I’m still reading the November 2005 affidavit on Cunningham’s bribery. It has a previously unknown level of detail on the CIFA-related pork Cunningham made possible. I think some of those details provide new insight into why the Director and Deputy Director of CIFA resigned (speaking of "trepidation") in August 2006, when the Cunningham investigation was focusing closely on CIFA.
The affidavit provides details of the involvement of the top management of CIFA in Cunningham’s deals for MZM. In particular, Deputy Director Hefferon intervened directly to make sure MZM still got its contracts.
A letter signed by Cunningham on or before February 24,2004, congratulates the Director of
CIFA regarding the Collaboration Center, stating in full as follows (emphasis added):I wish to take this opportunity to thank your staff for supporting the recent execution of the Counterintelligence Field Activity (CIFA) Collaboration Center Program. Additionally, I wish to endorse and support MZM, Idc.’s work, under your Statement of Work, DTD 20Feb04. As the Collaboration Center is completed, I hope to help you inaugurate the center as I did
at the inception of CIFA. According to Wade, MZM actually authored this letter on Cunningham’s congressional stationary.
That same day, at approximately 12:26 p.m., Wiatrak objects: "Because we are being directed to pass the money to a single contractor who perfoimed poorly on the last effort, I believe this is wrong and respectfully decline to participate." In response to his complaints, Wiatrak was simply informed by ClFA employee, Luis Elizondo, (by email forwarded on March 31, at 7:08 a.m.) that CIFA’s Deputy Director, Joseph Hefferon, directed that CIFA stay with MZM.
The intervention of Hefferon, in particular, is troubling. Why did Hefferon intervene? Who told him to? Was the pressure coming from Cunningham? Or some other source?