“Our entire crony capitalist system, Democrat and Republican alike, has become a kleptocracy approaching par with third-world hell-holes. This is the way a great country is raided by its elite.” Karen McQuillan
Flouting
Norms, Trump Seeks to Bring
Independent Watchdogs to Heel
David E. Sanger and Charlie Savage
As their numbers increased in the four decades since, inspectors
general have played that role in bureaucracies as vast as the Pentagon and as
tiny as the Denali Commission, charged with developing infrastructure in
Alaska. It was an inspector general who in 2003 discovered that the CIA was
using unauthorized techniques to torture detainees and an inspector general who
brought to light billions of dollars wasted in reconstruction projects in
Afghanistan.
But President Donald Trump has made clear that he has little use
for this kind of independent oversight, which he sees as yet another form of
resistance from the so-called Deep State. “I think we’ve been treated very
unfairly by inspector generals,” he said this week.
And now he has launched a full-fledged — and at moments quite
innovative — attack on the ability of inspectors general to investigate his
administration.
Trump’s effort began last month with a sudden flurry of
Friday-night firings and demotions. It has escalated with an attempt to bypass
legal requirements that he give reasons to Congress 30 days before removing an
inspector general. He has forged new ground by replacing them with political
appointees who hold on to their old jobs, keeping them under the control of the
cabinet secretaries they are supposed to be policing.
The president’s moves have hardly been subtle. When Steve A.
Linick, the State Department’s inspector general, was fired last Friday, he was
immediately locked out of his office and his email. His replacement is an
associate of Vice President Mike Pence’s and remains in a politically appointed
post that is subordinate to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, who complained this
week that Linick was not willing to live up to the secretary’s slogan, “one
team, one mission.”
The message to the 74 inspectors general scattered around the
government was unmistakable: If they unearth damaging information, especially
in these crucial months before a presidential election, they are inviting
retaliation.
“Trump is replacing independent inspectors general with
unqualified political allies, which is inconsistent with statutory
requirements,” said Kathleen Clark, a law professor at Washington University in
St. Louis who has written about the watchdog system. “The bottom line is he is
removing independent officials who protect the public and help ensure the law
is followed.”
When President Jimmy Carter signed the 1978 law creating the
inspectors general system, few imagined a president so determined to undercut
it. Carter hailed the “harmony and the partnership being established between
the executive and legislative branch of government to root out fraud and
corruption and mismanagement.”
President Ronald Reagan replaced all Carter-appointed inspectors
general when he took over in 1981, but he later rehired some of them and, since
then, the tradition has held that they remain in place when a new president
takes office, a sign of respect for their nonpartisan status. Presidents may
remove them, but Congress required an explanation of the reasons and, in 2008,
put in an additional safeguard by imposing a 30-day waiting period.
Trump, who likes to brag that he has total authority over the
executive branch, has shown that he has no intention of playing by those rules.
In removing Linick, for example, the president immediately stripped him of
authority and told Congress he no longer had full confidence in him, but did
not say why.
Trump later told reporters that he did so only because Pompeo
asked him to.
“I’ve said, ‘Who appointed him,’ and they said, ‘President
Obama,’” the president said. “I said, look, ‘I’ll terminate him.’ I was happy
to do it,” Trump later said. Pompeo added on Wednesday that he “should have
done it some time ago.”
A replacement was announced immediately: Stephen J. Akard, who
also will keep his current political appointment, subordinate to Pompeo, as
director of the State Department’s Office of Foreign Missions.
Among other things, Linick had been investigating whether Pompeo
and his wife, Susan Pompeo, inappropriately used a taxpayer-paid government
employee to run personal errands, and whether Pompeo acted legally last year
when he circumvented Congress on selling arms to Saudi Arabia and the United
Arab Emirates.
This week, Pompeo denied that he knew about what Linick was
investigating other than the arms deal and said it was “patently false” that he
asked Trump to fire him as retaliation. But he also refused to say what his
reason was.
At the same time Trump removed Linick, he abruptly installed
Howard “Skip” Elliott, a political appointee inside the Transportation
Department, to serve as the acting inspector general for that department.
