Top Gun CUNNINGHAM: I broke the law, concealed my conduct and disgraced my office.

Dave Kearton wrote:
Jeff Crowell wrote:


Jeff
Saying "Guns kill people" is like saying "Spoons made Rosie O'Donnell
fat."


Guns don't kill people, husbands who come home early kill people.

Geez, Dave - if you know something about his schedule that I don't
know, just TELL me!

yfG

" wrote:

Ed Rasimus wrote:

Ever been on the wing in the weather at night in a single-seat jet?

Didn't think so. "Merely capable" translates as pretty damn good in
terms of most folks capabilities.

You're drifting off topic, Eddy. The topic isn't about whether I (or
any other poster, for that matter) has ever been a jet pilot.

Oh, yes it is, punk.

You just don't know it.


Billy

http://www.two--four.net/weblog.php

On Thu, 13 Jul 2006 23:10:07 -0600, "Jeff Crowell"
Jcrow9DOTcableone.net wrote in
::

Just for the hell of it, do you know if he knew that he was entering
terminal airspace?

In this case, USAF Brigadier General ROBIN E. SCOTT, President of the
USAF accident investigation Board (not exactly an impartial observer),
found that Flight Lead Parker's decision to intentionally descend into
congested Class B terminal airspace at over 400 knots without the
required ATC clearance not to constitute "a deliberate disregard for
the safety of others."

In fact, his report intimates that the cause of Parker's misbehavior
was a loss of situational awareness, which lead to the death of
Jacques Olivier, was a malfunction of the navigation electronics on
board Parker's southbound F-16, when in fact, the documented equipment
errors actually placed Parker 10 NM farther north from the center of
the Tampa Class B airspace than he believed he was at the time. That
is to say, Parker would have been inside Tampa Class B airspace
without the required ATC clearance for many more miles had he actually
descended at the position he believed he was located instead of the
position the malfunctioning/miss-operated navigational.equipment
placed him.

The facts presented in the Air Force accident report support my
contention that Parker intentionally, willfully, deliberately and
recklessly descended into a very congested terminal area in excess of
400 knots and without being in communication with the authority
responsible for separating aircraft in that airspace, and without
regard for the life and safety of the civilians operating there nor
those residing under his flight path.

Assuming the Air Force accident report is 100% factual, it indicates
that Parker, Ninja Flight Lead, began his descent into Tampa Class B
airspace at a point he believed at the time was ~15 miles inside its
boundary. Any airman, even an illustrious Air Force pilot, knows that
the dimensions of Class B areas are roughly a 30 NM radius from the
central airport (KTPA in this case).

Parker was aware he was above Tampa Class B airspace when he
recklessly decided to descend through it, or he is a careless and
incompetent pilot (or both).

The errors in the systems did not cause this mishap.

According to the Air Force accident report, he INS system mysteriously
developed a ~10 NM southerly steering error spontaneously, subsequent
to the first sortie. This had the effect of indicating that the
aircraft's position was ~10 NM south of its true position. Parker
failed to do the _required_ position check which would have detected
this error.

Parker also erroneously input a slew error, and failed to make the
_required_ check when he engaged that navigation equipment. The
results of that error placed him 5 NM west of his indicated position.

Neither of the errors, electronic nor Parker's erroneous input, were
adequate in explaining why a highly trained Air Force pilot chose to
descend into Tampa Class B airspace at what Parker's navigation
equipment indicated was 15 miles inside the Class B boundary at the
time. The malfunctioning/misdialed navigational errors actually
assisted Parker's flight in being closer to the edge of the Class B
area when he chose to descend (at 140 knots in excess of his
aircraft's minimum safe speed in violation of FAR 19.117(d)) without a
clearance into the congested Class B terminal area. So the
navigational system errors lessened the time Parker's flight posed a
threat to Class B air traffic.

THE NAVIGATIONAL ERRORS DO NOT IN ANY WAY EXCUSE PARKER FOR HIS
RECKLESS ACTIONS. In fact the opposite is true.

There is no doubt in my mind that Parker's decision to descend into
the Tampa Class B area without the required ATC clearance was
deliberate and intentional; He had to be aware that he wasn't clear of
the class bravo airspace.

