No Comment — February 15, 2009, 12:49 pm

Halliburton Settlement Leaves Unsettling Questions

The Justice Department’s long-standing probe of corruption in connection with Halliburton’s Nigerian contracts—a matter of obvious and acute concern to Vice President Dick Cheney—was rushed to a final settlement just before the arrival of the new Obama team at Justice. Under the settlement Halliburton and its former subsidiary KBR are paying $579 million in fines. The New York Times opines today:

…there are a lot of unanswered questions about Halliburton’s practices in Iraq, with numerous complaints of overpricing and ineptitude. Its corporate conduct in the Nigerian scheme is hardly encouraging and should compel tighter scrutiny of its Iraq failures. Across a decade, KBR and Halliburton paid $180 million in bribes to Nigerian officials to secure $6 billion in contracts for building natural gas processing equipment. Under the settlement with federal authorities, Halliburton will pay most of the penalties, with KBR, its subsidiary during the bribery scheme, pleading guilty to hiring international bagmen to regularly grease Nigerian officials with million-dollar satchels of cash. A former KBR executive who deemed bribery a worthwhile cost of doing business now faces prison time.

That’s true. But put aside Iraq for a moment—there are no shortage of “unanswered questions” about the circumstances of this settlement. Consider the timing and circumstances. We start with a Justice Department which is now itself under strong suspicion of having been politically directed from the White House, with a special prosecutor already appointed and indictments now anticipated. In violation of normal procedures, Alberto Gonzales authorized Vice President Cheney and his staff to deal directly with Justice Department officials on matters of interest to them. We have every reason to ask whether this included the very Halliburton deal that the Bush team pushed through Justice before the new tenants arrived.

Why would Cheney care? For one thing, the corrupt dealings that are the focus of the deal occurred almost entirely between 1995–2000, while Dick Cheney was the CEO of Halliburton. For another, Halliburton tapped Cheney, who had no corporate managerial expertise, principally because of his expertise in government relations and because of his established track record in dealing not only with the U.S. government, but with governments around the world. The thought was that Cheney’s black book would help the company develop its rapidly expanding government contracts business. In other words, the multi-billion dollar Nigerian LNG deals were exactly the sort of thing that Cheney was expected to harvest for Halliburton. For a third, as my colleague Ken Silverstein notes, the man at the heart of the $160 million in corrupt payments, Jack Stanley, was hand-picked by Dick Cheney and had a direct report to him. Moreover, can you imagine a CEO under any circumstances simply not knowing about $160 million in grease payments made in connection with sensitive contract negotiations in Nigeria, a country long ranked at the bottom of Transparency International’s corruption lists?

Dick Cheney has long had very good reason to fear a prosecutor’s knock at the door. It might be his clear role in the outing of CIA agent Valerie Plame. It might be his authorship of the Bush Administration’s torture policy and his advocacy of warrantless surveillance of tens of millions of Americans. Or it might just be something quite mundane, namely, his role in securing a $2.2 billion contract to build a liquefied natural gas plant in Nigeria by making $160 million in corrupt payments to or for the benefit of government officials.

In any event, the Obama Administration are chumps if they sit back and accept the deal the Bush Justice Department concluded for the benefit of Dick Cheney. The whole matter needs to be reopened and examined independently. Let’s hope they consider Patrick Fitzgerald for the job.

Share
Single Page

More from Scott Horton:

Conversation August 5, 2016, 12:08 pm

Lincoln’s Party

Sidney Blumenthal on the origins of the Republican Party, the fallout from Clinton’s emails, and his new biography of Abraham Lincoln

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

Get access to 167 years of
Harper’s for only $45.99

United States Canada

CATEGORIES

THE CURRENT ISSUE

February 2018

Notes to Self

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

Within Reach

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

The Bodies in The Forest

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

The Minds of Others

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

Modern Despots

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

Before the Deluge

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

view Table Content

FEATURED ON HARPERS.ORG

Article
The Minds of Others·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

Progress is impossible without change,” George Bernard Shaw wrote in 1944, “and those who cannot change their minds cannot change anything.” But progress through persuasion has never seemed harder to achieve. Political segregation has made many Americans inaccessible, even unimaginable, to those on the other side of the partisan divide. On the rare occasions when we do come face-to-face, it is not clear what we could say to change each other’s minds or reach a worthwhile compromise. Psychological research has shown that humans often fail to process facts that conflict with our preexisting worldviews. The stakes are simply too high: our self-worth and identity are entangled with our beliefs — and with those who share them. The weakness of logic as a tool of persuasion, combined with the urgency of the political moment, can be paralyzing.

