Ex-White House aide faces new criminal charges

David Safavian, the Bush administration’s top federal procurement officer, was indicted a couple of weeks ago for his role in obstructing a criminal investigation into disgraced Republican lobbyist Jack Abramoff, Safavian’s former employer. Yesterday, it got much worse.

David H. Safavian, former chief of White House procurement policy, was indicted yesterday on five counts of lying about his dealings with former Republican lobbyist Jack Abramoff and impeding a Senate investigation of him.

The indictment accuses Safavian, who previously served as former chief of staff for the General Services Administration, of falsely telling GSA officials that Abramoff had no dealings with the agency at a time in 2002, the government alleges, that Abramoff was seeking to obtain use of two GSA properties with Safavian’s assistance.

It also accuses Safavian of repeatedly making false statements to investigators about a golf trip he took with Abramoff to Scotland the same year. GSA ethics rules prohibited receiving gifts from anyone seeking an official action by the agency.

Republicans and criminal indictments just keep running into each other, don’t they?

Keep in mind, the probe that prompted these new charges against Safavian stem from a now-infamous August 2002 golf trip to Scotland, which Abramoff paid for. Also on the trip were House Administration Committee Chairman Robert W. Ney (R-Ohio) and Ralph Reed, former executive director of the Christian Coalition and now a candidate for lieutenant governor in Georgia.

Place your bets now on who’ll get indicted next.

I vote for DeLay, again. But now that Safavian has decided to cooperate there’s really no telling who can get dragged in. Christmas truly came early this year…

  • I’d like to follow up with a question. It’s beyond question that Bush will pardon some of our current crop of indictees. IMO Nazi comparisons with this administration are not so much offensive as inaccurate; they operate much more like a latter-day crime family. Loyalty before competence, to coin a phrase. They’ll have no compunction about springing any Made Men out of the slammer.

    So who will Bush pardon? Who can Bush pardon? I’d be interested to know what we can expect after the trials have run their course.

  • Bush can only pardon people for federal offenses, and in that case I think he can pardon anyone but himself.

  • The “political dust” will not settle until after November 4, 2008. Between then and January 20, 2009, pardons could be as plentiful as blades of grass.

  • The thing about pardons is that if you grant one you’re basically admitting that the pardonee actually did something wrong. Bush has never been able to do that for anyone, not even Brownie ( W accepted his resignation, but he never actually said he did a bad job ) . I bet George will need a quart of Jim Beam to work out the logical conundrum on that one, by golly.

  • Comments are closed.