EXPOSING LEAHY’S LEGACY OF LIES: Week of Nov. 4
EXPOSING LEAHY’S LEGACY OF LIES — Part 2
SPEAKING TRUTH TO POWER
Quotations from the Air Force’s official records of the F-35 Burlington Basing Selection Process
Introductory Statement:
“We are here to read to you a quotation from the Air Force official administrative record of the F-35 Burlington basing selection process and to get your response to it.”
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Concluding Statement:
“We request that Senator Leahy initiate an independent investigation into the political corruption of the F-35 Burlington basing selection process.”
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Day 15, Monday, November 4, 2019
The Air Force Administrative Record shows over 50 examples of Senator Leahy and his staff’s interference in the F-35 Burlington basing selection process. Here are some of the phrases that mention his interference. They come directly from the official Air Force record regarding basing the F-35 in Burlington. Here is the third group of quotations out of 54 citations about Leahy’s interference:
- “Will Goodman, MLA for Sen Leahy, called me today and asked that I share a concern from Sen Leahy…
- “Sen Leahy will bring this up in his telecon with SECAF {Secretary of the Air Force} on 25 Oct…
- “Senator Leahy has requested a follow up…
- “Leahy was asking LL for dates…
- “Notes from today’s phone conversation between Senator Leahy and General Welsh…
- “Gen Welsh promised he would keep the TAG {The Adjutant General} and Sen Leahy’s staff informed of each step…
- “There is a strong speculation that the ANG is the leak to Sen Leahy’s office…
- “In response to a Sen Leahy inquiry…
- “once it was realized that the slides had been released to Sen. Leahy…
- “Considering all the issues we have had with Senator Leahy’s staff here in FMBL…
- “You may want to call Senator Leahy’s office direct…
- “The Secretary has been briefed now 3 times on the issues and I firmly believe he knows exactly what he wants/needs to say today to Sen Leahy…
Day 16: Tuesday, November 5, 2019
The Air Force Administrative Record shows over 50 examples of Senator Leahy and his staff’s interference in the F-35 Burlington basing selection process. Here are some of the phrases that mention his interference. They come directly from the official Air Force record regarding basing the F-35 in Burlington. Here is the last group of quotations out of 54 citations about Leahy’s interference:
- “Looks like Sen Leahy has a question regarding the number of comments received from the folks in the Burlington area…
- “I wanted to be sure that you received Senator Leahy’s response…
- “Air Force Congressional Contact Report: Hill contacts:Will Goodman (MLA Sen Leahy, D-VT)..
- “Sen Leahy’s office called this meeting to address concerns with the F-35 and KC-46 candidate scoresheet discrepancies…
- “SAF IEI met with Sen Leahy’s office…
- “VT CODEL (Sen Leahy/Sen Sanders/Rep Welch) Staffer visit to discuss F-35/KC-46 Environmental scoring discrepancy on Candidate scoresheets— Led by Sen Leahy’s staff (Will Goodman)…
- “Apparently someone from Leahy’s office made this comment…
- “Sen. Leahy’s office is concerned and pushing all the buttons they can to find out what is going on…
- “Mr. Germanos received a call from Sen Leahy’s office directly…
- “Sen Leahy’s office reviewed the comments in the updated EIS…
- “I need to respond to Sen Leahy’s office ASAP…
- “Sen Leahy’s office dialed in direct to Mr Germanos yesterday evening…
- From the email that Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Installations, Logistics and the Environment, Kathleen Ferguson, sent to the Chief of Staff of the Air Force, General Welsh, and another senior executive at Headquarters Air Force, Timothy Bridges: “Sen Leahy’s staff called direct to Mr Germanos at ACC yesterday afternoon to discuss the matter…
- “Sen. Leahy’s staffer inquiry is a complicating factor…
- “Sen Leahy’s office called ACC AO {Air Combat Command Action Officer} direct yesterday…
Day 17: Wednesday, November 6, 2019
Early in 2013, the Vermont Air National Guard prepared a paper titled “Command Messages F35A” to be used by Vermont Guard officials in responding to questions from the press about the F-35 basing. In this document, which was never intended to be made public, they provided guidance on how Guard officials should respond to F-35 questions. They listed three types of questions the press might ask: 1) “Questions We Know We’ll Get” 2) “Questions We Hope We’ll Get” and 3) “Questions We Hope We Don’t Get”. One of the questions they hoped not to be asked dealt with nuclear weapons. Another question had to do with Senator Leahy’s involvement. They were concerned about having to answer this question since Senator Leahy had improperly interfered, and had his staff intervene repeatedly in the F-35 Burlington basing process. The Air Force records show dozens of examples of this interference.
