What is Digg?76 Comments
- blackmage439, on 12/18/2007, -2/+59I want to be optimistic about this, but I just can't. If those logs aren't "lost," "misplaced," or destroyed in an "unfortunate" gasoline-fueled inferno, they soon will be. The Bush White House will continue to subvert justice and distort the truth, just like they always have.
- MonsterChaOS, on 12/18/2007, -5/+44Gotta love how the right wingers used these records to help incriminate Clinton, but when the shoe is on the other foot their all united against it!
- Kent4jmj, on 12/18/2007, -1/+25Small win but still a win.
- jaymzdean, on 12/18/2007, -2/+24They've already been shredded.
- noahhoward, on 12/18/2007, -0/+16Should have never needed a judge to say so. The White House works for us, imagine what would happen if you told your boss he can't see what you're working on. The people who suggest that that information is not public domain should be fired on the spot.
- Frei, on 12/18/2007, -0/+15Along with the constitution.
- MonsterChaOS, on 12/18/2007, -1/+15show me where I said conservative... Hell, most of you "right wingers" are the farthest thing from true conservatism.
- jsg7, on 12/18/2007, -0/+13The judge is on his way to Gitmo as we speak...
- Berkana, on 12/18/2007, -2/+15If by "logs" they mean "*****," I can see what they mean. The White House has been giving us ***** for years. The time for accountability is long overdue.
- MacEnvy, on 12/18/2007, -0/+11He didn't say "conservative". He said "right-winger". It's clear who he was talking about, and it didn't have anything to do with fiscal policy.
- Bhima, on 12/18/2007, -0/+11Just so you know I buried you for being whiney ass
- amoirae, on 12/18/2007, -0/+9Or Bush will declare martial law and/or invade Iran as a major distraction.
- Sinudeity, on 12/18/2007, -1/+10Meanwhile, countless other bush documents are being shredded. This seems like a diversion.
- misterRobot, on 12/18/2007, -0/+8Sigh...All of our private phone records and emails are fair game but the list of people that visit the house that *our* tax dollars pay for...that's top secret. I know the most recent 2 rulings aren't pointing that way, but that is the trend. The fact that immunity is being *considered* for those companies and privacy *considered* for public government documents is enough to show their true feelings. I just don't understand who can look at this situation and not be appalled. If they seriously think this is helping the security of the US, they are not considering how isolated it makes us citizens feel. Right now I feel the only connection between the executive branch and I is a flimsy election system where my Texan, typically democratic, vote is not even considered on a national level. When enough people start to feel disconnected as I do, the result will not prevent terrorism but breed it in our own citizenry.
- amoirae, on 12/18/2007, -0/+8So Bush is a bottom?!?
- Diggity75, on 12/18/2007, -0/+7EVERYONE votes for elected officials.
EVERYONE expects those elected to remain accountable for their actions while serving.
EVERYONE has a right to know what our government (and those people chose to run it) is doing.
While I don't disagree with taking care of things closest to you where you can have a greater impact, that doesn't free you of your responsibility to monitor the government that was created of the people, by the people and for the people. WE are those "people". - sheasie, on 12/18/2007, -0/+7Abramoff is irrelevant. I would like to know who visited with Cheney between September 1 - September 10, 2001.
- principle, on 12/18/2007, -1/+8From now on, they will meet to do their dirty business somewhere else. Otherwise it will not make any difference, because if they can ignore Congress they are certainly not afraid of a judge.
- Goldkill, on 12/18/2007, -0/+7President Bush is subject to the same privacy-invading laws as every other American citizen.
- inactive, on 12/18/2007, -2/+9Dobson, Falwell, Bauer...Jeff Gannon can be far behind....
- Azuroth, on 12/18/2007, -0/+6Please, RTFA. They are moving the case to a Bush appointed judge. No need for Gitmo when cronyism will fill the void without the expensive plane ride.
- jonpotz, on 12/18/2007, -1/+7Something tells me when they are released there will be hundreds of black bars and redacted statements in the name of "national security".
- funhouse1970, on 12/19/2007, -1/+6Google "Jeff Gannon Talon News" while you're at it.
- EricAnderton, on 12/18/2007, -2/+7When interviewed for comment on the court's decision, local political corresopndent Nelson Muntz commented: "Ha-Ha!"
- weebit, on 12/18/2007, -0/+5That is good news, but oops Bush and company lost those to a virus too. If it has not happened now, it will very soon. Just give Bushy time to figure out his method to trash them.
If it does happen lets not resort to stating that impeachment should happen, because it has not happed as of yet, and he has done far more worse stuff. if he manages to get rid of them, just impeach his butt, then tell the public. I am getting sick of hearing impeachment, and nothing happens. - Kent4jmj, on 12/18/2007, -0/+5I applaud the Judge for applying the Rule of Law. Left wing, Right wing is of no consequence.
- mikeyeah, on 12/18/2007, -0/+5These logs will just corroborate what most of us already now, the Bush Administration is the most corrupt Executive Branch in US history. Lets see how many times Jack Abramoff's name comes up on these logs, seeing how Bush says he only met him once or twice.
