Wisconsin Rep. Derrick Van Orden: 'Too Easy' for Veterans to Commit Fraud

Wisconsin Rep. Derrick Van Orden (R) reprises Joe McCarthy. 
This time, Van Orden takes aim at veterans, holding papers claiming 
massive fraud in House VA Subcommittee that Van Orden chairs, 
(Forbes). The former Navy Seal now levels his guns against 
veterans in service to Trump administration, planning cuts in
veteran benefits that would cut 80,000 VA workers who serve 
veterans, (AP). Rife with abuse, easy to defraud, says Van Orden.

Veteran Readiness and Employment (VR and E) Program Is Boogeyman Used to Hit Veteran
Benefits
False Accusations Provide Cover for Trump Admin to Cut Veteran Benefits

Madison, Wisconsin — Veterans are committing fraud and the VA is making it too easy, according to an old defamation against our guys.

Now, Wisconsin Rep. Derrick Van Orden (R-Wisconsin), who represents a gerrymandered district in western and central Wisconsin, is bringing this slander back.

Derrick Van Orden served 26 years as a Navy SEAL Senior Chief operator with multiple combat tours before being elected to Congress. 

Rep. Van Orden chairs the House Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity for Veterans. He said at the conclusion of his July hearing: "This, [VA VR&E (Veteran Readiness and Employment)], is a fantastic program. But it is rife for abuse. And it's too easy to defraud this program." 

Rep. Van Orden made his remarks at the House Veterans Affairs Committee hearing on July 16, entitled "Path of Purpose: Restoring the VA VR&E (Veteran Readiness and Employment) Program to Effectively Serve Veterans."

"Veteran Readiness and Employment (VR&E) (Formerly known as Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment) services to help with job training, education, employment accommodations, resume development, and job seeking skills coaching," reads a VA explanation of the popular program.

The new blast against veterans follows years of the Bush-Obama administrations using the offices of the Inspector General and DoJ to contrive criminal complaints against veterans for applying for disability benefits in what is supposed to be a paternalistic process, not an adversarial process. 

Congress and VA bureaucrats parading the specter of dishonest veterans appear a government disease that will never die, and charges of fraud commonly precede the McCarthyite slurs against military veterans, and dishonest work of VA Office of Inspector General.

National Associated Press writer, Allen Breed, took point on the neocon slurs against veterans some 15 years ago. See Tide of new PTSD cases raises fears of fraud (2010), for example. 

From Agent Orange, to PTSD to now trying to find a job and assimilate at home, veteran bashing is back in style.

After the AP's Breed cited benefits-hostile Dept of Veterans Affairs bureaucrat, Mark Rogers, in 2010 in his hit piece on veterans, in which Rogers said the VA benefits processes, especially PTSD, are an open invitation to fraud, veterans advocate and attorney Robert Walsh was more pissed-off than usual.

Robert Walsh of Battle Creek, Michigan, (U.S. Army, 101st Airborne Division, RVN 1971-72), said, "What about the claims of all the honest veterans that languish in the system for decades until they die? They freeze to death on the streets or blow their brains out in the garage. The veterans' benefits claims system is a national tragedy, and men like [longtime claims specialist with the Veterans Benefits Administration] Mark Rogers are the problem, not the solution for our veterans and their families."

The U.S. VA Office of Inspector General began accelerated referrals to the U.S. Dept of Justice when Vietnam veterans reached retirement age, and the VA and neocon press began its dishonest propaganda campaign against veterans to provide cover.

Van Orden's remarks against veterans this month were first reported by Forbes in late July 2025, citing almost identical language as veteran bashers regarding PTSD 25 years ago.

During the Veterans Affairs Committee hearing this month, Rep. Van Orden (R-WI) opened and closed the hearing about the VA's Veteran Readiness And Employment program with unsupported hyperbolic allegations of criminal fraud and waste.

One of the primary gripes of veterans advocates is the VA does not follow the law in administering (and adjudicating) veterans benefits, and the VA and its Congressional allies' work results in nothing less than death, with the VA Office of Inspector General ready to slur, lie and cheat in this macabre quest to stop veterans from using their benefits.

Said veterans advocate Walsh today, "Maybe VA OIG (VA Office of Inspector General) makes it 'too easy' to circumvent the law and kill innocent disabled and dislocated veterans. That's the problem."

The Forbes video footage from the House Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity for veterans, on the VR&E (Veteran Readiness and Employment) Program, is below. 

        

Decorated Army Combat Veteran, Jim Rudisill v. Secretary of Veterans Affairs

Veterans Day 2020 

 

Why the bureaucratic lust to screw our veterans over?

 

Doesn't everyone love veterans? No.

Veterans Day 2020 sees the veterans rights community rallying around another veteran, identified as "Bo" in administrative court litigation at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

Watch this veterans rights case, BO v Wilkie, next month, it will signal a lot about how we really care about our veterans.

It's a fight for veterans' benefits guaranteed by Congress.

Until them Happy Veterans Day 2020

By Christie Garella

BO v Wilkie Overview

Two veterans were introduced at church. One veteran was unexpectedly denied Post-9/11 GI Bill benefits to attend Yale divinity school because of a “misinterpretation”, following a multi-year process to gain his church’s endorsement to attend seminary and admission to Yale Divinity School. Hunton Andrews Kurth attorney Tim McHugh, who coincidentally used the Post-9/11 GI Bill to attend college and law school after serving in the Army, took on the case along with a Dominion Energy’s Pro Bono attorney and fellow veteran.

In August 2019, the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims issued a major decision in the case - BO v Wilkie - that could restore billions of dollars in Post-9/11 GI Bill and other educational benefits to military service members of the Post-9/11 era. The court rejected the practice of capping the benefits and reversed a decision by the VA’s Board of Veterans’ Appeals, ordering the board to recalculate BO’s entitlement to GI Bill benefits. In January 2020, the court denied the VA’s motion to stay the BO decision. The VA has since filed an appeal which was authorized by the Solicitor General in May 2020. The case is pending before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit with the telephonic oral argument scheduled for December 9, 2020.

GI Bill Background

Since World War II, Congress has provided veterans with different GI Bill benefits for different periods of qualifying service. HOWEVER, since 2009, the Department of Veterans Affairs began capping most veterans’ combined GI Bill benefits at 36 months if they had more than one period of separately qualifying service.

Wisconsin Veteran Was Awarded 70 Percent of Benefits for Which He Was Criminally Convicted of Receiving

Updated - "Despotism is a plan alone, without law and without rule, leading all its will and caprices," wrote Montesquieu, an Enlightenment political philosopher preceding the American Revolution.

The wrongfully convicted Navy veteran, Keith Roberts, is the victim of caprice and an orchestrated scheme to criminally target this veteran for fraud though Roberts' Claims file or C-file abundantly documents his claim for disability benefits for his diagnosed PTSD condition.

A legal argument advanced by Roberts concerns the U.S. Dept of Veterans Affairs and U.S. Dept of Justice's disregard of laws and rules that govern the conduct of federal agencies towards citizens applying for services and benefits, such as military veterans.

Laws and rules in place guide the adjudication of claims, though these legal processes are superseded by the caprice of men and women, in Roberts case.

Like 100,000s of veterans, Roberts engaged in the convoluted process of the VA bureaucracy seeking disability benefits in what is supposed to be a non-adversarial process under the Veterans' Judicial Review Act (1988) that empowers veterans the right to judicial review of decisions involving their benefits under the exclusive authority of the legislatively created VA adjudication procedures.

Roberts’ benefits claim — related to his PTSD that was diagnosed as occurring because of the in-service stressor event of witnessing and trying to prevent his friend (Airman Gary Holland) from being crushed to death by a C-54 airplane while stationed at a Naval air base in Naples, Italy in 1969, and an unrelated assault by the Navy Shore Patrol — was granted at the 100 percent disability level in May 1999.

But Roberts became a target when the VA and U.S. DoJ hatched their plan to probe and prosecute Roberts, as indicated in emails obtained by Roberts' attorney, Bob Walsh.

Former VA General Counsel attorney and VA national Director of Compensation and Pension Services, Renee L. Szybala, authored the VA’s response to a Robert's letter to the VA, and, evidence suggests, engineered the 2005-06 prosecution of Roberts by U.S. Atty Biskupic.