I believe Parker's decision to recklessly descend without a
clearance was a result of the situation created by all the careless
errors he made. Due to Parker's canceling IFR and failure to contact
Tampa Approach Control because he input the wrong frequency in his
radio, he either had to descend without a clearance, or fly past the
MTR entry point. He thought he was ~10 NM closer to the MTR entry
point then he actually was at the time. Parker just chose to chance
what he thought would be only a few moments of violating FARs, and
indulged in unprofessional, unsafe operation, rather than pausing to
safely regain control of the rapidly determining situation.

Parker made more than a _few_ careless mistakes and/or reckless
decisions. Some of them were indeed minor, but others were
unforgivable and deadly. The Air Force accident report mentions
these:


1. Lieutenant Colonel Parker did not specifically brief Class B and
Class C airspace restrictions in the Tampa area during the flight
briefing. Air Force directives _require_ the flight lead to brief
applicable airspace restrictions.

2. Canceled IFR with Miami Center.

3. Declined flight following service.

4. Erroneously thought he was given frequency 362.35 by Miami Center
and attempted to contact Tampa Approach Control there.

5. Failed to obtain ATC clearance from Tampa Approach for entry into
the Tampa Class B airspace.

6. Failed to establish two-way radio communications with Tampa
Approach Control prior to entering Sarasota Class C airspace.

7. Failed to adequately deconflict flight path (Air Force training
manuals emphasize that flight path deconfliction is a critical task,
one that can never be ignored without catastrophic consequences.)

8. Lost situational awareness.

9. Failed to recognize a significant 9 to 11 nautical mile position
error in his aircraft's Inertial Navigation System.

10. Did not crosscheck the INS accuracy with other systems.

11. Parker failed to notice the degradation in INS system accuracy.
The system showed a navigational system accuracy of 'medium', which
eventually degraded to 'low' prior to the collision.

12. Unintentional cursor slew bias input by the pilot. A crosscheck
of system indications is _required_ so that unintentional slews are
recognized and zeroed out. Parker didn't bother to perform the
_required_ crosscheck.

12. Failed to recognize a cursor slew bias in his ground attack
steering.

14. Mis-prioritization of tasks.

15. Parker had a normal post-mishap physical examination on 24
November 2000, 8-days after his flight killed Jacques Olivier!

I believe the high-speed of Parker's flight reduced the time the
pilots had to detect an aircraft on a collision course, and prevented
the late Cessna 172 pilot, Jacques Olivier, from maneuvering his
aircraft out of the path of the F-16s in time to avoid the collision
(which scattered parts of his still warm remains over 4 acres
surrounding the 2nd hole of busy Rosedale Golf and Country Club) that
afternoon. Olivier's aircraft was in a right turn at the time of the
480 knot (~550 mph) impact, so he had seen the rogue F-16 before it
shattered his light aircraft (and virtually caused his body to
explode), but because of its excessive speed, he lacked sufficient
time to get out of its way.

High speed leaves little time for human responses. (I direct your
attention to the table in the article included below.)



How long does a full windscreen traffic scan take?

I believe that the FAA or NTSB standard requires/suggests 15
seconds to scan left to right (but this assumes only one person
scanning the whole field of view).

How long does it take you to spot an F-16 against low-level
ground clutter at 12'O clock and one mile? How frequently do
you fail to see traffic called by ATC? We're both pilots. You
know what I'm talking about.

It is estimated that the average person can detect an object on a
collision course (stationary in the field of view rather than
moving) when it occupies 12 minutes of arc in the field of view
(1/5th of a degree) or (ISTR - badly ) something like 450-500m
range for each m radius of the central mass.

Assuming no glare reflection, which can confound any calculation
on detection range and probability, statistically, it would take
7.5 seconds to reach 12 O'clock using approved search patterns.
(OTOH, if its against low level ground clutter, then its probably
not on a collision course with you )
[This last sentence may be somewhat true in _level_ flight over
_level_ terrain with meteorologically restricted visibility; it
is not pertinent otherwise.]


If we generously assume that the head-on frontal-area "central mass"
of an F-16 is approximately 2 meters, we find that it should be
humanly detectable at a distance of ~1,000 meters, or ~3,250 feet.
This is roughly 1/2 of a nautical mile.


