What is Digg?Sponsored by Best Buy
Meet Antoine: Best Buy Chicago meets Best Buy New York. view!
www.youtube.com/bestbuy - One Chicago employee makes Best Buy’s holiday campaign cut.
107 Comments
- quaxon, on 10/15/2007, -3/+76I simply cannot wait till all the ***** that has gone on behind closed doors in this administration becomes declassified and comes to light. But by then i am willing to bet bush and his whole administration will have already moved out of the country (most likely to dubai) and will be able to evade all prosecution. I mean, just think about how the ***** atrocities that have gone on under him that we don't know about yet, there is obviously a major reason he doesnt want the public or anyone else for that matter to get their hands on these. this guy is a ***** war criminal of the worst kind and deserves everything thats (should be) comming to him.
- FRANKeB, on 10/10/2007, -3/+63How long before they call this judge a terrorist?
- Quijibow, on 10/10/2007, -2/+57And the shredding begins....
- hiphoc, on 10/10/2007, -4/+54Yea, whose gonna make him do it?
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -2/+26Cobbs, Bush used up any reasonable doubt he had coming to him a long, long time ago.
- o0joshua0o, on 10/10/2007, -2/+23Bush's legacy: unprecedented suckage.
- UtopiaInTheSky, on 10/10/2007, -2/+21Checks and balances are apparently dead. So, to answer your question: No one.
- Damian91, on 10/10/2007, -3/+20I'm just waiting for Bush to go "***** you, I can do what ever I want."
- juicerat, on 10/10/2007, -0/+17There's certainly probable cause for investigation.They won't let us investigate. And there is certainly evidence of torture and rendition. We aren't assuming anymore.
- FRANKeB, on 10/10/2007, -3/+19Wife of Ham Burgler? I understand he was involved in similar illegal activities during his tenure at MCDonald's HQ.
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -0/+16"You have to still present evidence first." How convenient that he's probably either sealed, hidden or destroyed it.
- MikeDawg, on 10/10/2007, -1/+16He can't hold them indefinitely, but he has put a hold on them for 999 years. . .
/sarcasm - inactive, on 10/10/2007, -1/+14There is more probable cause to investigate the Bush administration than Whitewater ever had.
- sitryd, on 10/10/2007, -0/+12or, alternatively, when Bush is no longer in office in 2008, the new president could unseal the records.
if there isn't a new president in 2008, then the fact his records aren't public may be the least of our concerns... - Felekar, on 10/10/2007, -4/+15The simple fact that he feels the need to hide his records, as well as him trying to get himself and his staff protection from war crimes is really an admission of guilt. I mean, why else would he not want anyone looking at his records?
http://felekar.blogspot.com - Chaoticfist, on 10/10/2007, -1/+12He will find some way to keep it secret.......or the shredders will be working over time.
- ferrell, on 10/10/2007, -3/+13JUDGE RULES: Back the ***** down, you ***** Nazi!
- awtripp, on 10/10/2007, -2/+12I agree, I wish the Clinton's records would come public, then the people could see how "inside-the-beltway" they are. The Clinton's have way too many connections to Washington insiders, there are just too many politicians (Dems and Repubs alike) with their hands in the pockets of Big Business. It's really sad that they get all this money and more money, just to bow to whims of the rich 5% and just using empty promises on the rest of us. President Clinton balanced the budget and had us on track for a surplus, and when terrorist ***** did go down he more or less did what he had to do and the Media wasn't spreading all this fear and panic to control the masses, I'm not saying Bill Clinton was perfect, but it's hard to ignore how great our country was doing when he was President, and how ***** our country is today because of George W. Bush.
- gernblansted, on 10/10/2007, -4/+12But CLINTON!!!!
- Bdog2g2, on 10/10/2007, -0/+8well look at his username
- UtopiaInTheSky, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7The shredding has long since finished. The Bush admin takes no chances!
- geckofiend, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7You fail at comprehending humor.
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -3/+10He may be the first President who has to pardon himself ... in perpetuity...
- swrostmore, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7According to the Department of Justice, the originals are, and have always been, in the National Archives.
- swrostmore, on 10/10/2007, -2/+9According to the DOJ investigation, Berger removed classified copies of data from the National Archives, and no original material was destroyed. Also I don't think those were Presidential records in any case. And why would Hillary Clinton be "holding onto" classified Presidential records?
- insomniac8400, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7Of course this was coming. I know bush will be immune when leaving office, but will his staff?
- Newlow, on 10/10/2007, -2/+8Paper shredders are going to be working over-time in the white house now.