As Roberts’ attorney Robert Walsh states in his CAVC (U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims) Supplemental brief filed in July 2007: "Ms. Renee Szybala, who responded to the letter for the Secretary, then appears to have had a direct involvement in orchestrating the efforts to commence criminal proceedings against the appellant in Federal District Court when she knew his appeals were pending at either the BVA (Board of Veterans' Appeals) or this Court (the CAVC)."

Szybala, who moved on from her position as VA Director of Compensation and Pension Services, was responsible for managing the network of VA Regional Offices across the country.

In an e-mail of January 27, 2005 from Debi Bevins, Special Assistant to the (VA) Secretary Jim Nicholson, Bevins asked Szybala: "Is there any truth to what Keith Roberts alleges in this e-mail?" referring to Roberts’ allegations of fraud and violations of his due process rights, and Roberts' declarations of his rightful entitlement pertaining to his experiencing what the VA calls "stressors."

In the same e-mail, Bevins asks: "Have we heard any news on the prosecution of Keith Roberts?"

Szybala replies in part in an e-mail dated January 27, 2005 that: "Of course not (there is no truth to Roberts’ allegations). But he (Roberts) may be confused and believe it. I have known of and been dealing with Mr. Roberts’ complaints for several years now, dating to my time at OGC (VA Office of the General Counsel) as explained in the message below. … In the interest of full disclosure, I also have a letter on this case from the American Legion, dated October 15, 2004 (asking for Vasil’s report), to which I have not yet responded. The fraud for which Mr. Roberts’ service connection was severed was uncovered, investigated, and reported by the OIG (Office of the Inspector General). To respond to the Legion’s letter, we need to confer with the OIG and have had trouble connecting. When we do we’ll ask them the question about the prosecution, too. My guess is, however, that this case would not interest a U.S. Attorney … ."

Several points made in this and subsequent e-mails obtained by the defense and not presented at the criminal trial by a young attorney (though successfully made part of the record of appeal at CAVC (U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims) after efforts by Roberts' subsequent atty, Robert Walsh) are critical and raise questions about the propriety of the prosecution instigated by the VA.

No testimony or evidence was presented at Roberts’ trial pertaining to Ms. Szybala’s statement that Szybala had been dealing with Roberts’ allegations and complaints for several years and that Szybala stated that "… he (Roberts) may be confused and believe it."

This is significant because if Roberts believed the VA claim that he was pursuing and Szybala assumed Roberts’ believed his claim, this discredits the principal allegation of the government’s criminal case that Roberts devised a "scheme" to formulate misrepresentations with the intent of defrauding the VA, the alleged crime for which Roberts was imprisoned for almost four years.

[In fact, the government in the person of Barbra Nehls of the Milwaukee VA Regional office wrongly claimed at trial that Roberts’ benefits were reduced based upon the VA’s determination that Roberts’ statements of facts from 1969 formed the basis of the VA decision to grant or deny benefits. This is a material misrepresentation of VA procedure: The determination of PTSD-related benefits relies upon medical evidence (such as being diagnosed by five different medical professionals that a vet has PTSD) and the existence of an in-service stressor (such as the reality that a man was crushed to death by a C-54 aircraft while an Airman was on duty), per 38 CFR (Code of Federal Regulations) 3.304(f). All a veteran has to achieve in first-person testimony is corroboration, not verification. The Code defines Post Traumatic Stress Disorder as Service connection for post-traumatic stress disorder; (PTSD) requires medical evidence diagnosing the condition in accordance with 38 CFR 4.125(a); a link, established by medical evidence, between current symptoms and an in-service stressor; and credible evidence that the claimed in-service stressor occurred (38 CFR 3.304(f))].

Officials from the Milwaukee Regional Office and Special Agent Raymond Vasil’s Inspector General’s (OIG) office were included in the series of e-mails including one e-mail from the OIG's Vasil dated January 27, 2005, stating: "The U.S. Attorney is interested in prosecuting. He is not 100% yet and wanted me to interview any additional persons I could find that were present when the original accident happened in 1969 … ."

Commander Robert Don Hathaway (USN) and officer-in-charge was present when the original accident happened, and was not interviewed by the Inspector General’s (OIG) office.

Seems they wouldn't have liked what Comd Hathaway had to say. After a four-hour deposition conducted in early 2019 by atty Walsh, Hathaway's April 2019 affidavit is an exoneration of Keith Roberts from the ludicrous indictment that Roberts lied about his role trying to save his friend from being crushed to death.

Everyone near the C-54 acted to save a man being crushed to death, some more effectively than others.

The engineering of the prosecution evident from the e-mails and the rushed, extraordinary prosecution itself were challenged in Roberts’ supplemental brief filed at the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) in July 2007.

"As detailed in the brief, the conduct of the (VA) Secretary has been contrary to law, in bad faith, highly adversarial. There is an inference of impropriety by any number of senior officials in the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs," reads the brief filed by attorney Robert Walsh.

And it bears repeating from the brief: "Ms. Renee Szybala, who responded to the letter for the Secretary, then appears to have had a direct involvement in orchestrating the efforts to commence criminal proceedings against the appellant in Federal District Court when she knew his appeals were pending at either the BVA (Board of Veterans' Appeals) or this Court (the CAVC)."

Two VA e-mails include.

• VA Emails Reveal VA Officials Plotting A. - Sept 2007 
• VA Emails Reveal VA Officials Plotting B. - Sept 2007

A reader following this story may have noted the jumping back and forth between Roberts' VA claim and Roberts' fight against his criminal prosecution.

Reads Roberts’ Court of Appeals for Veterans claims (CAVC) July 2007 brief:

The referral of this case directly from the VA OIG’s Chicago office to the U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Wisconsin for criminal proceedings is contrary to law, justice, equity, and fair play.

When the Court rules to restore the benefits of the Appellant, we shall have arrived at an absurd 'Alice in Wonderland' result. A veteran will sit in prison for accepting the wire transfer of funds to which he was legally entitled. … This extraordinary rendition of a veteran from a VA administrative dispute directly into Federal District Court on criminal charges is unprecedented.

We are here; it is Alice in Wonderland.

Keith Roberts is now back to receiving 70 percent of his 100 percent VA benefits, and his new start date is two years earlier than it had been awarded previously.

Perhaps Keith Roberts can have 70 percent of his days in prison back?

Roberts' next step is to get this 2006 criminal conviction vacated or overturned.

Veterans' advocates estimate there have been some 5,000 cases where the VA Office of Inspector General (OIG) or other VA officials have targeted veterans with criminal prosecutions while the VA is still adjudicating claims.

One problem is the OIG does not probe VA employees who ignore the law and regulations to target innocent veterans. Rather, the OIG is simply a hammer used to pound veterans into submission.

But Roberts and his attorney, Bob Walsh, will not give up as they push for full benefits restoration as prelude to vindication and exoneration.

Other attorneys in the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims bar agreee a time of reckoning is upon us.

Kisor v. Wilkie 139 S.Ct. 2400 (2019), and Monk v. Shulkin, 855 F.3d 1312 (Fed. Cir. 2017) may provide the legal precedent to end the abuse of veterans accused of benefits fraud.

Walsh's March 4, 2019 letter to U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs General Counsel, Mr. James M. Byrne is reproduced below.
--
March 4, 2019


U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs
Mr. James M. Byrne
General Counsel
810 Vermont A venue, N. W.
Washington, D.C. 20420

Re: Demand for a Hearing in accordance with 38 C.F.R. §§ 42.1-42.47 (1988)
Keith A. Roberts, VA Claim Number C 28 353 461

Dear Mr. Byrne:

In 2005 I was asked to assist Mr. Keith A. Roberts in the adjudication of the allegation of benefits fraud made against him by employees of the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs Office of Inspector General. Fourteen years later a final agency decision has still not been made in that dispute.