The table of airspeeds equated to feet-per-second below can be used to
compute the time-budget available to pilots for visually _detecting_
conflicting air traffic at that distance. It does not take into
consideration lighting, contrast, the time necessary to deduce and
make _appropriate_ control inputs, nor the time for the aircraft to
actually maneuver out of the path of the conflicting aircraft's path.


Time Until Impact
Closing-speed Feet Per Second At 3,250 Foot Distance
------------- --------------- ----------------------
250 knots 417 feet per second 7.8 seconds
300 knots 500 feet per second 6.5 seconds
350 knots 583 feet per second 5.6 seconds
400 knots 667 feet per second 4.9 seconds
480 knots 800 feet per second 4.1 seconds


From this table it is evident that the pilot of a military aircraft
traveling at a 400 knot closing-speed has _inadequate_ time to
"see-and-avoid". Using Kerryn Offord's figures, the pilot would have
the impossible task of repeatedly, spending 15 seconds, 8 to 12 times
a minute, scanning the entire windscreen during that portion of the
flight conducted below 18,000 feet. Clearly, there is only time for 4,
not 8 to 12, full scans in a minute. So it is not possible to rely
solely on visual detection of conflicting air traffic to prevent
midair collisions at high-speed. Even if the scan for conflicting air
traffic is divided among 4 pilots, there is no time left to do
anything else such as visual navigation, tuning radios, ...

These calculations only concern detecting the conflicting air traffic,
not avoiding collision with it. So, it is patently evident that some
other means of collision avoidance must be _required_ to insure the
hazard to air-safety posed by high-speed low-level military operations
is mitigated.

It is also evident that the FAA IS FAILING TO PROVIDE SAFE SKIES for
the public when it permits the military to indulge in this reckless
high-speed low-level operation.

It is my belief that there came a time when Parker had to descend to
reach the MTR start point, or admit to his student that he had lost
situational awareness. At that instant, he chose to descend into
Class B airspace without the REQUIRED ATC clearance, rather than
confess his confusion. This would have been consistent with Parker's
failure to perform all the other REQUIRED items/checks he failed to
accomplish on the mishap sortie.

Can you explain how Parker could possibly NOT have known that Class B
airspace lay just below him when he descended into it (clear & 10
miles visibility at the time)?

Class B airspace is typically 30 nautical miles in radius around the
central airport; that's 60 NM in diameter. This particular Class B
abuts the Sarasota Class C to the south. The MTR VR1098 start point
is ~1 nm outside the boundaries of these areas just west of Manatee
Dam. Given VR1098 extends to the eastsoutheast, it begs the question,
"how does a flight enter VR1098 WITHOUT being in contact with ATC, and
remain within the governing regulations?"

To have been UNAWARE that Class B airspace lay beneath the Ninja
flight, Parker would have to have been incapacitated in some way.
Another reason Parker may not have known his position relative to the
Tampa terminal airspace is mentioned in the Air Force AIB report:

"Lieutenant Colonel Parker did not specifically brief Class B
and Class C airspace restrictions in the Tampa area during the
flight briefing. Air Force directives require the flight lead
to brief applicable airspace restrictions."

The malfunctioning INS erroneously indicated Parker's position to be
~10 miles north of his true location. This resulted in his southbound
flight being ~10 miles FARTHER toward the edge of Tampa International
(TPA), the core airport, Class B airspace than indicated by Parker's
INS. Thus, the INS error actually contributed to moving the flight
toward the (presumably safer) periphery of the congested terminal
airspace, just not far enough. So, while the INS error may have
contributed to confusing Parker, it does not excuse his actions in any
way IMNSHO.

If he was disorientated, he should have remained above the terminal
area until he regained situational awareness. But, Parker was the
instructor on this sortie; did his ego play a part in his decisions?

Without evidence to the contrary, I have to attribute his decision to
descend NORDO into Tampa Class B airspace (and accelerated to 440
KIAS) to unprofessional arrogance rather than lost situational
awareness. His failure to perform the required airspace briefing, and
failure to perform the required navigational cross-checks is
indicative of a lack of professionalism or incapacitation; the AIB
report fails to substantiate the later due to the eight day delay in
the medical examination of Parker.



