Category Archives: The Denise Simon Experience

Secret Iran Nuclear Inspections, a Proven Fraud

Posted on by

The lies began in the White House with regard to the anytime any location inspections.

John Kerry is defending the IAEA and Iran fraud on the Parchin inspection that occurred last week.

Washington (CNN) The Obama administration is acknowledging that Iranians would be involved in inspections of the sensitive Parchin military site under a draft arrangement with the U.N., but officials are stressing that they are not the only ones who would be investigating the Iranian location long believed to have hosted covert militarized nuclear activity.

A senior State Department official said that the U.N. nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency, or IAEA, would have “total oversight” of sampling and inspections of Parchin under the agreement between the agency and Iran over access to the site.

“Iran is not self-inspecting,” the official said, though this official would not deny that Iranian inspectors will “play a role.”

It seems likely that IAEA staff would either be present or watching via video camera when the Iranians take samples from the site, a practice that the international nuclear agency has used in previous inspections agreements.

A senior administration official, meanwhile, said that while Iranians may be taking the samples at Parchin, individuals from other countries will be a part of their analysis. The official noted that the arrangement satisfies the demands of the IAEA. More details here.

What the secret nuclear inspection accord between Iran and the UN says _ and what others say

By GEORGE JAHN, Associated Press

VIENNA (AP) — An AP report has revealed that the U.N. International Atomic Energy Agency has agreed with Iran that Iranian experts and equipment will be used to inspect Iran’s Parchin military site, located not far from Tehran, where Iran is suspected of conducting covert nuclear weapons activity more than a decade ago.

Here are some questions and answers about the document, and what it means for the larger deal between Iran, the United States and five other world powers to limit Iran’s nuclear activities in exchange for easing sanctions against Iran.

WHAT HAVE IRAN AND THE IAEA AGREED?

According to a draft document viewed by AP, Iran has agreed to cooperate with the U.N. in answering longstanding allegations about possible past work to develop nuclear weapons at its Parchin plant — but only with the Iranians conducting the inspections themselves. Iran would collect its own environmental samples on the site and carry out other work usually done by IAEA experts. The IAEA will be able to review the Iranians’ work after the fact. The deal on Parchin was between the IAEA and Iran. The Obama Administration was not a direct party to the agreement, but apparently was aware of it.

___

WHAT DO OPPONENTS OF THE DEAL SAY?

Opponents of the broader deal are seizing an opportunity to say the entire exercise of negotiating with Iran is flawed, that it relies too much on trust of the Iranian government.

___

WHAT DOES THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION SAY?

The Obama administration and other supporters say the wider agreement say it is focused on the future, with ample inspections, and that the side accord between Iran and the IAEA is focused on Iran’s activities in the past and therefore is not central to the overall deal.

___

HOW UNUSUAL IS THE AGREEMENT ON PARCHIN?

Any IAEA inspection of a country suspected of nuclear irregularities is usually carried out by agency experts. They may take swipes of residue on equipment, sample the air or take soil samples in attempts to look for signs of clandestine work on atomic arms or other potentially dangerous unreported activity.

The document on Parchin, however, will let the Iranians themselves look for signs of the very activity they deny — past work on nuclear weapons. It says “Iran will provide” the agency with environmental samples. It restricts the number of samples at the suspect site to seven and to an unspecified number “outside of the Parchin complex” at a site that still needs to be decided.

The U.N. agency will take possession of the samples for testing, as usual. Iran will also provide photos and video of locations to be inspected. But the document suggests that areas of sensitive military activity remain out of bounds. The draft says the IAEA will “ensure the technical authenticity of the activities” carried out by the Iranians — but it does not say how.

In contrast, the main nuclear deal with Iran gives IAEA experts greatly expanded authority compared to what it has now to monitor Iranian nuclear activities as it works to ensure that Tehran is hewing to its commitments; reducing the scope and output of programs that Iran says it needs to generate energy but which can also be turned to making the fissile core of atomic weapons.

