Stephen R. Weisman writes in today's The New York Times that Paul Wolfowitz has hired attorney Robert S. Bennett to represent him in his efforts to keep his job as President of the World Bank. I guess the salary that Wolfie is receiving is more than any other employer would pay him. He seems desperate to keep his job.
Wolfowitz was instrumental in getting his girl friend, Shaha Riza, a job at the State Department and a raise in salary to around $200,000. I wrote in a previous post that Wolfowitz should resign. For someone like Wolfie who made a point upon beginning his World Bank position that rooting out "corruption" would be the main emphasis in the Bank's consideration of making loans, it is the epitome of hypocrisy for Wolfowitz to engage in securing salary increases and cushy positions for his intimate sexual lover.
Steve Clemons writes in his blog The Washington Note that normally the State Department requires a security clearance for anyone having access to its offices. This requirement applies to all employees. However, the State Department has no record of ever granting a clearance to Shaha Riza. Clemons quotes the excellent analysis of this affair by Sidney Blumenthal in Salon.
The upshot for Steve Clemons:
"Senator Jay Rockefeller, Chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, or Rep. Henry Waxman, who is one of the best and most tenacious investigators of government abuses, or some other concerned member of Congress should call for a Department of Defense investigation into Riza's security clearance, Wolfowitz's role in fast-tracking the clearance, and the State Department's seeming absence of any record confirming her clearance when Shaha Riza was granted unescorted access at the Department of State."
Tuesday, April 24, 2007
MORE ON PAUL WOLFOWITZ - WHO IS SHAHA RIZA?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Not only is Wolfowitz a “neo-con” (that is, one of the famous neo-conservatives) but he is also, as brash commentator Maureen Dowd has noted, a “con,” in the classic sense of the word: a con-man, a crook, evidenced by his influence-peddling on behalf of his mistress. However, in addition, one might suggest, Wolfowitz should also be considered a “con” in another sense of the word: short for “convict”—as in prison convict, which is where Wolfowitz might have ended up if he had been charged with spying for Israel as some federal agents believe he is guilty of having done.
ReplyDeleteMore? Visit this link:
http://ahmedismailibrahim.wordpress.com/2007/04/24/wolfowitz-gal-pal-scandal-nothing-compared-to-charges-of-treason/