folo

This is the second of a 4-part series about a defense contracting scandal in North Mississippi and Alabama with possible Roger Wicker connections. Part 1 outlined the facts involving a criminal prosecution against Michael Cantrell involving defense contracting in North Alabama. This part involves a New York Times story fleshing out additional details. Part 3 will describe earmarks Roger Wicker obtained for a North Alabama contractor, and Part 4 will outline the factual identities between the Cantrell corruption and the Wicker contractor.  Finally, there will be an epilogue drawing some conclusions about all of this.

Mr. Cantrell worked in a division that was a small part of the national missile defense program. Determined to save his job, he often bypassed his bosses and broke department rules to make his case on Capitol Hill. He enlisted contractors to pitch projects that would keep the dollars flowing and paid lobbyists to ease them through. He cultivated lawmakers, who were eager to send money back home or to favored contractors and did not ask many questions. And when he ran into trouble, he could count on his powerful friends for protection from Pentagon officials who provided little oversight and were afraid of alienating lawmakers.

The pleadings in the Cantrell case describe an unnamed subordinate Cantrell worked with. From the New York Times, we learn that the deputy was Doug Ennis.

The article describes Alaska Senator Ted Stevens (the one in the midst of a criminal trial in Washington) intervening on behalf of Cantrell’s defense contractor “friend”: "Senator Ted Stevens, the Alaska Republican, for example, chewed out Pentagon officials who opposed a missile range Mr. Cantrell and his contractor allies were seeking to build in Alaska."

One of Trent Lott’s staffers intervened to stop an investigation at the Pentagon that "threatened to discipline Mr. Cantrell for lobbying, a banned activity for civil servants.”

Ennis’s lawyer said about all this: "What they did may have been a scandal," said Walter E. Braswell, Mr. Ennis’s lawyer, referring to the actions of his client and Mr. Cantrell. "But even more grotesque is the way defense procurement has disintegrated into an incestuous relationship between the military, politicians and contractors."

The key passage provides some more identification of one of the companies Cantrell helped:

Mr. Cantrell had been working with Mr. Lott, then Senate majority leader, for several years. The lawmaker included several million dollars in the defense budget for an acoustics research center in his home state, and Mr. Cantrell made sure it went to the intended recipients: the University of Mississippi in Oxford and a Huntsville defense contractor that had a branch office in Oxford. In turn, Mr. Lott’s office helped get extra financing — $25 million or so every year — for Mr. Cantrell’s program.

So we know that Cantrell "made sure" a Huntsville defense contractor "that had a branch office in Oxford" got money through an earmark.

The Times article describes other contractors under investigation in the Cantrell case; it’s not explicit enough to positively identify which contractor is "company ‘1’" in the Cantrell plea agreement.

But it is clear that Cantrell’s questionable dealings involved a company that:

• Was based in Huntsville and had "a branch office in Oxford”;
• Was in the business Cantrell supervised–doing missile defense systems research;
• Was the beneficiary of Congressional earmarks that the defense department didn’t want; and
• May have been one of Cantrell’s "contractor allies" involved in a missile range in Alaska supported by Ted Stevens.

Go to part 3.