___

WHY IS THE PARCHIN AGREEMENT IMPORTANT?

Any indication that the IAEA is diverging from established inspection rules could weaken the agency, the world’s nuclear watchdog with 164 members, and feed suspicions that it is ready to overly compromise in hopes of winding up a probe that has essentially been stalemated for more than a decade.

Politically, the arrangement has been grist for American opponents of the broader separate agreement to limit Iran’s future nuclear programs, signed by the Obama administration, Iran and five world powers in July. Critics have complained that the wider deal is built on trust of the Iranians, while the administration has insisted it depends on reliable inspections.

The separate agreement on past nuclear activities does not affect the broader deal signed in July. And it doesn’t appear yet that the revelation will change any votes in Congress for or against a resolution of disapproval, which President Barack Obama is expected to veto if it passes.

___

HOW DID THIS AGREEMENT HAPPEN?

It could be a matter of priorities.

The Obama administration’s main focus in the broader Iran deal — signed by the U.S., Iran, Britain, France, Germany, Russia and China — is crimping Iran’s present nuclear activities so they cannot be used in the future toward making a bomb. Faced with more than a decade of Iranian resistance to IAEA attempts to probe the allegations of past weapons work at Parchin, there may be a willingness to settle for an agency report that is less than definitive — and methods that deviate from usual practices.

The IAEA also appears to have recognized that Iran will continue to insist the allegations are lies, based on false U.S., Israeli and other intelligence. After a decade of stalemate it wants to close the books on the issue and allow the U.N. Security Council to do so as well.

The alternative might well have been no inspection at Parchin any kind.

___

WHAT DOES THE IAEA SAY?

Director General Yukiya Amano says, “The arrangements are technically sound and consistent with our long-established practices. They do not compromise our … standards in any way.” He says agreements with Iran on clearing up the nuclear arms allegations “are confidential and I have a legal obligation not to make them public – the same obligation I have for hundreds of such arrangements made with other IAEA member states.”

___

WHAT DO OTHERS SAY?

Ned Price, spokesman for the National Security Council at the White House: “We are confident in the agency’s technical plans for investigating the possible military dimensions of Iran’s former program, issues that in some cases date back more than a decade. Just as importantly, the IAEA is comfortable with the arrangements, which are unique to the agency’s investigation of Iran’s historical activities.”

Olli Heinonen, in charge of the Iran investigation as IAEA deputy director general from 2005 through 2010, says he can think of no similar arrangement — a country essentially allowed to carry out much of the probe of suspicions against it.

___

HOW CRUCIAL IS PARCHIN TO THE OVERALL DEAL?

U.S. intelligence officials do not consider the Parchin inspections a critical part of the broader deal, according to one official, commenting only on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to be quoted. The U.S. believes most weapons work occurred there in 2003, the official says, and the site has been thoroughly cleaned up since then.

___

AP Intelligence Writer Ken Dilanian contributed to this report.

Why No Search Warrant for Hillary’s Mobile Devices?

Posted on by

The revelation that Hillary had her own email server was a shocker. Then the forced and scheduled production of those emails was another shocker as they were produced. The Trey Gowdy House Benghazi Committee being stonewalled by the Clinton camp and by the State Department was another shocker as compared with Hillary’s own false pledges of cooperation. Several outside organizations have been forced to file FOIA requests and then were forced to file lawsuits for production of those FOIA requests. This is coupled with the subpoenas from the Gowdy commission.

We hear about the server and the emails, but to date, it seems any request for search warrants has been nil. We cannot overlook the fact that Hillary also had and may still have 3 mobile devices, a Blackberry, and iPhone and an iPad. What about the electronic data on those devices or the meta-data trail to either back up the server data or perhaps in addition to that cache the FBI is investigating?

