb’s arrogance, bullying style, and questionable independence limit his ability to lead the NASA OIG and has in turn demoralized the OIG workforce. As an example, a recently hired employee, after only 2 days at the NASA OIG, called the agency she left requesting her old job back because most of the staff spent a good portion of the workday looking for a way out." [ComSenTest]

Mr. Kevin J. Carson, who has moved on to the OIG office for the Government Printing Office, was previously employed at NASA as the Program Director for Safety and Security Audits. His testimony highlighted what life was like prior to Mr. Cobb's arrival and what happened thereafter: "Specifically, there was considerably more involvement in writing, rewriting, and revising audit reports by the Inspector General. There was also considerable questioning of the audit results with Mr. Cobb frequently not agreeing with the conclusions and recommendations in audit reports. There was also what I would say was a general disrespect shown by Mr. Cobb for auditors in particular. Mr. Cobb would often make comments like “anybody can perform an audit” or when an auditor would mention something like compliance with government audit standards, he would make the statement that he had read the government audit standards and that all they were was “something for auditors to hide behind.” He also on more than one occasion mentioned to me that the safety audit directorate had “produced nothing of value to the Agency,” that our audits were “archaeological digs” or that we were “too far in the weeds.” [ComSenTest] Carson also testified that after Cobb's arrival reports to agency officials were sent to the officials who were under review for "comment" prior to release. Before the release of a report on noncompliance with international agreements on the Space Station the audit team was instructed to remove a section of the report, and told that if the redaction was not made the report would not be issued. According to Carson, in 2004 Cobb criticized Carson's department for having "nothing to show for its work." Carson said he reminded Mr. Cobb that his office had issued three reports and that Mr. Cobb had refused to release them.

Lance Carrington, formerly with NASA, has also moved on to a position with the IG's office in the Postal Service. His introduction to working with Mr. Cobb sounds anything but pleasant and productive: "When I became the NASA OIG Assistant Inspector General for Investigations in September 2002, Mr. Cobb was focusing efforts on the OIG’s audit work. I recall at that time, Mr. Cobb was upset because some GS-15 level audit directors were being paid more than he was. Mr. Cobb decided to transfer the field audit director positions to OIG headquarters in Washington, DC. In order to accomplish the transfers, buyouts were used. This had a negative effect by not allowing these positions to be backfilled with the same audit job series that were eliminated through the buyout." [ComSenTest] Matters seem not to have improved. Cobb referred to Special Agents as "knuckledraggers," continually criticized their writing, and told attorneys their opinions didn't matter -- if those opinions didn't conform to his own. Mr. Carrington summarized Mr. Cobb's management style, "Mr. Cobb’s personal interaction with the staff consisted of yelling and ridiculing and the more it affected them emotionally such as crying or other reactions, the more he did it. The atmosphere became like sharks in a feeding frenzy." [ComSenTest] When Cobb was asked by Mr. Carrington and others what performance standards were expected, Cobb replied (like the proverbial definition of porn) "I don't know, but I'll know it if I see it."

Democratic members of the House and Senate Committees have called for Cobb's resignation, two Republicans, Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX) and Rep. Tom Feeney (R-FL) are reserving judgment. Iowa Republican Senator Charles Grassley is quoted by the Washington Post saying, "According to the evidence, he has used this important position to interfere in the activities conducted by the investigative and audit divisions within his office for reasons that appear, at the very least, improper."

Could we predict -- Frazier out, and Cobb not far behind?