Loose Ends Watch: Schaffer’s Iraq Oil Contract

We got so busy last week that we missed a significant update on a story we’ve been following for some time.

When we last visited the topic of Senate candidate Bob Schaffer’s brokering of a contract between his former oil company Aspect Energy and the Kurdish Regional Government in northern Iraq, Grand Junction Sentinel reporter Mike Saccone was following up on an exchange between the State Department and the office of Sen. Wayne Allard over the deal–Allard’s office had requested “more information,” and the State Department had replied unequivocally that these kinds of deals with local Iraq governments were not recommended. As you know, the contracts in question have emerged as a problem for the Iraqi government as they try to craft a national oil revenue distribution law, considered a key hurdle in stabilizing the country.

It’s critical to note that Schaffer personally, in response to repeated press inquiries about his work for Aspect Energy in northern Iraq, has claimed that he “didn’t experience any discouragement.”

But that’s not what Allard told the State Department in his letter asking for “more information,” which Saccone disclosed on his blog last week:

As one example, Aspect Energy International LLC, (headquartered in Denver, COlorado), despite having been licensed to operate by both the KRG and the Baghdad government for over one year, has yet to secure a KRG concession agreement due to the U.S. State Department’s policies.

The State Department answered Allard in its letter:

…the President has been quite clear in stressing the importance of Iraq enacting a hydrocarbon law which creates a single investment regime for the country. The President has also clearly stated the strategic importance that the United States places in ensuring that Iraq passes a hydrocarbon law which reinforces Iraq’s unity and territorial integrity. In that regard, we have conveyed our view to all parties…that signing deals before such a law is passed will complicate efforts of the parties to pass a good law. We strongly believe that having competing oil and gas investment laws will be bad both for companies and for Iraq…

This is very simple when you get right down to it: either Schaffer lied when he said he “didn’t experience any discouragement,” or the rest of the documented record is lying. Each addition to the record, like this letter from Allard, makes it harder for Schaffer to continue to claim the latter.

A third possibility is that Schaffer really didn’t know about the State Department’s explicit policy against when he was doing in Iraq, and that Allard for whatever reason never shared the results of this communication with the State Department–obviously undertaken on Schaffer’s behalf. But to believe that you’d have to be, well, stupid.

We haven’t seen a single counterpoint to suggest this story is anything other than a looming disaster for Schaffer, linking the worst allegations about the Iraq war with Schaffer’s “Big Oil” record in a way the voters will find repellent, not ingratiating–especially when the 527s set it to spin after Labor Day.

11 Community Comments, Facebook Comments

  1. Laughing Boy says:

    You guys are really getting a lot of traction out of this.  

    What are the poll numbers at?  Just checking…

    C’mon, everybody loves a smartass, right?

    • RedGreen says:

      Not one of Schaffer’s “problems” has hit the air. As Pols points out, there’s no reason to introduce voters to the real Bob Schaffer until after Labor Day. And with at least four big hits in the wings, I’m fine with where the poll numbers are right now.

      You’re used to this and have had time to digest and rationalize why it’s OK for a senator to exhibit such poor judgment — repeatedly. In 2006, attacks like any one of these were enough to sink numerous popular Republicans, including long-time incumbents. Schaffer won’t survive all four.

      • Laughing Boy says:

        A “September Surprise”?

        Maybe he was meeting with Edwards at the Hilton…

        • RedGreen says:

          Check the ad strategies in 2006 against Reed (who lost in a primary) and Republican incumbents Taylor, Pombo, Gutknecht, Weldon, Sweeny and Shaw. Two months is plenty of time to bring a campaign crashing down over scandals, and each of those candidates had only a single scandal.

          • Laughing Boy says:

            You’re sounding so ominous today!


            • RedGreen says:

              Despite your regular name-dropping and protestations that you are — you really are — a serious politico, you’re someone’s 12-year-old kid. What’s wrong, did mom take away your PSP so you’re stuck on here?

              • Laughing Boy says:

                PSP in full effect. Have you tried Patapon?

                Thank God I’m not a serious politico.  Did you mean to say that like it’s a good thing?

                I work for a living, thanks.

                What, the ominous thing got under your bonnet?  I was just being my usual hilarious self.

                I’m just waiting for the 4 or 5 Bob Scheaffer bombshells that appear daily on Pols to affect his poll numbers.  Evidently they’re only helping.

                • WesternSlopeThought says:

                  Are these the polls the boy is referring to?

                  • Oliver says:

                    Given the GOP advantage in CO, Udall’s doing quite well.  Still, no reason to get alarmed in July over a couple of polls.  The Schaffer war profiteer scandal is quite good for Udall, I think.  Makes one wonder, as well, what else is out there.  So far we have sweatshops, war profiteering…I’ll take those, imagining there are more to come.

                • Oliver says:

                  Having to claim that you’re hilarious is well, hilarious.  

                  I prefer to see tight polls in July myself.  

                  • Laughing Boy says:

                    Laugh away.  Life is short.  Glad I could help you out.

                    This race is pretty unpredictable.  By all measures, Udall really should be hammering Scheaffer by now, but he’s not.

Leave a Reply

Comment from your Facebook account

You may comment with your Colorado Pols account above (click here to register), or via Facebook below.