Report: FBI investigating Curt Weldon
========================================...whether Republican Rep. Curt Weldon of Pennsylvania traded his political
influence for lucrative lobbying and consulting contracts for his daughter,
according to sources with direct knowledge of the inquiry.The FBI, which opened an investigation in recent months, has formally referred the matter to the department's Public Integrity Section for additional scrutiny. At issue are Weldon's efforts between 2002 and 2004 to aid two Russian companies and two
Serbian brothers with ties to strongman Slobodan Milosevic, a federal law enforcement official said.The Russian companies and a Serbian foundation run by the brothers' family each hired a firm co-owned by Weldon's daughter, Karen, for fees totaling nearly $1 million a year, public records show.
Karen Weldon was 28 and lacked consulting experience when she and Charles Sexton, a Weldon ally and longtime Republican leader in Delaware County, Pa., created the firm of Solutions North America Inc. in 2002. Both are registered with the Justice Department as representatives of foreign clients.
Word of the inquiry, which has been closely held within the Justice Department and the FBI, comes from two individuals with specific knowledge of the existence of the investigation. They both declined to be identified because of the confidentiality of criminal investigations.
Now these dealings are not news, but it's certainly good that they are finally coming to light. The Karen Weldon-Charlie Sexton debacle was reported back in Feb 2004 for by Ken Silverstein in the LA Times. This is just one of a series of egregious dealings.
Then there was Kim Weldon as the beneficiary of AgustaWestland's helicopter unit after they got the contract via Weldon's House Armed Services Committee, also reported by Ken Silverstein in a Harper's article called The Curt Weldon Employment Agency.
Then there is Cecilia Grimes, Weldon's friend and Delco realtor who all of a sudden became a lobbyist for defense contractors. This was also reported in the LA Times, in January 2006, summarized in the CREW report:
Need more on the Grimes situation? Read the LA Times story reprised on DelcoTomPaine's Common Sense blog.Cecilia Grimes was a small town real estate agent from Media, PA until March of 2003, when she became a lobbyist dealing exclusively with businesses with interests before Rep. Weldon, whom Ms. Grimes describes as a “longtime family friend.” Despite her lack of lobbying experience, Ms. Grimes represents numerous clients with business before Rep. Weldon.
Silverstein followed with Another Trip to the Curt Weldon Employment Agency just a few months ago describing how Andrew Weldon's race car driving career is sponsored by Schaffer Motorsports, which
... is owned by Tom Schaffer, a senior employee at Boeing; One of the sponsors of Schaffer Motorsports is Boeing Helicopters Credit Union, whose logo appears on the racecar Andrew Weldon drives. Boeing, in turn, is Weldon's top career patron, to the tune of $62,050 in donations.Looks like son Andrew didn't want to be left off the gravy train!
posted by Seventh Watch at 10:24 PM
16 Comments:
Republicans would do well to pick Sestak and save the district further embarassment by Weldon and his dubious dealings.
The House Ethics Committee should reawaken from it's long slumber once the Democrats regain control of Congress. Hastert replace (i.e. punished) Republican members of the committee for going after Weldon's voting buddy, Tom Delay. So, it is hardly a surprise that Weldon avoided serious scrunity and skated by.
For now, the connections between Weldon, his family and lucrative lobbying deals still remain as well as questions not yet answered under oath.
Bye. Bye. Curt!
Don't let the cell-door hit you on the way in.
Honest question for the Sestak supporters of the is blog. Have you guys been made aware of and if so, does it matter to you that Sestak's reputation in the Navy was not and is still not favorable in the slightest given his temperment in dealing with both subordinates and co-workers? It's fairly common knowledge among the rank and file that he was essentially fired from his job in the Pentagon by the incoming CNO for that very reason. Has this come up?
I had a few dealings with the Admiral myself (I'm still in) and am just curious if that issue has been raised in the campaign.
Thanks for any responses.
stu-
I've addressed this topic before, but I'll take another swing at it.
1) Sestak was opposed to the war in Iraq and voiced his objections to his superiors.
2) The incoming CNO was just that, incoming. He hadn't been there the whole time Sestak was. It appears he was either cleaning house for his own cronies/proteges or it may have been a purge of remain high ranking officers opposed to Bush's views. Sestak is on record as having differences of opinion on issues like fleet size and/or composition. It sounds to me like he didn't fit in with the direction Bush and Rumsfeld are taking the Navy and the rest of the armed forces.