Elliott replaced Mitch Behm, the deputy inspector general who
had been leading the office since its longtime head, Calvin L. Scovel III,
retired in January for health reasons. It put Elliott, who remains subordinate
to the transportation secretary, Elaine Chao, in control of investigations into
her work — including an inquiry into whether the department has shown
favoritism in steering taxpayer grants to Kentucky, where Chao’s husband, Sen.
Mitch McConnell, a Republican and the majority leader, is running for
reelection.
In a letter this week to Trump, Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, a
supporter of the inspectors general system, objected to “obvious conflicts of
interest” created by Trump’s installation of current political appointees to
control watchdog offices, saying the problems went beyond independence.
“It means that while still reporting to the agency secretary,
they will have oversight of and access to all confidential inspector general
information, including whistleblower complaints and identities,” he wrote.
Grassley has also been pushing the president to provide a more
detailed official explanation to Congress for his ouster last month of Michael
Atkinson, the inspector general of the office of the director of national
intelligence. As with Linick, Trump had put Atkinson on leave rather than
waiting 30 days, and told Congress only that he had lost confidence in him.
But in remarks to reporters, the president clearly remained
angry at Atkinson for trying to alert Congress to the whistleblower complaint
about Trump’s attempt to pressure Ukraine’s leader into announcing a criminal
investigation into former Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter Biden.
There is some precedent for one of Trump’s tactics: In 2009,
President Barack Obama abruptly ousted Gerald Walpin, the inspector general of
the Corporation for National and Community Service, and also put him on leave
and initially told Congress only that he had lost confidence in the official.
But lawmakers of both parties objected to the move amid
suspicions that it was connected to Walpin’s criticism of how a political ally
of Obama’s had spent an AmeriCorps grant. The Obama White House quickly sent a
detailed explanation claiming that Walpin was incompetent and had behaved
bizarrely and made no similar move for the rest of the administration.
While administrations of both parties have periodically clashed
with inspectors general, Trump’s campaign to intimidate and subjugate watchdogs
to political control is without parallel.
In late March, after the president signed a $2 trillion
coronavirus relief bill, he issued a signing statement claiming a right to
override a key safeguard: its creation of an inspector general empowered to
police $500 billion in corporate bailout funds. It required the inspector to
tell Congress if Treasury Department officials balked at providing information
on how the money was spent.
In the statement, Trump said he alone determined what
information lawmakers got. And on April 3, he announced his intent to nominate
Brian D. Miller, his own White House aide, for the position, leading critics to
charge that he was too close to the White House to provide aggressive and
independent oversight.
Later that evening, Trump fired Atkinson.
On April 6, Trump ripped into the acting inspector general for
the Department of Health and Human Services, Christi Grimm, after she issued a
report on equipment shortages at hospitals. He accused Grimm of being
politically biased against him. Three weeks later, he nominated a potential
replacement, although she remains in place while that nomination is pending.
On April 7, Trump demoted Glenn Fine as the longtime acting
inspector general for the Defense Department. The move disqualified Fine, who
has a reputation for aggressiveness and independence, from continuing to serve
as the just-named leader of a committee of inspectors general that Congress created
to coordinate oversight of the administration’s spending of trillions of
taxpayer dollars related to the pandemic.
Trump also replaced Fine as the acting Pentagon watchdog with
Sean O’Donnell, the sitting inspector general of the Environmental Protection
Agency who had clashed with Andrew Wheeler, the head of the EPA. By requiring
O’Donnell to split his time, critics said, the administration undercut his
ability to perform oversight at both agencies.
“It’s impossible to do them both,” said David C. Williams, who
served as inspector general of six federal agencies over the course of a
government career that spanned from the Carter administration to the Trump
administration.
But Trump’s latest twist — installing political appointees
controlled by agency heads to run inspectors offices — was a further
escalation.
“If you are supposed to take direction from the secretary who is
your boss, and also to have professional skepticism of their job performance,
it’s hard to reconcile those two roles,” said Andrew M. Wright, a former ethics
and oversight lawyer for Congress and in the Obama White House. “You risk being
under direct control by political appointees in a way that is not contemplated
by the inspector general statute, and unable to have the institutional distance
to be able to scrutinize political appointees’ work.”
