Posted on 06/02/2004 9:53:21 AM PDT by esryle
WASHINGTON — Democrats on Tuesday called for a full investigation of one of the most politicized issues in the reconstruction of Iraq: whether Vice President Dick Cheney was involved in a decision to award Halliburton Corp. a multibillion-dollar contract to rebuild the country's oil infrastructure.
Democrats charged that a recently released U.S. Army e-mail showed that Cheney, president of Halliburton between 1995 and 2000, had coordinated action relating to the contract, awarded without bidding and worth up to $7 billion.
The nonprofit Judicial Watch obtained the one-page e-mail earlier this year as part of a Freedom of Information Act request to the Army Corps of Engineers, which awarded the contract in March 2003.
"Every single aspect of this is so out of the ordinary," said Sen. Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.) at a teleconference organized by the Kerry campaign. "It raises the real question: Can the American people trust their government to do the right thing?"
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
Perhaps they finally figured out how to recover Algore's lost email.
You would think that the pubbies would exploit this to the nth degree. They won't as we know. My question is why. Think - the "Two-Party Cartel", owned & run by the elites.
I have my newly refurbished Spring /Summer foil hat to don..It's stunning.
When Judicial Watch isn't doing something that might help the Dems, of course, it is tagged as "the right-wing organization Judicial Watch."
Welcome to the forum.
Johnny, 'dat you??? :-D
Here's the "smoking gun" so you can see it for yourself:
http://www.judicialwatch.org/archive/2004/030503.pdf
Our minds don't work the way theirs do.
Exactly the reason why the RNC hasn't received a dime from me. When they start exposing the lies for what they are, THEN I'll send the cash.
Worst case scenario: They drub the issue until Cheney is forced to resign and low and behold, President Bush decides to nominate Condoleeza Rice or Rudy Guiliani for his next VP - hmmm, are the dems REALLY so smart as to wander down THIS road?
Does anyone know what the email says that's supposedly so incriminating?
You know that things are going well in Iraq for Bush, when the first thing every DemocRAT* reporter in the media brings up when asking questions is this e-mail. (*Katie the caver troll yesterday, and Chris Mathews on Hardball last night)
Wow. I did not know that.
yeah...of course I'm kidding!
That Cheney's office was involved in getting Halliburton the contract, I think (but don't hold me to that).
Great suggestion, though.
Thanks for the post. It seems this email is about Cheney trying to expedite the contract so that "boots are on the ground" and we can "meet expectations" to get the Iraqi recovery underway ASAP. That's how I read it; some scandal.
You'd think that was the only time Halliburton/KBR (and whoever else they own) has done werk for the gubmint.
Halliburton had governmnet contracts during the Clinton years, largely because they are one of few companies equipped to do certain kinds of jobs.
Deja vu all over again.
WASHINGTON — U.S. officials met legal guidelines in awarding billions of dollars in new contracts for Iraq reconstruction to a Halliburton subsidiary and other companies without seeking competitive bids, congressional investigators say in a draft report.
But the government often appeared to go beyond the rules when it ordered new work under older existing contracts, the General Accounting Office said in its review of 25 reconstruction contracts. The contracts represented almost all of the $3.7 billion committed for reconstruction through September.
Overall, the GAO found that the 14 no-bid or limited-competition contracts it reviewed generally complied with requirements. But its review of 11 "task orders" — work ordered under existing contracts — were generally questionable. Only two were deemed to be within the scope of the contracts, seven were at least partly outside the scope, and two were unclear if they were within the scope.
Note the words "often appeared" and "generably questionable" in reference to new work under existing contracts, nowhere does the GAO state there was any wrongdoing.
I work in the FedGov arena as a purchasing agent and have to prepare "Justifications for Other Than Full and Open Competition" (JOFOC) documents constantly. Most of the time the JOFOC documents cite significant cost savings to the FedGov by utilizing existing contractors who are familiar with the facilities where the work is to be performed or the equipment that is being utilized to perform that work.
It is SOP, I have literally seen hundreds of thousands of dollars saved per procurement by not having to reverse engineer items (when existing contractors already have drawings) and/or orientate new contractors. The Dems that make these claims don't have a clue, they just want to finger-point in an election year.
A rebuttal by Dave Lesar can be found at:
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.