3) But more importantly, even if he is a total prick of a boss, that has NOTHING to do with being a Congressman (which would make him an employee of the taxpayers, not a boss). There are more people that praise him ON THE RECORD than the anonymous people offering complaint.
What counts for a Congress is how he VOTES. As for being a boss, that's between him and his staffers. :-)
4) Sestak has proven himself intelligent and capable (and, yes, quite hard-driving) to be in a dead-heat against a 20-year GOP incumbant in a GOP stronghold. He has a message, experience and a record of 31-years of service that appeals to voters. Weldon has a history of cronyism and influence peddling that has earned him a place among the 20 most corrupt in Congress.
5) Is Weldon's campaign really going to hang its hat on a dubious claim that Sestak was a bad boss? Really? With all their differences of opinion on Iraq, torture, deficits, taxes, healthcare, choice, etc., Weldon supporters want to make this about what kind of a boss he would be?
So, Stu, my honest answer is that I believe Sestak's votes in Congress will, more often than not, represent my views and values. This has not been the case with Weldon. All other considerations pale beside this.
I have to add that I've been to a number of events where I've talked to his campaign staff, and I've been into the HQ in Media, which is a hive of activity.
Joe is a tireless worker, and he has a motivated group of campaign staff and volunteers. Literally, he has inspired thousands of volunteers and small, individual donors to get involved.
Sestak has always been very courteous to me personally, and he's obviously effective at motivating all of those thousands of voters. He's gone from the challenger with low name-recognition to the favorite in the poolls in eight months.
So in addition to reflecting the values of the community pretty well, we also have to take stock of his ability to be effective--to get the job done. And so far, I feel he's shown himself to have superlative leadership skills.
Thank you gentleman for your responses. Even though I don't agree with Admiral Sestak in many of his viewpoints I can honestly say that he is very intelligent, well-spoken and certainly qualified for the job. I witnessed him give the Navy's QDR pitch some years ago and he did a great job. In fact, as a Naval Officer I was proud of it. So in that regard, if you share his views I can understand voting for him.
Now the "yes, but" part. ;) Even though his personal demeanor and temperament isn't enough to discount his candidacy I do think if elected it will come into play one day. When you first meet him, he is very personable. In fact one might say charming. But to characterize him just as a "total prick of a boss" would in my mind be a gross understatement. He is "hard driving" and demanding to a fault. I can say with total certainty that everyone individual I know that worked directly for him couldn't stand him because of his arrogance. I didn’t work for him and I couldn’t stand him. Now one can discount this because after all, I am just another “anonymous source.” But keep in mind, those of us who know this about him are for the most part still in uniform and not really in a position to come out publicly and say anything. And once again, I don't believe this is enough of an issue to derail a candidacy anyway. Those on record who do support him are probably for the most part people the Admiral has worked for. So taking both positions together I would just add that while our bosses get to see our front side it is our subordinates behind us who can see if our arse is showing. If Admiral Sestak wins, I will find it interesting to see if he changes his methods or if he doesn't how a civilian staff will put up with his idiosyncrasies.
Also your scenario for why he was fired is somewhat plausible but generally having a different political outlook isn't enough to kicked to curb in such positions. Flag Officers are expected to voice dissent and quite often do. I have seen it first hand. I can assure you though he was fired because of his interaction with the staff. Morale among his directorate was pitiful with many of his senior officers had lost confidence in him. The running joke was that Admiral Sestak had caused more divorces among his staff, due to his extreme working hours that almost everyone had to comply with, than any deployment. It also just so happens that Admiral Sestak had worked for Admiral Mullen previously. Therefore, I attribute the quick dismissal (1st day on the job for the CNO) to him already knowing how Admiral Sestak operated.
One other interesting tidbit. As a Naval Aviator, I know some old-timers who were also Flag Officers and as is the case with most military men, conservative through and through. They had remarked in the past of another former Naval Officer who was real jerk back when he was still wearing the cloth. That man was Randy Cunningham.
Once again, thanks for sharing your viewpoint. Should make interesting talk with the boys around the office tomorrow. While I can’t say I want the Admiral to win, I applaud you all in voicing you opinion and participating in the process. It’s one of the reasons I do my job.
God Bless,
Stu
Stu-
I have to say that I'm pretty sure some of the people "on the record" were also his subordinates.
