Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

More on Dick Cheney's connections to Duke Cunningham scandal

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
kaal Donating Member (93 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-22-07 05:18 AM
Original message
More on Dick Cheney's connections to Duke Cunningham scandal
Edited on Thu Mar-22-07 06:04 AM by kaal
by John Aravosis (DC)


I'm digging deeper into this Carol Lam/White House/Duke Cunningham story. Very odd stuff.

Check out the following from the LA Times. Now, keep in mind that MZM was the firm bribing Cunningham, and the firm that Cunningham was directing the federal contracts to. The thing is, MZM had no revenue yet in 2001, but somehow from somewhere they had $100,000 to pay off Cunningham at the same time. Also, MZM had never had any federal contracts. But somehow they get on the preferred vendor list and their first contract is with Dick Cheney's office in the White House. And the amount of money Cheney's people pay MZM is the exact amount of money that is needed to buy Duke Cunningham's boat.

How and why did Dick Cheney's office help this nobody suddenly get rolling?
MZM Inc. was incorporated in 1993 but had not posted any revenue as late as 2001. Still, the company began paying for Cunningham's expenses, according to court documents. In November 2001, a company check for $12,000 paid for three nightstands, a leaded-glass cabinet, an antique washstand and four armoires.

In December 2001, a $50,000 company check was sent to a mortgage banker, who in turn made out a check to Cunningham for the same amount. In January 2002, the company's American Express card was used to purchase a leather sofa and a sleigh bed for Cunningham.

In all, more than $100,000 in cash and furnishings were given to Cunningham even before MZM had posted its first revenue.

Although MZM had no experience with government contracts, the General Services Administration in May 2002 placed the company on a list of approved information technology service providers, a key step for the company to get business from federal agencies.

The first contract, worth $140,000, came from the White House — to provide office furniture and computers for Vice President Dick Cheney.

Two weeks later, on Aug. 30, 2002, Wade purchased a yacht, later christened "Duke-Stir," for $140,000, according to court documents. Cunningham used the yacht, docked at the Capital Yacht Club, as his home in Washington — and the scene of parties for lobbyists and others.

The money and gifts MZM gave Cunningham were a small price to pay for the ultimate prize. In September 2002, the General Services Administration signed a so-called blanket purchase agreement with MZM totaling $250 million over five years.

Under the agreement, specific computer services for the Pentagon would be contracted to MZM without competition.


http://americablog.blogspot.com/">americablog.blogspot.com


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
NinetySix Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-22-07 05:32 AM
Response to Original message
1. It all begins and ends with Cheney, doesn't it?
Anywhere there's a whiff of something amiss regarding this administration, the trail leading to the truth is littered with the scat and territorial markings of Dick Cheney.

When Cheney was picked by Bush in 2000 to find a suitable VP running mate and ended uo picking HIMSELF, we should have known something was up. Instead, we treated it like it was the biggest joke of the day; how could we have understood then or foreseen that it marked the beginning of the unravelling of our Republic?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Old and In the Way Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-22-07 05:36 AM
Response to Original message
2. It's pretty obvious.....the Republican Political-Business model.
1) Steal Elections to grab power
2) Once in, get business partners to pay off corrupt Republican Congresspeople.
3) Get corrupted Republican Congresspeople to steer no-bid contracts to dummy corporations of same business partners.
4) Pay-offs all around with sizable reinvest/laundering of cash back into Republican election campaigns.

Repeat until taxpayer is throughly fleeced.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cassiepriam Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-22-07 06:00 AM
Response to Reply #2
4. You are correct. This is how it works. Oh and make sure all checks and balances
have been bribed or threatened into compliance.

And once all the money has been successfully stolen,
declare bankruptcy and walk away, and let the innocent
hold the bag and clean up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
glitch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-22-07 08:32 AM
Response to Reply #2
8. 5) Commit Waste
Good old term describing the sell off of assets (trees, oil, gravel, whatever) of the land you are managing but don't own.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fasttense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-22-07 05:42 AM
Response to Original message
3. Your link is not working. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kaal Donating Member (93 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-22-07 06:11 AM
Response to Reply #3
5. Thanks, I fixed it
This is what I don't understand:

The money and gifts MZM gave Cunningham were a small price to pay for the ultimate prize. In September 2002, the General Services Administration signed a so-called blanket purchase agreement with MZM totaling $250 million over five years.

Under the agreement, specific computer services for the Pentagon would be contracted to MZM without competition.




A blancket purchase agreement worth $250 is signed with NO competition...!!? How does that happen? Do our systems completely lack any oversight? Surely not!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fasttense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-22-07 06:39 AM
Response to Reply #5
7. I don't understand it either.
About five years ago, I dealt with government contracts and you had to have very specific and identifiable reasons for no bid contracts. The contracts were renewable every year, so every year you had to justify why you had a no bid contract. Needless to say they were very rare. The FAR and the CFR are the regulations that govern government contracts but each branch of government has its own regulations as well.

I knew a contract officer who went to jail over no bid contract kickbacks. But since the bushes took over, no bid contracts are the norm. I suppose they could have re-written the FAR and CFR but I suspect that since the regulations are so explicit and so detailed that they simply rig the numbers to justify their excessive (exclusive?) use of no bid contracts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zeemike Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-22-07 06:22 AM
Response to Original message
6. It reads like a how to manual
How to create a tit on the government cow to suck on.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CrazyOrangeCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-22-07 09:19 AM
Response to Original message
9. kick
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu May 02nd 2024, 06:10 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC