Foggo’s New Charges
Note: see the update below for issues relating to the accuracy of this post as originally posted. I’ve retained what seems to be supported by other data: mostly that the CIA is trying to spin Foggo’s additional charges as proof of the Agency’s own ability to investigate itself, spin that the timing involved seems to belie.
A number of you have pointed out that Dusty Foggo got some charges slapped onto his existing indictment.
A federal grand jury has accused a former top CIA official of pulling strings to get a high-level CIA job for his mistress, as part of a new indictment against the official in an existing corruption case.
The new indictment against Kyle "Dusty" Foggo, a former No. 3 official at the spy agency and a onetime senior CIA ethics officer, alleges that he pressured CIA managers into hiring the woman after she was turned down for a position in the CIA’s general counsel office. He also allegedly made false statements about her qualifications, the indictment states.
Foggo, the CIA’s executive director from 2004 to 2006, specifically told agency officials he had a "special interest" in seeing the woman hired, and he later berated them when they initially rejected her application. "When the ExDir has a special interest, you had better take notice," Foggo told the general counsel’s staff, according to an indictment filed late Tuesday by the U.S. attorney’s office in Alexandria.
[Update: RJ Hillhouse has deleted the post that I linked to substantively here and–at her request, I’m removing the citation of her blogpost. Her note on why she deleted her blogpost is here. The substance of the text–which Hillhouse does not stand by any longer–included some history on earlier events potentially related to these new charges.]
What’s so hilarious about this is that–in Joby Warrick’s article–the CIA is spinning that Foggo’s additional indictments prove how good CIA is at policing itself.
The initial filing of criminal charges against Foggo in 2006 prompted questions about internal security at the CIA, which is supposed to have an elaborate system of checks to limit the risk of malfeasance by agency insiders. But agency officials insisted yesterday that the system works and said that the CIA has played a key role in investigating Foggo.
"It demonstrates a willingness by the CIA to investigate itself," said an official who declined to be identified by name because the charges have not been tried in court.
[text deleted, see above]
But that was, presumably, over two years ago, back before Foggo had to resign from the CIA and back before–over a year ago–Foggo was indicted for bribery.
And it has taken up until now–[text deleted]–to get added to Foggo’s indictment? That’s the CIA’s idea of being willing to investigate itself?
No wonder the CIA never did anything with its OIG conclusion that the CIA’s torture violated the Convention Against Torture. Apparently, none of the guys they tortured had any [someone] who could rat out the CIA.