Archive for the 'Feasting on the Spoils' Category

Page 2 of 5

Brent Wilkes: Justice Delayed

Remember Brent Wilkes? The formerly high-flying San Diego defense contractor was sentenced to 12 years in prison for bribing former Congressman Randy “Duke” Cunningham, but it will be a long time before Wilkes is behind bars.

Wilkes has been free since January on $2 million bail while he appeals his conviction.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals recently delayed the appeal for the third time this year after Wilkes’ court-appointed attorneys argued that they needed more time.

All the paperwork in the case is now due April 9, 2010. Unless there’s another delay.

According to the court, it takes on average 4-5 months for the 9th Circuit to hear oral arguments, and then three months to a year for the court to decide, so Wilkes likely won’t have a decision before 2011.

By then, Wilkes’ former consultant and fellow convicted Cunningham briber, Mitch Wade, will be nearing the end of his sentence, as will Wilkes lifelong best friend, Kyle “Dusty” Foggo, the CIA’s former executive director.

Cunningham has a 2013 release date.

Foggo Talks to the NY Times

Kyle “Dusty” Foggo, the imprisoned former top CIA official, has given an interview to The New York Times, which published his claims last week in a front-page story titled, “A Window Into CIA’s Embrace of Secret Jails.

From behind the walls of a Kentucky prison where he is serving more than three years for fraud, Foggo says he was given a special assignment to help build secret prisons for suspected terrorists.Foggo “went on to oversee construction” of three prisons — one in Bucharest, Romania, one in Morocco (that went unused) and a third in an unnamed Eastern European country, the Times reported.

A review of the story and the background of the case shows there is evidence to believe Foggo’s account, but ultimately, there’s more reason to doubt he’s telling the whole truth.

First a bit of background:

Foggo pleaded guilty last year in a fraud scheme involving a defense contractor named Brent Wilkes. Foggo admitting using his influence at the agency to steer $2 million in contracts to Wilkes, who paid for lavish overseas vacations for Foggo and his family. Wilkes was separately convicted of bribing former Rep. Randy “Duke” Cunningham with cash, travel and hookers.

The scheme centered around Foggo’s time as chief support officer of FRANSUPT, the agency’s crucial regional support terminal in Frankfurt, Germany from July 2001 to November 2004. In that position, Foggo had control over millions of dollars in government funds.In November 2004, CIA Director Porter Goss picked Foggo to run day-to-day operations at the CIA, as the agency’s executive director, the No. 3 job. Foggo says he was promoted in part because of his work on the prisons.

The Times story paints a picture of Foggo as a lovable rogue, “a cigar-waving, burbon-drinking operator” who could get things done. The job of building prisons was “too sensitive to be handled by headquarters,” Foggo said.  “I was proud to help my nation.”

One problem lies with what isn’t in the story. Missing from the Times account is any comment from federal prosecutors, who have a strikingly different view of Foggo. To them, Foggo is a man who is motivated not by patriotism but by “narcissism and deceitfulness.”

In sworn declarations filed by prosecutors, a former director of the CIA’s Counterterrorism Center director described Foggo as a “con man” who was “seriously flawed, ethically and morally.” Former CIA Director Porter Goss says Foggo left him feeling “deceived and betrayed.”  A CIA attorney recounted how she became convinced that Foggo was “effortlessly lying” to her.

Is it possible Foggo is telling the truth? As chief support officer, he quite likely knew something about the prisons. Before securing his guilty plea, prosecutors complained that the defense wanted turn the case into “a referendum on the global war on terror” and a debate over sensitive “CIA programs and methods.”

Foggo’s attorneys asked to be read into areas of sensitive compartmented information — the most closely guarded class of secrets. One pertained to the CIA’s terrorist detention and interrogation program. The request was denied. Shortly before he went off to prison, Foggo spoke with a prosecutor investigating the CIA’s destruction of videotaped interrogations.

Human Rights Watch, the Council of Europe and ABC News have reported that Romania (as well as Poland) served as locations of CIA prisons. The most detailed of these investigations (pdf) by the Council of Europe’s rapporteur Dick Marty found evidence that Romania’s “black site” was located near in a secure zone around an airbase near the Black Sea — a ways from Bucharest.

The choice of a busy street for a location of a secret prison, however, strains credulity, since the changing of guard shifts, supplies and transport of detainees could attract unwanted attention.

