Monica Goodling Instructs DOJ Officials to Delete Documents - 5 year prison term problem?

[papau]

http://www.anonymousliberal.com/2007/04/monica-goodling-instructs-doj-officials.html
Friday, April 27, 2007
Monica Goodling Instructs DOJ Officials to Delete Documents




Yes, that's an instruction to delete documents. And notice the date: February 12, 2007. That's well after Congress began investigating this matter. I don't believe any subpoenas or document requests had yet been issued (someone please correct me if I'm wrong about that), but it was pretty clear by then that document requests were likely.

Let's review the timeline. On January 17, 2007, Senators Feinstein and Leahy grilled Alberto Gonzales on the recent spate of U.S. Attorney firings. On January 25, 2007, Senator Schumer announced that he was going to hold hearings on the firing of U.S. Attorneys. And on February 6, Schumer held the first set of hearings, in which Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty testified that Bud Cummins was not asked to leave for "performance-related" reasons, but rather to make way for Karl Rove protege Tim Griffin. That damaging testimony helped propel this story to the front pages.

And two days later, on February 8, 2007, Senators Durbin, Schumer, Murray, and Reid sent a follow up letter to Alberto Gonzales asking all sorts of questions arising out of McNulty's testimony, including a number of questions about the replacement of Bud Cummins with Tim Griffin.

It is in this context that Monica Goodling, four days later, sends out the above-displayed email, which attaches updated talking points re: Griffin/Cummins and various other U.S. Attorney related issues and instructs the recipients to delete prior versions of the documents.

As a litigator, I can tell you, that's a real no-no. You never instruct people to delete documents that are relevant to a pending investigation. Never. That's true even when the investigating body hasn't yet got around to requesting those documents. It smacks of obstruction. Indeed, the Obstruction of Congress statute, 18 U.S.C § 1505, specifically prohibits any attempts to obstruct "the due and proper exercise of the power of inquiry under which any inquiry or investigation is being had by either House, or any committee of either House or any joint committee of the Congress." The penalty is up to 5 years in prison.<snip>

[Patsy Stone]

1. Whoopsie.

Poor Monica was up to her eyeballs in it, wasn't she?

Also, love the use of the word "friendlies". I'd like to see that list. K&R

[Tandalayo_Scheisskopf]

2. You know, Papau...

I have the feeling that this bit of intrepid sleuthing, that started with Christy over at FiredogLake, might just change the complexion of either Goodling's immunity negotiations or the content of her testimony, if she gives it.

Just a hunch. ;-)

Some lawyer she is. Sheesh. Whadda maroon.

[papau]

9. Monday will be interesting - someone needs to call Waxman -and the press! :-)

:-)

[Erika]

3. She was dirty, dirty, dirty

No wonder she bailed out for immunity.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

4. what sort of government is this that destroys evidence?

[stubtoe]

29. Ours.

:(

[Rosa Luxemburg]

41. yes, we used to think this only happened in banana republics

[frogcycle]

5. Assuming the presence of a valid doc management system

asking email recipients to delete old versions seems reasonable to me. You are issuing a new version, you don't want someone accidentally grabbing the old one and using it; you ask them to delete from their pc. I have received such instructions many a time.

The key is, of course, that the doc management system does rigorous version control, archives all the earlier revs, and they are available to interested parties, including litigants, freedom of information, whatever.

I'm not saying they had such a practice, which they should have. I get the impression everything was being run by these religious wackos who didn't have a clue about real-world technology - just a bunch of people playing grown-up.

To the point of "appearing to be obstructing" it would have been good form to put in the email instruction "delete any local copies you may have of the now-obsolete versions; they can be retrieved upon request from the document archive system should you have a need for them in the future." Then nobody reading it later would get uptight. But that, of course, would call for a trained professional being in charge.