By a letter dated October 15, 2004, Mr. Phillip R. Wilkerson of the
American Legion wrote to the Director of the Compensation and Pension Service
of the Veterans Benefits Administration demanding a hearing regarding the
benefits fraud allegations made against him in accordance with 38 C.F.R. §§ 42.1-
42.47 (1988). (Exhibit 1.) That hearing has never been provided.
During the pendency of his recent appeal before the U.S. Court of Appeals
for Veterans Claims in docket 16-1219 a motion to intervene as amicus curia was
filed on behalf of Veterans for Due Process, Inc., (Mr. Philip Cushman). (Exhibit
2
Congressional mandated due process protections set forth in 38 C.F.R. §§ 42.1-
42.47 and the unlawful policy of the Veterans Administration (now U.S.
Department of Veterans Affairs) to circumvent them since 1986 is highly relevant
to this demand.
Keith A. Roberts, 38 C.F.R. §§ 42.1-42.47
In 1986 Congress completed an extensive effort aimed at improving
contract and benefits fraud adjudications by the federal government. See United
States. Cong. Senate. Committee on the Judiciary. Overview of False Claims and
Fraud Legislation. Hearing, Jun. 17, 1986. 99th Cong. 2nd Sess. Washington:
GPO, 1987. A copy of the legislative history is attached. (Exhibit 3.)
The Congressional effort was to end the Balkanized procedures found
throughout the federal government so as to protect the rights of those accused of
benefits fraud and also to protect the interests of the taxpayers.
The Veterans Administration promulgated regulations in accordance with
the 1986 legislation. The regulations were amended in 1988 to reflect the creation
of the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, and have not been amended since.
See 38 C.F.R. §§ 42.1-42.47 (1988).
In 2005 I made requests to your agency under the Freedom of Information
Act (FOIA). The responses supported my conclusion that the U.S. Department of
Veterans Affairs has never complied with the regulations for benefits fraud
adjudications. The Veterans Benefits Administration and the Office ofinspector
General make use of an ad hoc system which deprives veterans and other
beneficiaries of proper notice, a meaningful opportunity to be heard, and any
opportunity to confront evidence being used against them. Not only is the current
procedure devoid of fundamental fairness and due process, but unfounded
allegations of benefits fraud are placed in the veterans benefits claims file.
Thousands of employees of the Veterans Benefits Administration can lawfully
access the computerized claims file. The response to a recent FOIA request dated
August 10, 2018, indicates that since May 11, 1988, 4,163 VA benefits fraud cases
had been referred to the U.S. Department of Justice. These cases have been
referred by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs Office of Inspector General
(VA OIG) directly to United States Attorneys around the country. (Exhibits 4.)
A response from your office confirms that the due process protections found in 38
C.F.R. §§ 42.1-42.47 have never been afforded to any of these veterans accused of
benefits fraud.
Page 2 of 6
Keith A. Roberts, 38 C.F.R. §§ 42.1-42.47
One of the most troubling aspects of my involvement in the adjudication of
benefits fraud allegations by your agency has been the litigation position adopted
by your office. In Roberts v. Shinseki, 23 Vet.App. 416 (20 1 0), counsel for the
Secretary argued in supplemental briefing that your office had no role to play in
the adjudication of benefits fraud matters. During oral argument before the three
judge panel and later the en bane Court the position of the Secretary was that the
Office of General Counsel had no role to play in the adjudication ofbenefits fraud.
Counsel further stated that the reference to claims in 38 C.F.R. § 14.561 only
referred to claims by or against contractors. Since the agency had over 1 million
active claims for disability benefits pending at that time I found that position to be
rather remarkable. The ad hoc process employed by the VA OIG is devoid of due
process, fundamental fairness, and any reasonable degree of competence.
Veterans are denied access to the procedural due process afforded the recipients of
other federal benefits accused of fraud. The review of fraud allegations by your
office found in the regulations along with the preparation of a detailed complaint
to be served on the accused would have resulted in hundreds of the cases referred
to the United States Attorneys for prosecution being resolved administratively.
The recent case of U.S. v. Monkemeyer, 2:17-cr-10-PLM, U.S. District
Court for the Western District of Michigan, is illustrative of the hazards inherent
with the current "sand lot" procedures used to process benefits fraud allegations
by your agency. Mr. Monkemeyer was accused of altering his DD-214 by
employees of the VA Regional Office (RO) in Detroit, Michigan. His benefits
claims had been adjudicated by employees of the RO in West Virginia. His
unemployability determination was made by the Maine RO. Several years later he
was accused of benefits fraud. His disability compensation benefits were severed
and that decision is pending review by the BV A. He was indicted for theft of
government property under 18 U.S.C. § 641. After months of motions, discovery
and investigation a three day jury trial was held in 2018. Mr. Monkemeyer was
acquitted. His disability benefits have not been restored, nor had the damage to
his reputation. In addition, the unfounded allegations against him can still be
found in his VA benefits file. The economic harm to the taxpayers and Mr.
Monkemeyer have been significant. The personal damage to Mr. Monkemeyer has
been even more egregious. Had Mr. Monkemeyer been afforded his due process
rights under 38 C.F.R. §§ 42.1-42.47 much of the harm could have been avoided.
Page 3 of 6
Keith A. Roberts, 38 C.F.R. §§ 42.1-42.47
The United States Supreme Court raised the standard for fraud pleading in
civil matters in Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 127 S. Ct. 1955
(2007) and Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 129 S. Ct. 1937 (2009). Mr. Roberts
was deprived of any meaningful notice of the allegations against him. The VA
refused to provide Mr. Roberts or his American Legion representative a copy of
the report of the VA OIG which made allegations of benefits fraud against him.
That report had been placed in his benefits claims file. Both he and his American
Legion representatives were also denied access to his VA benefits claims file at
his hearing in Washington D.C. before the Board of Veterans Appeals (BVA) in
2005. It has since been determined that his appeal was adjudicated using an
incomplete photocopy of his claims file as the original was in the possession of the
employees of the VA OIG Chicago office.
As a former staff attorney for your agency I find the adjudication of a quasicriminal
allegation in what was intended by Congress to be a non-adversarial and
claimant friendly benefits system to an affront to logic and contrary to common
sense. As discussed in the amicus curia brief attached, an allegation of benefits
fraud should be closely held. Such an allegation is the province of the Office of
Inspector General and the Office of General Counsel. Unfounded allegations of
fraud have no place in a veterans benefits claims file. With the new national work
queue hundreds if not thousands of employees of the Veterans Benefits
Administration can access a file and review allegations that may or may not have
any basis in fact.
In the event a veteran is found innocent of any wrongdoing there is no
process or procedure available to remove fraud allegations from a benefits file.
Such allegations and related evidence should be restricted to files maintained by
your office and the Office of Inspector General in accordance with the procedures
mandated by 38 C.F.R. §§ 42.1-42.47. This is the exact issue now confronting
Mr. Monkemeyer. How do you un-ring a bell?
Some insight into the convoluted and unlawful procedures now being
followed by the VA OIG are set forth in the affidavit of Mr. Roberts dated March
9, 2007. (Exhibit 5.)
Page 4 of 6
Keith A. Roberts, 38 C.F.R. §§ 42.1-42.47
Since 1986 veterans and their family members accused of benefits fraud by
your agency have been deprived of due process of law that the recipients of
benefits administered by other departments of the government are routinely
afforded. In many cases veterans and other beneficiaries have been subjected to
premature criminal prosecutions and federal collection efforts without ever having
been afforded notice and an opportunity to be heard as mandated by the
Administrative Procedures Act 5 U.S.C. §§ 551-559, 701-706, 1305,3105, 3344,
4301(2)(E), 5335(a)(B), 5372, and 7521.
In this case Renee Szybala, then the director of compensation and pension
service of the Veterans Benefits Administration, was actively participating in the
effort to have Mr. Roberts indicted. At the same time she was assuring both Mr.
Roberts and his American Legion representative that his appeal was being
processed. Documents obtained in criminal discovery indicate that she had
authored the response to a letter sent by Mr. Roberts to then Secretary of Veterans
Affairs Principi concerning the loss of his benefits and the allegations against him.
Even more disconcerting is the questionable practice of employees of the
Office of Inspector General taking cases where allegations of benefits fraud are
being actively adjudicated by the Veterans Benefits Administration directly to
United States Attorneys for prosecution. The absurd outcome from this practice is
that a federal criminal conviction is obtained, a sentence served, damages
specified by the trial court are being collected, and then years later the benefits in
question are restored. That is what has happened in this case. Mr. Roberts has
had 30 percent of his benefits restored. And that decision is on appeal. So after
more than a decade a final agency decision as to benefits and damages has never
been issued.
Page 5 of 6
Keith A. Roberts, 38 C.F.R. §§ 42.1-42.47
We demand that the disability benefits of Mr. Roberts be restored in full. In
the alternative we request that a proper review of the file be made by your office
and that a complaint issue and proceedings before an administrative law judge be
convened in accordance with 38 C.F.R. §§ 42.1-42.47.
Sincerely, ~
PI'~
Robert P. Walsh
Enclosures: Exhibit 1., Letter, American Legion, Philip B. Wilkerson, to Renee
Szybala, Director of Compensation and Pension Service, October 15, 2004, 6
pages; Exhibit 2., Motion and Brief Amicus of Phillip Cushman, Roberts v.
Wilkie, CAVC 16-1219, motion to intervene denied by order dated October 27,
2017, 57 pages; Exhibit 3., United States. Cong. Senate Committee on the
Judiciary. Overview of False Claims and Fraud Legislation. Hearing, Jun. 17,
1986. 99th Cong. 2nd Sess. Washington: GPO, 1987, 176 pages; Exhibit 4.,
Freedom of Information Act response, August 10, 2018, 3 pages; Exhibit 5.,
Affidavit of Mr. Keith A. Roberts, March 9, 2007, 12 pages.
Page 6 of 6
#

Keith Roberts Wrongful Prosecution Is Part of Pattern of U.S. Government Bureaucrats Targeting Veterans

Men of honor have come forward to speak the truth
about the 2007 prosecution of Wisconsin's Keith
Roberts for fraud, a crusade that has netted the
lives of many military veterans. Commander,
United States Navy (ret), Robert Don Hathaway
has set the record straight, as bureaucrats crawl
back under the rocks where they live and work.