So if you were unable to contact the Class B ATC controlling
authority, would you descend into 60-mile diameter congested Class B
terminal airspace without the required clearance?

SNIP all

Is this personal? You've got a hard-on for this guy like a DA six months
before the election.

R / John

"John Carrier" wrote in message
. ..
SNIP all

Is this personal? You've got a hard-on for this guy like a DA six months
before the election.

R / John

Shouldn't that be "erection"? No, I guess not. That would limit the election
to Japan.
:-)
Dudley

On Fri, 14 Jul 2006 18:36:08 -0500, "John Carrier"
wrote in ::

Is this personal?

To whom are you referring Parker or Rosa?

Parker did a lot of irresponsible things, that resulted in the death
of a fellow airman. Rosa let him off with a reprimand.

If I had killed someone, I would have stood trial, and if convicted,
would have been sentenced. There is little question that Parker
should have been subject to the same sort of judicial due process. The
only conclusion one can draw is, that our military is above the law.

We all share the NAS. I would prefer not to end up like Jacques
Olivier splattered over four acres of golf course as a result of lax
USAF discipline. I know neither men, so my issue with these events
not personal, but their actions have sensitized me to the lack of
responsibility apparently rampant in the military. And I'm
uncomfortable seeing my tax dollars funding the death of a fellow
airman, and the injustice perpetrated against us civilians.

So now that I've answered your question, perhaps you'll be good enough
to answer one for me. Do you feel that justice was done in this case?

"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 14 Jul 2006 18:36:08 -0500, "John Carrier"
wrote in ::

Is this personal?

To whom are you referring Parker or Rosa?

Parker did a lot of irresponsible things, that resulted in the death
of a fellow airman. Rosa let him off with a reprimand.

If I had killed someone, I would have stood trial, and if convicted,
would have been sentenced. There is little question that Parker
should have been subject to the same sort of judicial due process. The
only conclusion one can draw is, that our military is above the law.

We all share the NAS. I would prefer not to end up like Jacques
Olivier splattered over four acres of golf course as a result of lax
USAF discipline. I know neither men, so my issue with these events
not personal, but their actions have sensitized me to the lack of
responsibility apparently rampant in the military. And I'm
uncomfortable seeing my tax dollars funding the death of a fellow
airman, and the injustice perpetrated against us civilians.

So now that I've answered your question, perhaps you'll be good enough
to answer one for me. Do you feel that justice was done in this case?

I haven't a clue. Without access to all the original data (as one might
have in an MIR), I wouldn't formulate an opinion. I doubt you've had such
access, but you've got your opinion, expressed in voluminous and vehement
detail. So be it.

R / John

Ed Rasimus wrote:

You might want to research the elements of "murder" before conducting
much more slander. You might also want to spend some time in a
single-seat, single-engine aircraft making decisions at the speed
required by the job on a daily basis.

Would Criminally Negligent Manslaughter be more appropriate? Had he been
at the legally required speed, he would have had twice the time to make
the necessary decisions.

Using that term would be fine with me.. it's still a felony..

Dave

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php...ndy_Cunningham
Table of contents
1 Bio

1.1 Background
1.2 Congressional Career


2 Meet the Cash Constituents

2.1 Campaign Contributions from Defense Industry


3 Controversy

3.1 Del Mar Real Estate "Deal"


3.1.1 Realtor was campaign contributor
3.1.2 Subsequent Rancho Santa Fe Real Estate "Deal"
3.1.3 Tom DeLay Defended Cunningham


3.2 Boat purchases, sale and "free rent"


3.2.1 Kelly C
3.2.2 Duke Stir
3.2.3 Boat #3 and Brent Wilkes


3.3 Wilkes/ADCS Investigation
3.4 War Profiteering?
3.5 Money Laundering?
3.6 Post-conviction
3.7 Honored in Washington
3.8 Use of classified bills for personal gain