[Old and In the Way]

6. I have to agree.....this is SOP in many organizations that revise documents continuously.

While I have no doubts about the criminality swirling around Ms. Goodling and the political players in the WH and DoJ, I find nothing overtly nefarious about this request. I have no idea about the content of these docs, but I've used similar language in e-mails to people whom I've supplied updated reports on an ongoing basis.

[papau]

11. Might help if the document archive system is not purged - but we will see if it

has - or has not - had one of those Microsoft Jet database problems that DUer Tandalayo_Scheisskopf made mention of earlier as a "possibility".

In insurance because of all the litigation, nothing every gets deleted - except for the local machines automatic 90 day clean-ups every 90 days of emails not saved from the in and sent areas to specific files, and what you want to do with the local machine is your business.

If you know the archiving sucks, indeed if you do not know for certain that the archiving is working, and send this email, I'd say 5 years is in your future.

[Tandalayo_Scheisskopf]

14. Document management technologies...

Would generally not use JET database technology in an enterprise-sized situation. A good one would use MS-SQL. A really good one, setup by a database admin with something of a free hand, a clue, and a pointy-haired boss who wasn't on the take from a channel representative would use either MySQL or Postgres.

I would think that anyone who tried instituting enterprise-wide or even department-wide document management with JET at the core would find his or her choice to be the ever-famous "career limiting move". Right about the time JET decided to do it's daily "let's eat all the documents!" routine. ;-)

[papau]

17. LOL - The Met's is a MySQL or MS-SQL -names look alike and my memory sucks

Indeed I suspect it is the weaker MS-SQL as the quality of IT is less now that we've replaced the old folks with H1 visa types from India that while nice folks do not seem impressive (a horrible internal web page system with screens that refused to totally erase when moving to a new section of the site - making the web pages unreadable - was released internally to 45,000 users - something that could not have happened 5 years ago - but we save $12000 to $20000 plus fringe per job slot by using H1's))

[Tandalayo_Scheisskopf]

19. Oh, I am sure that it's MS-SQL...

With all those buggy web page forms generated in Frontpage or Exchange's forms generator. By people who ain't quite up to speed.

I look forward to the possibility of the passage of a law in Congress that changes the landscape of this H1-B crap. It's proposes that companies that want to put jobs out to H1-B's have to post the jobs in the US for 90 days, minimum. Supposedly, the law will have some teeth in it too, so it does not get gamed.

[papau]

20. The old posting requirement did not specify major media, so we advertised in the local weekly in

rural Alaska.

Any such provision needs to require posting on Monster.com or the equivalent.

[EVDebs]

22. Check out Ptech's UML

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ptech

notable clients = White House, DOJ, not to mention most military and FAA. company now known as GoAgile. Still at WH and DOJ. Over and out.

[MadAsHellNewYorker]

15. I must disagree. As a former workhorse at a law firm, you never ask people to delete anything.

You point out that this is the newest version and it is the version that should be used. You date all versions to make sure no confusion exists. Its not that hard to keep straight. Asking anyone to delete anything definitely throws up red flags in my mind.

[papau]

18. I agree - that is the way major insurance co's work also-the only "delete" memo's say "don't delete"

but we do have the email in and send tidy up every 90 days routine. But the attachments - the documents - are never deleted - you keep all versions.

[frogcycle]

24. I was not trying to dictate policy to any one

every entity has (or should have) its own policies that comply with Sarbanes-Oxley, other applicable regs such as Presidential Papers Act, as well as whatever self-preservation practices it feels it prudent to adopt. All I'm saying is that this email, by itself, does not constitute a "smoking gun" unless it can be linked to violation of law. It does raise concern, because, as I said, the twits running the show appear to be either oblivious to, or unimpressed by the rule of law.

If they had their asses covered elsewhere, asking someone to delete old copies from their pc is not in itself bad. If the policy is that an individual's pc is to be considered an official record, subject to mandatory archiving, then the mechanism should be in force and continually verified. You just cannot assume that a non-technical individual is responsible personally for rigorous preservation of everything - particularly of stuff they did not author, but, rather received via email.