Navy Commander has come forward 50 years after a horrific death on a Naval air base to speak the truth and clear an innocent veteran wrongfully convicted by the VA and U.S. Dept of Justice

Updated - In 2010, the New York Times reported new U.S. Dept of Veterans Affairs regulations ending a requirement that "specific events like bomb blasts, firefights or mortar attacks" be documented as "stressors" for PTSD disability claims in a rare win for military veterans. 

A related consequential victory, it appeared, was the V.A. and U.S. Dept of Justice halting in its search-and-destroy mission of seeking out veterans with PTSD and prosecuting them for fraud for any or no reason.

This related victory for veterans was misreported here.

A malicious bureaucratic scheme implemented by the U.S. Dept of Veterans Affairs, Office of Inspector General continued after 2010.

Figures obtained by Robert P. Walsh, a Vietnam War combat veteran and a Michigan attorney who fights now for veterans, show that there have been 3,403 criminal arrests of veterans for fraud between 1986 and 2018, according to an Aug 10, 2018 letter to Walsh from the U.S. Dept of Veterans Affairs, Office of Inspector General.

One of those veterans is Wisconsin's Keith Roberts; another is Karl F. W. Monkemeyer, two men who served their country only to come home to be accused of fraud and wrongfully prosecuted by federal bureaucrats feasting on our veterans like jackals.

There is no due process that is observed for veterans who upset bureaucrats.

There is federal law that is supposed to protect veterans, but this law, 38 C.F.R.§§ 42.1-42.47 (1988), is falsely regarded as advisory by VA staff, for example, who disregard its protective mandates and procedures in their lust to justify their own bureaucratic importance.

Keith Roberts

Roberts’ VA disability claim for his diagnosed PTSD is related to his trying to save his buddy, Florida native Airman Gary Holland, from being crushed to death by a C-54 airplane while stationed at a Naval air base in Naples, Italy in 1969.

The VA and U.S. Attorney claim that Roberts lied about his role at the death scene (though he was stationed there and was on duty) and that he lied about being friends with Holland, though the two trained and arrived in Naples together. [An analysis obtained from Roberts wife, Deloris Roberts, of the service histories of Gary Holland and Keith Roberts reveals parallel military careers that would make it unlikely that Holland and Roberts were not at least friendly in their relationship, and that contradicts the prosecution’s indictment and trial statements.]

Commander Robert Don Hathaway

Roberts' attorney, Bob Walsh, located Roberts' officer-in-charge, Robert Don Hathaway, who was stationed at the Naples air base and conducted a four-hour deposition.

Hathaway, Commander, United States Navy (ret), is described as a no-nonsense Navy officer who reacted with surprise at news of the Roberts affair.

Hathaway's April 12, 2019 affidavit in sum corroborates Roberts' recollection of the death scene and utterly disconfirms the United States Dept of Justice's ridiculous indictment that Roberts misled the VA about his actions.

Roberts has testified under oath and in numerous documents submitted to the VA that he was on line duty, ordered (perhaps in bad form) several officers to help with the rescue of Holland, until ordered away.

Reads Mr. Hathaway's affidavit in part: "It is my considered professional opinion as a career U.S. Navy aviator of 30 years and a Navy Aviation Safety Officer for 10 years that the removal of the jacks from VC-54Q (Navy R5D) Aircraft Bureau Number (BUNO) 050878 on Saturday, February 1, 1969, was the most significant event in the chain of events which would culminate in the death of Gary D. Holland on February 5, 1969."

Put another way, the death of Holland was negligence, and those personnel who called off Roberts in his efforts and later testified against him were protecting an old crime that was dug up inadvertently by the VA.

"The death of Gary D. Holland was not an 'accident', it was the direct consequence of negligent conduct by officers and non-commissioned officers at NAF Naples, Italy," reads Hathaway's affidavit. "Some of these same individuals testified against Keith A. Roberts at his trial for criminal benefits fraud."

Roberts took it hard in 1969, watching a young man get crushed to death, and he bore ill will towards some of the people whom he believed were responsible.

Concludes Hathaway: "Gary D. Holland died during the Vietnam war. War is by definition productive of death and injury. But Gary D. Holland died tragically and avoidably in a place and at a time when he had every reason to feel safe."

Commander Robert Don Hathaway, USN, (Ret) has come
forward 50 years after a horrific death on a Naval air base
to speak the truth and clear an innocent veteran wrongfully
convicted by the VA and U.S. Dept of Justice.

Hathaway's April 12, 2019 affidavit is reproduced below; exhibits and images are referenced, but not shown:

AFFIDAVIT AND SWORN DECLARATION
ROBERT DON HATHAWAY
COMMANDER, USN, RETIRED

I, Robert Don Hathaway, being first duly cautioned and sworn, state that the
following information is true and correct based upon my personal knowledge.

PERSONAL INFORMATION
1. My name is Robert Don Hathaway, my date of birth is February 1,
1944. [personal info deleted here]
3. I attended Northeastern State University and received a Bachelor of
Science degree.
4. I joined the U.S. Navy in March of 1966 under an aviation officer
candidate program. I received my wings in June of 1968 and retired
in 1993.
5. I am a Naval aviator qualified in a number of fixed wing, rotary wing,
and jet powered aircraft.
6. I accrued over 1 ,000 hours flying C-54 aircraft during my Navy
career.
7. I graduated il-om the Naval Safety Officer Course at the Naval Post
Graduate School, Monterey, California in 1972/73.
8. This affidavit is prepared on behalf of Keith A. Roberts. A photo of
Keith A. Roberts is attached and marked as Exhibit A.
9. At no time has any employee of the U.S. Department of Veterans
Affairs or other U.S. government agency contacted me to discuss the
events of Tuesday, February 4, 1969, in which Gary D. Holland was
fatally injured.
10. As detailed below, Keith A. Roberts was under my command and was
on duty at the transient line office in Hanger 2, Naval Air Facility
Naples, Italy, on Tuesday, February 4, 1969, when Gary D. Holland
was fatally injured. A photograph of Gary D. Holland is attached and
marked as Exhibit B.
11. Keith A. Roberts was in pay grade E-3 on February 4, 1969, and was
designated as an ADJAN, Aviation Machinist's Mate (Jet Engine
Mechanic).
Naval Air Facility Naples, Italy (NAF Naples)
12. My first duty station in the U.S. Navy was Naval Air Facility Naples,
Italy (NAF Naples). I reported for duty there in August of 1968.
13. I was an ensign (0-1) when I arrived, and had been promoted to
Lieutenant Junior Grade (LTJG) by February of 1969.
14. Captain R. M. Frye, USN, was the commander, NAF Naples, in
February of 1969.
15. LCDR Jerry L. Fuchs, USN, was the Assistant Aircraft Maintenance
Officer at NAF Naples in February of 1969.
16. LCDR Harold R. Truesdale, USN, was the Operations Maintenance
Division Officer in February of 1969.
17. NAF Naples had two hangars in 1969. Hangar 1 was occupied by
Squadron VR-24. Hangar 2 housed the maintenance operations and
the Transient Line Division office, or line shack. A photo of the
hangars and ramp area circa 1959 is attached and marked as Exhibit
C. By 1969 a number of structures had been added near the hangars,
but the hangars were as shown in 1969.

