No Comment — March 14, 2008, 3:02 pm

Public Integrity, Redefined

Some of my readers complain that I am contributing to the feeding frenzy surrounding Spitzer-Gate, and that I should show a bit more perspective. Message heard. So here’s some perspective.

While a platoon of FBI agents were staking out the Mayflower Hotel in order to nab Spitzer in his tryst with a hooker (not named Cinnamon), here’s a good example of the Bush Administration’s astonishingly venal corruption which is not being investigated or acted upon. This reflects the morality of the current Justice Department, which can’t find the resources to look into the gang rape of a young woman from Houston, but is delighted to spend untold amounts catching a Democratic politician in consensual sex in a swanky hotel. No question in my mind about who the real perverts are.

So let’s turn to the Department of Housing and Urban Development, HUD. If the Bushies arrived in Washington in 2001 with a political spoils mentality—a conclusion which few would dispute at this point—then the goings-on at HUD would rival the destruction of FEMA for the vaunted position as Exhibit A. HUD Secretary Alphonso Jackson is a prototypical “loyal Bushie.” He is described as a “longtime personal friend” and as a former neighbor of the president, and he appears to put that personal rapport above just about everything.

We have to congratulate Jackson for being candid. As the Dallas Business Journal reports, Jackson articulated his criteria for awarding contracts in explicitly partisan political terms:

“He had made every effort to get a contract with HUD for 10 years,” Jackson said of the prospective contractor. “He made a heck of a proposal and was on the (General Services Administration) list, so we selected him. He came to see me and thank me for selecting him. Then he said something … he said, ‘I have a problem with your president.’

“I said, ‘What do you mean?’ He said, ‘I don’t like President Bush.’ I thought to myself, ‘Brother, you have a disconnect — the president is elected, I was selected. You wouldn’t be getting the contract unless I was sitting here. If you have a problem with the president, don’t tell the secretary.’

“He didn’t get the contract,” Jackson continued. “Why should I reward someone who doesn’t like the president, so they can use funds to try to campaign against the president? Logic says they don’t get the contract. That’s the way I believe.”

Of course, the litmus test that Jackson described, and which he actually applied, happens to be against the law. But no matter. The Justice Department is far too busy staking out love trysts at the Mayflower to be bothered with anything as trivial as corruption of the process of awarding federal contracts. After all, John Ashcroft himself knows the benefits of being a loyal Bushie and getting massively profitable non-bid contract awards. This is the way things are supposed to work: the rewards are supposed to flow to those who demonstrate loyalty. For those who don’t join the home team, tough luck.

Of course, Jackson not only fired a contractor because the contractor dared to speak publicly in a manner critical of President Bush, he also awarded a massive discretionary contract to Shirlington Limousine & Transportation Inc., which, as my colleague Ken Silverstein unearthed, was linked closely to Brent Wilkes and was used to transport congressmen, CIA officials and prostitutes to their rendez-vous with hot tubs, among other things.

And as U.S. Attorney Carol Lam quickly discovered, launching a criminal investigation into these matters was a career-stopper. You don’t look into the home team. Conversely, several of Lam’s U.S. attorney colleagues have learned how to play the game: if you focus on the love lives of Democratic politicians, you can keep your job, and you might well climb further up the Justice Department’s ladder than your abilities might otherwise warrant.

After the uproar over his Dallas Business Journal remarks, Jackson publicly insisted that he “didn’t touch contracts.” But the Center for American Progress lists a series of businessmen with close personal and financial ties to Jackson who have received no-bid contract awards from HUD.

Still, the most interesting recent disclosures about how things work at HUD emerged on Wednesday in the Washington Post.

After Philadelphia’s housing director refused a demand by President Bush’s housing secretary to transfer a piece of city property to a business friend, two top political appointees at the department exchanged e-mails discussing the pain they could cause the Philadelphia director.

“Would you like me to make his life less happy? If so, how?” Orlando J. Cabrera, then-assistant secretary at the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, wrote about Philadelphia housing director Carl R. Greene.

“Take away all of his Federal dollars?” responded Kim Kendrick, an assistant secretary who oversaw accessible housing. She typed symbols for a smiley-face, “:-D,” at the end of her January 2007 note. Cabrera wrote back a few minutes later: “Let me look into that possibility.”

What’s all this about? It seems that Secretary Jackson was eager to persuade the Philadelphia Housing Authority to sell a vacant lot that it owned to Kenny Gamble, a close personal friend of Jackson’s. The Authority wasn’t interested in selling. They quickly ran into a buzzsaw of bureaucratic problems with HUD. In a lawsuit, the Authority has charged that all of this was motivated by Jackson’s personal pique over their failure to give his buddy a sweet deal.

The emails obtained by the Post suggest that the charges have teeth.

Now you might think that charges that a cabinet officer corruptly used his office for personal benefit, interfered with contract awards for political purposes, and broke a contract because he disliked the contractor’s political views, would come to the attention of the Public Integrity Section at the Department of Justice and would be the subject of an investigation.