4 Committees and Affiliations

4.1 Committees


5 More Background Data

6 Resources and Articles

6.1 Resources
6.2 Articles & Commentary
6.3 SourceWatch Resources


-------------------------------

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Randy_Cunningham

Sentencing
On March 3, 2006, U.S. District Judge Larry A. Burns sentenced
Cunningham to 100 months (eight years and four months) in prison.[46]
Federal prosecutors had pushed for the maximum sentence of ten years,
but Cunningham's defense lawyers said that at 64 years old and with
prostate cancer, Cunningham would likely die in prison if he received
the full sentence.[47][48]. Judge Burns cited his military service in
Vietnam as the reason the full ten years was not imposed. Prosecutors
announced that they were satisfied with the sentence, which is the
longest jail term ever given to a former Congressman.[49]

On the day of sentencing, Cunningham was 90 pounds (41 kg) lighter
than when allegations first surfaced 9 months earlier. After receiving
his sentence, Cunningham made a request to see his 91-year-old mother
one last time before going to prison. "I made a very wrong turn. I
rationalized decisions I knew were wrong. I did that, sir," Cunningham
said. The request was denied, and Burns remanded him immediately upon
rendering the sentence.[50]

According to the Inmate Locator at the Federal Bureau of Prisons
website, Cunningham is currently incarcerated at the low-security wing
of the Butner Federal Correctional Complex in Butner, North Carolina
with inmate register number 94405-198. His projected release date is
listed as June 4, 2013.


Aftermath
Almost as soon as Cunningham pled guilty, Intelligence Committee
chairman Pete Hoekstra of Michigan (who, ironically, represents Guy
Vander Jagt's former district) announced his panel would investigate
whether Cunningham used his post on that committee to steer contracts
to favored companies. Hoekstra said that Cunningham "no longer gets
the benefit of the doubt" due to his admission to "very, very serious"
crimes. "We need to look at worst-case scenarios," he added. He also
shut off Cunningham's access to classified information. While Hoekstra
doesn't believe that Cunningham improperly influenced the Intelligence
Committee's work, a committee spokesman said that he wanted to make
sure its work stayed on the level.[51]

Bill Young of Florida, chairman of the Defense Appropriations
Subcommittee and former chairman of the full Appropriations Committee,
said that he plans to review Cunningham's requests for defense
projects. While he felt most of the requests were legitimate and
supported by the Pentagon, he said that he needed to be "doubly sure
that anything shaky is not going to stay in."[52]

On December 14, prosecutors in former House Majority Leader Tom
DeLay's money laundering trial revealed that they are looking into
ties between Wilkes and DeLay. One of Wilkes' companies donated
$15,000 to DeLay's PAC, Texans for a Republican Majority. Wilkes also
hired a consulting firm that employed DeLay's wife, Christine.[53]
On January 6, 2006, Time reported that Cunningham cooperated with law
enforcement by wearing a concealed recording device (a "wire") while
meeting with associates prior to his guilty plea. It is not known whom
he met with while wired, but there is speculation Cunningham's
misdeeds were not isolated instances and his case could reveal a
larger web of corruption.[54]

On February 24, 2006, Mitchell Wade pleaded guilty to paying
Cunningham more than $1 million in bribes in exchange for millions
more in government contracts.[55]

In March, it was revealed that CIA officials have opened an
investigation into the CIA's No.3 official, Kyle Foggo, and his
relationship with Wilkes, "one of his closest friends," according to
the article. Foggo has said that all of the contracts he oversaw were
properly awarded and administered.[56]

On April 17, 2006, the staffs of the The San Diego Union-Tribune and
Copley News Service were awarded the 2006 Pulitzer Prize for National
Reporting for their investigative work in uncovering Cunningham's
crimes.[57]

On May 12, 2006, FBI officials raided the Vienna, Virginia home of
former CIA official Kyle "Dusty" Foggo in connection with the
scandal.[58]

On June 6, 2006, Republican and former congressman Brian Bilbray won
the run-off election for Cunningham's seat, narrowly defeating
Democrat Francine Busby. The current term ends in 2006, so Bilbray
will face another election in November.[59]


-----------------------------------------



http://cunningham.house.gov/Biography/

Randy "Duke" Cunningham was born December 8, 1941, in Los Angeles,
California. After earning his bachelors degree in 1964 and his masters
in education in 1965 from the University of Missouri, Cunningham began
his career as an educator and a coach at Hinsdale (Ill.) High School.
As a swimming coach, Duke trained two athletes to Olympic gold and
silver medals. He later expanded his education experience as the Dean
of the School of Aviation at National University in San Diego.