The Transient Line Division
18. In addition to my flying duties I was the Division Officer in charge of
the Transient Line Division in February of 1969.
19. In my absence LT. Paul W. Solomon was the officer supervising the
Transient Line.
20. I reported to LCDR Harold R. Truesdale, USN.
21. LCDR Truesdale had been on the U.S.S. Forrestal on July 29, 1967,
in the Gulf of Tonkin when a Zuni rocket discharged prematurely and
caused a massive fire on the flight deck killing 134 sailors. This is
the same fire that John McCain survived.
22. LCDR Truesdale was deeply involved in the investigation of that
incident which he perceived had threatened to end his Navy career.
23. Because of the Forrestal incident in his recent past LCDR Truesdale
was extremely risk averse and micro-managed all of those reporting
to him at NAF Naples.
24. The senior non-commissioned officer in the Transient Line was Chief
George Hill, Jr. When I arrived in Naples in August of 1968 he was a
First Class Petty Officer (E-6). He was promoted to Chief Petty
Officer in January of 1969.
25. In February of 1969 Chief Hill had over 20 years of service in naval
aviation.
26. To the best of my knowledge Chief Hill passed away in 2009.
27. Keith A. Roberts, who was called "Robby", was an ADJAN, E-3, in
February of 1969.
28. He had reported for duty at NAF Naples in November of 1968.
Naples was his first duty assignment.
29. He was assigned to the Transient Line. A photo of Roberts in the
Naples Line Shack is attached as Exhibits D. A photo of Roberts
circa 1969 is attached as Exhibit E.
30. The Transient Line Division was responsible for all aircraft
movement on the base. That included the movement of aircraft
assigned to VR-24, the Fleet Air Logistics Squadron, which occupied
hangar 1.
31. Transient Line personnel were also responsible for placing aircraft on
jacks and removing them.
32. The Transient Line operated 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, and 365
days a year. The Division consisted of 2 officers, 1 Chief Petty
Officer, 4 Petty Officers and 6 men ofE-3 grade. The manpower of
the transient line was supplemented as needed. Approximately 11
enlisted men were assigned to the Transient Line in February of 1969.
33. The Transient Line office or "shack" was located in Hangar 2 and had
windows to the outside so that the runway, taxiways, and ramps could
be observed. There were also large windows so the hangar floor
could be observed.
34. The Transient Line Office had hot line telephones to the aircraft
control tower and to the fire station crash crew.
35. The actuator switch for the hangar Alarm Bell was located
approximately 6 feet from the transient line shack door that opened
out into the hangar.
36. The alarm bell was sounded if their was an emergency, or any time
aircraft were being moved in the hangar, and when equipment was
being moved on the hangar floor.
37. Tugs, forklifts and other equipment were stored outside and adjacent
to the hangar.
38. All of the enlisted men assigned to the transient line held aviation
rates.

VC-54Q (Navy R5D) Aircraft Bureau Number (BUNO) 050878
39. A number of Navy R5D (C-54) aircraft were either based or
maintained at NAF Naples in February of 1969.
40. A photo of a VR-24 C-54 circa 1960 is attached and marked as
Exhibit F.
41. Some of the C-54 aircraft were in a combination passenger and cargo
configuration for use by the senior commands.
42. VC-54Q BUNO 050878 (0878) was one of the combination executive
aircraft and was assigned to the Commander, Middle East Forces and
was based on Bahrain Island.
Friday, January 31, 1969
43. On Friday, January 31, 1969, (0878) had been in hangar 2 at NAF
Naples for periodic maintenance for approximately two weeks.
44. On January 23, 1969, Floyd M. Morris had determined that the nose
strut needed to be changed. See Investigative Report
69, (Exhibit J.), enclosure 14.
45. The aircraft had been placed on aircraft jacks by Transient Line
personnel.
46. A drawing depicting the jacking and lifting points for the C-54 is
attached and marked as Exhibit G.
47. A drawing depicting the aircraft jacks used for a C-54 aircraft is
attached and marked as Exhibit H.
48. The aircraft was positioned nose first in the hangar with the tail
section extending out over the ramp. A photo circa 1960 depicts a C-
54 in a similar position is marked as Exhibit I.
49. A new nose strut was being installed on C-54 (0878). All related
work had not been completed. See paragraphs 17-20, 20 FEB 69
investigative report (Exhibit J.) at page 4.
50. A drawing of the front main landing gear (nose gear) of a C-54
aircraft is attached and marked as Exhibit K.
51. On Friday, January 31, 1969, LCDR
capacity as the Assistant Aircraft Maintenance Officer at NAF
Naples, approach Chief George Hill, Jr. and requested that (0878) be
taken off the aircraft jacks.
52. The rationale set forth for this request by LCDR Fuchs was that the
removal of the jacks would facilitate movement out of the hangar in
the event of a fire and that under normal maintenance standards the
aircraft was not required to be on jacks. See paragraphs 19, 20, 20
FEB 69 investigative report (Exhibit J.) at page 4.
53. Chief George Hill, Jr. informed LCDR Fuchs that it was his opinion
that (0878) was not in proper maintenance status for removal of the
jacks and that they would be removed at a later time when the
necessary work was completed. Saturday, February 1, 1969
54. The new front main landing gear strut had been installed on Saturday,
February 1, 1969. See 20 FEB 69 investigative report (Exh. J.),
enclosure 14.
55. Enclosure 14 clearly indicates that critical components of the front
main landing gear assembly were missing on Saturday, February 2,
1969, when (0878) was taken off jacks by maintenance personnel.
See 20 FEB 69 investigative report (Exh. J.), enclosure 14.
Monday, February 3, 1969
56. Chief Steward, Gary D. Holland and other maintenance personnel
were involved in the installation of rigging and steering gear
associated with the front main landing gear. See 20 FEB 69
investigative report (Exh. J.), enclosure 14.
Tuesday, February 4, 1969
57. I reviewed my flight log which indicates that on Tuesday, February 4,
1969, I flew a mission in a C-117 Delta aircraft to the Naval Air
Station, Sigonella, Italy, then to Malta and returned to Naples. I
departed Naples early in the morning and had returned a short time
after Gary D. Holland had been evacuated by helicopter to the Navy
Hospital in Naples.
58. On Tuesday, February 4, 1969, written testing was conducted for
advancement from grade E-3 to E-4 in the morning. See the
announcement in the Capo News & Views base newsletter dated
January 8, 1969, and attached as Exhibit L., and see also 20 FEB 69
investigative report (Exh. J.), enclosure 14, confirming that Gary D.
Holland did not return to the hangar until 12:00 after completing the
test and eating lunch.
59. Keith A. Roberts along with other E-3's that worked in the hangar
were required to take the test. They were just returning to hangar 2 at
12:00.
60. After Chief Hill declined to remove the jacks from (0878)
maintenance division personnel had removed them as detailed above.
61. By the morning of Tuesday, February 4, 1969, (0878) was off jacks.
62. My recollection is clear that Keith A. Roberts was on duty at the
Transient Line Shack on Tuesday, February 4, 1969.
63. He was present upon my arrival at hangar 2 in the early afternoon of
February 4, 1969.
64. Keith A. Roberts participated in the after action debrief conducted by
Chief Hill and myself for all Transient Line Division personnel
during the afternoon of February 4, 1969.
65. The nose gear of (0878) collapsed trapping Gary D. Holland at 12:40.
See 20 FEB 69 investigative report (Exh. J.) Enclosure 15.
66. There was confusion and delay during the rescue effort.
67. Gary D. Holland was freed from the nose gear at 13:05. See 20 FEB
69 investigative report (Exh. J.), enclosure 5.
68. Gary D. Holland had been evacuated by helicopter to the U.S. Naval
Hospital, Naples, and arrived there at 13:20. See 20 FEB 69
investigative report (Exh. J.), enclosure 5.
69. Gary D. Holland was first seen by a medical officer at 13:30 on 04
FEB 69. See 20 FEB 69 investigative report (Exh. J.), page 2.
70. I had landed at Naples, taxied the aircraft, and was securing it when
Chief Hill came on board.
71. This would be the only time Chief Hill met me on an aircraft during
the entire time we served together.
72. The time was approximately 14:00.
73. Chief Hill briefed me on the collapse of the nose gear on (0878) and
the rescue efforts that had just concluded.
74. Chief Hill informed me that there were delays in the rescue efforts
and that in his opinion had the original efforts been allowed to
proceed Gary D. Holland would have had a good chance of survival.
75. Chief Hill stated that LCDR Harold B. Truesdale, USN, had ordered
the men attempting to use the fork lift to raise to nose of the aircraft
to stop as they might "further damage the aircraft".
76. There was a circus atmosphere in Hangar 2 when I arrived.
77. LCDR Truesdale was hollering instructions, ordering everyone to
return to duty and clear the hangar.
78. Some individuals responded that they did not work for him and
refused to leave.
79. At the time I arrived at Hangar 2 there were still at least 100 men and
women present.
80. Chief Hill and I gathered the Transient Line Division personnel and
had them each prepare a hand written statement regarding the incident
with (0878), the injury to Gary D. Holland, and what they had
observed or done as part of the rescue efforts.
81. Those hand written statements were then copied to the Transient Line
logbook to preserve them.
82. That evening I was present when there was a heated argument in the
Officers Mess regarding the incident, the rescue efforts, and what
many present believed to be unnecessary delay in freeing Gary D.
Holland.
Wednesday, February 5, 1969
83. Gary D. Holland died at 11:20 on 05 FEB 1969 at the U.S. Navy
Hospital, Naples, Italy. See 20 FEB 69 investigative report (Exh. J.)
at page 3.
84. LCDR Jerry L. Fuchs, USN, was appointed to conduct the
investigation by an order dated 05 FEB 1969. 20 FEB 69
investigative report (Exh. J.) enclosure 1.
The Reenactment of the Incident of February 4, 1969
85. LCDR Jerry L. Fuchs, USN, supervised a staged reenactment of the
incident in which Gary Holland was killed on Wednesday, February
5, 1969.
86. LCDR Fuchs prepared a statement in which he describes entering the
nose wheel well of (0878) on February 5, 1969. At this time the
aircraft jacks had been reinstalled.
87. LCDR Fuchs states that with his "left leg in position underneath the
down lock linkage, similar to the position depicted in enclosure (32),
I reached for the hydraulic line top connection, enclosure ( 15), which
the party was to secure, and as a result raised the down lock linkage
with my thigh. The lifting of the down lock linkage out of the lock
position required no intentional effort on my part. The process of
repositioning my body in any way caused sufficient force to be
applied to the down lock linkage to lift it out of the overcenter
position, which in turn would have allowed the nose wheel to
collapse if the aircraft had not been supported by jacks. "
20 FEB 69 investigative report (Exh. J.) enclosure 17, dated 5
February 1969.
88. Keith A. Roberts has informed me that he participated in another
reenactment identical to the one described above. Roberts states that
he was not able to move the linkage with his body no matter how hard
he tried. He further states that a color photograph of the reenactment
he participated in was offered as an exhibit at his criminal trial.