This article originally appeared in The New York Times.
Another Private Jet Company Owned by a Trump Donor Got a Bailout —
This One for $20 Million
The two private jet companies are among the first 96 airline
companies disclosed as recipients of taxpayer funds under the CARES Act.
by Jake Pearson
A Jet Linx aircraft on Sept. 25, 2019, in Teterboro, New Jersey. The private jet company, whose owner was an early Trump donor, received $20 million in taxpayer aid.
An Omaha, Nebraska-based
private jet company whose principal owner donated generously to Donald Trump
and Republicans ahead of the 2016 election received $20 million in taxpayer aid
from the federal bailout package passed in March.
Jet Linx Aviation, which caters
to well-to-do CEOs and executives, was the second private plane company founded
or owned by Trump donors to receive federal funds designated for the airline
industry under the Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security Act. CNBC
reported on Thursday that Clay Lacy Aviation, a Van Nuys, California-based
private jet company whose founder has given nearly $50,000 to the Republican
National Committee and Trump, got $27 million in federal funds.
Jet Linx Management Company
Vice Chairman John Denny Carreker and his wife, Connie, gave $68,100 to Trump’s
campaign, the Republican National Committee and the Trump Victory Committee
between October 2015 and November 2016, Federal Election Commission filings
show. Connie Carreker gave an additional $1,000 to the Trump campaign in
November 2018, according to the FEC.
Most of the CARES Act money for
the airline industry has gone to commercial or regional carriers. American,
Delta, United and Southwest collectively were allotted almost $19.5 billion,
more than three-quarters of the total reserved for the passenger airline
industry.
But private charters haven’t
been left out.
About 70 such companies
received CARES Act funds as of April 27, according to the first round of
disclosures to 96 recipients published this week. That represents just a
fraction of the roughly 2,000 private jet companies operating in the U.S., as
compiled by Private Jet Card Comparisons, an independent buyer’s guide. In
total, they received about $157 million in taxpayer aid, less than a percent of
the more than $23 billion disbursed so far for the passenger airline industry.
in the industry: Last year, the flight tracking firm Argus Traqpak ranked them fifth and 11th, respectively, in hours logged, according to a list of the top 25 private air charter operations. No other top 10 private jet company received federal grants. The average grant amount for the 70 private jet companies to receive aid was $2.2 million, about a tenth of what Jet Linx and Clay Lacy each received.
A number listed for the
Carrekers at their Dallas home wasn’t in service, and a press representative
for the company hasn’t responded to emails seeking comment. A Treasury
Department spokeswoman said campaign contributions play no role in determining
which companies received federal funds, requirements that were set by Congress.
CNBC reported that Clay Lacy
did not respond to a request for comment on its reporting.
Lawmakers set aside $25 billion
for passenger airlines in the coronavirus relief bill. Companies that earned at
least half their revenue last year by flying people from place to place could
apply for grants from a special program within the CARES Act designed to cover
payroll and benefits for workers. The size of the grants companies received is
supposed to be based on how much they paid their employees in salary and
benefits between April and September last year. The law restricts how much
executives are allowed to take in compensation.
The Treasury Department
declined to say how many total companies applied for the payroll grants, how
many were private plane companies or how many applicants were deemed ineligible
for funds. A spokesman for the Transportation Department said officials
verified that applicants held up-to-date “certificates and authorizations”
before the Treasury distributed them money.
It wasn’t clear when the other
passenger airline companies granted payroll aid would be publicly disclosed.
Jet Linx claims an 112-aircraft
fleet that flies out of 18 cities where it operates its own private terminals.
The company says it has 450 workers, who serve as flight crew and operations,
maintenance and support staff.
Jet Linx offers well-heeled
customers membership packages that give them access to luxury plane rides for a
fee. On its website, Jet Linx offers members who pay $5,000 up front access to
any size jet for pay-as-you-fly costs. Hourly rates can run up to $4,500 per
hour.
Do you work for a company that
was denied CARES Act funds? If so, or if you were laid off from a company that
received the federal aid, email Jake Pearson at jake.pearson@propublica.org
Doris Burke contributed
research.