I am not someone that could have ever served in the military because I am a completely anti-authoritarian in that: since about 8th or 9th grade I discovered I was smarter than my teachers and since then nearly everybody I ever worked for (with notable exceptions of some PhD's that taught me a lot). That being the case, if someone (Sestak included) TOLD me to "jump", my response would certainly be something other than "how high?". Professionally, I work as a computer consultant, often for hard-ass bosses that quickly learn to treat me with respect because I save their asses (mostly when I disagree with them).
In the military, you have very little flexibility in disobeying orders. The management "style" you ascribe to Sestak would be essentially impossible to maintain in a more civilian roll where people can quit (as opposed to walking off a ship in the middle of ocean). The non-military works by such a different set of rules, that the concerns you express about Joe would become a non-issue. Joe will want the best people he can get. The simple economics of suppy and demand will level the playing field as the good people will insist upon the level of respect they can get elsewhere. (Aren't the Republicans always claiming the free-market cures all ills?)
The problem with Randy "Duke" Cunningham was about bribery, fraud, etc. I don't think it is fair to put him in the same analogy with Joe, since your issue with Joe has nothing to do with his personal integrity but rather his inter-personal skills.
The other thing about Joe that has changed since you knew him is his daughter's severe illness. I truly believe that experience has altered him. I believe that he will fight hard to make sure that children have the high quality health care he was lucky enough to have for his own daughter.
As to the issues... Do you believe...
1) The US should abandon the Geneva conventions?
2) That capturing people and then hiding them from Red-Cross, refusing to charge them, torture them and not give them the opportunity to defend themselves is different than the police-state activities in China?
3) That the FISA court's requirement that the government justify a wiretap and get a warrant within 72-hours is unreasonable?
4) That the US government should not negotiate drug prices on behalf of Medicare patients?
5) That the minimum wage of $5.35/hour is fine where it has been since 1997, despite rising costs for basic living expenses for families?
My answer to all these things is NO. Curt Weldon voted for or advocated for these things and I disagree. I would hope that someone as thoughtful as you seem to be would object as well. Weldon has been wrong on the most important votes.
"Word of the inquiry, which has been closely held within the Justice Department and the FBI, comes from two individuals with specific knowledge of the existence of the investigation. They both declined to be identified because of the confidentiality of criminal investigations."
Ah your typical liberal sources, rumor and innuendo with a dash of un named sources.
If you turn on CNN, the FBI just raided the office and home of Weldon's daughter. The "liberal sources" were correct.
Of course now the FBI has raided Karen Weldon's home and business. They also raided the home of long time Weldon chronie Charlie Sexton.
http://cbs3.com/topstories/local_story_289111243.html
The FBI investigation that lap dog Puppio and Weldon insisted did not exist has now threatened his pathetically run campaign. This is not only a death knell to Weldon and the Republican majority in congress but also to the chrony politics of Delaware County Republicans.
DD,
I’m not going to get into the issues. First, each of the issues you brought up deserves greater attention than I am willing to give in few paragraphs and secondly we are probably not going to agree. (Though I am restraining myself on the FISA bit) ;) I will ask that as someone on the left you realize the many times conservatives and liberals share the same goals but we differ on the solutions. I think that is often lost in the political fray.
Let me state that in bringing up Randy Cunningham I am in no way insinuating that Admiral Sestak is prone to criminal behavior as I have no reason to believe it. Rather it was more of a question of personality types and in that vane I think they are very similar. Incidentally, knowing what I knew about the “Duke” before his fall would have dissuaded me from giving him my vote. Heck, if Admiral Sestak was as conservative as Ronald Reagan I wouldn’t vote for him.
You have however hit really upon my questions surrounding the Admiral. Can he adjust to a civilian staff? I’m not so convinced he can in the long run. We all thought he would change when he got married. Didn’t happen. We then were sure he would change when he had a child. Didn’t happen. So I really have a hard time believing he has changed now. You just don’t change a career military officer (Flag Officer to boot) overnight. They grow too accustomed to getting what they want and when they want it. I agree the free-market will prevail. So people will put up with his antics either because they share in his viewpoints, don’t know any better and/or just want to get ahead. But mark my words, if he wins this issue will come up at least within the democratic party lifelines.
One other thing. Yes there are differences between the civilian and military world but I think you underestimate the pushback that even military personnel give. We are not a bunch of pushovers. The average type “A” Naval Aviator for instance usually has no problem telling someone (even a higher rank) to kiss his backside. It’s just when the decisions are finally made, we all get on board for the team. In fact one of my more amusing run-ins with the Admiral had me politely telling him I wasn’t going to do what he asked (ordered). He was “hot” to say the least. Fortunately, I had my boss on my side and he outranked Sestak.
