I ask because I could have sworn I heard a Republican say on CSPAN recently that it was the largest scandal in the history of political scandal. A Google search turned up this from a January 19
CNN story about Samir Vincent's guilty plea:
"Various U.S. estimates allege that Saddam, who was able to choose the vendors, exploited the program to seize an estimated
$2 billion to $4 billion in illegal surcharges on its oil sales and kickbacks on the humanitarian goods purchases." <bold added>
Granted, $2-4 billion is a large amount. But in LBN there's a story about Halliburton's overcharging the Pentagon $4 billion, and over the weekend, a scandal over the Bremer's occupation government losing track of $9 billion broke.
Once upon a time, boys and girls, when a person was shown that the amount they were touting as "the largest in all history" was suddenly shown to be dwarfed by other amounts, they would drop their claims and shut up, hoping to make their lie go away from public memory as fast as possible. But in this day and age, we can expect the Bushists to continue touting oil-for-food as "the greatest scandal ever" while much greater scandals in their own government go ignored.