Perhaps the Oscar Wyatt case is another selective prosecution?
In a surprise move, Texas wildcatter Oscar S. Wyatt reached a plea deal with the Justice Department and pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to commit wire fraud on Oct. 1.
Maverick Houston oil and gas tycoon Oscar S. Wyatt was on trial for wire fraud and prohibited transactions. It is alleged that he paid bribes to the Iraqi government to obtain coupons that would allow him to buy oil through the UN-sanctioned “Oil for Food Programme.” Ben Berry, head of the FBI’s white-collar crime unit, said Wyatt was also guilty of “terrorist financing” because he violated a Bush order barring such dealings with Iraq.
Wyatt, 83, explained his decision to take a plea deal by saying that at his age he couldn’t “waste any more time messing with this operation.” He will serve between 18 and 24 months and pay an $11 million fine.
Some others have been instructed to pay bribes to Iraq, and there is no way of knowing whether Wyatt is innocent or guilty. It appears that the US did not object to people buying oil under the Oil for Food program until 2002, when some went to Syria. That year, Saddam began demanding bribes for vouchers in 2000. Some American companies refused to pay, but others continued to do business with him. There is a 2004 CIA report on these operators that is 918 pages long, but the names of companies and individuals have been redacted. It is estimated that Saddam may have made $10 in illegal profits and that Wyatt may have amassed just under $4 million for $23 million in profits over 7 years.
Few Americans were dictated; although various sources identified many American individuals and companies involved. The neoconservatives, eager to discredit the UN, obtained a report from Paul Volcker showing that many corporate interests were involved. Chevron, which had named a tanker truck for former employee Condi Rice, was named, along with Mobil Exxon. Marc Rich, whose pardoning of Bill Clinton was repeatedly denounced by conservatives, was also named but not charged.
What’s interesting is the manner and intensity with which the Justice Department went after Wyatt. The impeachment made Wyatt’s patriotism the problem. His lawyers are trying to exclude from the evidence the diary of an employee of the Iraqi State Petroleum Marketing Organization. He claims that Wyatt bragged on January 27, 2003, while in Iraq, that he had persuaded a US senator to speak against the proposed invasion. Reuters claimed the senator was Edward Kennedy. The newspaper also said that Wyatt warned of a US invasion and estimated the type of US forces the Iraqis were likely to face.
The government does not claim that he told them anything classified. An intelligent reader would assume that Wyatt wanted Saddam to back off so the oil would keep flowing. He was probably trying to prevent the war that the Bushies were determined to launch.
The prosecution insists on making him look like a traitor. His lawyers say this information will hurt the jury, but admit that Wyatt was not a fan of George W. Bush. They add that he flew bombing missions in World War II. The reactionary columnist helped on the government’s case, writing that Wyatt is “lucky he’s not charged with treason.”
Apparently, Wyatt’s communications had been monitored since 2001. His former business partner, David Chalmers, was also included. Chalmers has been described as a big Republican donor, but the fact is that he gave more to Democrats. Since 1989, he and his wife have donated more than $500,000 to Democrats. Wyatt has angered the Bushes because he disputed the elder Bush’s claims of rising in the oil industry from humble beginnings. In 1990, he and John Connally again incurred the ire of the Bushes when they negotiated the release of 22 oil workers held by Saddam Hussein as “human hostages.” Mrs. Bush denounced him in her autobiography for putting “profit above honor.” He has often been a thorn in the side of big Texas energy interests, most recently leading a shareholder revolt against El Paso Corp., which had acquired his Coastal Corp.
It has been said that the touch and carefree Wyatt is not even afraid of the devil. He will need every ounce of courage to face up to two years in federal prison at his advanced age.
Some may conclude that it is not wise to make large donations to the Democratic Party. There is growing evidence that the Justice Department may be engaging in politically selective trials. In Mississippi, Paul Minor was sent to prison for donating to a state supreme court judge’s campaign even though Mississippi law appears to open the door to contributions from lawyers and businesses. In Wisconsin, Georgia Thompson went to jail for awarding a contract to the lowest bidder. Fortunately, an appeals court reversed her conviction. In Alabama, Democratic former Governor Don Siegelman was sent to prison for appointing a taxpayer to a state board. In this case, there is convincing evidence that the charges were made for political purposes.