Other Industries Using Boeing's Pioneering Methods to Corrupt the Government Agencies That Regulate Them
Boeing's corruption of the FAA and DOD is legendary (at least here). However, wholly different industries use the same methods corrupt Boeing management uses to corrupt the agencies they want to hobble from doing their critical duties.
Last week an article came out in the Washington Post detailing how the Drug Industry uses Boeing's corrupt hiring methods to hire former Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) officials in order to corrupt that agency by subverting its regulation of the industry, just as Boeing has almost totally subverted FAA regulation of Boeing's Quality and Engineering departments as noted on this site.
"The hires came after the DEA launched an aggressive campaign to curb a rising opioid epidemic that has resulted in thousands of overdose deaths each year. In 2005, the DEA began to crack down on companies that were distributing inordinate numbers of pills such as oxycodone to pain-management clinics and pharmacies around the country.
Since then, the pharmaceutical companies and law firms that represent them have hired at least 42 officials from the DEA — 31 of them directly from the division responsible for regulating the industry, according to The Post."
Boeing has long similarly hired many officials from the FAA formerly heading up critical enforcement arms of the agency responsible for independently and impartially making sure Boeing is compliant with relevant FAA regulations.
'The number of hires has prompted some current and former government officials to ask whether the companies raided the division to hire away DEA officials who were architects of the agency’s enforcement campaign or were most responsible for enforcing the laws the firms were accused of violating.
“The number of employees recruited from that division points to a deliberate strategy by the pharmaceutical industry to hire people who are the biggest headaches for them,” said John Carnevale, former director of planning for the White House’s Office of National Drug Control Policy, who now runs a consulting firm.'
This is exactly the reason Boeing hires FAA officials straight from their jobs regulating Boeing, and why they hired Darleen Druyun, a former DOD procurement official that Boeing's CFO promised a quid pro quo Boeing executive job (and her daughter and boyfriend a job) if she gave the Air Force Tanker Program contract to Boeing instead of their competitor. Druyun did 9 months in prison for her corruption and Boeing CFO Sears did 4 months in prison for his role on behalf of Boeing management corruption.
Interestingly, the Druyun affair was ultimately outed by a Boeing employee who reported Boeing's theft of Lockheed competition sensitive U.S. satellite launch services contract proposal documents to Boeing H.R.
Way more interesting is that corrupt Boeing attorney Mark Rabe (unsuprisingly currently accused of destroying evidence by former Boeing contractor Alabama Aircraft Industries) was involved in the investigation that was then launched by the company.
At that time, he apparently did the right thing and his investigation resulted in the firing of the former Lockheed employee who stole the documents from Lockheed and the Boeing manager who had them in his desk and had used them to help Boeing win most of the launch services contract.
That is really surprising, because Mark Rabe was the eminently corrupt Boeing attorney that Doug Bain, Boeing Chief Counsel at the time, assigned to investigate my report I had sent to Bain in 2002 requesting that Boeing investigate and end the Boeing/FAA corruption negating Boeing QA documented within that I had long witnessed.
Of course, noting that Boeing attorneys like Rabe and former Chief Counsel Bain are corrupt is totally redundant. As I have witnessed, Boeing attorneys only exist to enable Boeing to get away with doing the wrong thing--not to ensure compliance with the law.
That's what occurred in the 2002/2003 Boeing investigation of my report. Bain decided to do absolutely nothing to address the fraud I reported in any way. No employees were fired, not even my Boeing QA Supervisor of the time that had harassed me when I did my job and tried to convince me that Boeing inspectors were not supposed to inspect anything at Boeing, and were instead supposed to just buy off the paperwork that stated we did without any inspection and train mechanics. My supervisor was promoted instead by Boeing, probably to ensure he denied my report should I later get it investigated by the relevant government agency or official.
Rabe specialized in white collar criminal defense, so it was no wonder he and Bain protected the felonious Boeing managers that I reported the criminal actions of to them, rather than holding them accountable in any way, and instead ensuring they were promoted to reward them for their corruption.
Even though they covered up the Boeing QA Management corruption I reported to them, they took my report extremely seriously, and as a major threat to the company's lucrative and criminal QA subversion across the enterprise, so much so that both Rabe and Bain hopped on a Boeing corporate jet in 2003 and flew to my Boeing workplace, I assume to ensure my Division management had all of its denials ready in case I went public after they buried my report, which I was threatening to do at the time after I gave them one more chance to do the right thing.
