• Inhofe won’t meet with McGurk

    June 8, 2012

    Tags: , , , ,
    Posted in: Embassy/State, Iraq

    USA Today reports on the latest twists and turns in the McGurk saga:

    An aide to Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla, the second-ranking GOP member on the Senate Armed Services committee, said that the senator was concerned about the sexytime e-mails and a separate unsubstantiated allegation of inappropriate behavior by McGurk in Baghdad. The senator has decided to put off considering McGurk’s nomination and canceled a meeting with the nominee after learning of the e-mails. “Until those issues are cleared up, he will not meet with Mr. McGurk,” said an Inhofe spokesman.

    The Washington Free Beacon reports “One source on Capitol Hill with knowledge of the nomination confirmed that the State Department had acknowledged the emails came from their system.”

    As for Ms. Chon, the object of McGurk’s email affections, the Wall Street Journal says that “Ms. Chon, currently a reporter in Money & Investing, asked for a formal leave of absence from The Wall Street Journal in March when it appeared her then-fiancé might be nominated as ambassador to Iraq. The request was granted at the time, and the leave is scheduled to begin later this summer.” That seems to confirm that McGurk divorced his wife, to whom he was married whilst romancing Chon, and is now married to Chon.

    The Journal apparently did not find reason to comment on whether it condoned its reporters being romantically involved with their sources, even as it back-backhandedly confirmed that its reporter was romantically involved with her source.

    Senator McCain has previously taken issue with McGurk, because of failed negotiations with the Iraqis last year to keep residual US forces in the country beyond 2011. McGurk led those negotiations. McCain and others had also questioned whether McGurk, who unlike his post-Saddam era predecessors has never held a previous ambassadorship, was ready for the job of running the world’s largest embassy.

    And just to sweeten the deal, the Iraqi National Accord, the most prominent opposition bloc in Iraq’s parliament, has earlier written to Congress to oppose his nomination and say he was too close to Shiite politicians. The group has since backed off a notch, saying they’ll work with whoever the US sends to Baghdad ’cause they kind of have to, but it does set the wrong tone.


    Readers of my book, We Meant Well, will remember an incident where an innocent romantic email from a male State Department contractor to a female soldier kicked off a major incident that ended up with the contractor being swiftly fired for misuse of the official email system for personal use. If McGurk is allowed to end up as ambassador, that would be only the latest in a long series of double standards of conduct at the State Department.

    The rule at Foggy Bottom is the higher the rank, the less the spank when it comes to naughtiness. That is not to imply, of course, that McGurk is into bondage and discipline play…



    Related Articles:




    Copyright © 2020. All rights reserved. The views expressed here are solely those of the author(s) in their private capacity.

    • Recent Comments

    • Jhoover said...

      1

      To all who don’t know McGurk in Baghdad, he wrote:

      IN JANUARY OF THIS year, I left a comfortable practice in Washington for Baghdad, to work for the General Counsel to the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA). I left my own office, with a view of the White House’s South Lawn, where I could watch the Presidents helicopter launch and land. I left my own apartment, with more than enough space, and a big bed, near restaurants and people teeming about. And I left my friends and loved ones, whom I would miss dearly.

      Baghdad was very different. I worked in a small office, in a former palace of Saddam Hussein, with a small window, shared by eight lawyers and three translators. I slept in a small trailer, in a small bed, with spotty electricity and running water. I had a roommate, who was also my boss. There were no restaurants to speak of. People teemed about, but most were armed, or in uniform, and their daily commute was by armored column, not subway car. I made close friends, but still missed home. And I could not leave a foursquare mile area without body armor, helmet, and at least two heavily armed guards.

      This guy “worked in a small office, in a former palace of Saddam Hussein” where he had Arabian Nieghts on the roof of the palace of Saddam, use to be having an web/link to his titled link A Lawyer in Baghdad, on early years of invasion of Iraq and he written, where international law was lived, breathed, and debated, with real world consequences, twenty-four hours a day. Attorneys in Baghdadthe legality of invasion of Iraq,

      So he “left my friends and loved ones” working24/7 environment, wonder from where extra time this spooky guy had spare for his sexytime ?

      Let read this genius lawyer what he wrote:
      http://www.greenbag.org/McGurk.pdf (Not exists Any More!)

      In sum, to those who say international law does not exist, or who say the occupation of Iraq was somehow extra-legal, I invite them to scrutinize the legal work of my former o?ce, where international law was lived, breathed, and debated, with real world consequences, twenty-four hours a day. Attorneys in Baghdad worked within a complicated web of international authorities, and were among the ?rst to gain practical experience operating within the framework of traditional occupation law a framework that had existed largely as a debating point, never voluntarily implemented by an occupying authority. The limitations and defects of that framework became readily apparent to many of us. For where the purpose of an occupation is enabling and transformative, a legal framework that e? actively locks-in the laws and institutions of a repressive, ousted regime does not make sense, nor does much good, for anyone. The international community, therefore, should consider updating the Hague Regulations and the Geneva Convention, to re?ect the realities of modern military interventions, and to permit fundamental change where transformation (from dictatorship to elections, for example) is a desirable international objective.

      06/8/12 8:37 PM | Comment Link

    • Jhoover said...

      2

      To all who don’t know McGurk in Baghdad, he wrote:

      IN JANUARY OF THIS year, I left a comfortable practice in Washington for Baghdad, to work for the General Counsel to the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA). I left my own office, with a view of the White House’s South Lawn, where I could watch the Presidents helicopter launch and land. I left my own apartment, with more than enough space, and a big bed, near restaurants and people teeming about. And I left my friends and loved ones, whom I would miss dearly.

