When Roberts encouraged the Inspector General of the Pentagon (the Pentagon investigating themselves) to investigate this office instead of completing Phase II it was not difficult to figure that this was one more abusive strategy of his to delay and divert the much needed investigation. This was just before the 2004 election. His agenda was obviously to slow down or put a stop the Phase II of the SSCI.

Still wondering if we will witness congress hold anyone (Feith, Ledeen, Hadley etc etc) ACCOUNTABLE for creating, cherry picking and disseminating the false pre war intelligence? Are they waiting for a “blue dress”?

Jim Knodell.

About 8 years ago, Knodell was a fairly senior Secret Service Agent. He was on the Presidential Protective Detail (Clinton) but had a desk job – responsible for liaising with White House staff and making travel arrangements for other agents. A pretty dull job.

Anyway, the Bush Administration somehow hired him away from the Secret Service and into the White House Office of Admninstration as the Director of White House Security (WHS).

WHS is responsible for vetting all political appointees security risks, assigning security clearances, investigating unauthorized leaks of classified information and other sensitive tasks. Was Knodell qualified? Who knows.

.

This was proven at a hearing attended by Henry Waxman, where Knodell revealed that the White House NEVER investigated the Plame leak. His office would have been responsible for the investigation.

And here’s a snippet of a Waxman letter to then White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card:

… On March 16, 2007, the Oversight Committee held a hearing to examine the disclosure by White House officials of the covert status of CIA officer Valerie Plame Wilson. At this hearing, the current Chief Security Officer at the White House, James Knodell, testified that the White House Security Office (1) did not conduct any internal investigation to identify the source of the leak (2) did not initiate corrective actions to prevent further security breaches, and (3) did not consider administrative sanctions or reprimands for the officials involved.

… Following the hearing, my staff heard from multiple current and former security officials who work or worked at the White House Security Office. These security officials described a systemic breakdown in security procedures at the White House. The statements of these officials, if true, indicate that the security lapses that characterized the White House response to the leak of Ms. Wilson’s identity were not an isolated occurrence, but part of a pattern of disregard for the basic requirements for protecting our national security secrets.

326. On February 28, 2008, the Project on Government Oversight (POGO) issued a report on the Inspector Generals. It found that 60% of IGs appointed under Bush had prior political experience but only 20% had previous experience in auditing. This is the reverse of the situation under Clinton where 60% of IGs had experience in auditing and less than 25% had previous political experience. Civilian IGs come in two flavors, those appointed by the President and approved by Congress and those appointed by agency heads. Both types are overseen by the Deputy Director of the President’s Office of Management and Budget (OMB) currently Clay Johnson III. Johnson’s philosophy is that “Surprises are to be avoided” and that IGs are expected to work with their agencies. The problem is, of course, that IGs are supposed to be independent monitors of them. Aside from Johnson’s input into the situation, the goal of IG independence seldom happens for various reasons. First, those IGs who are appointed by agency heads aren’t independent by definition. Second, even IGs who are Presidentially appointed may have their independence curbed by budget constraints as has happened at the State Department over and above the antics of Cookie Krongard (see item 251) or by a lack of its own attorney as is the case with the Pentagon’s IG which uses a deputy to the DOD’s in house General Counsel. Third, some IGs like NASA’s Robert Cobb (see item 149) identify so strongly with their agencies that they have abdicated any real oversight or independence. The result is that the IG system does not work, but then this Administration was never into oversight into what it was doing anyway.

http://www.pogo.org/p/government/go-080228-ig.html

The bill requires a full review by the Inspectors General of our national security agencies and of the President’s warrantless wiretapping program to determine what took place in the past and to ensure accountability going forward.

Doesn’t this mean that foxes will be conducting the review of the raid on the chicken-coop?

A bit of a conflict of interest when your world view is to protect at all costs yet your responsibility is to hold accountable to the law at all costs.

Sometimes an Inspector General has to say that her boss, her organization, her President, is wrong, that he or she broke the law or other important rules, and that it should stop.