When will this house of cards finally fall?
ps. Support Dennis Kucinich and/or Ron Paul! - williamdyer, on 12/18/2007, -1/+6Perhaps some Lincoln Log Cabins. Just one reason for Bush to "take a wide stance" on the visitor logs.
- venicerocco, on 12/18/2007, -0/+5Lighten up kid. It's just politics.
- Thuktun, on 12/18/2007, -0/+4Let the shredding commence.
- undergrace, on 12/18/2007, -0/+4You RTFA - "On Monday, Collyer and Lamberth agreed to consolidate the two Abramoff-related cases before Lamberth, even though Collyer, in accordance with long-standing courthouse practice, would have dealt with both because the case she was hearing was the older of the two."
The case WAS supposed to go to Collyer, a Bush appointee, but she agreed to let Lamberth take both cases, even though they should have gone to her. Lamberth, the one fighting to make the records public, now gets to oversee everything. This is EXACTLY how it should happen. - inactive, on 12/18/2007, -0/+4he calls it "clearin brush"
- funhouse1970, on 12/19/2007, -0/+3It is conspiracy. It is fact. "Conspiracy Theorist" is just a label psychologically 'designed' to shut your mind down.
Conspiracies happen. Look the word up in a dictionary. - IsmailOo, on 12/18/2007, -2/+5oh god, now we are going to see all the gay porn stars and prostitutes that the administration has been taking in, oh and maybe we'll find where Osama bin laden is hiding, haha...
- skulljar, on 12/19/2007, -0/+3AND I'M GOING TO MY ROOM SO LEAVE ME ALONE! *SLAMS DOOR*
- Elranzer, on 12/18/2007, -2/+5Log Cabin Republicans (Google it)
- skulljar, on 12/19/2007, -0/+3Why do we need secrecy in government? What if absolutely every single conversation by any civil servant was public record? What if every single government budget was an open book? What if every civil servant's agenda was published in full with a short delay to prevent assassination? Would China or Iran or North Korea or anyone for that matter really have an opportunity to destroy us or even harm us? What if the only secrecy were those surrounding human intelligence agents?
I've worked in US Government and particularly managed a budget for a while; hundreds of millions of dollars- and there was secrecy but mostly because people didn't want to hear whining. Maybe the budget officer didn't want oranization A to know that she was giving organization B $10m for their pet project. That's not a good enough reason in my opinion. - EricAnderton, on 12/18/2007, -1/+3It's like any sport or game. The ball can be used to score points for either team. Control of the game is what matters, and what is most esteemed by the players and spectators.
The mistake we all make is assuming that things are like chess, where the only difference between either player is between the eardrums. - yogurtslinger, on 12/18/2007, -0/+2I'd love to my own "log" on the front steps of the white house
- bbardlbradd, on 12/18/2007, -1/+3 It's only reasonable to have these types of documents public in a nation that is supposedly ran by the people.
- Christianptriot, on 12/18/2007, -0/+2Good one!
- PhilLesh69, on 12/19/2007, -0/+2it is all just a diversion.
- RonBurgundy76, on 12/18/2007, -1/+3Who are you and what have you done with Frei?
- Amric, on 12/19/2007, -0/+1As if this ruling will have any effect whatsoever. The Bush administration will do as it pleases, ruling or not. Any incriminating records will be "accidentally" lost/deleted. Sorry guys, those servers are a bit unstable.
They just don't seem to cope with a seven pass wipe very well for some reason :p - inactive, on 12/19/2007, -0/+1Abramoff isn't irrelevant. He's simply a different crime. Abramoff is the poster boy for Republican corruption. Dick Cheney is a poster boy for the attempted imperial presidency. Both criminals, but two separate crimes.
- skulljar, on 12/19/2007, -1/+2Yeah, you guys read too much into this. Watch more American Idol or play more Mario Brothers. If EVERYONE would just do that, then no one would be out doing other stupid things like being politicians or mimes and the world would be a great place. WTF does the government have to do with American Idol? Get a real life.
- Bakrain, on 12/19/2007, -0/+1Why the secrecy?
- PhilLesh69, on 12/19/2007, -0/+1Open government is a well-run, efficient and responsive government.
Many agency heads just want to be as powerful or more powerful than the guy in the next agency over. They all want armed military style motorcades to go to Old Ebbitt Grill for lunch, and Uniformed Secret Service patrol cars parked in their driveway to impress their neighbors.
I'm sure there are people with security clearances working at the EPA, or the Park Service, for that matter. - Fortuna, on 12/20/2007, -0/+1Sigh... I thought inane comments were automatically dugg up to at least +8
- inactive, on 12/19/2007, -0/+1What are you babbling about, nut job?
You get all freaky guilty because you KNOW you have been supporting this regime, and then you spazz out.
How does YOU being buried prove a point?
It proves people think your comment was crap.
Geez, rightard. Get a clue. -
Show 51 - 76 of 76 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is