That Chief Counsel Bain and Rabe, the senior Boeing attorney whose investigation of the internal Boeing Lockheed proprietary data theft ultimately led to the outing of the Druyun affair that resulted in the resignation of Boeing CEO Condit and prison sentences for Druyun and Boeing CFO Sears, came to my relatively small Boeing workplace on such a special trip to ensure the covering up of my report was remarkable. It was the equivalent, analogy-wise, of Bill Gates coming to my own house to personally confiscate and destroy my defective copy of Microsoft Windows so I wouldn't be able sue Microsoft to get it fixed.
This proves Boeing has only gotten more corrupt over time, especially with their bribing of key government officials with quid pro quo jobs so they don't do their job in oversight of Boeing, as they continue to do with key FAA and DOD officials, just like the Pharma industry does with the DEA as noted in this article.
"It is not unusual for corporations to hire federal employees directly away from the government..."
'"...the number of hires from one key division shows how an industry can potentially blunt a government agency’s aggressive attempts at enforcement.
The DEA diversion officials who have gone to the industry since 2005 include two executive assistants who managed day-to-day operations; the deputy director of the division; the deputy chief of operations; two chiefs of policy; a deputy chief of policy; the chief of investigations; and two associate chief counsels in charge of legal affairs and enforcement actions against pharmaceutical companies.
“It’s obvious that they targeted the office,” said Joseph T. Rannazzisi, who ran the diversion division for a decade before he was removed from his position and retired in 2015.
Most of the DEA officials went to work for the pharmaceutical industry and law firms within weeks of leaving the agency. Among the 31 DEA diversion employees, 22 began their new jobs within weeks of leaving the DEA.
At least five of the 31 DEA employees were hired by McKesson — the nation’s largest drug distributor and fifth-largest corporation. McKesson has been the subject of two publicly disclosed DEA enforcement actions, which resulted in $163 million in fines after allegations that the firm failed to report hundreds of suspicious orders for millions of pain pills from Internet pharmacies and others.
The Post contacted a dozen former DEA officials who went to work for the drug industry, but few agreed to be interviewed.
Ethics experts said revolving-door issues have been a long-standing concern across the government, with some of the most notable cases coming from the Defense Department.
The ethics experts said the number of officials switching sides at the DEA raises serious questions about whether the ability of the diversion division to carry out its mission has been compromised by the pharmaceutical industry.
“The findings that so many DEA officials have switched from their roles preventing, detecting and investigating illegal drug use to working for those involved in the supply chain is disturbing,” said Scott H. Amey, general counsel for the Project on Government Oversight, a watchdog group in Washington. “It’s also another reminder of how well the revolving door is greased and how the revolving door can negatively impact government operations. It’s not a surprise that DEA isn’t as vigilant as it once was when so many ex-feds are working for the companies that they once investigated.”
The DEA has pursued cases against some of the largest opioid distributors in the country, including McKesson, Cardinal Health and AmerisourceBergen, as well as CVS and Walgreens, which distribute opioids to their own pharmacies. In general, the companies did not admit wrongdoing and said they were taking steps to address illegal diversion.
In 2008, McKesson settled one of those cases, paying a $13 million fine without admitting liability. That same year, the DEA filed a case against Cardinal. That company also settled, paying a $34 million fine.
The DEA’s initiative was sharply curtailed in the face of pressure from the pharmaceutical industry beginning in 2013, according to a Post investigation published in October. In fiscal 2011, civil case filings against distributors, manufacturers, pharmacies and doctors had reached 131. By 2014, they had fallen to 40.
The slowdown came after DEA lawyers began to require a higher standard of proof before cases could move forward. Supervisors in the field said they were frustrated that their cases were being stalled at DEA headquarters. Top DEA and Justice Department officials have declined to discuss the reasons behind the slowdown.
Government ethics experts said regulators often join the industries they oversee, lured by substantially higher salaries.
“That high rate of turnover makes you really wonder whether those officials were acting in the interests of the DEA rather than the companies they were regulating,” said Craig Holman, an expert on revolving-door issues for Public Citizen, a government watchdog group in Washington. “Just by seeing your colleagues going that way, that tells you that you can shape your future employment prospects if you behave accordingly.”
Once senior employees leave for jobs in the industry, ethics experts said they can exploit weaknesses they are aware of within the DEA.'
So there you have it. Proof that other major U.S. industries are following the exact template that Boeing has long used to corrupt/end unbiased FAA and DOD regulation of itself, with deadly results.
Please do everything you can to end this deadly Boeing fraud. Write your Representative and Senators and ask at least for a Congressional investigation of the Boeing/FAA corruption documented on this site. Boeing has steadfastly continued and expanded this fraud, at least since 2002 when I reported it directly to former Boeing Chief Counsel Bain.
