Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

The secret, redirected money for Iraq, hidden from Congress

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 (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
liveoaktx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-16-04 10:02 PM
Original message
The secret, redirected money for Iraq, hidden from Congress
I don't know about the rest of what Woodward says but the part about stiffing an ignorant Congress is huge- http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/04/15/60minutes/mai...

"President Bush, after a National Security Council meeting, takes Don Rumsfeld aside, collars him physically and takes him into a little cubbyhole room and closes the door and says, 'What have you got in terms of plans for Iraq?' What is the status of the war plan? I want you to get on it. I want you to keep it secret," says Woodward.
"...The end of July 2002, they need $700 million, a large amount of money for all these tasks. And the president approves it. But Congress doesn't know and it is done. They get the money from a supplemental appropriation for the Afghan War, which Congress has approved. ...
Some people are gonna look at a document called the Constitution which says that no money will be drawn from the treasury unless appropriated by Congress. Congress was totally in the dark on this.
*********************************

From what I can see, this seems to refer to the Anti-Deficiency Act http://www.sptimes.com/2003/09/28/Tampabay/Military_sta... -what happened to this?
And what bill was this money tacked onto so we can read it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemoTex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-16-04 10:05 PM
Response to Original message
1. Watergate axiom:
Follow the money. Same for Iran-Contra. It could sink Bu$h, too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bushfire Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-16-04 10:05 PM
Response to Original message
2. $700 million, and no $$$ for flak jackets or armored humvees?!?
Shocked I tell you, Shocked! <sarcasm off>
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
proud patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-16-04 10:06 PM
Response to Reply #2
5. Bingo !
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DrBB Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-16-04 10:06 PM
Response to Original message
3. Sounds kinda like Iran-Contra, don't it?
Whole point there was, they wanted to shovel money at the Contras, but Congress had nixed funding for death squads and paramilitaries and all that fun stuff. So they went around Congress to get what they wanted anyway.

Gee, what a funny coincidence--how many guys from that era find themselves with jobs in the Chimp administration. And guess what? they've got the same ideas! What a surprise!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemoTex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-16-04 10:07 PM
Response to Reply #3
6. Heh-heh-heh!
Thinking alike tonight my friend!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mhr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-16-04 10:06 PM
Response to Original message
4. With A Republican Congress And Compliant Media
who will investigate this potential scandal.

Sorry for being cynical!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gristy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-16-04 10:08 PM
Response to Original message
7. Was Woodward in that cubby-hole of a room with them?
Edited on Fri Apr-16-04 10:11 PM by gristy
"President Bush, after a National Security Council meeting, takes Don Rumsfeld aside, collars him physically and takes him into a little cubbyhole room and closes the door and says, 'What have you got in terms of plans for Iraq?' What is the status of the war plan? I want you to get on it. I want you to keep it secret," says Woodward.

He sure does make it sound like he was. :shrug:

That said, if indeed Bush diverted money intended for Afghanistan to Iraq, I think Bush has a Problem, as in...

"Houston, we have a Problem."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
k in IA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-16-04 10:14 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. WH has confirmed that they did do this in Nov 2001.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sinistrous Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-16-04 10:39 PM
Response to Original message
9. 
Perhaps someone more fluent in Congressese can interpret this better than I, but my quick reading of this (especially the paragraph under "DEFENSE EMERGENCY RESPONSE FUND") tells me that Congress gave Rummy a hell of a lot of latitude in allocating a hell of a lot of money.


www.fas.org/asmp/resources/govern/107th_hr4775pl.pdf

116 STAT. 836 PUBLIC LAW 107206AUG. 2, 2002

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, DEFENSE-WIDE

For an additional amount for Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide, $721,975,000, to remain available for obligation until September 30, 2003, of which $390,000,000 may be used, notwithstanding any other provision of law, for payments to reimburse Pakistan, Jordan, and other key cooperating nations for logistical and military support provided to United States military operations in connection with the Global War on Terrorism: Provided, That such payments may be made in such amounts as the Secretary may determine in his discretion, based on documentation determined by the Secretary to adequately account for the support provided, in consultation with the Director of the Office of Management and Budget and 15 days following notification to the appropriate Congressional committees: Provided further, That such determination shall be final and conclusive upon the accounting officers of the United States: Provided further, That amounts for such payments shall be in addition to any other funds that may be available for such purpose: Provided further, That the entire amount is designated by the Congress as an emergency requirement pursuant to section 251(b)(2)(A) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985, as amended.