The claim that rove "thought RNC email was being archived" so had a practice of deleting everything points this out. Unless he had signed something specific saying he was personally the official responsible party for archiving everything he wrote, including getting it copied off his PC hard drive to other media, and shipping that to Iron Mountain or some such for preservation, then he is within his rights to assume someone else - one of the "little people" he would not want touching him - is dealing with that.

[papau]

28. Sarbanes-Oxley doesn't get mentioned, but litigation requirements do - and

the Presidential Papers Act is quite specific and everyone is told to check with the White House Counsel. In large insurance companies we get memos noting current litigation and saying do not delete from local machines, despite the archiving, anything to do with the topic.

But as you say, the rule of law does conflict with a Commander in Chief presidency support by the media, until one realizes that many on the Supreme Court agree with the idea that war time power eliminates "illegal" - as Nixon noted.

I doubt she was in real trouble - just a lot of legal bills.

Now if she sings, she may very well be in real trouble. Indeed, almost as much trouble, albeit more extra work than legal, as those trying to comply with Sarbanes-Oxley are in (I am not a fan of Sarbanes-Oxley).

The next week should be interesting.

[MadAsHellNewYorker]

31. The key here though is the timeline, after the first hearing on 2/6 and the

investigatory letter on 2/8, its pretty much understood you don't delete anything relating to an ongoing investigation. So for her to send out an email on 2/12 asking for deletion of previously created "facts" with new "facts" indicates something is definitely going on. It may not be the smoking gun, but it certainly is a red flag.

[frogcycle]

36. yes, that timing certainly suggests

either she is a blithering idiot or up to her eyeballs in conspiracy. It stinks to high heaven, but MAY not be a "smoking gun" - that is, not a useful one.

[Metta]

7. A smoking gun. Let's see what come sof this.

Only the best, I hope. :donut: :donut: :)

[EVDebs]

8. It all goes right to the heart of this corruption, Papau

"It's all part of a growing ongoing investigation into corruption in defense and intelligence contracts, which already has sent former Rep. Randy “Duke” Cunningham to prison and, legal sources say, may threaten others in Congress and the CIA. "

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12634250/

Note that this story is dated May 4, 2006. The heat from the Carol Lam investigation is now being felt in the Arizona case of Renzi, who is hinting at a 'national security' defense (LOL !) re his land deal next to Ft Huachucha.

The entire Octopus behind the scenes is the old CIA drugs, $ pipeline, offthebooks offtheshelf Ollie North kinda stuff. Congress doesn't know cuz Congress is kept in the dark and the right ones are paid off, especially those GOP ones.

[papau]

12. I really hate believing the CIA rogues of 63 are still around in spirit in new CIA rogues - I have

known station chiefs and wet work folks and they are highly ethical people (the wet work fellow was a little nuts, and various coverts where so highly into it that they demanded that a superior be present in the operating room before an emergency room Doc could start the anesthesia for the operation that might save their lives).

Indeed none of the above was told to me directly - just over the years one can piece together snipits of past conversations to make sense of the situation. These CIA/NSA folks are dedicated.

The 1963 rogues that were influenced by the Texas oil people as to economic/security danger of JFK were out of control as far as I can tell (and again - I never got any direct conversations on this or any other CIA/Pentagon intel matter - so this falls into the definition of unproven conjecture quite easily).

I really do not want to believe - and I do not believe - that it is happening again.

But I did see the "National Security" land deal defense by Renzi, and got a good laugh. The DA "Bushie" corruption appears to go deep.

[EVDebs]

21. You need to read more

Alfred McCoy's Politics of Heroin: CIA complicity in the global drug trade for openers. This has been the 'background' corruption that has now gotten SOOOOOOOO out of control that our DoD's budget can't account for 25% or $2.3 Trillion

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/01/29/eveningnews/main325985.shtml

You don't want to believe the truth ! You can't handle the truth !