To date, the general conclusion is the FBI is protecting Hillary at the behest of the Justice Department, which hardly seems to be the case. The FBI has assigned their ‘A’ team to this mission and they have a multi-track objective that includes global cyber- espionage, hacking and a meticulous investigation to determine just how many laws were broken beyond the scope of the one or two prevailing violations of protecting classified material. It must be mentioned here that the FBI was also a recipient from the normal intelligence distribution list, so the FBI has their own record of transmissions that went to Hillary and other intelligence or national security personnel.

It would also be a good time as well to include the fact that the Chinese hacked the Office of Personnel management and was able to capture files of all security clearance employees which included Hillary. It is estimate that the OPM hack was determined to have occurred in June of 2014, a year or so after Hillary left her position as Secretary of State, but that OPM hack date is an estimate. Further the depths of the stolen electronic files are still being realized and those numbers are growing exponentially. Were they other known foreign hacks the FBI has open case files on, beyond the OPM intrusion?

This is an important and perhaps a top concern for the FBI, the NSA and associated cyber agencies to determine other possible foreign hacks into Hillary’s electronic files and those of her inner circle personnel. This could in fact be the single reason why the White House or the Obama National Security Council has chosen to defer answers and comments on the Hillary server-gate scandal to either the Department of Justice or the FBI. There is a high probability of a deeper and more threatening security condition of classified material. There could be the likelihood of other cyber intrusions being investigated by the FBI that have not been made public for which Hillary and her team may have been victims.

Anyway, this is hardly a matter that will be solved soon, yet it is a sure bet that almost daily more will bubble to the surface. Meanwhile, Politico has published a fairly good summary as to why Hillary and her lawyers are white knuckled and in panic mode at this moment.

One also cannot omit the entire notion that violations on behalf of Hillary, Bill, Jake Sullivan, Huma Abedin, Cheryl Mills and others at the Clinton Foundation or at the State Department could add to the building nightmares for those mentioned or for the Hillary legal team headed by David Kendall. Mixing government business with a private and global foundation where big big money moved back and forth could be the cherry on the banana split for this building scandal.

Hillary’s FBI nightmare

If the feds have Clinton’s personal emails, too, some of them are bound to come out — exactly as she feared.

The next question in the Hillary Clinton email matter is who will force the FBI to release any documents it may have retrieved from the 2016 presidential candidate’s homemade server — Congress or the courts?

The answer: A federal judge may decide to get aggressive and order the law enforcement agency to turn over any newly discovered records or at least preserve them pending further court action. But don’t expect congressional subpoenas to fly — or FBI director James Comey to get hauled to Capitol Hill anytime soon.

Key congressional committees investigating Clinton’s emails argue that the courts are better suited to force the release of federal documents. One GOP source familiar with the investigations said a congressional committee could “theoretically subpoena the FBI” to demand the contents of Clinton’s server, but judges are likely to wade into the issue first.

“I think the court is better positioned right now because of where the cases are in litigation,” the source said.

Court action, however, depends on the aggressiveness of federal judges who are now managing more than 30 Freedom of Information Act cases involving emails on accounts maintained by Clinton or her top aides.

The FBI has already rebuffed one judge’s effort to obtain messages the agency has recovered from Clinton’s server, prompting a stinging attack from Iowa Sen. Chuck Grassley, the Republican chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

On Wednesday, key members of Capitol Hill expressed reluctance to dive in after a report surfaced that the FBI has successfully retrieved messages left on Clinton’s server. The FBI declined to confirm the Bloomberg report Wednesday.

House Benghazi Committee Chairman Trey Gowdy — a former federal prosecutor — made clear through a spokesman that he has no intention to cross swords with the FBI.

“Chairman Gowdy has not asked the FBI about its investigation into Secretary Clinton’s unusual and unprecedented email arrangement, nor has the Bureau offered a briefing to the committee,” Benghazi panel spokesman Jamal Ware said.

“The chairman believes the FBI is the nation’s premier law enforcement agency and he is not willing to comment on its ongoing investigation into the mishandling of classified information in connection with Secretary Clinton’s server.”

