White House reviews Iraq funds

[maddezmom]

WASHINGTON, April 19 (Reuters) - The White House on Monday denied any wrongdoing in funding the war in Iraq after a book alleged money was diverted from operations in Afghanistan without the knowledge of Congress.

~snip~

Rep. David Obey of Wisconsin, top Democrat on the House of Representatives Appropriations Committee that oversees spending, said Bush owed Congress "a full, detailed and immediate accounting."

If the book is accurate, Obey said it was "ironic that the president was surreptitiously authorizing expenditures to begin a plan for war" while resisting efforts in Congress to boost spending for homeland security.

The Republican chairman of the House Appropriations committee, Bill Young of Florida, said because "of the lack of specificity in the Woodward account, it is impossible to determine what specific funds he is alleging were spent without Congress' knowledge."

A spokesman for Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Ted Stevens, an Alaska Republican, said money was not shifted from Afghanistan to Iraq planning, and that the Afghanistan operation got all the money requested for it.

http://www.reuters.com/financeNewsArticle.jhtml?type=bondsNews&storyID=4870540

Bet both sides of the aisle are working overtime on finding out the truth.

[acmavm]

1. Ted Stevens is a walking, talking piece of shit. He would sell out his

mother for five votes.

[Lindsay]

3. I've got a long list of candidates for my least favorite senator,

but Stevens is real high up on the list.

[cliss]

2. Do they really turn over the checkbook

to George Bush, and keep their fingers crossed? What the hell are they doing in Congress?

I thought THEY were supposed to be authorizing funds transfers. Apparently not. Just when you think it couldn't possibly get any worse, it is.

[Lindsay]

4. My recollection about some of the funding measures

is that the White House deliberately included "slush funds" (although I don't remember the name they used to characterize them). That was one of the reasons some Dems opposed them...not that that did any good with a Repug majority.

But yeah, basically the Repugs were giving Bush* any damned thing he wanted, included lotsa pocket change.

[RoyGBiv]

5. Headline

Has anyone else noticed that while the article's headline says "White house reviews" that there was absolutely no mention in the story of the WH doing a single thing except asserting that Congress was "fully informed"? That is, they aren't "reviewing" anything?

I can't think of a single response that's come out today to Woodward's commentary on 60 Mins last night that is actually doing anything really to refute what he said. Even Powell, who came the closest to calling Woodward a liar straight out, simply said he was "aware" that Bandar was being informed. He didn't, in fact, say anything that directly refuted Woodward's assertion that Bush informed Bandar prior to Powell.

The responses today are all very interesting, I think.

[Miss Authoritiva]

6. You can debate the ethics of this, but

I have a feeling that the Bush Administration had its legal counsels clear this first and that there probably is/was enough "broad discretion" under post-9/11 emergency spending legislation for them to do this.

That's part of the beauty of getting broad discretionary powers following a terrorist attack.

[stevedeshazer]

7. Let me get this straight

They are asking this lying, thieving, crooked White House for "a full, detailed and immediate accounting.".

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!

Send in the clowns.

[Tellurian]

12. HA,HA,HA ...is right. Let the Fox count the Chickens in the hen house!

[TacticalPeek]

8. If I read all this right, they could be in a world of hurt.

First, that FY 2002 supplemental has a checkered history:

http://www.interaction.org/library/detail.php?id=846


And second, if any of this blood money came from the following provision of that 2002 act, Katie bar the door!

PEACEKEEPING OPERATIONS
For an additional amount for "Peacekeeping Operations" for
emergency expenses for activities related to combating international
terrorism, $20,000,000, to remain available until June 30, 2003:
Provided, That the entire amount is designated by the Congress
as an emergency requirement pursuant to section 251(b)(2)(A) of
the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985,
as amended: Provided further, That funds appropriated by this
paragraph shall be available only for Afghanistan, and may be
made available notwithstanding section 512 of Public Law 107–
115 or any similar provision of law.

FY 2002 Supplemental


BWAAHAHAHAHAHAH!

[stevedeshazer]

10. Hmmmmmmmm

Very interesting....

[moondust]

9. Even if found technically legal

it remains deceptive, misleading, and unethical as hell.

[Tellurian]

11. An Outright Lie! Read this article...

Pentagon Denies Terror Funds Used for Iraq

By JOHN J. LUMPKIN, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON - A Democratic congressman on Monday demanded to know whether the Bush administration transferred $700 million to Iraq war planning efforts out of counterterrorism funds without informing Capitol Hill.

The Pentagon said it didn't happen.

A senior Defense Department budget official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the Pentagon used a smaller amount of post-Sept. 11 counterterrorism money on projects that would aid the war on Iraq, but the spending had a wider purpose — it also improved the military's capability to fight terrorists everywhere.

At issue is whether counterterrorism money was spent inappropriately on any preparations for a possible conflict in Iraq, and whether Congress was informed of the Bush administration's changes in spending plans.

The Pentagon provided its account Monday.

In July 2002, Gen. Tommy Franks sent the Pentagon $750 million in requests for improvements, projects and supplies that would help him carry out a war on Iraq, the Pentagon budget official said.

The Pentagon reviewed the request and funded $178 million that it believed it could justify spending from counterterrorism spending bills approved after the Sept. 11 attacks. Those bills gave the administration vast spending authority, but some question whether preparations for a possible war with Iraq would fall under that.

The $178 million went for fuel and rations, improvements to military communications networks and improvements to Franks' headquarters in Florida, the budget official said. Pentagon officials said all of these were important to Franks' command regardless of events in Iraq. Franks, as chief of U.S. Central Command, also had authority over the war in Afghanistan.

read on:

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20040420/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_war_planning&cid=544&ncid=1480