Spinning Wolfowitz’s Corrupt Behavior
by sarabeth at 7:02 am on April 14th, 2007 in Bush Man Date, Corruption, Podium SpinI’ve had it up to here with reports which blandly describe Paul Wolfowitz as getting “personally involved in securing a large pay rise and promotion” for Shaha Riza.
He wasn’t just “personally involved” in a minor transgression kind of way. He flagrantly and blatantly took charge of the promotion-and-pay-raise decision. He unilaterally ordered the outrageous promotion-and-pay-raise that Riza received. That’s not my hyperbole, it’s Wolfie’s.
I now direct you to agree to a proposal that includes the following terms and conditions.
The person being so ordered was Xavier Coll, the bank’s vice-president for human resources, who obviously didn’t think any of this was kosher:
(Wolfowitz’s) memorandum acknowledges that Mr Coll, the bank’s senior human resources officer, opposed at the very least the arrangements for Ms Riza’s promotions.
Oh, and by the way:
…the terms and conditions Mr Wolfowitz ordered Mr Coll to offer Ms Riza were not seen or approved by either Roberto Dañino, the bank’s then senior legal officer, or the ethics committee.
Now, Mr. Wolfowitz is trying to present his behavior as an innocent mistake:
But let me also ask for some understanding. Not only was this a painful personal dilemma, but I had to deal with it when I was new to this institution, and I was trying to navigate in uncharted waters. The situation was unprecedented and exceptional.
Wolfie, the waters regarding how you’re supposed to conduct yourself when you’re boffing a subordinate are universally recognized to be extremely well charted. Gosh, men like you have been boffing subordinates like her for years and years and years. The code of conduct is pretty clear to one and all.
Seriously, no one is really going to buy your innocent mistake excuse. No one other than the White House, that is. The White House will buy unlimited quantities of whatever you want to sell. Unlimited quantities at any price. Any time.
Despite the emerging evidence of Wolfowitz’s corruption and increasing clamor for calls to resign, Bush is standing firmly with him. “Of course President Wolfowitz has our full confidence,” Deputy White House Press Secretary Tony Fratto said yesterday.
Of course. When did a little corruption ever stand in the way of this administration standing by someone they love and adore?
Oh, and by the way, Wolfie is a victim too:
For people who disagree with things they associate with me in my previous job, I am not in my previous job.
The axe that now hangs over his head is there not because of any thoroughly corrupt behavior he has recently exhibited. It’s there because people are mad at him over the Iraq war.
If these people thought about it, they would realize that Wolfie has turned over a new leaf. Now’s he’s all “make love, not war”. Those may well be uncharted waters for him. That’s why he ran aground.
And, finally, Wolfie being Wolfie, he really couldn’t stop himself from uttering a bald-faced, bare-assed lie:
I take full responsibility for the details of the agreement, and I did not attempt to hide my actions or to make anyone else responsible.
Of course, you didn’t. You only sent out your closest adviser and most trusted aide, Kevin Kellems, to declare that “All arrangements concerning Shaha Riza were made at the direction of the bank’s board of directors”. Just like you said, never attempted to hide your actions, or to make anyone else responsible. No sir!
*** Update, 3:05 pm ***
World Bank President Paul Wolfowitz’s hold on his job weakened as the U.K. and Germany declined to join the U.S. in backing him.
Wolfowitz has “damaged the bank,” Hilary Benn, the U.K. development secretary, said today. His German counterpart, Heidemarie Wieczorek-Zeul, said he must “decide for himself whether he can continue to fulfill his duties credibly.”
[…]
A French minister yesterday also refrained from backing Wolfowitz.
[…]
U.S. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson yesterday told reporters that he had “a very high regard for Paul Wolfowitz,” describing him as a “very dedicated public servant.”Benn, Wieczorek-Zeul and French Finance Minister Thierry Breton refrained from praising Wolfowitz, the former U.S. deputy defense secretary who was nominated by President George W. Bush in 2005. Breton, asked yesterday if he had confidence in Wolfowitz, said: “I have confidence in the bank.”
sarabeth wrote:
In the post I quoted this statement from the WaPo story:
This appears to be flat-out incorrect, or extremely misleading, at best.
Perhaps the terms were not seen by the Ethics Committee at the time they were agreed upon. That is incomprehensible, but possible.
But these is no doubt that the Ethics Committee reviewed the terms in February 2006, and concluded that
(see page 83 of this pdf document)
Posted 15 Apr 2007 at 7:36 am ¶
cristian wrote:
sarabeth wrote:
Financial Times puts it this way:
and concludes:
Posted 16 Apr 2007 at 9:13 am ¶