Posted on 06/23/2008 12:29:53 PM PDT by NormsRevenge
WASHINGTON: John McCain, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, is fending off charges that he pushed the U.S. Air Force into a faulty $35 billion deal for midair refueling planes.
Democrats weighed in after the Government Accountability Office, a nonpartisan arm of Congress, found last week that the air force had made "significant errors that could have affected the outcome of what was a close competition" between Boeing and a combination of Northrop Grumman and European Aerospace & Defense Systems, or EADS, which was awarded the contract.
The Democratic National Committee accused McCain of "mimicking" EADS, the corporate parent of Airbus, Boeing's rival, "every step of the way" in shaping the competition for the contract.
"In reality, Senator McCain intervened at key steps in the process, echoing the arguments of the EADS/Airbus consortium each time," the Democratic Party headquarters said.
The senator from Arizona, it asserted in a follow-up statement, "helped steer a tanker contract to a European company for which seven of his campaign advisers and fund-raisers then lobbied."
McCain has argued that his actions were aimed exclusively at promoting a fair and open bidding process.
"My paramount concern in the tanker replacement program has always been that the air force buy the most capable aerial refueling tankers at the most reasonable cost," he said in a statement after the Government Accountability Office, or GAO, found fault with the process of awarding the contract. "Obviously they need to go back and redo the contracting process again, the awarding of it, and I hope that this time they will get it right."
The presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, Barack Obama, applauded the GAO recommendation and called for the air force to reopen the tanker competition.
(Excerpt) Read more at iht.com ...
The fact people went to jail due to taking graft and the fact it was a sole source contract with no other bidders, something the libs always scream about, makes no difference? Oh wait, it’s an election year.
The Democrats will make it grow legs.
If Obama becomes president then the Air Force won't see dollar one for any new systems, including tankers.
I feel so sorry for him getting roughed up like he is.
Who would have thought 'Outsourcing American Jobs' would be so controversial for a Potential Presidential Nomonee?
I feel so sorry for him getting roughed up like he is.
Who would have thought 'Outsourcing American Jobs' would be so controversial for a Potential Presidential Nominee?
Airbus won bidding on a project they cannot complete on time. People are smoking rock if they think Airbus will get that plant built and jets rolled out on time. Also, that design is not what the USAF needs.
Competition with a subsidized state entity such as EADS is by definition not possible. You can't win.
And if the charge that they subsidized wasn't "determinable" then why was EADs in such a hurry to pull out of the competition if that was going to be addressed?
"The resulting concessions apparently skewed the selection process against Boeing," said Thompson, a defense industry consultant with close ties to the Pentagon.
I don't think it was McCain's fault or intention that the contract ended up in EADs' hands. I think the eons of graft caused it, and that McClain ended up wearing the sh!+ eating grin when all the dominoes fell.
I am glad that there may be a chance to pull the contract back out of EADS' claws. I hope that McCain has to squirm for a while. In the end, US voters will cast their ballots with the usual carelessness that ignores this sort of issue.
The Dems feign outrage that McCain would let EADS bid on this and possibly reduce the number of US jobs involved as well as the price, but the minute Obama is sworn in, he will cancel the contract altogether.
This was and is an open bid for your information! You are about three years late on the lease deal that was offered, thats long gone and the Air Force P.A. has completed serving her time.
Try again!
Worse yet, the Obamanation(B.O. HUSSEIN) will sell the entire fleet of Air Force Aircraft for scrap to the Chinese as a thank you for funding the campaign( one billion citizens at $1.00 a piece ).
The Long and Short of It:
Sen. McCain’s investigation proved unethical behavior that sent some Boeing employees to jail.
That is something.
Oh, wait...Democrats don’t want to hear that, do they?
I get it.
The Long and Short of It:
Sen. McCain’s investigation proved unethical behavior that sent some Boeing employees to jail.
That is something.
Oh, wait...Democrats don’t want to hear that, do they?
I get it.
AIRBUUST, the bankrupt bellyup company whose gift keeps on giving! Ask the passengers and crew of AA587 what they think of AIRBUUST!
Interesting thing about that. Mr. Integrity has always asserted he was doing this on behalf of the Taxpayers, but we taxpayers were going to get 100 planes for $18 billion. Not a bad deal, and hardly a gouging of "$6 billion" that McCain's deputies asserted.
Now that we get a do-over, what happens...EADS puts in a bid for $40 billion for 100 planes...h'mmmmm. Doesn't seem like the taxpayer made out too well on that deal...."Mr. Budget Hawk". Sigh. An honest press would have crucified McCain over these Grand-Standing shenanigans...which cost us defense capability...and taxpayer dollars...long ago. At least such that he never would have survived South Carolina's primary.
As for Democrats not wanting to hear about sending Republican pro-Defense people [Boeing for instance] to jail...don't be so sure.
And just who...precisely...do you think RINO McCain is and would rather be running as?
Meanwhile, EADs people commit bribery right and left, and deduct it from their taxes as legitimate business expenses, but Boeing is somehow the seat of all evil, eh? You guys were so sure Boeing was the worst. Wrong. You jumped out of the frying pan...into the fire...
Airbus has a history of graft and corruption, perhaps you should read The Center For Security Policy Report, and also read the June 2003 article in The Economist titled, "Airbus' secret past – Aircraft and bribery"?
The Economist article details Airbus sales campaigns in India, Syria and Canada that involved corruption and bribes. The article notes that in 2001, the Undersecretary for Commerce for International Trade, Grant Aldonas, testified before Congress on US competitiveness in aircraft manufacturing. The Undersecretary warned that bribery remains a threat to US competitiveness, quoting him, he said:
"The Economist observed:
'This is an industry where foreign corruption has a real impact. Bribery by foreign companies can have important consequences for US competitiveness. Because of the critical role governments play in selecting aircraft suppliers, and because of the huge sums of money involved in aircraft purchases, this sector has been especially vulnerable to trade distortions involving bribery of foreign public officials.'
"His remarks were directed squarely at Airbus and the European nations which aggressively back Airbus sales campaigns throughout the world.And perhaps you think this is all, 'old news'? Wrong again. EADs, the parent company was just busted just last year, committing Bribery in Austria for its Eurofighter...guess old habits die hard..."According to a 2001 European Parliament Report -- the US National Security Agency intercepted faxes and phone calls between Airbus, Saudi Arabian Airlines and Saudi government officials in early 1994. The NSA found that Airbus agents were offering bribes to a Saudi official to ensure that Airbus received a $6 billion order to modernize Saudi Arabian Airlines fleet. Bribes and corruption have long been part of Airbus' standard operating procedure for getting other countries to buy their airplanes."
Yes. He can. Why on Earth would you expect any different from this RINO sleaze?
Actually, the taxpayer, rather than being gouged $6 billion as McCain asserted...would have gotten 100 tankers for $18 billion. Now we have to pay $40 billion.
Gee, such a savings. Thanks John McCain! NOT!
USAF wouldn't have even owned those tankers under the previous deal.
Yes, I believe they would have. It was a lease to own deal, as I understood it. And Boeing would have fronted the R&D and deployments! Meanwhile, now the USAF has to string the deployment out while it coughs up $40 billion in the distant future...for the same number of planes...
I would not put it past him. With a compliant press, the Prez can get away with a lot of treasonous activity with virtually no consquence to his own political fortunes.
We saw that proved decisively with the Xlintons...
Unfortunately we are being given a RINO in EADs hip pocket as the alternative choice.
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.