This woman is either a deranged sociopath or basically someone who is emblematic of the ‘loyal Bushie’ mindset, which appears to embody a complete lack of respect for the law, along with an enormous level of ignorance in not being able to even imagine ever having to answer questions in front of a committee. Ms. Doan clearly has no shame, and is treating all of this as if were a game of some kind. She’s playing in front of the committee, just as she was playing with the GSA and the careers of its federal employees when she was in charge. She happened to be great at the political fund-raising game, and like a kid winning a contest for selling the most candy bars door to door for their school, she won a prize. In GOP-land that prize is an appointment to head up a very important government agency. Qualified or not, the government itself is carved up and handed out as prizes to people like Ms. Doan.
Her behavior in these hearings, especially when confronted with her prior testimony, is that of a pouting, spoiled little girl, whose propensity for tantrums happens to be spattered throughout the pages of sworn testimony she has provided up to this point. Caught in a flat out lie or (in the case of this video clip) caught stupidly admitting to investigators that she would retaliate against whoever provided evidence against her, the capacity of this woman to simply do the right thing is nonexistent. Every one of her actions towards the job, her employees and the investigation, is driven by a primal reflex that recognizes no boundaries or even the slightest notion that her natural instincts could be fallible in any way. She feels entitled to behave in this manner. She sold the most candy bars, and therefore she cannot possibly be wrong. Anyone who suggests otherwise is stupid.
Pingback: Lurita Doan
im guessing this has to do with alberto gonzales and the AG firings. honestly, i started watching it with an open mind and thought originally terny acted appropriately but before the woman could speak he was interrupting here. that does not even occur in a courtroom with a judge. and al, answer this question with honesty, with the office of the AG being a political office (who serve at the will of the president), if the AG’s are not prosecuting or meeting goals as the administration is wanting them to do, is that not a reason for removal. Also, last time I checked, political appointments and removals were at-will, especially in the executive branch. bill clinton as we all know removed all AG’s and appointed his chosen ones while Bush did not. So without conspiracies or hes a republican (pick your four letter word) or etc, etc; i am trying to find out the scandal (other than Alberto Gonzales not being on the ball, but thats not a scandal, that may mean there are better people for the job than him, however, he still serves at the discretion of the prez).
This isn’t about the DOJ investigation at all. Doan was the administrator of the Government Appropriations Office, which rewards government contracts. The Hatch Act makes it illegal for a government agency to do anything political…their job is to spend the taxpayer’s money the right way.
She was rewarding contracts based on which GOP districts needed a boost prior to the election, and Rove’s people put together a slide show presentation that listed which districts they were targeting…she has everyone at GAO (higher ups) attend a meeting where these slides are shown, and she gets up at the end of it and says, “how can we use GAO to help our candidates”…several of the people who were there blew the whistle (all Bush appointees btw), as it was clearly illegal.
Then came the contracts like one with Sun Microsystems where the gov’t was overpaying for about $25 million, and the IG met with Doan…she insisted it be awarded again. Stuff like that. This is her second hearing, and since then, a white house investigation has found her to be untruthful as well, AND in statements to them, she says that she is going to retaliate against the people under her who told the truth to Congress.
This is against the law as well. But even though she admits to that, under oath, to the investigators…here at this second hearing a month or so after the first, she’s trying to say that the ‘tense’ of her statement was interpreted incorrectly…hence the clip I just posted.
this is all news to me, i havent really seen much of it anywhere nor am i familiar with the GAO, however, this would hardly make the first time a govt body acted in political interest, unfortunately its washington. not saying it makes it right, which is one of the reasons y i favor less govt. less opportunity for political gain at the expense of taxpayers and govt reputation.
Small as you want to make it – this department is one you can’t do without. The auditors working in this place are the ones that can save you and I serious money if they’re allowed to do their job.