As James Risen wrote in State of War, “The CIA wanted secret locations where it could have complete control over the interrogations and debriefings, free from the prying eyes of the international media, free from monitoring by human rights groups, and, most important, far from the jurisdiction of the American legal system.”

The story lacks some internal consistency, something interrogators look for when evaluating truthfulness:  Foggo says he was given the task secret prisons because it was “too sensitive for headquarters.” Nevertheless, his work on the CIA’s so-called black sites helped him win a promotion back at headquarters, suggested that headquarters was well aware of his sensitive mission.

And finally, while the Times doesn’t rely on Foggo alone — it cites anonymous “former intelligence officials and others briefed on the matter.” One of these sources may be Brant Bassett, who is quoted later on in the piece speculating that Foggo was taken down because of his “fast rise and blunt approach.”

Regardless of whether Bassett is a confidential source or not, The Times didn’t fully explain his connection to the story. Bassett was a friend of both Wilkes and Foggo, part of their poker playing D.C. social circle. Bassett also served under Porter Goss the House Intelligence Committee and may have played a role in getting Foggo named executive director.

We owe a great deal to reporters like The Washington Post’s Dana Priest, who helped expose the CIA’s network of secret prisons with the help of agency insiders who were troubled by what was going on. It’s an important story, perhaps too important for the Times to give such credence to a man like Kyle “Dusty” Foggo.

Foggo & Wilkes, Jerry Lewis & Tom DeLay

cg1.jpg

Sharp-eyed reader Oskar points out a little nugget buried in the Foggo documents:

I was reading the Foggo appendix and found something pretty interesting. Om page 60, we learn that Wilkes and Foggo apparently dined with Lewis and DeLay(!). Of course, a dinner is just a dinner and doesn’t prove anything. But, still, it’s pretty interesting given Lewis’ claim that he had not seen Wilkes for 10 years or so…

This blog is lucky to have such astute readers.

The dinner for four at the Capital Grille that Oskar is referring to took place on Monday, May 16, 2005. Foggo, then the CIA’s executive director, and his old friend, defense contractor Brent Wilkes, had two impressive guests. The government’s appendix  states: “Assumes DeLay and Lewis also dined on the bill,” which came to $1,423. Wilkes, as always, picked up the tab.

Fast-forward to today. Wilkes has been sentenced to 12 years prison for bribing former Rep. Randy “Duke” Cunningham with cash and hookers. (He’s out on appeal) Foggo was sentenced to more than three years for illegally steering CIA contracts to Wilkes.

At the time, Reps. Jerry Lewis and Tom DeLay were two of the most powerful members of the House of Representatives. Lewis was chairman of the House Appropriations Committee and the House was set to take up its annual appropriations bills.  DeLay, of course, was the majority leader.

One year later, Lewis was apparently suffering from memory loss, according to this 2006 story in The New York Times:

In recent months, Mr. Lewis has said that he barely knew Mr. Wilkes and that he did not remember seeing him in nearly a decade. But Mr. Wilkes says their relationship was closer than that. (emphasis added)

Ever since they went on a scuba-diving trip together in 1993, he said, Mr. Lewis had referred to him as his “diving buddy.” They occasionally dined together or met at political functions, Mr. Wilkes said. At a Las Vegas fund-raiser in April 2005, Mr. Wilkes said, Mr. Lewis greeted him as “Brento” and hugged him as Mr. Wilkes surprised the lawmaker with $25,000 in campaign contributions.

As for DeLay, he had flown three times on a jet owned by one Wilkes’ company. Another Wilkes company gave $15,000 to TRMPAC, a political action committee DeLay founded to establish a Republican majority in the Texas legislature. (See my AP story here for more.)

Wilkes and Foggo were regulars at the Capital Grille and shared a well-stocked wine locker there. In 2005, documents show the two old high school buddies dined together at the pricey D.C. steakhouse about once a month.

Porter Goss on Foggo and the CIA

ProPublica’s Marcus Stern has unearthed a trove of documents filed in the case against Kyle “Dusty” Foggo.

For those of you who don’t know, Foggo is the former No.3 man at the CIA who has pleaded guilty and is scheduled to be sentenced Thursday for steering agency contracts to his childhood friend, Brent Wilkes.

Reading the documents about this lothario of a man with a nasty temper, I came away with the same impression as one of Foggo’s former bosses at the spy agency who stated that he was “flabbergasted” when then-CIA director Porter Goss tapped Foggo in November 2004 as his executive director.