Grassley said he was concerned by anonymous leaks cited in the Bloomberg story, noting that the FBI has not responded to congressional inquiries about the investigation.

“You know it is getting a little absurd when someone at the Justice Department is apparently leaking details to the press about an investigation that the department officially refuses to admit to Congress that it is conducting,” Grassley said.

“In light of the details reported in the media, the committee will be seeking more information about the State Department’s attempts to regain possession of the email records that should have remained at the State Department in the first place. The FBI should also provide clarity on how it will handle the emails now that they have been recovered from the server.”

Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee Chairman Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) said he was “hopeful” that the results of the FBI inquiry will be made public. He promised to press his own inquiry but offered no specifics.

Regardless of what Congress decides to do, Hillary Clinton’s decision to have a tech firm she hired turn the server over to the FBI last month at its request greatly raises the potential that messages she has claimed to be private will eventually make it into the public domain, lawyers tracking the case said. Clinton has said that she had tens of thousands of emails deleted after determining that they contained personal information, but now the FBI appears to have at least some of those in its possession.

“This is enormously significant,” said Dan Metcalfe, a former top Justice Department official handling disclosure issues. “It’s one thing for the bureau to have taken control of the server itself, and when you add to that their technical capabilities to glean information from it, if there is information there that transcends what [Clinton] furnished to State, I think the odds are exceedingly high that that at least some if not all of that information will ultimately enter the public domain.”

While State and the National Archives have determined that about 1,500 of the 30,000 emails Clinton turned over last December are entirely personal records, that determination won’t render those messages or others entirely and indefinitely off limits under the Freedom of Information Act if they turn up in the FBI’s files after being extracted from Clinton’s server, Metcalfe said.

“Those are no longer merely personal records,” said Metcalfe, a former director of Justice’s Office of Information & Privacy who now teaches law at American University. “Anything that the bureau pulls off that server, old messages, new messages, Hillary’s allegedly personal messages, Hillary’s admittedly official records is now an agency record of the bureau’s law enforcement activities.”

Metcalfe said those records could be withheld by the FBI, but once its investigation ends, the documents would have to be processed if requested. That could lead to messages State viewed as entirely personal being published at least in part, he added.

Meanwhile, action continues in the courts. On Monday, the FBI turned down U.S. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan’s invitation to explain where its investigation stands. The response led Grassley to blast the FBI for “behaving like it’s above the law.”

Sullivan has not yet signaled what other steps he will take, if any. The plaintiff in the case, the conservative group Judicial Watch, could ask the judge to issue a subpoena to the FBI for relevant records. It would be an unusual step and likely lead to legal fireworks.

“A subpoena served upon the FBI will be resisted by the U.S. attorney’s office,” predicted former federal magistrate John Facciola.

At a hearing earlier this month in another case, U.S. District Court Judge Reggie Walton seemed uncomfortable with the idea that Clinton and her attorneys had the final call in determining that over 31,000 emails from her private account were purely personal.

“We’re not sure exactly what type of evaluation was made of that 31,000 messages,” the judge said.

Clinton’s lawyers have argued that government employees generally have the right to determine whether emails or other records are personal and delete them. The Justice Department backed Clinton — to a point — in a recent legal brief, while stopping short of saying that a former government employee such as Clinton has the right to independently make such a determination nearly two years after leaving the government.

Walton said the scenario that played out doesn’t really fit others the courts have previously addressed.

“This is sort of a unique situation,” the judge said. “The State Department never had possession of these records.”

Still, not all judges may be interested in delving into any Clinton files now in the possession of the FBI, particularly if it appears Congress is punting the issue to the courts.

“Congress has different and more powerful ways to obtain information from the State Department than a FOIA plaintiff,” Judge Rosemary Collyer wrote in an order Monday rejecting one group’s arguments that it needed prompt access to Clinton-related emails to aid Congress in getting to the bottom of the Benghazi attacks.