      Baghdad was very different. I worked in a small office, in a former palace of Saddam Hussein, with a small window, shared by eight lawyers and three translators. I slept in a small trailer, in a small bed, with spotty electricity and running water. I had a roommate, who was also my boss. There were no restaurants to speak of. People teemed about, but most were armed, or in uniform, and their daily commute was by armored column, not subway car. I made close friends, but still missed home. And I could not leave a foursquare mile area without body armor, helmet, and at least two heavily armed guards.

      this guy use to be having an web/link to his titled link A Lawyer in Baghdad, on early years of invasion of Iraq and he written,” where international law was lived, breathed, and debated, with real world consequences, twenty-four hours a day. Attorneys in Baghdad”the legality of invasion of Iraq,

      so 24/7 working environment, wonder from where extra time this spooky guy had spare for his sexytime ?

      This “genius” lawyer wrote at that time let read:
      “http://www.greenbag.org/McGurk.pdf” (Not exists Any More!)

      In sum, to those who say international law does not exist, or who say the occupation of Iraq was somehow extra-legal, I invite them to scrutinize the legal work of my former office, where international law was lived, breathed, and debated, with real world consequences, twenty-four hours a day. Attorneys in Baghdad worked within a complicated web of international authorities, and were among the first to gain practical experience operating within the framework of traditional occupation law – a framework that had existed largely as a debating point, never voluntarily implemented by an
      occupying authority. The limitations and defects of that framework became readily apparent to many of us. For where the purpose of an occupation is enabling and transformative, a legal framework that eff actively locks-in the laws and institutions of a repressive, ousted regime does not make sense, nor does much good, for anyone. The international community, therefore, should consider updating the Hague Regulations and the Geneva Convention, to reflect the realities of modern military interventions, and to permit fundamental change where transformation (from dictatorship to elections, for example) is a desirable international objective.

      06/8/12 8:38 PM | Comment Link

    • Jhoover said...

      3

      To all who don’t know McGurk in Baghdad, he wrote:

      IN JANUARY OF THIS year, I left a comfortable practice in Washington for Baghdad, to work for the General Counsel to the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA). I left my own office, with a view of the White House’s South Lawn, where I could watch the Presidents helicopter launch and land. I left my own apartment, with more than enough space, and a big bed, near restaurants and people teeming about. And I left my friends and loved ones, whom I would miss dearly.

      Baghdad was very different. I worked in a small office, in a former palace of Saddam Hussein, with a small window, shared by eight lawyers and three translators. I slept in a small trailer, in a small bed, with spotty electricity and running water. I had a roommate, who was also my boss. There were no restaurants to speak of. People teemed about, but most were armed, or in uniform, and their daily commute was by armored column, not subway car. I made close friends, but still missed home. And I could not leave a foursquare mile area without body armor, helmet, and at least two heavily armed guards.

      this guy “worked in a small office, in a former palace of Saddam Hussein” where he had Arabian Nieghts on the roof of the palace of Saddam, use to be having an web/link to his titled link A Lawyer in Baghdad, on early years of invasion of Iraq and he written, where international law was lived, breathed, and debated, with real world consequences, twenty-four hours a day. Attorneys in Baghdadthe legality of invasion of Iraq,

      so he “left my friends and loved ones” working24/7 environment, wonder from where extra time this spooky guy had spare for his sexytime ?

      This genius lawyer wrote at that time let read:
      http://www.greenbag.org/McGurk.pdf (Not exists Any More!)

      In sum, to those who say international law does not exist, or who say the occupation of Iraq was somehow extra-legal, I invite them to scrutinize the legal work of my former o?ce, where international law was lived, breathed, and debated, with real world consequences, twenty-four hours a day. Attorneys in Baghdad worked within a complicated web of international authorities, and were among the ?rst to gain practical experience operating within the framework of traditional occupation law a framework that had existed largely as a debating point, never voluntarily implemented by an occupying authority. The limitations and defects of that framework became readily apparent to many of us. For where the purpose of an occupation is enabling and transformative, a legal framework that e? actively locks-in the laws and institutions of a repressive, ousted regime does not make sense, nor does much good, for anyone. The international community, therefore, should consider updating the Hague Regulations and the Geneva Convention, to re?ect the realities of modern military interventions, and to permit fundamental change where transformation (from dictatorship to elections, for example) is a desirable international objective.

      06/8/12 8:39 PM | Comment Link

    • Meloveconsullongtime said...

      4

      “The rule at Foggy Bottom is the higher the rank, the less the spank when it comes to naughtiness.”

      That would explain why a former Consul General in Russia has been getting away with colluding with a Russian honeypot to commit international child kidnapping. But it looks like that situation won’t last much longer.

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c-E4eatxUAk

      06/9/12 4:10 AM | Comment Link

    • Rich Bauer said...

      5

      At least he made an honest woman out of her:

      “State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland would not comment on the emails but noted that “they are out there for everyone to see” and that the reporter “subsequently became his wife.”

      If BM had married his rooftop partner, then that would be okay too?

      06/9/12 10:50 AM | Comment Link

    • White House wants Iraq crisis resolved before Nov. elections? (C.I.) | thecommonillsbackup said...

      6

      […] credibility to be an ambassador. Let’s talk about John McCain’s objections. Let’s talk about Inoufe’s objections. Let’s talk about all those issues, and whether they add up to someone who deserves to be an […]

      06/18/12 1:21 PM | Comment Link

    Leave A Comment

    Mail (will not be published) (required)