In the end, this is nothing more than a side note to the campaign but I appreciate your friendly conversation. As I have said, the Admiral’s campaign is of interest within my office because so many of us have “experienced” him. If he gets elected, he will be interesting to watch. At the very least I expect him to get back at the CNO with countless RFIs to the Navy staff. Payback is a “bitch” as they old saying goes.
God bless,
Stu
Stu-
Sounds like you have quite a few interesting tales to tell (or to keep quiet). Shame you don't live around the 7th district, I'd enjoy grabbing a drink at a local bar and hearing an interesting story or two (or some cautionary warnings). Though, I doubt mine would be as colorful.
Joe's campaign staff (as well as Weldon's) contains true believers, supporters, hired guns, loyalists, and opportunists, etc. as well as outside forces with various agendas. After 31 years in the military, Joe is certainly feeling the culture shock. But, he is also meeting people from all ages and walks of life that are supporting him for different reasons than his subordinates in uniform. With so many diverse people, the "antics" you describe would be so self-defeating that Joe would be smart enough recognize them and change course.
As to the issues, I agree they each deserve quite a lot more than a few paragraphs. However, I feel that the general approach/direction being taken from the far-right neocons has been discredited by the reality of the results.
My primary concern is how Joe will vote on the key issues of the day. How he and his staff treat each other is of little concern to me compared to the bigger picture. Here in the civilian world, I've consulted for guys that are "professional" abusers of their (underpaid) employees. Compared to them, Joe would be an amateur. :-)
stu, you'll understand if we're skeptical about your service record, as this is the internets and all. Also, did you know that ALL of the quotes used by Weldon and the NRCC are based on anonymous quotes from an opinion column from GOP-stenographer Gil Spencer. The other two sources are from defense industry trade publications, again from "some people", and not from navy.mil sources which titles like "Navy Times" and "Inside the Navy" might lead you to believe.
And here's the other thing - it will be a lot easier to replace Sestak in two years if his constituents choose, and a lot harder to vote-out Weldon after 11-terms.
rzklkng,
That is your prerogative to be "skeptical" about my service record. I'll still sleep well tonight. I can't speak for the Gil Spencer column nor do I feel the need. I was simply curious if the Admiral's personality was a known quantity among his supporters so I chose to come here and fish where I would fine some. It's not like I think I am going to sway the election by posting my question here. Besides, I don't even vote in your district nor do I live in your state. DD gave me the feedback I was interested in and for that I am thankful.
God Bless,
Stu
Stu-
I enjoyed our "banter". I'm not at all skeptical about your service or claims that Joe had some "friction" (putting it mildly) with his subordinates. It's also clear to me that you are more curious about how Joe will do in the political environment than looking to bash him. I think I'm pretty safe in saying that you don't hate Joe, but also, he's not on your short list of favorite bosses.
I hope you and Joe's former associates are getting a kick out of the antics of Joe's opponent.
Maybe after the election is over, I'll do a "What's Wrong with Joe that We Need to Fix" column and we can have a few tales from the campaign trail as a consolation gift for the Weldon staffers.
It is safe to say I don't "hate" Admiral Sestak. In fact hate is a word I reserve for very, very few. To be honest, I can't say he was officially my "boss" either. I did a favor for him when he was leading up the Navy's QDR. That favor quickly turned into more and more tasking from him at which point I just stopped returning his calls and emails. (For those playing along at home this is a quick reminder that "NAVY" stands for Never Again Volunteer Yourself.) Far from having the desired affect, which was that the Admiral would give up, he sent another officer to personally summon me to his office where he proceeded to chew my arse about orders and such. That's when I told him that I would no longer be aiding him, that I didn't work for him and that he could take the issue up with my boss. My boss, who had words with Sestak before regarding another issue with which I was a player, was more than happy to weigh in on the matter. I must say that I enjoyed spinning Sestak up a bit. But I've done that to a few senior officers. ;)
As far as Representive Weldon goes, we really haven't talked about him. As you probably know, the majority of the military is conservative so of course our leanings are usually Republican. That being said, most in the military have little patience for corruption of any sort. Is Weldon guilty of what he is being accused? I don't know and probably won't ever know for sure. Wouldn't surprise is he was nor would it surprise me to be something stirred up by the opposition. Politics is a dirty game and neither party holds a monopoly on virtue. However when they are found guilty, I wish they all would be hung by fingers.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home