digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

Once-secret memos question Clinton's honesty - - Breaking Ne

washingtontimes.com — Newly released documents demonstrate Hillary Clinton was believed to be dealing dishonestly with federal prosecutors during Whitewater investigation.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • diggeradoo, on 05/08/2008, -2/+89Just another of the hundred reasons why the Clintons and their cronies should never be allowed back in the White House.
    • Wargalas, on 05/08/2008, -20/+11Told you so.

      Love,

      The Republicans.
      • AshamedAmerican, on 05/08/2008, -4/+22Yeah, you guys did much better.
        • Wargalas, on 05/08/2008, -15/+5Well you didn't believe us about Al-Qaeda, you didn't believe us about Hillary's honesty, you didn't believe us about a number of things, and now when you find out for yourselves, you deserve an "I told you so."
          • ayeroxor, on 05/08/2008, -2/+5The fact that you think there is one single cohesive group called Al Qaeda and the implication that you think everyone who says they're "in Al Qaeda" believes the same things as all the others tells me all I need to know about your political expertise.
          • Wargalas, on 05/08/2008, -2/+2Oh please, do tell us with your vast amount of expertise in counter-terrorism, where I went wrong. I'm speaking of Osama Bin Laden's Al-Qaeda, not these fly by night wannabes that you see in different parts of Asia and the Middle East.
          • jebudas, on 05/09/2008, -1/+2@Wargalas,
            Are you referring to the same Osama Bin Laden that we had cornered in Afghanistan, but didnt pursue? Could that be because someone in the white house wanted a war with Iraq and wouldnt be able to justify it if we caught him?
          • Wargalas, on 05/09/2008, -1/+2Yep, one and the same. I want THAT guy dead.
          • CryRightardCry, on 05/09/2008, -1/+3What a stupid ***** you are.
            What, did you have your head completely up your ass, or do you just like to lie?
            You pathetic scumbags FAILED at everything you touched, and you dragged the entire world down with you to wallow in the sewer.
            You losers still lack the integrity to admit your failures.
            ***** off back to the other losers at LGF.
        • CaptainAmerica1, on 05/08/2008, -4/+6Your handle says it all, buddy.
        • CryRightardCry, on 05/09/2008, -1/+3@traitorous CaptainAmerica1
          That's because he has the integrity to be ashamed.
          He has the ethical and moral capacity to see what utter evil is being commited in America's name.
          Just because you are too much of a scumbag rightard to understand is no reason to try to take shots at him.
          Your nick is far worse. Are we really expected to believe the Cap't would be a right wing warmonger shill?
      • tjmb9, on 05/08/2008, -5/+3At least our heroes aren't senile.

        oh go ahead punks
    • lacreme, on 05/08/2008, -9/+5i'm a member of the green party and i think you two fighting is just SO CUTE
    • Balks, on 05/09/2008, -0/+0Just wait, there are more documents that have yet to be de-classified. Perhaps people should ask the Clintons about a little thing called Mogadishu. I'm sure they'd love to explain that one.
  • bitfreak, on 05/08/2008, -3/+58Uhhh...the Clintons are dishonest? That comes as a huge shock to me. Watching the news footage from this campaign, I actually thought Hillary was an average blue collar Jane, Master of the gas station coffee machine, that does shots of whiskey, always tells the truth, and dodges sniper fire.

    OK, the coffee machine comment was below the belt, but man I laughed my ass off when I saw that video. Clinton VS The Coffee Machine. Clinton 0, Coffee Machine 1. To be fair, let's not talk about Obama VS The Bowling Lane. My man let us down there. LOL.