Boeing's current Chief Counsel, Michael Luttig, has carried on with Bain's past support of this fraud by Boeing. In my liberal informed opinion, Luttig is actually a step down from the as noted corporate crime abetting Bain. He's never met a fascist he didn't like, being a conservative so extreme he is on the right wing nutjob fringe. An oligarchy supporter, no wonder he is on the Board of Directors of the most corrupt and arrogant large company on the planet.
Please write your representative, even if my liberalism offends you. The lives you save by doing so may be your own and/or of someone you love.
This quote is from a letter I wrote to Boeing's chief corporate counsel (a member of the Boeing Board of Directors, I believe) in October 2002 after the FAA performed an intentionally very limited and Boeing corruption friendly non-investigation of my report that I received the intentionally minimal results of in August 2002. My next steps to get reform at Boeing were limited at that point, and all but the most unlikely one--appealing to FAA headquarters again for a reinvestigation of my report after noting my well founded suspicions of corruption in the TAD that resulted in the intentionally very limited "investigation" of my report--required me to go public with Boeing and the FAA's corruption, a step I did not want to take as I did not want to take that step except as a last resort because I wanted to get reform in Boeing's quality system with the least damage to Boeing's reputation possible. I would have went public in heartbeat if it meant only that Boeing's corrupt QA management would suffer the consequences of such bad publicity and be replaced, but I knew that mostly innocent hourly employees like I was would also suffer consequences if I had to resort to getting the public to protect themselves from the corruption in Boeing Quality Assurance management, and it was the non-management employees that were already suffering layoffs at that point. I resolved to take a different route--to contact Boeing Headquarters management in blind faith that they were not involved in the corruption in their lower management ranks at BCA. I attempted to use a potential lawsuit and going public--the two other major routes I could take at that time--as leverage in case Boeing Headquarters management did not want to act to stop the corruption just because it was the ethical and lawful thing to do, and needed additional motivation to act in the public and military personnel safety interests.
In response to my letter, Boeing's chief counsel assigned the same attorney that had investigated the Boeing theft of competition sensitive data from its chief competitor on the EELV program competition. I had to help this attorney convert the reports I had forwarded to Boeing's chief counsel that I had submitted to the Boeing corruption biased FAA to a format the attorney's computer software would open. After several weeks, Boeing Headquarters decided to hide behind the FAA's non-investigation of virtually all the items in my report--chief among them the Boeing QA management corruption that engendered almost all of the other noncompliances documented in my report. It was at that point that I knew the corruption did not stop in the QA management ranks--it extended all the way into the Boardroom of Boeing Corporate Headquarters itself. And so it is to this day. CEOs and other positions on the Boeing Board change faces, but key personel on the Board refuse to act to stop this law breaking and defrauding of Boeing's commercial and military customers via the Product Subtitution that Boeing performs when it condones rollerstamping by not acting to stop it and/or by pretending it does not exist for Boeing's bottom line's sake. As noted in the home page, Boeing's chief counsel was so convinced of the truth of my allegations and the consequences for the company if this matter became public and gained media traction that he "hopped" a corporate jet to fly from Boeing Headquarters in Chicago to fly to BCA headquarters in Washington to personally handle this matter himself. If he knew that my allegations were not true, he simply would have ignored them, instead. It is this collusion between "working together" corrupt Boeing and FAA management that prevented Boeing from acting in a lawful and caring manner for the safety of the public in response to my letter quoted below that I am trying to end by getting the OIG to restore real and effective oversight of Boeing by reform of the FAA TAD that currently suckles from and mimics Boeing's corruption. Once that is done, the corrupt management at Boeing will have no agency to hide their corruption behind as they currently do in the TAD:
October 13, 2002
Senior Vice President and General Counsel
The Boeing Company
Boeing World Headquarters
100 N. Riverside
Chicago, IL 60606-1596
312-544-2800Re: FAA File Number 2002NM420013, Certificate Management Office Special Evaluation—Boeing Propulsion Systems Division, Everett Division, and Renton Division.
Dear Mr. (Name),
My name is Gerald Eastman, a Precision Assembly Inspector at BCAG, and although you likely have no idea who I am, there may be a slim chance that (Name), BCAG Vice President and Assistant General Counsel, or someone else in her office may know of me and/or the matter of which I write. That would likely only be the case if Quality Assurance Management at the Propulsion Systems Division (PSD) of BCAG had contacted Boeing Legal regarding their possible suspicions of who had reported their corrupt activities to the local FAA MIDO office, and had named me, accurately, fingering who was to "blame" for that report. However, it is quite possible neither you or anyone in Boeing Legal know who I am or of my report because PSD had chosen not to advertise their likely suspicions for some reason known only to them, or perhaps even because, however unlikely, they never figured out who had submitted the report. In that doubtful latter possibility, they may have been befuddled because, even though in my report I requested the FAA not to protect my identity if it would impede their investigation in any way, it appears that they may have intentionally ignored that request in order, not to protect me, but to use such "protection" of my identity as a convenient excuse in order to not investigate the corruption detailed in my report.