Investigation Report of 20 February 1969
89. The initial investigation of the fatal incident of February 4, 1969,
was conducted by LCDR Jerry L. Fuchs, USN. The report is dated 20
February 1969 and consists ed of71 pages. A copy is attached and
marked as Exhibit J.
90. LCDR Jerry L. Fuchs, USN, in his capacity as the Assistant Aircraft
Maintenance Officer at NAF Naples, was directly involved in the
decisions and actions that resulted in the death of Gary D. Holland.
91. LCDR Jerry L. Fuchs, USN, should have recused himself from any
role in the investigation of the incident other than as a witness.
92. The report dated February 20, 1969, is a preliminary report. This type
of report is also referred to as a "line of duty" report. The primary
purpose of these reports is to confirm that the death of the individual
involved was in the line of duty so that veterans benefits and Navy
final pay and benefits can be authorized.
93. The more comprehensive official U.S. Navy Safety Report has not
been available for my review. Access to those reports is restricted.
They are not subject to release via the Freedom of Information Act
and are for official use only.
94. It is my considered professional opinion as a career U.S. Navy aviator
of 30 years and a Navy Aviation Safety Officer for 10 years that the
removal of the jacks from VC-54Q (Navy R5D) Aircraft Bureau
Number (BUNO) 050878 on Saturday, February 1, 1969, was the
most significant event in the chain of events which would culminate
in the death of Gary D. Holland on February 5, 1969.
95. LCDR Jerry L. Fuchs, USN, testified in Federal District Court in the
trial of Keith A. Roberts that he could not think of any situation in
which an enlisted person would give an officer an order. That is
absurd. Military aviators routinely take orders from enlisted
personnel. The enlisted personnel serving on the Transient Line
directing aircraft give orders to the officers operating the aircraft on a
daily basis. Many military air traffic controllers are enlisted
personnel. The instructions they give to aircraft are orders.
96. Keith A. Roberts believed that as the individual manning the
Transient Line shack on February 4, 1969, when Gary D. Holland was
injured he should not have been impeded in his effort to rapidly raise
the nose of the aircraft with the fork lift.
97. That is inconsistent with the facts in the case, as clearly senior men
had arrived on scene that were more qualified to direct the rescue
efforts.
98. Keith A. Roberts and others who served with Gary D. Holland have
been troubled by his death.
99. The death of Gary D. Holland was not an "accident", it was the direct
consequence of negligent conduct by officers and non-commissioned
officers at NAF Naples, Italy.
100. Some of these same individuals testified against Keith A. Roberts at
his trial for criminal benefits fraud.
101. Gary D. Holland died during the Vietnam war. War is by definition
productive of death and injury. But Gary D. Holland died tragically
and avoidably in a place and at a time when he had every reason to
feel safe.
End of Statement

AFFIDAVIT AND SWORN DECLARATION OF
ROBERT DON HATHAWAY
COMMANDER, USN, RETIRED
I declare under the penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.

Date Signed
NOTARY PUBLIC
STATE OF OKLAHOMA )
) ss.
COUNTY OF CHEROKEE )
On this \l_lliday of ~(',· \ , 2019, Mr. Robert Don
Hathaway came before me and signed this affidavit after being first duly cautioned
and sworn and acknowledging it to be true to the best of his personal knowledge.
~/~~
, Certified Notary Pubhc
Cherokee County, Oklahoma
My Commission Expires: 0 8: J 0 3 Jz L.

AFFIDAVIT AND SWORN DECLARATION
ROBERT DON HATHAWAY
COMMANDER, USN, RETIRED
LIST OF EXHIBITS
A. Photo of Keith A. Roberts circa 1968.
B. Photograph of Gary D. Holland circa 1968.
C. Photo of the hangars and ramp area, NAF Naples, Italy, circa 1959.
D. Photo of Keith A. Roberts in the NAF Naples Transient Line Shack circa 1969.
E. Photo ofKeith A. Roberts at the NAF Naples circa 1969.
F. Photo of a VR-24 R-5-D, C-54 aircraft circa 1960.
G. Drawing depicting the jacking and lifting points for the C-54 aircraft.
H. Drawing depicting the aircraft jacks used for a C-54 aircraft.
I. Photo circa 1960, C-54 nose first in a hangar at NAF Naples similar to the
position of(0878) on February 4, 1969.
J. U.S. Navy report of the investigation into the circumstances connected with the
death of AMSAN Gary D. Holland, as a result of an accident on 4 February
1969, dated 20 FEB 69, 71 pages.
K. Drawing depicting the front main landing gear (nose gear) of a C-54 aircraft.
L. Capo News & Views base newsletter dated January 8, 1969, announcing the
E-3 to E-4 written examination for the morning of Tuesday, February 4, 1969.
End of Exhibit
#

House Vets Chair Miller says VA spending review needed; Sen Chair Murray Vows to Fight Miller

The lines are drawn between the two new congressional Veterans' Affairs committee chairs—House VA Committee's Rep. Jeff Miller, and the Senate VA Committee's Sen. Patty Murray.

Rep. Miller (R-Fla) has already sparked outrage among veterans for vowing to cut spending and Sen Murray (D-Wash) has vowed to fight back as the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA or VA) remains a political flashpoint.

The DVA (VA) moved sharply to the pro-benefits side of the spectrum with several major pro-veteran initiatives begun the last two years over the almost universal objection of the GOP and one Democratic senator, Sen. James Webb (D-VA).

Most veterans' groups remain unsatisfied though generally noting the direction of the progress made on veterans' behalf and the Presidential initiative supporting military families.

From Kimberly Hefling's AP piece

WASHINGTON – The GOP chairman of the House Veterans' Affairs Committee, Rep. Jeff Miller, promised on Thursday a thorough review of spending for veterans' programs.