Yet we know that people do change their minds. We are constantly molded by our environment and our culture, by the events of the world, by the gossip we hear and the books we read. In the essays that follow, seven writers explore the ways that persuasion operates in our lives, from the intimate to the far-reaching. Some consider the ethics and mechanics of persuasion itself — in religion, politics, and foreign policy — and others turn their attention to the channels through which it acts, such as music, protest, and technology. How, they ask, can we persuade others to join our cause or see things the way we do? And when it comes to our own openness to change, how do we decide when to compromise and when to resist?

Illustration (detail) by Lincoln Agnew
Article
Within Reach·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

On a balmy day last spring, Connor Chase sat on a red couch in the waiting room of a medical clinic in Columbus, Ohio, and watched the traffic on the street. His bleached-blond hair fell into his eyes as he scrolled through his phone to distract himself. Waiting to see Mimi Rivard, a nurse practitioner, was making Chase nervous: it would be the first time he would tell a medical professional that he was transgender.

By the time he arrived at the Equitas Health clinic, Chase was eighteen, and had long since come to dread doctors and hospitals. As a child, he’d had asthma, migraines, two surgeries for a tumor that had caused deafness in one ear, and gangrene from an infected bug bite. Doctors had always assumed he was a girl. After puberty, Chase said, he avoided looking in the mirror because his chest and hips “didn’t feel like my body.” He liked it when strangers saw him as male, but his voice was high-pitched, so he rarely spoke in public. Then, when Chase was fourteen, he watched a video on YouTube in which a twentysomething trans man described taking testosterone to lower his voice and appear more masculine. Suddenly, Chase had an explanation for how he felt — and what he wanted.

Illustration by Taylor Callery
Article
Before the Deluge·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

In the summer of 2016, when Congress installed a financial control board to address Puerto Rico’s crippling debt, I traveled to San Juan, the capital. The island owed some $120 billion, and Wall Street was demanding action. On the news, President Obama announced his appointments to the Junta de Supervisión y Administración Financiera. “The task ahead for Puerto Rico is not an easy one,” he said. “But I am confident Puerto Rico is up to the challenge of stabilizing the fiscal situation, restoring growth, and building a better future for all Puerto Ricans.” Among locals, however, the control board was widely viewed as a transparent effort to satisfy mainland creditors — just the latest tool of colonialist plundering that went back generations.

Photograph from Puerto Rico by Christopher Gregory
Article
Monumental Error·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

In 1899, the art critic Layton Crippen complained in the New York Times that private donors and committees had been permitted to run amok, erecting all across the city a large number of “painfully ugly monuments.” The very worst statues had been dumped in Central Park. “The sculptures go as far toward spoiling the Park as it is possible to spoil it,” he wrote. Even worse, he lamented, no organization had “power of removal” to correct the damage that was being done.

Illustration by Steve Brodner
Post
CamperForce·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

After losing their savings in the stock market crash of 2008, seniors Barb and Chuck find seasonal employment at Amazon fulfillment centers.

Chance that a Silicon Valley technology company started since 1995 was founded by Indian or Chinese immigrants:

1 in 3

A gay penguin couple in China’s Polar Land zoo were ostracized by other penguins and then placed in a separate enclosure after they made repeated attempts to steal the eggs of straight penguin couples and replace them with stones.

Trump’s former chief strategist, whom Trump said had “lost his mind,” issued a statement saying that Trump’s son did not commit treason; the US ambassador to the United Nations announced that “no one questions” Trump’s mental stability; and the director of the CIA said that Trump, who requested “killer graphics” in his intelligence briefings, is able to read.

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

HARPER’S FINEST

Report — From the June 2013 issue

How to Make Your Own AR-15

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

By

"Gun owners have long been the hypochondriacs of American politics. Over the past twenty years, the gun-rights movement has won just about every battle it has fought; states have passed at least a hundred laws loosening gun restrictions since President Obama took office. Yet the National Rifle Association has continued to insist that government confiscation of privately owned firearms is nigh. The NRA’s alarmism helped maintain an active membership, but the strategy was risky: sooner or later, gun guys might have realized that they’d been had. Then came the shootings at a movie theater in Aurora, Colorado, and at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, followed swiftly by the nightmare the NRA had been promising for decades: a dedicated push at every level of government for new gun laws. The gun-rights movement was now that most insufferable of species: a hypochondriac taken suddenly, seriously ill."

Subscribe Today