But you’d be wrong. They’re far too busy staking out love trysts at the Mayflower Hotel and launching massive investigations into junior college teachers who underperform their teaching plans. They understand the priorities of the Bush Administration perfectly. The Administration has its own understanding of the word “integrity.” And Secretary Jackson is a prime example of just what that word has come to mean.

Share
Single Page

More from Scott Horton:

Conversation March 30, 2016, 3:44 pm

Burn Pits

Joseph Hickman discusses his new book, The Burn Pits, which tells the story of thousands of U.S. soldiers who, after returning from Iraq and Afghanistan, have developed rare cancers and respiratory diseases.

Context, No Comment August 28, 2015, 12:16 pm

Beltway Secrecy

In five easy lessons

From the April 2015 issue

Company Men

Torture, treachery, and the CIA

Get access to 165 years of
Harper’s for only $45.99

United States Canada

CATEGORIES

THE CURRENT ISSUE

June 2016

Trump’s People

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

The Old Man

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

The Long Rescue

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

New Television

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

The Improbability Party

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

view Table Content

FEATURED ON HARPERS.ORG

Post
Helen Ouyang on the cost of crowd-sourcing drugs, Paul Wood on Trump's supporters, Walter Kirn on political predictions, Sonia Faleiro on a man's search for his kidnapped children, and Rivka Galchen on The People v. O. J. Simpson.

The new docudrama The People v. O. J. Simpson: American Crime Story (FX) isn’t really about Orenthal James Simpson. It’s about the trials that ran alongside his — those informal, unboundaried, court-of-public-opinion trials in which evidence was heard for and against the murder victims, the defense and the prosecution, the judge, the jury, and the Los Angeles Police Department, to say nothing of white and black America. History has freed us from suspense about Simpson’s verdict, so that the man himself (played here by Cuba Gooding Jr.) is less the tragic hero he seemed in the mid-Nineties than a curiously minor character. He comes to the center of our attention only once, in Episode 2, at the end of the lengthy Ford Bronco chase scene — which in real life was followed by a surreal cavalcade of police cars and media helicopters, as well as an estimated 95 million live viewers — when Simpson repeatedly, and with apparent sincerity, apologizes for taking up so much of so many people’s time. It is an uncannily ordinary moment of social decorum, a sort of could-you-please-pass-the-salt gesture on a sinking Titanic, in which Simpson briefly becomes more than just an archetype.

Photograph (detail) © Eve Arnold/Magnum Photos
Article
Trump’s People·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

"All our friends are saying, load up with plenty of ammunition, because after the stores don’t have no food they’re gonna be hitting houses. They’re going to take over America, put their flag on the Capitol.” “Who?” I asked. “ISIS. Oh yeah.”
Photograph by Mark Abramson for Harper's Magazine (detail)
Article
The Long Rescue·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

He made them groom and feed the half-dozen horses used to transport the raw bricks to the furnace. Like the horses, the children were beaten with whips.
Photograph (detail) © Narendra Shrestha/EPA/Newscom
Article
The Old Man·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

The new docudrama The People v. O. J. Simpson: American Crime Story (FX) isn’t really about Orenthal James Simpson. It’s about the trials that ran alongside his — those informal, unboundaried, court-of-public-opinion trials in which evidence was heard for and against the murder victims, the defense and the prosecution, the judge, the jury, and the Los Angeles Police Department, to say nothing of white and black America. History has freed us from suspense about Simpson’s verdict, so that the man himself (played here by Cuba Gooding Jr.) is less the tragic hero he seemed in the mid-Nineties than a curiously minor character. He comes to the center of our attention only once, in Episode 2, at the end of the lengthy Ford Bronco chase scene — which in real life was followed by a surreal cavalcade of police cars and media helicopters, as well as an estimated 95 million live viewers — when Simpson repeatedly, and with apparent sincerity, apologizes for taking up so much of so many people’s time. It is an uncannily ordinary moment of social decorum, a sort of could-you-please-pass-the-salt gesture on a sinking Titanic, in which Simpson briefly becomes more than just an archetype.

Illustration (detail) by Jen Renninger
Article
New Television·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

With its lens shifting from the courtroom to the newsroom to people’s back yards, the series evokes the way in which, for a brief, delusory moment, the O. J. verdict seemed to deliver justice for all black men.
Still from The People vs. OJ Simpson: American Crime Story © FX Networks

Amount an auditor estimated last year that Oregon could save each year by feeding prisoners less food:

$62,000

Kentucky is the saddest state.

An Italian economist was questioned on suspicion of terrorism after a fellow passenger on an American Airlines flight witnessed him writing differential equations on a pad of paper.

Subscribe to the Weekly Review newsletter. Don’t worry, we won’t sell your email address!

HARPER’S FINEST

Mississippi Drift

By

Matt was happy enough to sustain himself on the detritus of a world he saw as careening toward self-destruction, and equally happy to scam a government he despised. 'I’m glad everyone’s so wasteful,' he told me. 'It supports my lifestyle.'

Subscribe Today