    • wendelgee2, on 05/08/2008, -0/+13Nah...the media let us down there. Did you ever read that it was 7 frames, and 2 of them were bowled by a little girl? Neither did I. So, that's 37 in 5 frames, essentially.
    • AYork, on 05/08/2008, -1/+4You've got that wrong. It's all that *while* dodging sniper fire. And keeping dirty Chinese Commie hands off our magnet factories.
    • fleischner, on 05/08/2008, -18/+2Okay, how about Obama vs. Rev. Wright? You know, the guy that preached to Obama for 20 years and Obama somehow never heard any of his inflammatory statements. Obama is a dangerous, dangerous liar.
      • petebot, on 05/08/2008, -0/+6Go ahead, let's see how much you can squeeze out of it.
        • roflcoaster, on 05/08/2008, -0/+1no more than fox has.
        • fleischner, on 05/08/2008, -9/+2Please. Hypocrisy doesn't look good on you.
          • petebot, on 05/08/2008, -2/+5Hypocrisy of what? The Wright controversy is *****, just like McCain's black baby controversy in 2000.
          • petebot, on 05/08/2008, -0/+1Sorry, I forgot to put ""'s around controversy.
          • fleischner, on 05/08/2008, -6/+3Hypocrisy of claiming that news isn't news and we should all "move on." Name any GOP scandal or perceived scandal that liberals (including the professional media; i give you Dan Rather) didn't want to exploit to the hilt. And now we want to point out that Obama gets his inspiration from a vicious racist but we're supposed to ignore it. Just stop with the silly deflecting.
          • chan0429, on 05/08/2008, -0/+1fleischner I've never seen a Digg user account with so many negative diggs.
            Granted this is the only thing anyone has that seems to stick to him and which is why this keeps on getting brought up, but please you and the Clintons just stop already, it's mind-numbingly redundant and boring.
      • wendelgee2, on 05/08/2008, -0/+4yawn.
      • BadseedJR, on 05/08/2008, -0/+7Secret memos or it didn't happen!
      • chan0429, on 05/08/2008, -2/+4How about Obama's racist white Grandmother? As Obama has said, he loves these people, they are a part of who he is, he can't just deny a part of who he is, he can disagree with him but not cast him aside. Which is why Obama is a better man than most politicians and why I'd trust him to be my president.

        The only thing Obama is a danger to are big corporate spenders and the single large donors that maxed out the amount they could contribute to Clinton. Rev. Wright vs. Whitewater, the Clinton Body Count (http://www.theforbiddenknowledge.com/hardtruth/cli ... her connections to Rupert Murdock (http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2006/05/ ... her vote for the war, and her lies about sniper fire.

        Hilary is a dangerous, dangerous liar.
      • uberfu, on 05/08/2008, -1/+2so - let's see - on one hand you have Hillary Clinton who has been a reputed cronic liar since the day she uttered her first word and on the other hand you have Barrack Obama who is obviously bull-***** about his relationship with his priest [he's simply more smooth about it]_ So we have a Liar vs a Liar on the Democratic side and then we have McCain who will most likely continue in the footsteps of the Republican Policies of the past 8 years - is it too late to vote for Bugs Bunny?
      • IADTatami, on 05/09/2008, -1/+1Triple-dog dangerous is where I draw the line, so Obama's still got my vote... for now.
      • bitfreak, on 05/09/2008, -0/+1Does the word 'turdblossom" mean anything to you?
    • dinot, on 05/08/2008, -0/+1I've had trouble with uncooperative coffee machines in my time. and washing machines. and even those old rotary telephones :(
  • JosselynB, on 05/08/2008, -3/+29I'm not surprised in the least, but is the Washington Times a credible source? Seems I've heard otherwise so I'm honestly asking....
    • MacEnvy, on 05/08/2008, -5/+8I agree. I'm no fan of Hillary, but this is just a hit piece by the WT.

      FTFA, and I have to agree:
      '"This is a baseless accusation which was looked into over a decade ago in an investigation that took $71.5 million and eight years to determine there was no case," he said.'
    • jstohler, on 05/08/2008, -4/+12Wash Times is owned by the Moonies. Fail.
      • IphtashuFitz, on 05/08/2008, -2/+6Yeah, I learned that back when looking for my first job out of college. Didn't know anything about them at the time. Sent them a resume (along with dozens of other places). First question I got in my interview there: "Do you know anything about the Washington Times?". I basically said that about all I knew was that it was a newspaper located in Washington. The guy then proceeded to fill me in on how it was owned by the Moonies and years ago virtually everybody who worked there were Moonies, and there are still plenty of them there today.

