Read other letters about this article

• Sunday, May 11, 2008 07:41 AM

  Where are the indictments?

  Can someone explain to me why this isn't garden variety theft of government services?

  If the Congress has forbidden the expenditure of funds on publicity campaigns of this kind except where specifically authorized by the Congress, and this campaign wasn't authorized, why don't these sections of the US code apply?

  http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/usc_sec_18_00000641----000-.html

  641. Public money, property or records

  Whoever embezzles, steals, purloins, or knowingly converts to his use or the use of another, or without authority, sells, conveys or disposes of any record, voucher, money, or thing of value of the United States or of any department or agency thereof, or any property made or being made under contract for the United States or any department or agency thereof; or

  Whoever receives, conceals, or retains the same with intent to convert it to his use or gain, knowing it to have been embezzled, stolen, purloined or converted—

  Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; but if the value of such property in the aggregate, combining amounts from all the counts for which the defendant is convicted in a single case, does not exceed the sum of $1,000, he shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.

  http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/usc_sec_18_00000653----000-.html

  653. Disbursing officer misusing public funds

  Whoever, being a disbursing officer of the United States, or any department or agency thereof, or a person acting as such, in any manner converts to his own use, or loans with or without interest, or deposits in any place or in any manner, except as authorized by law, any public money intrusted to him; or, for any purpose not prescribed by law, withdraws from the Treasury or any authorized depositary, or transfers, or applies, any portion of the public money intrusted to him, is guilty of embezzlement of the money so converted, loaned, deposited, withdrawn, transferred, or applied, and shall be fined under this title or not more than the amount embezzled, whichever is greater, or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; but if the amount embezzled is $1,000 or less, he shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.

  It seems to me that any government official who planned or conducted this campaign using government resources of any kind - the toner in the printers that printed the briefings, the paper they were printed on, the electricity in the rooms the briefings were held in, etc., have violated these sections and should be indictable. That goes right up to Rumsfeld, if not to the President.

  And since the military analysts in this case can be construed to be "receivers" under Section 641 if they accepted free travel, research material produced using public funds - hell, even if they got free donuts during the briefings - then the analysts can be indicted, too.

  —BrianScheetz Read BrianScheetz's other letters
  Permalink
  Flag
  Click "Submit Flag" if you feel this post is inappropriate. Explain why below if you wish.

  Cancel