His newly appointed counterpart in the Senate, Sen. Patty Murray, said she will be watching Republicans "like a hawk" to ensure veterans get their financial due.

The House and Senate Veterans' Affairs committees have jurisdiction over the Veterans Affairs Department, one of the largest federal agencies with a $114 billion budget and 300,000 employees. It provides benefits checks and medical services to the nation's 22 million veterans, including the thousands coming home from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan with mental and physical wounds.

House Veterans' Affairs Chairman Miller, a conservative from the Florida Panhandle, said the VA has had record budget increases in the last decade with little oversight by either party over how the money was spent.

"As we move forward, all areas will have to be reviewed, and that includes looking at the Defense Department, looking at Homeland Security and looking at Veterans Affairs," Miller said.

Miller said he's concerned about the billions spent within the VA on contracting, but it's unclear where the review of veterans' spending will lead. He said veterans should receive the benefits they've earned, but he also thinks veterans understand why fiscal responsibility is necessary.

"I think it's fair to say the veterans in this country have sacrificed in their service to our nation, but they are willing to do what's necessary to help get this country's fiscal house in order," said Miller, a former real estate broker and deputy sheriff who has a large air base in his district.

Murray, who was named to the top Senate Veterans' Affairs committee job on Thursday, said she'll be monitoring what Republicans do.

"Believe me, I've been here before, I have heard the promises, `Oh, don't worry, we haven't touched them. They're fine.' Then come to find out, that no, on the ground, everywhere it's really important, they're really impacting services, and I will be watching them like a hawk," said Murray, who was re-elected last year to a fourth term in Washington state.

Murray, the daughter of a disabled World War II veteran who spent time as a college intern working in the psychiatric ward of a VA hospital, said the Republicans' "slash everything motive" doesn't recognize the needs veterans have. She said the VA still doesn't do enough to be an advocate for veterans.

"We cannot say, `Gee, Sorry,' to them," Murray said. "We have to say: 'our country is there for you.'".

New VA Benefits Claim Form: Just Six Pages

Say good-bye to the 26-page-long benefits claims form from hell.

Is this the beginning of a veteran-friendly U.S. Dept of Veterans Affairs?

By Kelly Kennedy in the Army Times

After years of complaints from veterans about having to fill out a 26-page-long benefits claims form for the Veterans Affairs Department, the Office of Management and Budget has approved VA’s new six-page form.

As the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have progressed, the 26-page application became particularly troublesome for veterans dealing with traumatic brain injuries or post-traumatic stress disorder, both of which can cause short-term memory loss and other cognitive issues.

“It’s a good thing and we’re pleased,” said Paul Sullivan, executive director of Veterans for Common Sense. “In our view, the current form is burdensome. It’s too long.”

VA spokesman Steve Westerfeld confirmed in a voicemail that VA had shortened VA Form 21-526, as well as creating a new “express claim” form, or 21-526EZ, which is six pages long and requires that the veteran provide his own medical and military records, rather than waiting for VA to gather them.

The EZ form comes as a result of a pilot program mandated by the Veterans’ Benefit Improvement Act of 2008. That pilot program will now be expanded to include everyone, according to VA’s May Compensation & Pension Service Bulletin.

Sullivan, along with other veterans’ service groups and several members of congress, have pushed for the shorter form.

Tom Staudter, spokesman for Rep. John Hall, D-N.Y., said Hall had talked with several veterans who said they couldn’t fill out the lengthy form, and therefore never received any disability compensation. Hall is chairman of the House Veterans’ Affairs subcommittee on disability affairs and memorial assistance.

When Hall met with veterans again last week and told them about the new six-page form, “they were absolutely pleased to hear it’s on the horizon,” Staudter said.

Sullivan said that, by reducing the form from 26 pages to 6 pages, VA could kill about 20 million pages of paperwork, per the 1 million claims expected this year.

“Filing a 26-page disability claim is undoubtedly a daunting process for veterans, particularly those who have traumatic brain injury or post-traumatic stress disorder,” said Amy Fairweather, policy director for Swords to Plowshares, an organization that provides counseling, case management, and job training to veterans in San Francisco, and which has argued for a shorter form. “The change to a simpler six-page application will certainly break down barriers not only for veterans, but also for advocates and VA staff.”

Several other veterans service groups, such as Disabled American Veterans and the American Legion, have also argued for the shorter forms during congressional hearings.

Sullivan said the 26-page form creates a barrier for the veterans that, in turn, creates an adversarial atmosphere. For example, the old form asks a veteran to detail his or her military service, which seems like finding a lot of details that are already readily available to VA.

“The guys say, ‘Doesn’t the government know when I served?’” Sullivan said.

VA officials had not yet returned a call for details about the new form, such as when it will be implemented.

The Fallen and the Living

Updated - Saluting Veterans for Common Sense

The Wisconsin State Journal ran my response to an article by national Associated Press writer Allen Breed this month disparaging veterans' disability benefits.

The benefits system is so veteran-friendly that Breed mocks it as "an open invitation to fraud," an absurd insult to our veterans.

One wonders if neocons like Breed still really believe what they write.

A thank you to the State Journal's editorial staff on this Memorial Day weekend, honoring the fallen and those who survived as we thank the families and veterans always.

Pictured above is a shot from a Marine friend in China Beach, 1969. Makes me laugh.

But like most of the young sent off to war for lies, this dude did not come home the same guy who left. So, have a happy Memorial Day weekend and a cold Pabst Blue Ribbon or anything else brewed in Wisconsin.

Jailed Wisc Vet Knocked Down by High Vets' Court

Update: Text of CAVC opinion in KEITH A. ROBERTS, APPELLANT, V. ERIC K. SHINSEKI, SECRETARY OF VETERANS AFFAIRS, APPELLEE, on Appeal from the Board of Veterans' Appeals (05-2425)

Keith Roberts, wrongly imprisoned Vietnam-era veteran now living in a half-way house in Northern Wisconsin received an adverse ruling Friday from an en banc (full) panel of the UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR VETERANS CLAIMS (CAVC) in his benefits case (05-2425).

The 45-page opinion is complex. Some of the elements of the opinion remand parts of Roberts claim, but in sum, Roberts has been hung out to try.

Roberts had followed the advice of his veterans service officer and sought retroactive benefits dating to the time of discharge, bad-mouthed the DVA repeatedly, and was rewarded for his trouble with a federal prosecution during the Bush-Cheney years.

Roberts is considering appealing to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

Sound incredible?

For background, see Jailed Wisconsin Veteran Case Gets More Bizarre. From an earlier post:

What does the U.S. government do with a veteran who blows the whistle on the U.S. Dept. of Veterans Affairs (DVA) shreddergate scandal and who badgers the DVA as he “tenaciously pursues his claim for disability benefits," telling DVA staff that they are a bunch of "bureaucratic assholes?" The Bush-Cheney DVA and the U.S. Dept. of Justice targeted, convicted, and impoverished this Wisconsin Navy veteran on trumped-up charges of wire fraud.

Specifics, say the U.S. government, are that Navy Airman Keith Roberts and Gary Holland (who was crushed to death by a C-54 aircraft at an airbase in Naples, Italy, back in 1969) were not friends [despite their parallel service histories] and Roberts exaggerated his efforts to rescue his fellow airman, [despite the fact that he was on line duty, and subsequently at least one veteran present has corroborated Roberts' actions]. Yeah, that's right, those are the specifics of the prosecution's criminal case hatched back in 2005-2006 to shut up and retaliate against a veteran who had become, according to a Milwaukee DVA regional hospital source, a "belligerent ass." [A background source at the Clement J. Zablocki VA Medical Center in Milwaukee e-mailed the Lee Rayburn radio show in Madison in early June 2007 after a program about the Roberts case and asked to remain anonymous out of fear of losing his job. "I'd have to say that you guys are TOTALLY (uppercase in the original) right about Roberts' conviction being bullshit. ..." Disability claim denied and off to jail.

In the latest developments, Roberts, a political prisoner of the Republican Party, now reportedly embittered and feeling hopeless, is expected to be released from federal prison in March after serving almost four years behind bars.

He still has a rare case [Keith A. Roberts v. Eric K. Shinseki (05-2425)] pending before an en banc panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) that issued what appears to be a bizarre order on December 29, 2009.

Roberts and the DVA

Roberts was advised in 2002 by the late Jim Henning, a Shawano County (Wisconsin) Veteran's Service Officer, to apply for an earlier retroactive date for his PTSD disability benefits predicated in part by his witnessing Holland being crushed to death and related trauma.