        I'm glad they didn't offer me a job.
    • InfamousAtheist, on 05/08/2008, -1/+14WT is definitely a biased source, but so are many, many others we get news from at digg.

      Reading the article, it certainly appears that the documents contradict HRC's statements about her income as an attorney in the 80s.

      I'm not surprised...
    • johnnykahalawai, on 05/09/2008, -0/+1HRC bringing up William Ayers put me over the edge. She has had so many strange relations over the years and I think it is worth talking about them before she's offered the VP spot. If you think the WT is biased imagine what Fox and it's new surrogate the Wall Street Journal would have reported were she the Democratic Nominee or VP.
  • abburdlen, on 05/08/2008, -6/+24This is from the Washington Times for crying out load!
    What's the point? Enough with the Clinton bashing.
    The primary is over, Obama won, she lost.
    On to McSame.
    • gsxrjason, on 05/08/2008, -1/+24We're scared that if we take our eye off her she will pop up like the bad guy in the horror movie after he's been shot 3 times but not in the head yet.
      • elint6, on 05/08/2008, -0/+11True. She has been gifted with excellent bullet-dodging skills.
      • Nobi-Wan, on 05/08/2008, -0/+3That was literally the best comment I've read on Digg in a long, long time.

        The scary thing is that it's so true about the Clintons.
      • doctechnical, on 05/08/2008, -0/+4You *are* using silver bullets, right?
      • dondara, on 05/08/2008, -0/+5Yeah, you have to cut the head off and burn the body, it's the only way to be sure.
        • doctechnical, on 05/08/2008, -0/+3And bury the head at a crossroads during a new moon. Can't be too careful.
    • xen0blue, on 05/08/2008, -0/+2if she's really that bad as you people claim you won't stop bashing her
  • redcolumbine, on 05/08/2008, -1/+11Perjury is a MUCH bigger shadow than having once admired someone who subsequently got so high on limelight that he lost his marbles. But I still think her contempt for the voting public is worse, given the job she's interviewing for.
  • Yatata, on 05/08/2008, -5/+10ok ok ok let's move on shall we? this is all slightly old hat. Obama's got it, Hillary's irrelevant, time to get on to running against Mcmilitaryindustrialcomplex.
    • tcbishop12, on 05/08/2008, -2/+7Not until she's out and says so.
      • Yatata, on 05/08/2008, -0/+1as Tolle says, "What you fight, you strengthen. What you resist, persists." I think it's time we all moved on to the main event - at least in projected thought, and let this one go. Stay positive, focus on the desired outcome, not on what you fear. that's the road forward out of this mud pit.
  • davidg11, on 05/08/2008, -0/+24I'd comment on this story but the incoming sniper fire is preventing me from doing so.
  • davidg11, on 05/08/2008, -1/+14Hey, C'mon now. That's not fair. It all depends on what the definition of "IS" is.