Another challenge for Congress is that it could be disturbing precedent by trying to bring in an outside party to verify that Clinton has turned over all her official emails or even those relevant to the Benghazi attacks. Usually, the recipient of a subpoena turns over what he or she deems responsive, not a broader set of records for someone else to review. “The way we’ve always had is a process of self-production,” Facciola said.

In cases involving search warrants for electronic records, courts have sometimes appointed magistrates to go through the records and sift out what law enforcement really needs. But the question these days is more often about how the computer that does the sorting should be programmed and who gets to decide that.

“That’s the real battle going on,” Facciola said. “Oftentimes, the technicians who create these programs don’t even agree on one methodology. … How do you separate the wheat from the chaff?”

 

 

 

 

 

The Deadly Kid Pot Epidemic in Colorado

Posted on by

Is there a guilty party in this problem? Who deserves the blame? Does the benefit of increased tax revenue outweigh the deaths and other criminal activity or the influx of pot tourism where people are sleeping in the streets and claiming social welfare benefits? Are employers having issues with quality hiring or quality of work output by their workers? How about the high students getting a good education or even attending class? Is Colorado able to compete with other states in the realm of business and commerce?

Report: Colorado Pot an ‘Epidemic’ Among Kids

Sure, we wanted it legalized, but didn’t think kids would want any!

By Trey Sanchez, TruthRevolt:

The results are in, and according to a report by the Rocky Mountain High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area, Colorado children are using marijuana at a much higher rate than ever before and are experiencing an increase in hospital visits, school suspensions, and even death.

It’s gotten so bad, the co-founder of an advocacy group called Smart Colorado has called child and teen use of marijuana an “epidemic.”

“Kids have no idea how dangerous or harmful Colorado’s pot is,” Diane Carlson said.

Here are the numbers in the report via CBS Denver: 29 percent increase in emergency room visits, and a 38 percent increase in hospitalizations during retail marijuana’s first year. Eleven percent of Colorado’s 12 to 17 year-olds use pot — 56 percent higher than the national average. It also cites a 40 percent increase in drug-related suspensions and expulsions — the vast majority from marijuana. The study cites a significant increase in marijuana-related traffic deaths.

The culprit according to Carlson? Its commercialization, she said, adding, “Marijuana might have been legalized in our state; it did not have to mean massive commercialization and promotion of marijuana use.”

Some parents who use medical marijuana have previously complained that its packaging could look attractive to children. In one instance, a mother complained that her hash dose called “Bruce Banner Wax” was contained inside of what looked like a colorful rubber bouncy ball from a vending machine. This was brought to the maker Boulder Pharma’s attention and they pulled the product from their shelves.

Other parents are complaining about the influx of marijuana ads popping up all over the state and how that intensive marketing is affecting children. One parent told CBS Denver that he came home to find his 13-year-old son unconscious, gray, no pulse, and no breathing after what he says was a marijuana overdose. Luckily, he was resuscitated by his father.

And high school-aged users and dealers are balking at the numbers that indicate 60 percent of students use marijuana regularly at certain schools, saying that number is “way low.”

Carlson agrees, saying her organization has heard from “hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of parents throughout the state” with stories like this father and son.

Richards of Planned Parenthood, then a Hillary Hire

Posted on by

A bill that would strip Planned Parenthood of federal funds was passed in the House of Representatives on Friday. The 241-187 vote was divided mostly along party lines.

“For the one-year period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act, subject to subsection (b), no funds authorized or appropriated by Federal law may be made available for any purpose to Planned Parenthood Federation of America, Inc., or any affiliate or clinic of Planned Parenthood Federation of America, Inc., unless such entities certify that Planned Parenthood Federation of America affiliates and clinics will not perform, and will not provide any funds to any other entity that performs, an abortion during such period,” the bill reads.

The measure– HR 3134, also known as the Defund Planned Parenthood Act– would defund Planned Parenthood of federal funds for one year while investigations of the organization’s practices are conducted, in light of claims made by the Center for Medical Progress. More here.