Bad move.

Critics and veteran groups rightly accused the Bush administration of the unprecedented politicalization of the Department of Justice and the DVA, and see the indictment and conviction of Roberts (and other veterans) on charges of wire fraud as a consequence of this politicalization that discourages Vietnam-era veterans from seeking PTSD benefits, per the views of the American Enterprise Institute's Dr. Sally Satel.

Roberts was diagnosed with PTSD and granted disability benefits in 1999, but became suspicious that the DVA was altering his Claim file (C-file), and he loudly accused the VA of engaging in fraud in phone conversations. Ultimately, the VA and then US Attorney Stephen Biskupic turned Roberts' charge around, and charged and convicted Roberts with fraud, an injustice that still has veterans all over the country shaking their heads in disbelief.

Memorial Day Weekend

Update: Weekly Presidential Address: Sacrifice.
On this Memorial Day weekend, President Obama calls on the American people to join him in paying tribute to America’s veterans, servicemen and women – particularly those who have made the ultimate sacrifice - and their families.

This is the first weekend of Summer and a time to mark the sacrifices of our veterans.

It seems appropriate to mark the disrespect that is tragically shown our veterans, and honor some people fighting for them.

From the injustice of jailed Vietnam-era vet Keith Roberts (jailed since 2007 for seeking PTSD benefits that he deserves) to Mike (Beetle) Bailey to Vietnam Vet Bob Walsh (an attorney fighting for veterans), the last several years I have seen up close and personal how the millions of veterans we honor are herded like cattle through the VA system and treated like dirt.

I'll honor veterans this weekend by renewing the fight and honoring the friendships with better men than I who have fought for veterans for decades.

At left is a partial list of others whom I am proud to note as sometimes happy, sometimes grim warriors who give veterans that highest of honor: Giving a shit.

Military Document Corroborates Jailed Vet's Story

by Michael Leon

Madison, Wisconsin—A February 6, 1969 “Special Enlisted Personnel Performance Evaluation” corroborates the version of events of Airman Keith Roberts (1968-74) who sits behind bars, serving a four-year sentence for federal wire fraud after seeking VA disability benefits.

The document (at right) lists his duties at the Transient Line Operations Division, and Roberts was recommended for advancement to 3rd Class Petty Officer, two days after Roberts’ colleague and friend, Airman Gary Holland, was crushed to death in the wheel well of a C-54 airplane at a U.S. base in Naples, Italy on Feb. 4, 1969.

The document (exceptional in nature) is significant because it was given to Roberts and put in his service file two days after the death of Holland as the military equivalent of a pat on the back for Roberts’ performance at the scene of Holland’s death by Lt. Commander H.R. Truesdale, Roberts’ commanding officer.

Holland had trained with Roberts in New Jersey and they both came to the small Italy airbase as young airmen within weeks of each other.

The document undercuts the theory advanced by US Atty Stephen Biskupic’s office (Eastern Dist. of Wisconsin) that Roberts engaged in a “scheme” to “fabricate” events at Holland's death that led to his granting of disability benefits in 1999, retroactive to 1992.

Bush Policy

After being diagnosed with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and granted disability benefits, Vietnam-era veteran Keith Roberts had no idea that an array of political and bureaucratic forces allied with VA Secretary Jim Nicholson in 2004-05 was determined to adopt the policies of the rightwing think tank, the American Enterprise Institute, ultimately resulting in Roberts’ prosecution after Roberts phoned the VA and complained that the VA were engaging in fraud in the processing of his PTSD disability claim.

Roberts’ benefits were ultimately cut after his phone call, and US Atty Biskupic's office used the VA benefits-severed administrative fact as a means of prosecuting Roberts in a criminal process.

Under the Bush administration, the VA is using well-crafted propaganda to defend a reduction in benefits to veterans with PTSD, and redirect blame towards the troops themselves, or dismiss the PTSD as a mere pre-existing personality disorder, not requiring VA disability benefits.

On Memorial Day at a peace rally in Madison, one Vietnam veteran seeking PTSD benefits, Terry Collins, said, "The VA is trying to drive me crazy. They are just dragging this out and trying to frustrate me to death."

The Bush VA wants Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) disability benefits slashed, as returning Iraq and Afghanistan vets' and Vietnam-era vets’ claims have spiked.

Jim Henning

Roberts was advised by the late Jim Henning, a Shawano County (Wisconsin) Veteran’s Service Officer with an impeccable record, to apply for an earlier retroactive date for his PTSD disability benefits in an official VA document.

Henning’s advice laid out in the document in Roberts file cut no ice with VA higher-ups and US Atty Stephen Biskupic (Eastern Dist. of Wisconsin).

Henning’s document was never introduced at trial.

Next Legal Steps

Roberts’ ordeal featured material misrepresentations and distortions of facts and VA processes made at trial, the grand jury indictment and investigation by the VA and US Atty.

And much exculpatory evidence was never introduced at trial in defense of Roberts.

Roberts' appeal brief is due June 29 before the US Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit.

The government brief is due July 30. Roberts' reply brief is due August 13.

Oral arguments are scheduled at the Court's convenience.

Significance for Vets

Beyond Roberts’ liberty, the Roberts case bears heavily on 100,000s of vets as the Administration looks to cut costs by axing treatment and benefits for returning PTSD-wounded veterans, entitlements that are anathema to Bush rightwing ideologues.

No other VA case that Roberts’ attorneys or his colleagues have even heard of involves a veteran in the middle of the VA adjudication processes, indicted and then convicted of wire fraud. [And all benefits must be deposited through electronic funds.]

Every veteran who files for PTSD (especially Vietnam-era vets) is now at criminal risk if they cannot prove that their "stressors" exist to the evolving and high standard of the VA in these matters.

“The process of gathering evidence to prove PTSD disability is extremely time-consuming,” said Sen Barrack Obama (D-IL) in 2005. “It requires the compilation of medical records, military service records, and testimonies from other veterans who can attest to a person’s combat exposure. I cannot fathom why the VA would require veterans to go through this emotionally painful process a second time.”

Roberts is a warning to every vet. He was swiftboated by his own government and they are making this veteran look like a scheming, crooked con man.

The cases to be adjudicated are:

- U.S. v. Roberts, E.D. of Wisconsin federal court, docket 05-CR-118. U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit, 07-1546, 03/12/07.\;

- U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) docket number 05-2425;

- VA Board of Veterans Appeals docket number 03-04 265.
###

Update on Innocent Vietnam-era Veteran Jailed

Madison, Wisconsin - Keith Roberts will soon be moved (we don't know when) from a Kenosha, WI jail to a federal facility. We'll get you an address ASAP so he can receive mail (his mail was confiscated as contraband by the good people of the Kenosha county jail).

His appeal is scheduled for May 30th before the 7th Circuit, but will likely be postponed because the trial transcripts were made available to the appellate attorneys only days ago.

Media

The following media appearances by me on Keith are scheduled for this week:

The Lee Rayburn Show
The MIC 92.1 FM (Madison)
Thursday, May 24
7:00 AM central time
http://www.themic921.com/cc-common/podcast.html

A Public Affair
WORT 89.9 FM (Madison)
Listeners can call in at (608) 256 2001 (15-minute segment show)
Friday, May 25
Noon PM central time
http://www.wort-fm.org/listen.php

Financial Help

Those able to help with financial support can send checks/cash to (anything helps):

Keith Roberts Defense Fund, Inc.
Kentucky Neighborhood Bank
201 E. Lincoln Trail Blvd.
Radcliff, KY 40160

Letters

Short Letters can be posted as comments here, and Keith's wife, Delores, can pick up the comments and see that Keith receives them.

More Exculpatory Evidence

Coming here soon, more exculpatory evidence for this ludicrous and politically motivated prosecution of a veteran diagnosed with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and jailed for 48 months on federal fraud charges.

Keep the faith, and the fight.

###

Armed Forces Day and a Marine’s Shocking Fight Against the VA

Since May 20, 1950, every third Saturday in May has been observed as Armed Forces Day, an occasion to salute the men and women in all branches of the service who protect our country.

Look here Saturday on this Armed Forces Day for the story of a Marine fighting the nastiest of enemies: the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA).

Honor our service men and women, our veterans, and their families. This coming story of a poster-boy Marine betrayed and humiliated will appall you, and — many vets hope — make you very angry.

###