Actually, he is defending the Alberto Gonzales of the General Services Administration,Lurita Alexis Doan.
This is much smarter: not only is the spotlight is not as bright on GSA as it is on Justice, but GSA contractors are a lot more willing to pay politicians for access to the contracts GSA awards. Davis collects protection money from them, which he wouldn't get if he were defending Gonzales. The prize GSA contract is Networx, the biggest GSA contract ever, at $20 billion. Not counting other GSA bidders who have contributed to Davis, the bidders on Networx have paid him, and his wife, campaign contributions of over half a million dollars. His wife, a Virginia pol with no campaign limits, gets additional cash from such donors through her work for ICG, a lobbying and consulting firm whose services include preparing GSA contractors for hearings before the House Oversight and Reform Committee. That’s the Committee Tom Davis chaired until January 2007.
Tom Davis has been slowing down the GSA hearing with prepared remarks defending Doan and softball questions to the Bush donor.
If Davis wants to defend federal workers, perhaps he should start with the workers Doan maligned when she lied about their performance ratings, saying they were low. They were not low.
Let's not forget that for the crooks to keep power, they needed a multi-pronged attack: They needed the contributions from contractors with GSA and the other agencies contracting out core functions, donated to people in a position to take the money: Delay, Foley, and Davis, with a little help from Abramoff. They used the money for schemes such as the ones suppressing voter turn out. And they needed loyal Bushies in the Justice Department lawyers to look the other way.
Let’s look at the similarities between the Alberto Gonzales scandal at Justice and the GSA scandal:
I. Critics of Lurita Doan are poor performers.
Doan obstructed the investigation into her Hatch Act violation by claiming the witnesses had motive to lie: "There's not a single one of those who did not have somewhere in between a poor to totally inferior performance,” she said. Actually, three of the five witnesses "met performance expectations;" 3 on the rating scale of 5. Government raters are required to give a quota of "3" ratings, so many superior employees end up taking turns getting the 3. One appointee had been rated 4 of 5, and another had received the highest rating 5 of 5.* Critics of Alberto Gonzales are poor performers.
II. Critics of Lurita Doan are picking on a successful African American, according to Davis.
REP. DAVIS OPENING STATEMENT:…the retaliation is actually being done against an African-American entrepreneur who supports the Bush Administration.* Critics of Alberto Gonzales are picking on a successful Hispanic.
III. Lurita Doan “can’t recall” the meeting where the improper activity occurred.
* Alberto Gonzales “can’t recall” the meeting where the improper activity occurred.
IV. Lurita Doan remembers the meetings in question but didn’t pay attention when the improper activity occurred. She claims she was Blackberrying. However, there is no Blackberry activity on her account during this meeting.
* Alberto Gonzales remembers the meetings in question but didn’t pay attention when the improper activity occurred.
Cross posted on MyDD and DailyKos.