  • swrostmore, on 05/08/2008, -4/+12Washington Times, owned and operated as a conservative propaganda outlet by Korean cult leader Sun Myung Moon. "In today's warfare of ideology, intelligence and propaganda, nobody can compete with Reverend Moon." Commenting in 1996 about Unification Church ownership of the Times and other news outlets, Moon said:
    "That is why Father has been combining and organizing scholars from all over the world, and also newspaper organizations, in order to make propaganda."
    • NonLeftistDiggr, on 05/08/2008, -5/+4Chill out! Don't worry about it, you have the New York Times, you have the LA Times, you have newsweek, USA today, I could type papers all day.... to counter balance the washington times.
      • swrostmore, on 05/08/2008, -4/+3If you feel that way, by all means, post up some quotes from the NY Times management where they openly admit to being a propaganda outlet....
        • NonLeftistDiggr, on 05/08/2008, -3/+2Don't need them, the headlines and editorials are blatant enough.... not to mention journalists tend to be 80%+ registered democrats.
          • swrostmore, on 05/08/2008, -2/+2And the people who sign the journalists' paychecks tend to be 80% registered Republicans....what's your point? Until you post proof you're buried as a ***** conspiracy theorist.
          • Apophis574, on 05/08/2008, -1/+2@ swrostmore
            LOL
            and you're not... wow..
          • NonLeftistDiggr, on 05/09/2008, -1/+2Proof? Look it up, it is as widely known as it is ignored, last time I saw it a few years ago it was 85%.

            Majority of journalists are registered democrats = conspiracy theory....... that's comical
    • yellowcakewalk, on 05/08/2008, -4/+1Here's more about the Moonie Times:
      http://digg.com/world_news/Washington_Times_founde ...
    • xen0blue, on 05/08/2008, -3/+3funny you don't mention the other 99% of the media that is owned by far left extremists like george soros or michael eisner
      • skiboy352001, on 05/08/2008, -2/+2Or Rupert Murdock, Yeah, I can see how you could have forgotten that one.
  • dpcamp, on 05/08/2008, -1/+11woah woah woah...
    A politician being dishonest???
    That is breaking ne!!!!
  • motogoat, on 05/08/2008, -2/+8While I agree that she's done and Obama is our man now, this is still substantive news. Why bury it just because her bid for the nomination is almost over? Even if she'd never thrown her hat into the ring for president, as a senator...this is still important news. It it were any other senator, it would still be getting publicity.
    • Troy64, on 05/08/2008, -1/+2It wasn't important news when the Republicans were talking about it in the 90s. It was a right wing conspiracy then.
    • ShempRider, on 05/08/2008, -1/+2Yup. If you or I dealt "dishonestly with federal prosecutors during [ANY] investigation", we'd be facing time in Club Fed.
  • x0rcist, on 05/08/2008, -0/+7There are no questions about Clinton's lack of honesty.
  • ScienceDoc, on 05/08/2008, -4/+8The Washington Times is the Rush Limbaugh of newspapers.
    • dondara, on 05/08/2008, -1/+2A newspaper that does drugs, bangs Haitian hookers and spreads ***** all over the ...Screw it, you know where I was going with this. Not enough energy left to make fun of that fat *****, it's been a rough day.
  • NonLeftistDiggr, on 05/08/2008, -2/+4"once secret memos"..... yeah right, "once hidden memos"
  • goodnrg, on 05/08/2008, -1/+4Agree with the comments about the bias of the Washington Times, but this goes to the point of Billary being "vetted", as they continue to say. If she had been the nominee, all the old baggage would have been pawed over and all the new baggage (Bill's business deals, Clinton library donations, etc) would have been opened. Agree with the commentator who said that they had "more baggage than JFK."
  • budgetguitar, on 05/08/2008, -0/+2They have more baggage than that old Sampsonite gorilla.
  • doctechnical, on 05/08/2008, -0/+5We are the headlines that say "Ne!"
  • chrissku, on 05/08/2008, -1/+11Sounds like she belongs in prison, not the White House.
    • ender7074, on 05/08/2008, -3/+0Same thing Republicans have been saying for years. Welcome to the club....
  • an0nymous, on 05/08/2008, -1/+1Honestly, she's done. Old news. No sense beating her up anymore. She was exposed and the electorate recoiled.
    • CaptainAmerica1, on 05/08/2008, -0/+2I wouldn't call the success she's had reflective of public "recoil." She came damn close to getting the nomination.