And that is one reason why I am writing to you now. I had submitted the report to the MIDO office in two parts, on January 28th and May 31st of this year, detailing the rampant corruption that is ongoing within the Quality Assurance Management ranks at BCAG that is decimating even the minimally required levels of effectiveness of our FAA required Quality System purposely. QA Managers, in a misguided attempt to create "value" for the Company, please their managers (and Manufacturing) to retain their jobs, and/or attempting to pad their pocketbooks with hefty future merit bonuses, are not ensuring their inspectors do their essential safety related jobs to assure the quality of the airplanes we build, but instead are doing exactly the opposite—ensuring they do not, and/or cannot do their inspection jobs lest the costs of documentation and rework of valid defects detract from the current quarter’s bottom line. How do they do this? Mostly by doing nothing, letting the "Quality Assurance Organization airplane" remain pilotless and withholding any kind of maintenance due to their intentional absence and neglect, allowing that essential "vehicle" to the safety and quality of our aerospace products to "fall out of the sky," thereby disabling it so it will not get in Manufacturing’s way of delivering products "under cost" and "on schedule," or as (name), former fellow inspector liked to put it—allowing Manufacturing to "push more garbage out the door," without the "luxury" of inspectors performing their jobs. By doing this, they achieve their long held ultimate goal—manufacturing self-acceptance in A&I areas of our factories—years earlier, and without the required FAA approval that they fear may never come (due to the FAA’s certain knowledge of just how intentionally ineffective our Quality System is) in time to meet their "value creation" goals.
The vast majority of inspectors know there is effectively no one "at the wheel" of our Quality System, and know they can do their jobs (or, more accurately, not do their jobs) any way they want to without fear of reprisal. Soon they learn they do not have to do their jobs at all, and many succumb to becoming what their management wants them to be—anything but inspectors doing the job of inspecting. Many like the freedom of surfing the internet and/or "shooting the breeze" all day with fellow workers their coveted "welfare inspection jobs" allow them to do. The only real "work" they have to do is to get up occasionally to stamp the inspections on the paperwork off. The only things they know will bring the wrath of their corrupt management down upon them is if the paperwork does not look like they actually did the inspections (stamps missing, etc.), or if they attempt to divert from their status of "inspectors on welfare" and begin to actually inspect the airplanes we build. However, not all inspectors—especially the ones like me—want to go that route intentionally made so easy for us. We know the importance of our jobs to countless people’s lives, and the future of this Company’s predominance in the commercial aircraft industry. We do not follow the path intended for us by our corrupt management, and instead work to "pull up" the essential "Quality Assurance Organization airplane" to save it, peoples lives protected by it, and BCAG, from destruction by actually doing our jobs of inspection per plan, procedures and engineering requirements. This is where QA Management’s plans to facilitate Manufacturing’s unimpeded pursuit of their cost and schedule targets by not doing our jobs goes awry, and where they must actively pursue their corrupt goals, by "getting their hands dirty." This involves active misinformation to line inspectors to make them believe their jobs are to do anything but actually inspecting mechanic’s work, transferring them into office "make work" jobs to make sure they cannot document defects on the airplane in order to cut costs by letting those defects deliver to customers, and transferring them completely out of the factory setting if they persist in attempting to do their jobs of inspection. I know. All of that, and more, has happened to me only because I persisted in my attempts to do my job despite such corrupt QA Management trying to convince me otherwise. Am I alone in being treated this way for only attempting to do my job? No--not by far. Many other inspectors who similarly attempted to do their jobs for ethical reasons have been also thusly treated.
Many ethical inspectors trying to do their jobs continue to labor in our corrupted Quality System, slightly or fully ignorant to the above facts. They don’t know fully why their jobs become exponentially more difficult and abusive the more they try to do their jobs, and why they receive only negative attention from shop and their management for trying to do their real jobs well. I was "in the dark" for a long time similarly, not fully understanding why doing my job well only seemed to cause me grief. However, looking back, I had known why everything was as it was, but had not wanted to consciously face that "unthinkable" truth. Thankfully, (name), my former QA Supervisor, put me in a room and "faced me with the facts." That 1/11 meeting, for me, had as profound an effect on me as 9/11 has had upon our nation. I have been "fully enlightened" to the true nature of our Quality System since then, and that pivotal meeting finally "got me off the fence" into my present somewhat quixotic (thus far) endeavor to single-handedly attempt to reform the corrupt BCAG Quality System.
The Last Inspector