Transparency and the 9/11 Trials, Coal Ash Dump Regulations, Delhi Firm Admits Major Fraud
Good morning, and welcome Wednesday's Daily Read. As we wait to see whether the Senate will back Gov. Rod Blagojevich's appointment of Roland Burris to Barack Obama's seat, the Post's Dana Milbank sketches a colorful scene of Burris's trip to the Hill yesterday. Meanwhile, we've got an interesting mix of accountability news today, with Madoff headlines after the jump. See something we missed? Post your suggested must-read items in the comments below.
Protective Order Weighed in 9/11 Trials » The military judge overseeing proceedings against five of the men accused of planning the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks signed an order designed to protect classified information that is so broad it could prevent public scrutiny of the most important trial at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, according to lawyers and human rights groups. Late Monday, the judge appeared to have second thoughts about the breadth of the order. — Washington Post
Coal Ash Dumps Lack Regulation » The coal ash pond that ruptured and sent a billion gallons of toxic sludge across 300 acres of East Tennessee last month was only one of more than 1,300 similar dumps across the United States -- most of them unregulated and unmonitored. — New York Times
New Delhi Firm Admits Fraud » Satyam Computer Services, a leading Indian outsourcing company that serves more than a third of the Fortune 500 companies, significantly inflated its earnings and assets for years, the chairman and co-founder said Wednesday, roiling Indian stock markets and throwing the industry into turmoil. — New York Times
Personality Tests Spawn Cheating » Many retailers have largely automated the hiring process with online personality tests, cutting the time store managers must spend in interviewing applicants. But the test also is creating a culture of cheating and raising questions for applicants about its fairness. — Wall Street Journal
ER Survey: Police Abuse Suspected » Nearly 98 percent of emergency room physicians reportedly believe some patients were victims of suspected excessive force by police, according to a national survey published in the Emergency Medicine Journal. Yet most of the suspected incidents went unreported because no laws require physicians to alert authorities. — USA Today
LAPD, Coroner at Odds in Girl's Death » The Los Angeles Police Department waged an aggressive behind-the-scenes campaign to convince coroner's officials to change their finding that a SWAT officer's bullet killed a 19-month-old girl held hostage by her father three years ago, according to records reviewed by The Times. — Los Angeles Times
After the jump...
» Austria's 'Woman on Wall St.' Now Out of Sight (NYT)
» Bailouts for Madoff Victims? The I.R.S. Can Be Flexible (NYT)
» Madoff Tried to Stave Off Firm's Crash Before Arrest (WSJ)
BEST OF THE REST
» Donor to Richardson Also Gave to Obama (WaPo)
» Senators Turn Burris Away at Capitol (WaPo)
» Six Federal Agencies to Join Anti-Fraud Task Force (WaPo)
» House Releases New Rules Package (OmbWatch)
» Cunningham Briber Out of Prison on Appeal (North County Times)
» U.S. Court Orders Skilling Resentenced (AP)
» Report: OMB did not pressure Pentagon on competitive sourcing (GovExec)
» Chicago schools hit on espresso maker purchases (Chicago Tribune)
» Rail Firm Accused in Fatal Calif. Crash (AP)
» Israel Puts Media Clamp on Gaza (NYT)
By Amanda Zamora |
January 7, 2009; 9:14 AM ET
The Daily Read
Previous: Blackwater Guards Head to Court |
Next: What a Week for Burris








If you have solid tips, news or documents on potential ethical violations or abuses of power, we want to know. Send us your suggestions.

Unfortunately I believe that we are limited in what we can focus on. I think that if we proceed with the partisan sideshow of prosecuting Bush admin. officials, healthcare will get lost in the brouhaha.
The Washington Post's permanent investigative unit was set up in 1982 under Bob Woodward.
We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.
User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.