(I heard that before somewheres)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfred_W._McCoy

Tim Weiner's book Blank Check: The Pentagon's Black Budget

http://www.namebase.org/sources/PR.html

takes it a step further since the military's budgetting is even more out of Congressional oversight. This is all extra-Constitutional since all spending by the govt is supposed to originate in the House, not in some CIA or DoD backroom and tied to an Afgan or Golden Triangle drug source.

Sorry to burst your bubble.

[papau]

26. From talks long ago with the accounting team atop the Pentagon - There's no 2.3 Trillion missing

Now it appears that the drug trade stuff http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfred_W._McCoy is true. And it is also true that Congress passes black box money for the 15 intel org's including the CIA, but somebody in Congress wanted that money appropriated, and Congress did then pass bills allowing those overseas accounts and secret airlines and trading companies and other assets that belong to those orgs - nothing illegal or accounted for. I suspect the accounting detail is not there for the intel ops (a detail I can't ask about and no one says anything) - and of course my info, which is conjecture and not known facts, is not current and dates to the Reagan admin 2nd term.

As to the $2.3 Trillion "not accounted for" http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/01/29/eveningnews/main325985.shtml that is all a pretend problem that someone with no knowledge of accounting and our government structure put out.

The value of military assets, and even their existence, is shaky as actual inventories are not audited - but that problem is relatively small - several billion - and "secrets" about giving away stuff may be the reason. Other than that, the $2.3 trillion "missing" is all technical accounting - nothing is missing.

The government has been on a program since early Clinton to get accounting that was traceable to passed Congressional money bills that could be tied to actual expenditures. DOE achieved this a few years ago per the Ernst Audit (remember the $400 million missing that the GOP screamed about in the 2000 campaign - which was never missing - and the DOE audit process that actually found the $20 million that had been sent to fake vendors, sending that person to jail). In both the DOE case in the past of $400 million and the current case of DOD $2.3 trillion the number does not refer to monies missing. It refers to money spend and entered into the Departments debit and credit system that has been audited - not missing - but which can not be matched to the Department of Treasurt's "accounting by Congressional spending bill that has been passed" system - an audit matching difficulty solved by a concept called a "suspense account" because the Departments definitions for each line item in the accounting general ledger does not match or map to the Treasuries accounting line item definitions, so the unmatched entries go into the "suspense account". It is this "suspense account" that is $2.3 trillion in size.

There is thus no way to prove that Congressional restrictions on spending per any given passed bill were actually enforced - again a Reagan gift from the treason of his violating the Boland Amendment. The value of information provided depends on the honesty of the political appointee reporting the situation to Congress. All that is known is that the total spent was indeed authorized as a dollar amount, and who the money went to per the accounting done at the Department (but that is where categories for spending are routinely fake so as to move secret funds to the intel guys) .

So a Waxman can not get detail to hang a political appointee that moves money illegally. So new Reagan like treason of spending funds not authorized by Congress (called Executive Commander in Chief authority by the neo-cons and something the new right wing Supreme Court would no doubt rule was not treason if it involved a Republican) is not provable .

Indeed our media is treating this situation today as "flexibility" and our President is pretending he does not have this "flexibility" in Iraq- thus Bush's saying we run out of money two weeks ago (which we did - perhaps - if the Pentagon spent the money for the things in the bills that said what the money was to be spent for) versus the GAO saying it runs out the end of July (because items that do not tie to specific bills ares a tiny bit limited, but mainly that is when all the money appropriated to the Department runs out).

I agree spending should be tied directly to bills as the Treasury and the private audit firms they have hired like Ernst are trying to do. But Congressional Democrats go along with the GOP on the secrecy need (what USSR type country is trying to see our secrets is beyond me - so why is there a continued secrecy need?) that is meet by the flexibility of having a Departments audit system not match the Treasuries per bill approach http://www.namebase.org/sources/PR.html.