      The majority of the public isn't as smart as you are.
      • ender7074, on 05/08/2008, -2/+2Puh-leaze. You're smart because you buy into Obama's line of crap instead of Clintons? Yah, real smart....
        • CaptainAmerica1, on 05/08/2008, -0/+1You're making me laugh...nope, not an Obama guy either. He's more scary than she is.
  • usgovterrorists, on 05/08/2008, -4/+6Why aren't we questioning the integrity of the terrorist United States Government?

    The Iraq war was based on a 1000 lies!

    Isn't that a clue that the terrorist United States Government are horrific liars?
    • CaptainAmerica1, on 05/08/2008, -1/+3I don't say this too often on Digg...but, you're an idiot.

      You have no idea what terrorism is.
      • usgovterrorists, on 05/08/2008, -2/+2The truth can be verified!
        You're the idiot!
        Invading a country based on a thousand lies, using tons of depleted uranium, makes any known terrorist look like a boyscout!
  • Kikinou, on 05/08/2008, -3/+4I know that Clinton isn't honest, I know she's a liar, I know she's corrupt, and I know that Bill is a sleazeball. But I'm voting for the person I think can get the things that are important to me DONE, not who is honest. Honesty is nice but look what happened to our last honest president -- Jimmy Carter. Got ZERO done. Nice chap, terrible president. I fear Obama may be Carter II. I want out of Iraq and I want universal health care. I think Clinton has a better chance of making both happen than Obama does. I can't see Obama going 10 rounds with the Republicans like she can. But nonetheless I'll be supporting Obama once this all ends, which will be very soon me thinks, it's over. So chill.
    • KSUdesigner, on 05/08/2008, -0/+2Yeah just like she got us all universal health care when the Clintons were in the White House last time around. What makes you think she'll be successful at getting us universal health care this time? It's not about going rounds with the Republicans, it's about crossing the party lines and working WITH the Republicans.
    • bcamp1973, on 05/08/2008, -0/+1what? OMG. Pull your head out.
    • dondara, on 05/08/2008, -0/+1You do have a point. Honesty in Washington would be as welcome as a turd in a swimming pool. I think the backlash will limit the number of republicans he will have to deal with so I think he has a chance. And really, Hillary going ten rounds? That doesn't sound like something I would want to see. Well, maybe with a donkey or large billy goat.
  • tkcom, on 05/08/2008, -0/+3Breaking Ne? What the fu?
  • Phyrix, on 05/08/2008, -0/+0I'm guessing this is the beginning of a potential series of "leaks" that will remind her that exiting now with her grace intact might be a good idea.
  • WCL23, on 05/08/2008, -0/+5Clinton's honesty questioned? Next you'll be saying she wasn't really shot at by a sniper....
  • asskicker32, on 05/08/2008, -0/+2Newly released? As of 8 months ago?
  • userperson, on 05/08/2008, -0/+1A) Clinton's honesty? ... I don't understand.
    B) What does she do for a living?
    C) no really?
    D) i.e. it's Thursday.
    E) buried this article is from 1998, Lewinsky gave him oral, but she didn't inhale (blue dress).

    Don't get me wrong all the others lie as much if not more... McCain/Obama say 'I want to help.' I know they're lying, but they are at least trying to sell it. Clinton pfft ... I don't know if she's just really bad at it , or all the history involved, but ... no, just no.
  • bcamp1973, on 05/08/2008, -1/+2something we've known all along. And yet millions of Americans support this bitch?!? it boggles the mind. Pull your heads out people. She will bleed this country dry if she makes it to the white house...
  • lolben, on 05/08/2008, -0/+0I've heard people say they don't come to digg because it seems too pro-obama, even though
    these accusations came from an obama supporter,

    but I realize digg isn't one-sided, Hillary just has one after another bogus fact reveling how much more I wouldn't want her being the one to run our country.
    • ender7074, on 05/08/2008, -1/+0Digg is completely one sided. Dont fool yourself.
  • Mr.Gone, on 05/08/2008, -0/+1As interesting as breaking Neon sounds, I think the omission of a couple dashes could have saved this headline.
  • BionicPimp, on 05/08/2008, -2/+1"The documents....identify numerous instances in which *prosecutors*(emphasis mine) questioned Mrs. Clinton's honesty"

    prosecutors question everyones honesty. It's part of the legal process. If the prosecutors were able to prove dishonesty...also known as purjury...we would all be talking about inmate clinton right now.

