Put on your tinfoil hats, folks. We’re going for a ride.
The news about the FBI’s knowledge of former Supreme Court Chief Justice William Rehnquist’s psychotic episodes and drug addiction got me thinking about the process I once went through to get my security clearance.
When you apply for a security clearance your past is laid bare. You fill out a form listing three or more character references. A team of federal detectives, then goes out and interviews them, getting even more references. These are checked, and then cross-checked.
You also are asked somewhat personal questions. Among other things, you may be asked whether you’ve ever committed a crime, what your sexual orientation is, and/or whether you’ve done drugs. What surprised me later to learn is that the investigators don’t really care what your answers are as long as you’re honest. Chances are they already know the answers, in fact. What they are looking for is anything in your past that can be held against you.
The reasoning is simple: they want you beholden to Uncle Sam and no one else. If you’ve got a deep, dark secret somewhere that would be devastating to you if revealed, you will understandably do whatever you could to keep it secret. If a foreign agent were to discover your secret, you could be easily blackmailed into doing whatever they wanted, up to and including betraying your country.
I thought of my trip through this security-clearance gauntlet when the Hookergate story first surfaced of crooked Randy “Duke” Cunningham. Cunningham was up to his neck in hookers, illegal cash, and God knows what else when he was brought down along with Jack Abramoff. Sidestepping for a moment the question of whether he is the world’s biggest idiot, Cunningham’s antics were an obvious threat to his security clearance and so became easy leverage against him. Abramoff could play Cunningham like a Top 40 station, getting The Duke to do whatever he wanted.
It’s simple stuff, really. Spycraft 101. Prehaps that what attracted Cunningham’s fellow partier, Kyle “Dusty” Foggo. That Foggo was the number 3 person at the CIA should raise some eyebrows. Coincidence? The CIA is obviously quite familiar with these techniques. They own these techniques. This should raise the question: why was the CIA involved in the compromising of a congressional representative?
I’ll say that again: why was the CIA involved in the compromising of a congressional representative?
The news stories make it seem that Foggo was a party boy who just happened to get caught with the other party boys. Boys will be boys, ha ha. Nothing to see here, folks. Just some overgrown frat boys having a little fun.
But its no joke, people. The CIA was involved in the bribing of congressmen. Doesn’t that alarm you a little?
Foggo was appointed to his high CIA post by its new Director, Peter Goss. Goss has been rumored to have attended Foggo’s parties, although his spokesperson denied it. Goss and Foggo were said to be “good friends.”
Let’s go a little deeper and speculate on the nature of Foggo’s hiring. Could it be possible that Foggo had some dirt on Goss and leveraged it to gain his position? Goss’s sudden and never-unexplained resignation when the Hookergate story broke certainly raises yet-unanswered questions.
I find today that the CIA is not cooperating with the investigation of Dusty Foggo, according to the Wall Street Journal. Strange, isn’t it? Why is the CIA reluctant to turn over documents for an investigation into a misbehaving direector? I’m sure the CIA isn’t pleased with the publicity this case has already gained. One would think they would be eager to wash their hands of it and hang Foggo out to dry. After all, if the CIA was unaware of Foggo’s extra-curricular activities, why wouldn’t they choose to cooperate?
Methinks they doth protest too much.
The CIA wrote the book on blackmail. It’s a commonly-method to gain the cooperation of foreign agents. Who’s to say it isn’t also being used against domestic agents: our own politicans? Crooked guys like Cunningham were sitting ducks and ripe for the picking. Foggo, Brent Wilkes, and Abramoff used Cunningham like an ATM machine. Surely the CIA saw an opportunity here!
In fact, if they could target Cunningham (and obtensibly Goss), what would stop them from going after others? Why wouldn’t they push for the appointment of compromised (and thus CIA-friendly) officials for important posts? The CIA has assets with which to frame domestic media coverage. Why not use them to generate support for their preferred candidates?
I smell a story here as big or bigger than Watergate, one that could shake the very foundations of our alleged democracy when it breaks. The real question is: when will Americans start paying attention?
Read more about the shady characters involved in Hookergate at Firedoglake.