In 1966, at the age of 25, Cunningham joined the U.S. Navy and became
one of the most highly decorated pilots in the Vietnam War. As the
first fighter ace of the war, Cunningham was nominated for the Medal
of Honor, received the Navy Cross, two Silver Stars, fifteen Air
Medals, the Purple Heart, and several other decorations.

Duke's experience in Vietnam and his background as an educator
prepared him well to train fighter pilots at the Navy Fighter Weapons
School -- the famed "Top Gun" program at Miramar Naval Air Station. As
Commanding Officer of the elite Navy Adversary Squadron, Cunningham
flew Russian tactics and formations against America's best combat
fighter pilots. Many of his real-life experiences as a Navy aviator
and fighter pilot instructor were depicted in the popular movie "Top
Gun."

Upon his retirement from the Navy in 1987, Cunningham translated the
Masters in Business Administration he earned at National University
into a successful business in San Diego.

In 2004, the people of California's 50th Congressional District
elected Duke Cunningham to his eighth term in the House of
Representatives. As the voters returned a Republican majority to both
chambers of Congress, Congressman Cunningham retained his position on
the powerful House Appropriations Committee. Cunningham serves on the
Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education Appropriations
subcommittee, which is instrumental in providing key funding for
education and medical research, two of his priorities. He also serves
on the panel's Defense subcommittee, which provides funding for our
national defense and armed services. At the beginning of the 109th
Congress, Cunningham was selected to serve as the Chairman of the
Subcommittee on Human Intelligence Analysis and Counterintelligence on
the House Select Committee on Intelligence. Cunningham was first named
to the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence by Speaker Hastert
in the 107th Congress. His extensive military experience, continued
service on defense and intelligence committees, and recognition as a
congressional leader on national security issues make him an ideal fit
for this prestigous position.

Through his committee assignments and the pursuit of his legislative
priorities, Congressman Cunningham continues to work for a stronger
economy; quality education for our children, a strong and efficient
national defense; and smart investment in medical research and
innovation. He places a priority on the effective use of taxpayer
resources for our children's future.

Several organizations have honored Congressman Cunningham for his work
in Congress. Most notably, he has been recognized for his work as a
fiscal conservative by such organizations as Citizens for a Sound
Economy, the National Taxpayer's Union, and the National Federation of
Independent Businesses. He has also been recognized by education
groups for his tireless advocacy and by several law enforcement
organizations for his tough-on-crime position.

Duke and his wife Nancy, the Director of Administrative Support
Services for the Encinitas Union School District, have three children
-Todd, April and Carrie.


Contact Duke Cunningham

2350 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
(202) 225-5452
(202) 225-2558 fax

613 West Valley Parkway
Suite 320
Escondido, CA 92025
(858) 755-8382
(760) 737-8438
(760) 737-9132 fax

-------------------------------------------------------------------
On Fri, 07 Jul 2006 23:39:14 GMT, Larry Dighera
wrote in :

http://edition.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0603/04/cst.02.html
WHITFIELD: The Democrat who delivered the address is Francine Busby,
the party's candidate to replace former Republican Congressman, Randy
"Duke" Cunningham of California.

Cunningham is now serving a federal prison term for bribery. The San
Diego Republican was sentenced yesterday to eight years and four
months for taking bribes from at least three defense contractors.

CNN's chief national correspondent, John King, takes a closer look at
Cunningham's career and his fall from power.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

JOHN KING, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Randy Cunningham and high
risk have been partners a long time.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: His name is Randy "Duke" Cunningham, and he is a
legend of air power.

KING: The Vietnam ace whose daring exploits were an inspiration for
Maverick in Hollywood's "Top Gun."

VAL KILMER, ACTOR: I don't like you because you're dangerous.

TOM CRUISE, ACTOR: That's right, Iceman. I am dangerous.

KING: And from famous war hero, Cunningham parachuted into a seemingly
less risky business: politics.

RANDY "DUKE" CUNNINGHAM (R), FORMER CALIFORNIA REPRESENTATIVE: Duke
Cunningham, running for U.S. Congress.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Duke Cunningham will be a congressman we can be
proud of.