    There is a reason why grand jury evidence is sealed. It is inflammatory and punitive, especially for people who the prosecutors could not convict. remember that whitewater was a career maker for these prosecutors...if they could have taken down the first lady, they would have.
    • frankingeneral, on 05/08/2008, -0/+2Yeah, but there was a damn good suspicion. What it really boils down to is that perjury is one of the most difficult cases for a prosecutor to prove. In this case all they had were witnesses that contradicted Hillary's sworn testimony. So while it may not have been enough for prosecutors, I think that when several witnesses line up and contradict several of your statements, chances are you're a liar.
    • johnnykahalawai, on 05/09/2008, -0/+1That's what makes this story interesting. Back then you say "hmm" that seems off. But when you look at in the context of all this year's whoppers (Bosnian Sniper Fire, brining peace to Northern Ireland etc...) it REALLY makes you wonder.
  • Homerr, on 05/08/2008, -0/+1B..b..but.. Clinton?
    lol, ok that excuse is pretty much dead now.
  • oldcyborg, on 05/08/2008, -2/+3Even among politicians, the Clintons are not known for their honesty..... I would say that this trait goes WAY back, and is unlikely to change..... As the saying goes. "Would you buy a used car from these people?" hehehehehehe Think about it.....

    Cyborg
  • Suzilla, on 05/08/2008, -3/+4Another smear job by the FoxNoise ancestor, Washington Times.
    1) The article said (shock! horror!) that PROSECUTORS thought Hillary might not be telling the truth. (Imagine that! A prosecutor, of all people, thinking the person they're prosecuting might not be truthful. Whodathunkit?)
    2) The only substantial accusation the article brought up was Hillary's involvement with Madison Guarantee Savings & Loan, which she represented in several matters. It used this in conjunction with her declaration that she never received a penny for her work while at Rose Law Firm on their behalf. It's called PRO BONO, and lawyers are, in most states REQUIRED to do a certain amount each year. (Believe it or not.)
    3) The article failed to point out that after spending $60 millions on several investigations that included this particular item, those inexplicably skeptical prosecutors were unable to find anything to substantiate those suspicions.

    I support substantive political discussion and I think crap like this article deserves no attention whatsoever. Oh, and I'm voting for Obama.
  • F0RMLESSNESS, on 05/08/2008, -0/+3Clintonian Truth = say it loud enough and long enough and it becomes almost true.
  • bbqsalad, on 05/08/2008, -1/+3It doesn't matter who wins, You all loose.
    • dinot, on 05/08/2008, -0/+1don't you mean "we"? Or do you have a spaceship?
  • ender7074, on 05/08/2008, -3/+3I love it! The same people that spent YEARS defending and worshiping the Clinton crime family are now acting all suprised when they find out they actually are crooks. News flash! Most of us have known this for years. Can't wait till you guys find the same exact things about Obama.
    • dinot, on 05/08/2008, -0/+1kinda like when we were all saying how Bush and his cronies were a bad idea but no one listened? the difference was that Clinton's "crime" family didn't put us into recession or forced the US into 2 perpetual wars.
  • xen0blue, on 05/08/2008, -4/+3what is it with democrats and lying?
    • letherial, on 05/08/2008, -2/+1errr...for ever 1 democratic lies we get 10 republican lies...and for ever lie we get in the goverment there is 100 in the background

      the question should be, what is with our goverment and lying?
  • Gregsaw, on 05/08/2008, -0/+4These memos question her honesty? I would've thought it was the dozens of times she was caught lying that did that
  • TheInformer, on 05/08/2008, -0/+1Let's repeat the democratic talking points from the Whitewater era: "Who cares?"
  • happyhead7, on 05/08/2008, -0/+0Hillary Clinton's response: "Its the religious right conspiracy against me!"
  • JointVenture, on 05/08/2008, -3/+2I have to thank the Obama supporters for destroying the Democratic parties conspiracy to hide the illegal actions of the Clinton's. The Republicans have been telling you that the Clinton's were crooks for 16 years, thanks for finally telling them that they were right, and not a right wing conspiracy.