DEFENSE EMERGENCY RESPONSE FUND
(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

For an additional amount for the Defense Emergency Response Fund, $11,901,900,000, to remain available for obligation until September 30, 2003, of which $77,900,000 shall be available for enhancements to North American Air Defense Command capabilities: Provided, That the Secretary of Defense may transfer the funds provided herein only to appropriations for military personnel; operation and maintenance; procurement; research, development, test and evaluation; the Defense Health Program; Overseas Humanitarian, Disaster, and Civic Aid; and working capital funds: Provided further, That notwithstanding the preceding proviso, $120,000,000 of the funds provided in this paragraph are available for transfer to any other appropriations accounts of the Department of Defense, for certain classified activities, and notwithstanding any other provision of law and of this Act, such funds may be obligated to carry out projects not otherwise authorized by law: Provided further, That any funds transferred shall be merged with and shall be available for the same purposes and for the same time period as the appropriation to which transferred: Provided further, That the transfer authority provided in this paragraph is in addition to any other transfer authority available to the Department of Defense: Provided further, That upon a determination that all or part of the funds transferred from this appropriation are not necessary for the purposes provided herein, such amounts may be transferred back to this appropriation: Provided further, That during the current fiscal year, upon a determination by the Secretary of Defense that funds previously made available to the Defense Emergency Response Fund are required to meet other essential operational or readiness requirements of the military services, the Secretary may transfer up to $275,000,000 of funds so required to the appropriate funds or appropriations of the Department of Defense, 15 days after notification to the congressional defense committees: Provided further, That the entire amount is designated by the Congress as an emergency requirement pursuant to section 251(b)(2)(A) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985, as amended: Provided further, That $601,900,000 shall be available only to the extent that an official budget request that includes designation of $601,900,000 as an emergency requirement as defined in the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985, as amended, is transmitted by the President to the Congress.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DeepModem Mom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-17-04 04:04 AM
Response to Original message
10. Why is the significance of this reported only on CBS website..
and not in coverage of the book either in the print press or on tv? It's reported on the website, I think, as part of Woodward's "60 Minutes" interview. Maybe after it's broadcast tomorrow night, the press will pick up on it -- if today's working press understands what the word "unconstitutional" means.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
enough Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-17-04 08:32 AM
Response to Reply #10
11. Agreed, this seems to be the most significant thing reported so far,
yet none of the coverage deals with it. The most optimistic interpretation I can think of is that they are trying to corroborate it before reporting it, since it is so important. But that would mean that they were serious.

In general, I'm not sure how important any book can be that has no attributions, no documentation, no notes. It seems like a pretty sketchy way to write a book, and I doubt it will have any large effect on anythihng.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
enough Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-17-04 09:36 AM
Response to Reply #11
12. Page 3 of Washington Post article
snip>

In the summer of 2002, Bush approved $700 million worth of "preparatory tasks" in the Persian Gulf region such as upgrading airfields, bases, fuel pipelines and munitions storage depots to accommodate a massive U.S. troop deployment. The Bush administration funded the projects from a supplemental appropriations bill for the war in Afghanistan and old appropriations, keeping Congress unaware of the reprogramming of money and the eventual cost.

snip>

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A17347-20...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DeepModem Mom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-17-04 09:49 AM
Response to Reply #12
13. You and I, enough, read this and understand the significance --
for most people, and apparently for the press, it may have to be spelled out, as Woodward does:

"...The end of July 2002, they need $700 million, a large amount of money for all these tasks. And the president approves it. But Congress doesn't know and it is done. They get the money from a supplemental appropriation for the Afghan War, which Congress has approved. ...SOME PEOPLE ARE GONNA LOOK AT A DOCUMENT CALLED THE CONSTITUTION WHICH SAYS THAT NO MONEY WILL BE DRAWN FROM THE TREASURY UNLESS APPROPRIATED BY CONGRESS. CONGRESS WAS TOTALLY IN THE DARK ON THIS."

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/04/15/60minutes/mai...

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 Wed Nov 22nd 2017, 01:21 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) 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