Another Private Jet Company Owned by a Trump Donor Got a Bailout — This One for $20 Million
The
two private jet companies are among the first 96 airline companies disclosed as
recipients of taxpayer funds under the CARES Act.
May 15, 5:02 p.m. EDT
A Jet Linx aircraft on Sept. 25, 2019, in Teterboro, New Jersey.
The private jet company, whose owner was an early Trump donor, received $20
million in taxpayer aid. (Sylvain Gaboury/Patrick
McMullan via Getty Images)
An Omaha, Nebraska-based private jet company whose principal
owner donated generously to Donald Trump and Republicans ahead of the 2016
election received $20 million in taxpayer aid from the federal bailout package
passed in March.
Jet Linx Aviation, which caters to
well-to-do CEOs and executives, was the second private plane company founded or
owned by Trump donors to receive federal funds designated for the airline
industry under the Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security Act.
CNBC reported on Thursday that Clay Lacy Aviation, a Van Nuys,
California-based private jet company whose founder has given nearly $50,000 to
the Republican National Committee and Trump, got $27 million in federal funds.
Jet Linx Management Company Vice Chairman John Denny Carreker
and his wife, Connie, gave $68,100 to Trump’s campaign, the Republican National
Committee and the Trump Victory Committee between October 2015 and November
2016, Federal Election Commission filings show. Connie Carreker gave an
additional $1,000 to the Trump campaign in November 2018, according to the FEC.
Most of the CARES Act money for the airline industry has gone to
commercial or regional carriers. American, Delta, United and Southwest
collectively were allotted almost $19.5 billion, more than three-quarters of
the total reserved for the passenger airline industry.
But private charters haven’t been left out.
About 70 such companies received
CARES Act funds as of April 27, according to the first round of disclosures to
96 recipients published this week. That represents just a fraction of the roughly 2,000
private jet companies operating in the U.S., as compiled by Private Jet Card Comparisons, an independent buyer’s
guide. In total, they received about $157 million in taxpayer aid, less than a
percent of the more than $23 billion disbursed so far for the passenger airline
industry.
in the industry: Last year, the flight
tracking firm Argus Traqpak ranked them fifth and 11th, respectively, in hours
logged, according to a list of the top 25 private air charter operations. No other top
10 private jet company received federal grants. The average grant amount for
the 70 private jet companies to receive aid was $2.2 million, about a tenth of
what Jet Linx and Clay Lacy each received.
A number listed for the Carrekers at their Dallas home wasn’t in
service, and a press representative for the company hasn’t responded to emails
seeking comment. A Treasury Department spokeswoman said campaign contributions
play no role in determining which companies received federal funds,
requirements that were set by Congress.
CNBC reported that Clay Lacy did not respond to a request for
comment on its reporting.
Lawmakers set aside $25 billion for
passenger airlines in the coronavirus relief bill. Companies that earned at
least half their revenue last year by flying people from place to place could
apply for grants from a special program within the CARES Act designed to cover payroll and
benefits for workers. The size of the grants companies received is supposed to be based on how much
they paid their employees in salary and benefits between April and September
last year. The law restricts how much executives are allowed to take in
compensation.
The Treasury Department declined to say how many total companies
applied for the payroll grants, how many were private plane companies or how
many applicants were deemed ineligible for funds. A spokesman for the
Transportation Department said officials verified that applicants held
up-to-date “certificates and authorizations” before the Treasury distributed
them money.
It wasn’t clear when the other passenger airline companies
granted payroll aid would be publicly disclosed.
Jet Linx claims an 112-aircraft fleet that flies out of 18
cities where it operates its own private terminals. The company says it has 450
workers, who serve as flight crew and operations, maintenance and support
staff.
Jet Linx offers well-heeled customers membership packages that
give them access to luxury plane rides for a fee. On its website, Jet Linx
offers members who pay $5,000 up front access to any size jet for
pay-as-you-fly costs. Hourly rates can run up to $4,500 per hour.
Do you work for a company that
was denied CARES Act funds? If so, or if you were laid off from a company that
received the federal aid, email Jake Pearson at jake.pearson@propublica.org
No comments:
Post a Comment