    Thanks Obama fans!
  • spiffywilco, on 05/08/2008, -0/+1On a side note, Mark Penn even looks evil as hell. Also, he looks very confused all the time.
  • PaganHeathen, on 05/08/2008, -0/+0Shocking I wonder how these came to the surface now at all times?
  • themonkman, on 05/08/2008, -0/+1It would seem that the only sniper fire that Hillary has ever done was from that of the prosecutors in the Whitewater scandal. Hillary cannot be allowed a chance to take the Whitehouse. She has so many lies under her belt I'm surprised she can keep her belt on at all. She is morbidly obese with lies. I don't know about you, but I'm god damned tired of being lied to by Republicans AND Democrats. These people all think the American public is mentally deficient, which may be generally true, but the tide is changing. It's going to be a royal tsunami when all of the lies of the Government comes flooding out. I'd suggest they all buy a very reliable boat and a life jacket.
  • vandernderyid, on 05/08/2008, -0/+4Wow. We are treating the Washington Times as credible nowadays? The paper is owned by the Unification Church. I thought Digg was anti-cult. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unification_Church#Cu ...

    The Church actively recruits despondent college students through its WorldCARP student group, which has been banned at USC and heavily scrutinized at Berkeley:

    From Wikipedia on WorldCARP
    According to David Crandell, Director of Student Activities at the University of Southern California, "CARP has been accused of being one of those groups that preys on college students".[4] Crandell also reported that "I don't care about the content of their beliefs, but when they are deceptive in their recruiting or use psychological manipulation to keep people involved, then we've got problems."[4] CARP had its student group status at USC revoked in 1994 and according to Crandell, The Office of Student Activities would probably not allow the group to be active on campus if they requested to be reinstated.[4]
    The Office of Student Life at the University of California, Berkeley has received multiple complaints about CARP.[5] A Berkeley student who attended a CARP event at the request of a CARP member, is reported as saying "If I would have known, I would never have shown up ..... they were very nice and I think they were sincere, but I also think I was misled."[6] In part of an extensive description of the group's activities, a student summarizes in detail: "They exploit loneliness and shyness to create an artificial sense of family."[7]

    Hey Anonymous, get on this!
  • mkaylor, on 05/08/2008, -2/+1Well here we are with the daily SLAM THE CLINTONS. Guess we all forgot how good it was while Bill had the watch. Guess GW Bush has done a fantastic job on his watch. You guys have lots of problems. You better wake up and remember how it really was!!!

    Go McCain!!!!!!!!!
  • Kenzan, on 05/08/2008, -0/+2'The documents, reviewed by The Washington Times, identify numerous instances in which prosecutors questioned Mrs. Clinton's honesty, an issue that continues to dog her on the campaign trail after she was forced to acknowledge earlier this year exaggerating a story about coming under sniper fire as first lady during a visit to Bosnia in 1996."

    Umm..No, it wasn't really so much an exaggeration as much as it was a
    SERIES OF COMPLETE AND UTTER LIES!
  • jontalisman, on 05/08/2008, -3/+1A newspaper story written by The Moonies! Is this the best the Obama bots can do today? Bwahahaha!
  • uberfu, on 05/08/2008, -1/+2Is anyone really and truely surprised that Hillary Clinton is a confirmed Liar?
  • enronias, on 05/08/2008, -0/+2Wow double failure at titling, use of breaking news and running out of space mid-word.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 59 of 59 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.