Planned Parenthood President, Cecile Richards is scheduled to testify before Congress on Thursday, September 29th regarding the use of taxpayers funds ($500 million) that harvest fetal tissue for sale.

Hillary Clinton Hires Daughter of Planned Parenthood’s President

As Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton defends Planned Parenthood from the fallout over its baby part-selling scandal, the mainstream media conveniently ignores one very important detail: the Planned Parenthood president’s daughter is a top Hillary campaign operative.

Rommel Demano/Getty Images for the 2014 Tribeca Film Festival/AFP

Breitbart: Cecile Richards, president of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, has seen her abortion-providing organization come under fire after a series of videos caught top employees trying to trade aborted baby parts in callous fashion.

Hillary Clinton, who said that she has only seen excerpts from the videos, strongly defended Planned Parenthood in her appearance this past weekend on CBS’s “Face the Nation.” Clinton called the videos “misleadingly edited” and “intentionally taken out of context” and condemned a Republican “attack on Planned Parenthood.”

Clinton, who counts Planned Parenthood as a past donor, has a more glaring but little-discussed conflict of interest in this case. Her Iowa communications director is Lily Adams, daughter of Planned Parenthood boss Cecile Richards.

Adams is also the granddaughter of former Democratic Texas governor Ann Richards, who lost her 1994 re-election bid to George W. Bush.

Lily Adams, who was tweeting from Iowa Tuesday as Clinton visited the state, previously worked in a deputy communications role for the Democratic National Committee (DNC).

Adams garnered attention during her stint at the DNC by organizing a failed boycott against this reporter’s former publication, after this reporter wrote that men looking at attractive women on the sidewalk should probably not be considered a hate crime. Adams endured mockery for her efforts.

Federal Employees Stealing Gasoline, Cheating Taxpayers

Posted on by

The fleecing of Americans at the hands of government employees file is getting thicker. What say you after you read the result of this investigation? Anyone else out there reading this have a matter to be investigated?

Fuel fraud: Government employees steal millions from taxpayers at the pump

As a federal employee at Arlington National Cemetery, Bobby Bennett Harris was authorized two fuel cards to maintain vehicles assigned to the nation’s most famous burial site.

But he got caught using those cards to fill up his personal SUV. What tripped him up?

One of the cards that paid for gasoline was assigned to an all-electric vehicle. Oops.

“Yes, that was an obvious sign,” Eric Radwick, special agent for the General Services Administration, deadpanned in an interview with Watchdog.org.

In April, Harris agreed to a plea deal with federal prosecutors in Virginia for theft of government property — two years of supervised probation, nine days of confinement and a $5,000 fine and restitution for the $5,354 he acknowledged stealing by using the gas cards.

Harris’ case may be noteworthy for his blunder, but, unfortunately, it’s hardly unusual.

The Office of the Inspector General at GSA has closed out 260 fleet card cases and recovered more than $2.4 million in federal taxpayer money between 2010 and 2014, but specialists in how to crack down on fraud say the real figure is probably much higher.

“It’s difficult to prove,” Allan Bachman, education manager at the Association of Certified Fraud Examiners, told Watchdog.org. “Unless you look at every little charge and do mileage estimates on every vehicle and how many miles per gallon they get and how many miles per gallon were actually expended, then you’re in deep weeds.”

“I don’t think we can put a definitive number on how bad the problem is,” said Radwick, a member of the Inspector General’s team for 13 years, who said he’s seen the number of fuel fraud cases increase dramatically during that time.

A review of GSA cases by Watchdog.org of government employees accused of misusing fleet cards showed 10 guilty pleas, one military discharge and one arrest in just the past 11 months.

The thefts were as low as $976 and as high as $24,000, involving a range of federal employees that included a VA hospital volunteer, a U.S. Navy recruiter, an Amtrak employee, a contract driver for the Department of Homeland Security and a former inspector with District of Columbia Fire and Emergency Services.