“Command Messages F35A: — “Questions We Hope We Don’t Get:
3) Do you know of any improprieties that Senator Leahy had his hands in that would have affected basing decisions in Vermont’s favor?” (Admin Record #58254)
Day 18: Thursday, November 7, 2019
Throughout the basing selection process, Senator Leahy and his staff repeatedly contacted Air Force officials pushing them to select Burlington. This entry from October 19, 2012 shows Air Force officials from the Secretary of the Air Force office and from the Air Force Chief of Staff office discussing Leahy’s efforts to convince the Air Force that the Vermont delegation is fully supportive of the F-35 basing. Leahy also provides incorrect information to the Air Force (and minimizes Vermonters) by referring to those opposed to the basing as a vocal minority. In fact, the majority of those who sent in comments to the Air Force were opposed to the basing, as were the majority of citizens in both Winooski and Burlington who voted to oppose the F-35 basing in Vermont.
“Sen Leahy is concerned that the AF may think VT is not in favor of the F-35 being based in VT. However, that is not the feeling of the delegation.” (Admin Record #55514)
“Will Goodman, MLA [military legislative assistant] for Sen Leahy, called me today and asked that I share a concern from Sen Leahy. There is a vocal group in VT who is not in favor of basing the F-35 in Burlington, however, this view is not shared with the VT delegation. On the contrary, the VT delegation is strongly supportive of basing the F-35 in Burlington. Sen Leahy will bring this up in his telecon with SECAF [Secretary of the Air Force] on 25 Oct and I told Will that I would pass this onto the CSAF [Chief of Staff Air Force] as well. He understands the basing process and Burlington will be scored, however they’re scored, but he is concerned about the perception this vocal minority might have on strategic Air Force decisions.” (Admin Record #55544)
Day 19: Friday, November 8, 2019
In order to rank installations for aircraft basings, the Air Force scores them on a list of factors, one of which is related to “encroachment” meaning, the number of houses in the noise zone. In this entry, the Air Force acknowledges that Burlington received a falsely high score on encroachment because the score was based on incorrect information they received from the Vermont Air National Guard. A few years later, Burlington was being looked at for basing a cargo/transport aircraft, the KC-46. In scoring for the KC-36, the Air Force did an on-site inspection, rather than using information from the Vermont Air Guard. As a result, Burlington’s score for encroachment for the KC-46 was low, since they had observed houses in the noise zone. (The higher the score, the better the chance the installation has of being selected.). The scores for encroachment should have been the same for the F-35 and the KC-46, since the number of houses around the airport was basically the same.
The Air Force admits their F-35 scoring process was flawed, and that they have since changed their methods of scoring. When scoring for the F-35, they relied on information they got from the local Air Guards, which they refer to as a “mass data call.” For Burlington, they used data provided to them by the Vermont Air National Guard on F-16 noise levels and on encroachment. They also used information from an FAA document (Part 150), which contained information on F-16 noise, provided by the Vermont Air National Guard. For the KC-46, the Air Force came to Burlington to conduct an in-person assessment.
In this citation and elsewhere, the Air Force acknowledges that Burlington received an incorrectly high score during the evaluation for the F-35. Leahy learned of this significant discrepancy between the environmental scores for the F-35 and the KC-46. This entry from January 16, 2013 is the report that the Air Force wrote relating the concerns Leahy expressed about the scoring problems. The Air Force officials seem to indicate that Leahy was not concerned about getting the scoring corrected for the F-35; but rather, he was concerned that revealing the truth to the public might result in a lawsuit and prevent Burlington from being selected for the F-35 basing.
“Subject: F-35 and KC-46 Candidate Scoresheets Discrepancies for Burlington AGS
When the Strategic Basing process began … environmental criteria of noise and encroachment were validated based on forecasted trends (FAA Part 150). The Strategic Basing process now uses actual environmental conditions.
Sen Leahy’s office called this meeting to address concerns with the F-35 and KC-46 candidate scoresheet discrepancies. A8PB [officials from the Strategic Planning and Programming Office] explained the F-35 candidate basing selection data call used FAA Part 150-0 rule-sets, where forecasted trends in encroachment and noise contours could be utilized. The SBP [Strategic Basing Process], however, has now evolved to capture actual noise and environmental trends. The KC-46 utilized this updated process, and resulted in a lower environmental score for Burlington. The [Leahy’s] concern centers on opposition to basing the F-35 at Burlington. Should citizens note this discrepancy, they could point to a flawed process, tie up the basing decision in litigation, and possibly prevent the AF from allocating F-35 at Burlington. Furthermore, the AF recognizes the mass data call as an imperfect science. Burlington was recognized as an encroachment risk.” (Admin Record #56929)