“I found Director Goss’s selection to be quite revealing, that Mr. Goss would be taken in by a ‘con man’ like Mr. Foggo,” wrote agency veteran described only as John Doe No. 2, who was Foggo’s supervisor at an overseas CIA station in 1989, when local police filed a diplomatic protest against  Dusty for assaulting a bicyclist.

So how did Foggo come to be selected as Goss’ No. 3? Goss refused to comment when I called him while reporting my book, but the question has always nagged at me.

Porter Goss answers those questions for the first time in a sworn declaration filed in an appendix to the memorandum, which you can read here.

Goss says Foggo’s name was suggested by members of his senior staff. Although Goss doesn’t say this, I’ve heard that Foggo was recommended by Patrick Murray. Murray was chief counsel on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, which Goss chaired, and he served as chief of staff at the spy agency during Goss’ stormy tenure there.

Goss says he directly asked Foggo whether there was anything he needed to know that would “reflect poorly” on the Director’s office or the CIA.  Foggo denied there was. Had he known what Foggo was up to with Wilkes, Goss says he would have fired him on the spot.

When press reports linked his executive director to Brent Wilkes, “I learned from my public relations staff that Foggo had been less than candid.” Ultimately he lost confidence in Foggo and asked him to resign. In May 2006, less than two years after he was sworn in as CIA director, the White House fired Goss and replaced him with Gen. Michael Hayden.

“I felt deceived and betrayed by Mr. Foggo,” Goss concludes.

A source tells Laura Rozen that Goss is lying, but I’m taking Goss at his word. He’s out of public life now, and I don’t think he would expose himself to perjury charges. At any rate, it’s more than apparent that he was absolutely the wrong man for the job of CIA director.

How out of the loop was Goss if it fell to public affairs to inform him of the problems with Foggo? As  the documents make clear, were already well known to his supervisors and were included in his agency file.

Foggo was not the only staff member who was unworthy of Goss’ trust. Equally suspect was Goss’ choice of Murray and the other “Gosslings” he brought over from Capitol Hill. As Ken Silverstein noted back in 2006, the Gosslings arrived at Langley with a “lengthy list of names of people to be purged and went about removing them.” One was Stephen Kappes, who eventually returned to the agency and is now serving as deputy director under President Obama.

A man who can’t tell the difference between the Foggos and the Kappeses shouldn’t be in charge of the Central Intelligence Agency. Period.

Update from CQ’s Jeff Klein:

Kyle “Dusty” Foggo’s CIA dossier included allegations that he was sharing a woman with a suspected Russian mole, according to a top former spy agency official and other sources.

CIA Director Porter J. Goss knew about the allegation when he hired Foggo to be the agency’s executive director, its third highest official, an aide said today.

But Merrell Moorhead, an aide to Goss at the CIA from 2004 to 2006, said CIA security officials later withdrew that and other serious allegations about Foggo’s record and “gave him a clean bill of health.”

Second Update: Klein updated his post to quote Moorhead as saying that Bassett “recommended” Foggo. Laura Rozen agrees. Ken Silverstein has reported that Bassett “positioned” Foggo for the job of executive director.

I’m not convinced. Bassett was a consultant to the agency. Maybe that makes him part of the “senior staff” Goss alludes to in his statement. I’m not so sure.

It seems there are still some hard feelings over Foggo and the blame game goes on.

Cunningham Case Prison Watch

picture-2.pngpicture-5.pngpicture-4.pngpicture-7.png

Sweet Deal!

OK, I know Mitch Wade got a good deal at his sentencing but this is going too far:

Update: I just got off the phone with the Bureau of Prisons. What this means is that Mitch is in bureaucratic limbo. He’s been given a date to get himself to prison, but as of now (Jan. 23), he’s still a free man. In short, he’s en route.

The (Alleged) Reasoning Behind Wilkes’ Release

I’ve been scratching my head over the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling that freed Brent Wilkes from prison on $2 million bail while he appeals his conviction for bribing former Rep. Randy “Duke” Cunningham. The court’s reason for releasing Wilkes makes absolutely no sense at all.

First, a bit of background: The 9th Circuit granted Wilkes bail in March. Judge Larry Burns in San Diego required Wilkes to post collateral of $1.4 million. Wilkes pledged three homes, but Judge Burns ruled in June that it wasn’t enough as he had concerns over the value of the homes.

