FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

The General Lied

Talk about a bunch of whiners.  We live in a country run by a consummate liar whose most egregious lies have resulted in (a) the deaths of more than 4000 American servicemen and women, (b) the infliction of  life altering wounds on more than 20,000 servicemen and women, and (c) millions of people in a far-off land becoming homeless and refugees in foreign countries. We live in a country where a general of the Army whose first concern should be the welfare of his troops, lies to Congress about the quality of water supplied to troops working in the far off land that the consummate liar has done much to destroy.   This is a general to whose command the welfare of those he commanded was entrusted. And we whine about a plagiarist.

Early in July it was disclosed by Senator Byron Dorgan that General Jerome Johnson misled (a Washington euphemism for lying) Congress in April 2007 when he testified that there were no problems with water supplied to American troops by KBR, described as the largest defense contractor in Iraq.

According to a report in the New York Times, beginning in 2006 whistleblowers let Congress know that there were problems with the nonpotable water KBR supplied the troops. The Pentagon’s inspector general confirmed that KBR had not provided safe nonpotable water for hygiene uses at several Iraq bases.  The Pentagon learned of this in a communication from the inspector general on March 31, 2007.  Three weeks later General Johnson testified before the Senate Armed Services Committee that problems with the water supplied by KBR were not widespread.  It was a minor breach of trust by the general.  When your commander-in-chief is a man whose lies have ruined millions of lives, a drop or two of bad water is hardly anything to get excited about.  Nor is a bit of plagiarism even when the plagiarist has been nominated to a Federal District Court judgeship.

Michael E. O’Neill, a former to aide to Senator Specter is law professor at George Mason University.  He is considered a fine legal scholar who has had a brilliant career and is clearly of the sort of cloth from which federal judges are cut. There is only one flaw in the fabric and it would not even be noticeable if some journalist from the New York Times had not only discovered it but then seen fit to hold the fabric up for all to see.  Alan Liptak is the journalist. He discovered that Mr. O’Neill has plagiarized on more than one occasion.  One of several occasions of plagiarism involved an article he wrote in 2004 for the Supreme Court Economic Review, a journal published by the George Mason School of Law.

The purloined passage dealt with something called “bounded rationality” which, according to Mr. O’Nell “is not a refutation of the rational actor model,” quoting word for word from a book review published in 2000 in the Virginia Law Review.  Explaining the copying Mr. O’Neill said it was a result of a “poor work method.” “I didn’t keep track of things.  I frankly did a poor and negligent job.”  He got that right. In 2007 the Review issued a retraction of the article.

The White House is unperturbed by a bit of plagiarism sanctioning as it has, lying to create foreign policy. Emily Lawrimore, a White House spokeswoman said Mr. O’Neill had been completely forthcoming” and had “expressed remorse for his actions. ” She also said that the background searches the White House conducts are “very thorough” and “would capture issues such as this one.”  It is hardly surprising that an administration that routinely lies would be unperturbed by a bit of plagiarism and would consider confession of misconduct adequate to remove the stain from a reputation. Not everyone agrees with the White House.

Deborah Rhode who teaches legal ethics at Stanford described the retraction of the article in the Review  as “extremely unusual” and said the plagiarism was a “textbook case of conduct that casts doubt on someone’s fitness for judicial office.”  Mr. O’Neill, in  contrast,  said the 2004 plagiarism was “fairly insignificant” and asked whether it was “something to kill someone’s career for?”  One answer was given by Daniel Polsby, the dean of the law school. He  said as a consequence of the plagiarism Mr. O’Neill “stepped away from tenure and will reapply for it.”  That may not be necessary. Mr. O’Neill, answering his own question has refused to withdraw his nomination for a federal judgeship and if an unethical administration has its way, Mr. O’Neill will have life tenure as a federal judge.  That’s much better than humbly applying for restoration of a privilege lost through misconduct held up for all the world to see.

CHRISTOPHER BRAUCHLI is a lawyer living in Boulder, Colorado. He can be reached at:  Brauchli.56@post.harvard.edu

 

 

 

 

 

 

More articles by:
September 19, 2018
Michael McCaffrey
A Curious Case of Mysterious Attacks, Microwave Weapons and Media Manipulation
Elliot Sperber
Eating the Constitution
September 18, 2018
Conn Hallinan
Britain: the Anti-Semitism Debate
Tamara Pearson
Why Mexico’s Next President is No Friend of Migrants
Richard Moser
Both the Commune and Revolution
Nick Pemberton
Serena 15, Tennis Love
Binoy Kampmark
Inconvenient Realities: Climate Change and the South Pacific
Martin Billheimer
La Grand’Route: Waiting for the Bus
John Kendall Hawkins
Seymour Hersh: a Life of Adversarial Democracy at Work
Faisal Khan
Is Israel a Democracy?
John Feffer
The GOP Wants Trumpism…Without Trump
Kim Ives
The Roots of Haiti’s Movement for PetroCaribe Transparency
Dave Lindorff
We Already Have a Fake Billionaire President; Why Would We want a Real One Running in 2020?
Gerry Brown
Is China Springing Debt Traps or Throwing a Lifeline to Countries in Distress?
Pete Tucker
The Washington Post Really Wants to Stop Ben Jealous
Dean Baker
Getting It Wrong Again: Consumer Spending and the Great Recession
September 17, 2018
Melvin Goodman
What is to be Done?
Rob Urie
American Fascism
Patrick Cockburn
The Adults in the White House Trying to Save the US From Trump Are Just as Dangerous as He Is
Jeffrey St. Clair - Alexander Cockburn
The Long Fall of Bob Woodward: From Nixon’s Nemesis to Cheney’s Savior
Mairead Maguire
Demonization of Russia in a New Cold War Era
Dean Baker
The Bank Bailout of 2008 was Unnecessary
Wim Laven
Hurricane Trump, Season 2
Yves Engler
Smearing Dimitri Lascaris
Ron Jacobs
From ROTC to Revolution and Beyond
Clark T. Scott
The Cannibals of Horsepower
Binoy Kampmark
A Traditional Right: Jimmie Åkesson and the Sweden Democrats
Laura Flanders
History Markers
Weekend Edition
September 14, 2018
Friday - Sunday
Carl Boggs
Obama’s Imperial Presidency
Joshua Frank
From CO2 to Methane, Trump’s Hurricane of Destruction
Jeffrey St. Clair
Maria’s Missing Dead
Andrew Levine
A Bulwark Against the Idiocy of Conservatives Like Brett Kavanaugh
T.J. Coles
Neil deGrasse Tyson: A Celebrity Salesman for the Military-Industrial-Complex
Jeff Ballinger
Nike and Colin Kaepernick: Fronting the Bigots’ Team
David Rosen
Why Stop at Roe? How “Settled Law” Can be Overturned
Gary Olson
Pope Francis and the Battle Over Cultural Terrain
Nick Pemberton
Donald The Victim: A Product of Post-9/11 America
Ramzy Baroud
The Veiled Danger of the ‘Dead’ Oslo Accords
Kevin Martin
U.S. Support for the Bombing of Yemen to Continue
Robert Fisk
A Murder in Aleppo
Robert Hunziker
The Elite World Order in Jitters
Ben Dangl
After 9/11: The Staggering Economic and Human Cost of the War on Terror
Charles Pierson
Invade The Hague! Bolton vs. the ICC
Robert Fantina
Trump and Palestine
Daniel Warner
Hubris on and Off the Court
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail