“Duke” of Deception" (nat. security implications of Cunningham scandal)

[swag]

http://www.prospect.org/web/page.ww?section=root&name=ViewWeb&articleId=10816

“Duke” of Deception
The overlooked security implications of the Cunningham scandal.
By Laura Rozen

. . .
But in the Cunningham case nothing is quite what it seems. Two months have passed since he pled guilty to taking more bribes than any other legislator in U.S. history, yet no more indictments have been issued, not even against the four people described as “co-conspirators” in the Cunningham plea agreement. No other shoes have dropped -- until now.

On January 6, 2006, Time magazine reported that in the days before Cunningham’s plea agreement was publicly announced, he had been wearing a concealed recording device. “The identity of those with whom the San Diego congressman met while wearing the wire remains unclear, and is the source of furious -- and nervous -- speculation by congressional Republicans,” Time wrote. To whom had Cunningham led the FBI as part of his cooperation agreement? A recent story in the Los Angeles Times cited Cunningham’s attorney, K. Lee Blalack, as saying Cunningham had not recorded any other “public officials,” but declined to clarify whether he had recorded others. The implication of the two reports is clear: Prosecutors have further targets in their crosshairs beyond Cunningham. In law enforcement, the standard procedure is for prosecutors to haul in the little fish first in order to net the big fish later. So there was something peculiar about the Cunningham case, where such normal logic had seemingly been turned on its head. Here the big fish -- a ranking Representative -- had pled guilty before the businessmen from whom he had admitted taking bribes. What the Time report suggests was that Cunningham might not be the biggest fish in this case after all.

The Cunningham case has revealed several lawmakers worthy of investigative scrutiny. Two men described but not named as co-conspirators in the original indictment -- Brent Wilkes, the chairman of San Diego-based defense contractor ADCS Inc., and Mitchell J. Wade, the founder and until recently chairman and president of defense and intelligence contractor MZM Inc. -- donated “more than a million dollars in the last ten years to a roster of politicians,” including contributions from their employees and company political action committees (PACs), according to the Center for Responsive Politics. In some instances, those donations seemed to track closely with appropriations recommendations from politicians that benefited Wilkes’ and Wade’s companies.
. . .

A close reading of the 33-page Cunningham plea agreement raises troubling questions about the relationships that connect Wilkes, Wade, Kontogiannis, and those whom the Cunningham plea agreement describes as “others.” The indictment describes multiple instances when Wilkes and Wade used companies owned by Kontogiannis and his wife’s nephew essentially as the banking vehicles to launder bribes to Cunningham through the purchase of real estate, boats, and other valuables. In other words, Wilkes and Wade would seem to have had some degree of knowledge of Kontogiannis being central to the corruption scheme. While we know how companies belonging to Wilkes and Wade benefited from their bribes to Cunningham -- with a few hundred million dollars in sensitive U.S. government contracts -- it is still opaque what precisely Kontogiannis got out of the Cunningham arrangement. One is left to wonder what other interests Kontogiannis may have been representing, interests which could have benefited from his favors to Cunningham in ways that have not yet been revealed.

In short, who is investigating the counterintelligence implications of this case to protect against potential breaches of U.S. national security?

[niyad]

1. I just read the entire article--would ask WHY crocodile tears are worth

more attention than this, but we already know the answer. it just gets uglier and uglier by the minute.

[Flabbergasted]

2. This all smells funny. I like repubs going down but

this whole deal seems like someone is pulling strings to take them down.

[Demeter]

3. And This Is Bad Because?

Frankly, I'm willing to sacrifice all Republicans under any pretext, because they've done the same for me and mine already. Turnabout is fair play, you know.

[Flabbergasted]

4. It lends credibility to Bush if Congress is negliable.