[EVDebs]

32. "ignorance of the law is no excuse"

That "pretend problem that someone with no knowledge of accounting and our government structure put out" was put out by Donald Rumsfeld and vouched for by that whistle blower. "So a Waxman cannot get detail to hang a political appointee that moves money illegally" means that, as of today, there is no case; this is NOT TO SAY such a case is not well on its way ! I pray, and expect your prayers too, that such a case emerges from the current Attorneygate obstruction of justice investigations.

This is precisely the problem: the CIA and GOP money pipeline to fund their funandgames is now too vast and too visible. Meyer Lansky, the mob's old moneyman, knew this and intentionally kept skims to under 15% in order to not arouse suspicion. If the GOP and CIA are abusing a government required 'suspense account' system, this is an impeachable offense if abused to the extent that I think it is being abused !!!!

Today's greed and arrogance within the CIA and GOP create the golden opportunity to use the old 'national security' defense along with, as you suggest, a new non-treasonous "Executive Commander-In-Chief authority" -- where the Constitution shows no such authority exists. Dare I say it, commonsense says it too, otherwise why not return the monarchy, or at least call it what it is, a GOP monarchy.

Congress WILL reexercise ITS authority in war making and no new violations of the War Powers Act will be tolerated ever again !!!

[papau]

34. I hope and pray that you are correct that government will stop this hiding of facts under a Nat'l

Security blanket - exposure to light solves a lot of problems.

But the media is already making fun of the Waxman efforts, allowing GOP quotes to the effect "it is a waste of time" to go unchallenged.

How do we get our media back if the Congress is afraid of breaking up the monopolies and the monopolies do not have a fairness doctrine to control their slant? We need the French election laws in the U.S.

Better is of course adding to those laws the Federal Financing of all Federal elections including primaries.

[EVDebs]

35. We lost 'our' media when CIA started Operation Mockingbird

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKmockingbird.htm

and Operation CHAOS
http://www.serendipity.li/cia/lyon.html

and all those other domestic operations that suppress and counter lawful dissent in this country. It's just common sense yet people are shocked when they find that...

CIA Plans to Shift Work to Denver
Domestic Division Would Be Moved
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/05/05/AR2005050501860.html

just in time for the Democratic Party's '08 Convention. Their timing is nothing if not perfect ! Again, a Church Committee will HAVE TO investigate and restore the Constitution in this country to its rightful place. The Democratic Party and Green Party along with all other progressive liberal groups out there, teamed up with conservative 'libertarian' types who see the real damage the Republicans are doing, can bring the country back, no doubt about it.

[EVDebs]

40. Yeah, it's probably a lot more by now...

Pentagon Contractors Owe $7.7 Billion in Unpaid Taxes
By Thomas D. Williams
t r u t h o u t | Report

Monday 30 April 2007

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/043007J.shtml

The US either funds medicare and SS or else we've got to start taking a SERIOUS look into the fraud and waste at DOD/CIA etc.

Are we really getting 'our money's worth' in Iraq ? Halliburton and Blackwater sure are. Bottom line is the money is 'missing' and went not to where it was supposed to go; instead it went into GOP connected front companies and black ops: a black hole.

[whistle]

10. Hey Monica, taking the 5th won't do you any good...best to flee the country

...ASAP!.....PDTM (Please dump this message)

[peacetalksforall]

13. I still don't understand the group assumptions. It appears

someone told them they would never get caught.

I really want to know the message, context, and source.

They were so arrogant and busy, now so scared and running - to their lawyers.

With the excepton of DeLay, Rove, Addington, Hadley, RIce, Cheney and Pres Know Nothing aka King George.

[frogcycle]

25. I wrote an essay once

on organizational persona. The theme was that organization take their personality from the top. I contrasted a company I once worked for before and after a change of CEO. People's demeanors were different the next day]!