On Dec. 30, 9th Circuit Judges Thomas G. Nelson and A. Wallace Tashima apparently decided that the homes Wilkes pledged as collateral were suddenly worth more now than they were in June:

“While the district court (Judge Burns) has concluded that a personal appearance bond secured by $1.4 million in property or assets is required during the pendency of this appeal, we conclude that given changed market conditions which have resulted in a decline in the value of real property, Wilkes’ pledge of three properties subject to forfeiture is sufficient to assure his appearance during the pending of this appeal.”

That’s pure gibberish. If the housing market declines, homes are worth less, which means that Wilkes is even further from the $1.4 million threshold. Despite their cushy lifetime appointments, Judges Nelson and Tashima had to know that much. Maybe the court thought no one would notice.

I checked with Shaun Martin, a law professor at the University of San Diego who clerked for the 9th Circuit to see whether I was missing something. After reading the order, he was as confused as I was.

“That raises more questions than it answers,” he said.  Teading between the lines, Martin said the judges had grown impatient with all the back and forth and just wanted to move on. “You can fairly put the order down to frustration and needing to say something to let the guy go,” he said.

Wilkes Released

Two former defense contractors convicted of bribing former Rep. Randy “Duke” Cunningham are swapping places in the prison system. As Mitchell Wade prepares to head to prison following his sentencing last month, a federal judge granted $2 million bail for Brent Wilkes, who was serving 12 years for bribing Cunningham.

Wilkes has been fighting for release for nearly a year. The 9th U.S. Circuit of Appeals in March granted Wilkes bail pending appeal of his bribery, fraud, and conspiracy convictions.  Judge Larry Burns in San Diego, however, kept the 54-year-old Wilkes locked up over concerns over the value of the collateral he was posting to secure release.

Burns required Wilkes to post collateral of $1.4 million or 70 percent of his bail — seven times the typical 10 percent requirement. Wilkes pledged three homes subject to forfeiture, but Judge Burns said it wasn’t enough.

On Dec. 30, the appellate court ordered Wilkes’ release, ruling that the three homes was now sufficient “given changed market conditions which have resulted in a decline in the value of real property.” The court seems to be saying that a million bucks isn’t what it used to be.

Wilkes has been serving his time at Terminal Island in San Pedro. His former consultant, Mitch Wade, hasn’t yet reported to prison to begin serving his 30 month sentence.

The sentencing judge recommended that Wade serve his time at a prison “camp” in Petersburg, Va. Cunningham is serving 100 months in a similar prison camp in Tuscon, Arizona.

Inouye denies it

Following Monday’s sentencing of defense contractor Mitchell Wade, Sen. Dan Inouye’s spokesman responded to my reporting that the senator was one of the Wade five:

“Senator Inouye has not been contacted by the FBI or any other investigative authority in connection with the cases involving Duke Cunningham, Brent Wilkes and Mitchell Wade. Speculation and suggestions that a cloud of wrongdoing hangs over him and that he engaged in similar misconduct have no basis in fact.” — Inouye Press Secretary Mike Yuen.

Who paid for Cunningham’s bribes? You did.

That’s the true meaning of today’s sentencing of defense contractor Mitchell Wade, who supplied former Rep. Randy “Duke” Cunningham with $1.8 million in bribes.

Judge Ricardo Urbina sentenced Wade to 30 months in prison and, unbelievably, imposed a fine of only $250,000. If I’m reading the prosecution’s court filings correctly, that means the judge is allowing Wade to keep most of the wealth his corruption bought.

Prosecutors had asked for a much higher “significant” fine. In court filings, the government said the $250,000 fine Wade’s attorneys were seeking was “far too low” a penalty, noting that it’s only  $16,000 more than the mandatory minimum penalty.

“Wade, whose company earned $150 million from Defense Department from 2002-2005, is still a wealthy man. He has the capacity to pay more, and he should pay more,” Assistant U.S. Attorney Howard Sklamberg wrote in a court filing.

Judge Urbina had the tricky task of balancing what prosecutors called Wade’s “mammoth acts of corruption” with the extraordinary assistance he provided the government in its investigation of Cunningham and others. The judge rewarded Wade for his cooperation with reduced prison time.

By failing to impose a significant fine and seize the ill-gotten gains, the judge is  assuring Wade can pay his $2 million legal team at WilmerHale and still profit from his corruption.

And here I thought the criminal justice system was supposed to discourage crime.