But one fuel fraud case GSA uncovered in 2011 was more than 10 times bigger. That’s when a then-married couple had to pay restitution of nearly $300,000 for using multiple fleet credit cards to fill up non-government vehicles in Hampton, Virginia.

The cards were assigned to Colleen White, who worked at the motor pool at Fort Monroe military installation before it was decommissioned. Lanaire White was sentenced to 84 months of incarceration and three years of supervised release after being convicted in a jury trial of conspiracy, wire fraud, theft and firearms violations.

“Everyone’s got one or two gas card cases in their portfolio,” said Radwick of his IG staff of about 65 agents, including 10 in the Washington, D.C., office. “It’s very steady.”

But it can be hard to crack down on fuel fraud because of the sheer number of cards the federal government has distributed — some 590,000.

“The more cards that are out there, the more opportunities there are to take advantage of those cards,” Bachman said in a phone interview from the ACFE headquarters in Austin, Texas.

The government fleet is huge — more than 650,000 vehicles around the world, driving more than 5 billion miles a year, consuming $400 million in gas and costing $4 billion to maintain. The fleet includes some military vehicles that are leased through the GSA.

Is the job just too big for one agency to track?

“Just by the number of government employees and the vast mission of the federal government, there’s going to be large amounts of everything — computers, cars, what have you,” Radwick said. “With the design of the program, hopefully agencies aren’t paying for cars they don’t need because it’s coming out of an agency’s line-item budget … I know the vehicles that we have, we use ’em all.”

Bachman, who believes the problem is not worse in the federal government than in the private sector, said most companies and agencies use gas card systems because they’re just easier.

“If the purchasing department had to be responsible for handing out cash every time somebody had to get gas, or even taking the vehicle themselves to fill it up or to keep a fuel farm as many places do, that becomes really burdensome,” Bachman said. “It’s much cheaper just to say, ‘Here’s your credit card for gas, it has a limit, say, of $75 a transaction and you can’t use more than four times a month.’ If those kinds of controls are built it, it’s a tremendous advantage.”

The key is to make sure controls are put in place and enforced.

“We’re looking at a lot of data,” Bachman said. “The best thing you can do is sampling — not necessarily watching every transaction, but picking transactions and saying, do these transactions really make sense?”

Radwick has heard a slew of excuses from federal employees who misuse government-issued gas cards. One of the most common? That they simply mistook the government card for their personal credit card.

But GSA recently changed the gas cards to make them more distinctive on the front and back:

Photo from GSA website

 

“Once you put (the card) in the pump it requires you to do stuff that normal credit cards don’t, so that excuse goes out the window,” Radwick said.

“People are creatures of habit,” Bachman said. “An employee who is using the card legitimately, you can pretty much track when that person is going to use their fuel card. So when they use the card outside of that pattern, that raises a potential red flag.”

Online tools and data mining help GSA inspectors track down more cheaters and the agency has made a concerted effort to publicize convictions and guilty pleas.

“When you do catch someone, if you make it very public that you’ve caught someone abusing the procurement card, that they have been dismissed and, depending on the magnitude, possibly even looking into civil or criminal prosecution, that sends a message as well,” Bachman said. “That’s a big deterrent.”

So why do people do it?

“They don’t think they’re going to get caught,” Radwick said. “And a lot of times when they do get caught it’s ‘Yeah, I knew this was coming’ … We very rarely catch someone on their first, second or third time doing it. They’ve been doing it for a little while and they’ve gotten complacent and they think, nobody’s watching this, nobody’s paying attention.”

Radwick said he expected the drop in gasoline prices in the past 10 months would encourage cheaters to back off. But despite the risk, that hasn’t happened.

Despite more arrests, more convictions and more efficient technology in the hands of GSA agents, the problem persists.

“Are we getting more cases? Yes we are,” Radwick said. “Is that because it’s getting worse or are we getting better? I really don’t know.”

“It’s hard to tell if we’re chipping away at it and making real inroads or not,” Bachman said.