I also drew an analogy to ant colonies. All the workers are the offspring of one queen, and they have her traits. Army ants behave one way; leafcutter ants another. Somewhat astonishingly, humans are similar to ants. Nazi Germany would be a great example.

The attitude of "I am the decider"; "dictatorship would be great as long as I get to be the dictator" pervades this administration, and also permeated the entire republican party. It is both overt, as when they publish "talking points" and then every frigging republican and media whore repeats them incessantly, and also more subtle, wherein they all just adopt the mentality. The entire "with us or against us" mindset. The "they can't stop us" mindset.

People who actually might have been competent working somewhere that had rules and ethics became incompetent working for this administration, basically because they all assume the drunken fratboy's persona. He doesn't believe in science? They neither do they. He doesn't believe in negotiation or compromise? Then neither do they. He doesn't concern himself with rules (dui, awol...)? Then neither do they.

here's the essay

[peacetalksforall]

33. Excellent article. I can relate to it all. Thanks. I absolutely believe

in top down responsibility and message setting that effects behavior and performance (and all the other associated stuff regarding health and self-esteem) that business schools and haman resource people now have made into a science.

I worked many years for a well known company. I remember hearing people talk about how poorly one of our new CEO's was doing. They would never atrribute their claim concretely. I held a quite different opinion. The message he passed down to me drove me to raise my high standards even more. I can't remember the names of most of the other leaders - I can't forget his. He spoke 'us', not 'I' and 'you can', not 'you must'.

But, I was lucky. I worked for an inspring person part time during high school and was smart enough to observe this person's talent and modeling that got planted in my head.

We can ascend to and descend from messages placed by leaders.

Every minute of watching the Abu Graib atrocities, i 'knew' that the message was coming DOWN to these people from very high UP - and they were covering it UP - in the highest offices of the corporations who own the television networks and the very highest offices of the FCC. And, all we have to show for responsibility is proof that Rumsfeld is still in the Pentagon and Cheney is still VP and PNAC is only barely crumbling and no CEO's of ownership companies of the television networks have been fired for non-investigation. The trickle down irresponsibility is also passed to all the employees and guest experts who have wasted their degrees by going along with the blackout of prisons, rendition, jet flights to prisons, fueling at supposedly civilized countries and paid off countries who do the torture in addition to our own kids and mercenaries.

And torture is just one of the trickle down traitorist acts against world citizens. They have guaranteed future death by retaliation - unless, those tortured and their friends find incredible compassion and forgiveness. Some message. Up or down?

[frogcycle]

37. precisely

even if orders to do this or that were not issued overtly, the atmosphere of what is acceptable spreads like wildfire. It is so profound, in my opinion, as to suggest some intrinsic pack - or herd - whatever - behavior genes.

Unfortunately, I have come across quality leaders only a couple of times in my career. The vast majority of people are scheming and conniving to take care of themselves. If they are CEO's they are focused on this quarter's "numbers" because they have a bonus tied directly to it.

The few people who actually believe in the greater good, "do the right thing" etc. unfortunately tend to get frustrated, tune out, and drop out. The scum like gwb manage to get into positions of responsibility, because they promote their own.

[madrchsod]

16. now where did she get her law degree !

it`s really amazing just how utterly stupid these people are

[moodforaday]

38. Are you asking sarcastically?

Because if you aren't, you will be amused: she got her degree from Pat Robertson's Regent University, apparently a "tier 4" academy:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monica_Goodling

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regent_University

Jon Stewart had a barrel of fun over this a few nights ago. He mentioned something like 150 Regent alumni are working in the * admin now.

[madrchsod]

39. yes...stewart was great the other night...

