Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
Pentagon anti-fraud agency fakes own documents, internal report says
By Larry Margasak, Associated Press, 6/5/2001 15:36
WASHINGTON (AP) The Pentagon agency charged with exposing fraud destroyed documents and replaced them with fakes to avoid embarrassment when its own operations were audited, an internal inquiry found. The incident last year cost the government thousands of dollars and ''could adversely affect the confidence of the public'' in Defense Department audits, says the report obtained by The Associated Press.
The records destruction occurred as the Pentagon inspector general's work was about to be reviewed by Internal Revenue Service auditors part of a routine program where one U.S. inspector general checks the work of another.
The unsuspecting IRS reviewers found ''no problems'' with the Pentagon's audit work after poring over the phony documents, the internal report said. The document destruction was substantiated in the report, written by an inspector general's employee assigned to investigate her own agency.
''It's a very sad day indeed when the watchdog gets caught cheating,'' Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, wrote Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld in demanding to know more about the incident. The inspector general's office and the Defense Department public affairs office declined to comment on the incident.
Grassley, chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, began investigating the destruction recently after a Pentagon whistleblower brought it to his attention. While the inspector general is supposed to root out government fraud and waste, the report said the 983 hours spent creating the fake documents cost taxpayers $63,000.
''As soon as we became aware of the allegation and findings, we immediately withdrew our previous opinion,'' said David C. Williams, the inspector general for the IRS. As a result, Pentagon audits must include a disclaimer that the work fails to meet established audit standards.
The IRS auditors had selected eight Defense Department audits for review, and senior Pentagon auditors realized that working papers for one of them a 1988 audit report would never get a passing grade, the report said.
''Instead of submitting it and suffering the consequences, a decision was made to destroy all the original work papers and to re-create an entirely new set,'' Grassley wrote Rumsfeld. He said 12 to 15 officials in the Defense Department inspector general's office were involved, including senior auditors.
The Pentagon report concluded, ''The backdating of the re-created working papers misled the ... review team to believe the ... papers were ... done at the time of the audit.''
Grassley and the internal report said the official who prepared the originals was directed to sign the fake papers even though that auditor did not create the substitutes. ''At some point, the majority of original working papers were destroyed,'' the report said.
The President's Council on Integrity and Efficiency, an organization of federal inspectors general, is investigating the incident so far, only looking at potential changes in audit procedures.
The incident ''has some negative repercussions to the image'' of inspectors general, said Gaston Gianni Jr., vice chairman of the council and the inspector general at the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. Grassley said he's not satisfied with the internal Pentagon review.
He wrote Rumsfeld it ''may have been unwise'' for the Pentagon's deputy inspector general, Robert Lieberman, to have one of his senior deputies conduct the internal investigation and then conclude that Lieberman was not implicated.
The senator also said that disciplinary actions were under consideration only for lower-ranking auditors and their immediate supervisors, but not senior officials.
The article doesnt state when this happened was it recent or back during x42's admin?
Great. Just great.
A better URL.
Being that it was a 1988 audit report, and being that Gasserly was leading the investigation, and being that generating a report based on the fraudulent documents would probably take more than a handful of months, and being that an investigation into such a claim would probably take more than a handful of months, I think it is safe to assume this was under the last administration.
But the real smoking gun that it was the last administration is that the article does not say when it happened.
Thanks for your link we have this gem...
The incident last year cost the government thousands of dollars and ''could adversely affect the confidence of the public'' in Defense Department audits, says the report obtained by The Associated Press.
Clinton's damn Clinton!!!!
Look at the link in post # 4...its in there.....last year it happened.
Thanks I could not get the url to come up on my web tv
I'm just another Gov't slave.... Rip me off I deserve it oh high and mighty masters
From the #4 link:
The incident last year cost the government thousands of dollars and ''could adversely affect the confidence of the public'' in Defense Department audits, says the report obtained by The Associated Press.
"Clean up! Another Clinton mess in aisle 5..."
Close bold...sorry about the duplicate.
Here's another Clinton administration mess left for President Bush to clean up: Court Rules Against US Transportation Dept.
BOLD BE GONE!
I used to work for the Directorate at the DoD Inspector General where this occurred, and know most, if not all of the players involved in this episode.
I can assure you all that this is nothing more than typical bureaucratic laziness and poor managment, which is commonplace at this organization. Someone merely did a poor job of documenting their work, and the SES and GS-15s who run the outfit decided to dummy up new workpapers, rather than face the music for not complying with federal auditing standards.
I'm sure that all those involved will either a) be promoted or b) be allowed to retire early with a nice buyout package.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
[
Top
|
Latest Posts
|
Latest Articles
|
Self Search
|
Add Bookmark
|
Post
|
Abuse
|
Help!
]
FreeRepublic , LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 Forum Version 2.0a Copyright © 1999 Free Republic, LLC |