KING: Now 16 years after that first campaign, San Diego Congressman
Duke Cunningham's exploits are once again the stuff of Hollywood.

CUNNINGHAM: I broke the law, concealed my conduct and disgraced my
office.

KING: His corruption is stunning in its scope and in its sheer
audacity: $2.4 million in bribes, at least. Private jets for resort
getaways. A California mansion. A Rolls Royce. A lifestyle well beyond
his means and a thirst for more.

That appetite, longtime friends like Charles Nesby say, perhaps were
some of the traits that made Duke Cunningham a successful ace.
Cockiness.

CAPT. CHARLES NESBY, CUNNINGHAM FRIEND: That's the nature of the beast
in all of us that are fighter pilots. You're naturally aggressive.

KING: Naked avarice is what prosecutors call it.

And look at this. Cunningham actually scribbled this bribe menu on his
congressional notepad. Want a $16 million contract? The cost is a
boat, "BT" for short, worth $140,000. Add in another $50,000 for each
additional million dollars in contracts.

NORMAN ORNSTEIN, AMERICAN ENTERPRISE INSTITUTE: What Cunningham did is
breathtaking.

KING: Norman Ornstein has been studying Congress for 30 years and says
there has been nothing like this before.

ORNSTEIN: This is somebody who set out to live a lavish lifestyle by
making sure he could shake down contractors, lobbyists and interest
groups.

KING: Thousands of dollars in meals, at the Capital Grille and other
pricey Washington restaurants, Cunningham's tab picked up by defense
contractors.

Private jets, again, paid for by contractors, to whisk the congressman
around the country.

Then trendy Delano Hotel on Miami's South Beach was one destination
two years ago: $1,254 for the room, $848 for Cunningham's meals at the
hotel. Nearly $13,000 for the chartered jet.

Cunningham grew to expect luxury, the prosecution memo says. His
co-conspirators eagerly plied him with it.

He was, after all, on the House Appropriations Committee, a leading
voice on its defense subcommittee, able to enter multimillion dollar
favors into the Pentagon and other budgets.

His Navy days gave him standing on military matters, and stories via
the big screen.

CUNNINGHAM: I met my wife by singing, "You Lost That Loving Feeling"
to her at the Miramar officer's club.

KING (on camera): Perhaps they should have raised questions, some
friends say, when a congressman with a $165,000 a year salary bought a
penthouse condominium here just outside Washington, in addition to the
pricey home he owned in southern California.

(voice-over) The condo came courtesy of a defense contractors'
$200,000 down payment. Inside, tens of thousands of dollars worth of
antiques the congressman demanded in exchange for favors, all now in a
warehouse awaiting government auction.

This is the boat from the bribe menu, The Duke-Stir, a flashy exhibit
of Cunningham's lifestyle. Real estate records like these, the more
mundane evidence that would begin his fall from grace.

November, 2003, Cunningham sold his home in Del Mar to a defense
contractor for nearly $1.7 million. The contractor lost $700,000 when
he resold it. That caught the eye of a Copley News Service reporter,
and then that caught the eye of the feds. What they found is eye
popping.

NESBY: It's the power, and then some people handle the power
correctly. Other people, the power can be misused. Duke lost his moral
compass.

KING: Nesby is one of 40 Cunningham friends and family members who
wrote the judge, appealing for leniency. In his letter, Nesby recalled
the white naval officer who took a risk, standing up for a young black
pilot.

NESBY: It was not popular for him to do that, but I appreciated it.
What he did, he leveled the playing field and allowed me to compete
and gave me what I deserved. And I'll always love him for that.

KING: In his note to the judge, Cunningham wrote, "It all started very
slowly and innocently," that he's sorry, worried about dying in
prison. But "I will accept your sentence without complaint."

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Randy "Duke" Cunningham will be remembered as an
educator, a legislator, but most of all, as a legend of air power.

KING: A career that is the stuff of Hollywood. Then...

CUNNINGHAM: In my life I have had great joy and great sorrow. And now
I have great shame.

KING: ... and now.

John king, CNN, Washington.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

Larry Dighera wrote:

snip vast amount of info readily available elsewhere on the net

Any particular reason you did that? Why not post the link, instead of
posting yards of text straight off another website?

Gordon