[EVDebs]

23. John Dowd, Goodling's attny is a crackerjack moneylaundering attny

""Written Works

"U.S. Laundering, Forfeiture Laws Now Reach All Points on Globe," September 2002

"When Agents Serve Search Warrant, Businesses Must Know Rules of Game (Part 2 of 2),," Money Laundering Alert, June 2001

"When Laundering Charges Surface, Battles Commence on Many Fronts (Part 1 of 2)," Money Laundering Alert, May 2001 ""

http://www.akingump.com/attorney.cfm?attorney_id=58

meaning that Monica probably took someone else's advice when hiring this guy. The REAL back story to this attorney firing is the obstruction of justice into the Carol Lam case,

""It's all part of a growing ongoing investigation into corruption in defense and intelligence contracts, which already has sent former Rep. Randy “Duke” Cunningham to prison and, legal sources say, may threaten others in Congress and the CIA. ""

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12634250 /

The 'rogues of '63' as you put it never left. Operation Gemstone of Watergate 70's should have given you a clue also. Iran Contra's 'off the books off the shelf' operations are another, along with the wonderfully dyslexic Fawn Hall's transposition of the Credit Suisse bank account number that broke open Ollie's secret account !

""Abrams provided the Bruneian official with a bank account number into which the deposit should be made. Abrams had obtained it from North. But the number -- which was to have been for the Enterprise's Lake Resources account in the Credit Suisse bank Geneva -- had two numbers transposed, and the subsequent $10 million deposit went into the wrong account.38""...

""Footnote 38: Instead of Lake Resources account number 386.430.22.1, the number North provided to Abrams, on a card typed by North's secretary Fawn Hall, was 368.430.22.1. ""

Final Report of The Independent Counsel for Iran/Contra Matters
Volume I: Investigations and Prosecutions
Lawrence E. Walsh; Independent Counsel
August 4, 1993; Washington, D.C.
http://history.liberatedtext.org/ic/14othermoneymatters.html

Again, please pay more attention to your CIA acquaintences. They aren't as ethical as you think papau !

[papau]

27. I like to believe in folks - and many are now dead - and almost all retired. Their

kids are good eggs.

I have suspected waring fractions within the CIA, but have never understood how that could continue without permission from the top. So in that case they are not "rogue" - they are directed with permission, indeed orders, to do what they do.

I was shocked when reports surfaced that directed EMF (perhaps now being made commercial as directed sound) was, perhaps, used by the CIA to kill Senator Paul Wellstone (as I know of no other org that was into the technology at the time, it seems plausible, but there are ways to get directed sound effects that do not involve techniques that could bring down a low flying plane, and I am not sure the directed EMF actually works to this day). The WTC7 looks CIA until you realize how many must have the secret - and that is not the CIA way.

But I stand by my comment about the folks I know being good folks - and agree - sadly - that there may be a problem in the organization.

[EVDebs]

30. The equivalent of a new Church Committee investigation will be necessary

in order to bring about correcting the 'problem in the organization'

While the CIA was spending $ to influence elections overseas, they undoubtedly did and continue to do same here at home, witness FL 2000 and Ohio 2004:

"Covert United States involvement in Chile in the decade between 1963 and 1973 was extensive and continuous. The Central Intelligence Agency spent three million dollars in an effort to influence the outcome of the 1964 Chilean presidential elections. Eight million dollars was spent, covertly, in the three years between 1970 and the military coup in September 1973, with over three million dollars expended in fiscal year 1972 alone.(1)"

http://foia.state.gov/Reports/ChurchReport.asp

Dust off your copy of All The President's Men and read the early footnotes around pages 30-40; you'll find money (coming in from "Chilean investors"...left uninvestigated) that eventually goes to a Mexican bank and then to Nixon. Betcha that was some of the CIA's excess $ coming in to fund a certain CREEP.

PS. This is only the money we KNOW about. Off the books, "off the shelf", projects funded without Congress' knowledge or oversight are possible due to the drug connection. It's no coincidence the War on Drugs was a lost cause, the CIA sees to that.