- gernblansted, on 10/10/2007, -1/+7Bush's Presidential Library will be the first of it's kind in that it will operate something like a Think Tank with the goal of essentially spinning his presidency in a positive light. They are going to have a very difficult task ahead of them, especially if the government of/by/for the people prevails and the people get to know what really happened during his rule with the release of those papers.
If he and his administration get caught in lie after lie now, just wait until that can of worms get opened up. - inactive, on 10/10/2007, -1/+7Ron Paul of course.
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6Yes. Thank you for this fabulous offer! I'm clicking over as I speak. Yes, am now entering my credit card number. Thank you!
- jaxcs, on 10/11/2007, -1/+7Those records you think contain incriminating evidence is not being hidden by Clinton but by executive order of Bush. Bush Jr. sealed Bush Senior's records and therefore had no choice but to similarly seal Clinton's records (or rightfully risk a claim of partiality). It comes back to Bush Jr. anyway you slice it.
- jroll8481, on 10/10/2007, -1/+7You are just trying to abuse the same catch-22 card that bush has been playing for about 6 years now. Just because you don't have the smoking gun does not mean you can not think for yourself and draw conclusions based on the things that you know. where there is smoke there is fire, but based on your point of view i would have to walk in the burning house and get burnt before i can determine that, yes, it is on fire. now I'm not saying that there are not times when you need to see it yourself to believe but that's when you have very little to go on and only someone telling you what to think. here we have numerous "fishy" situations...
Alberto Gonzales clearly lying in front of congress, Haliburton's no bid contracts for work that they either don't do or do poorly, failure to put of that damn fence, telling us there was concrete evidence that Hussein had destructive weaponry and that Iraq has something to do with 9/11, outing a CIA operative, downplaying the cost of the war and the effort needed to succeed leading up to the war, the countless fake bin laden tapes or the one that was proved to be 6 years old, rice clearly trying to cover up the recent blackwater mess, everyone around him except Cheney and rice quitting, the ties to the bin laden family, the ties to the oil companies, the rising price of gas, the housing market crash, the sinking value of the dollar, the rising national debt, the poor quality of imports from china.....etc
any one of these as isolated incidents then you can give them the benefit of the doubt and wait until you have concrete proof, but this is a bit much to just blow off as coincidence and to do so would be exposing your own ignorance. and honestly if he had nothing to hide then why would he want to seal the documents? look you are welcome to your own opinion, no matter how misguided it is. but please don't come on here trying to act like people aren't supposed to draw these conclusions simply because we have no proof when the same people controlling the proof are the ones who would have reason to keep it hidden.
By the way...I can get you a great deal on some wooden nickels - bffoley, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6Exactly. Remember the whole Plame case where the administration kept saying "Whoops, we cant find that. Or that. Or that". Papers shredded, all emails from certain periods deleted.....
- StarlessKnight, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6"And no, the Daily Show doesn't count as a legitimate "news source"." He's an informative comedy show, true. He can also be, sadly, more informative than actual news stations that repeat the same stories, and are often too busy with the latest celebrity drug scandal or sexcapade.
As for checks and balances... well they sure aren't working that well, any more, are they? Congress is having an investigation, they demand the truth from administrative servants, what happens next? "Executive privilege!" "I can't recall." "I'm not appearing." "Whoops, we lost the emails." "We'll tell you what you want to know, off the record, behind closed doors, suuuure." "Have them swear in under oath? Whatever for?" Look at just how effective they're being. You can just tell the Executive is being kept in line by the Legislative. - nilcam, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6The Democrats will nicely ask him to follow the judge's ruling. Problem solved.
- statik99, on 11/03/2009, -4/+9I hope he doesn't find a way of hiding the records, like in his head (he has enough room there since he lacks a brain), the world, not just the american people, deserve to use this douche as an example of what NOT to do if elected into office.
- cosmicdreams, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6Yea for Historians!!
- Felekar, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5Ahh, but not all presidents have this amount of secrecy. That and I was attempting to put in [/Big brother thinking] after that but it didn't display. -.-
- FaraFiro, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5Let's have a shredding Party!..Lets invite..Dick, Rummy, Condee, Wolfy, Osama....BYOB...RSVP IN 10min...
- jct821, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5"Is the worm turning, Mr. Randall?"
"The worm has turned, Mary, and now it's packing an Uzi."
"It's about time, sir." - swrostmore, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5I read somewhere that Bush's classifying of Presidential records at the beginning of his term was designed to protect certain records of Bush Sr. Does anyone have any more information about this?
- objectcode, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5Americans will get up off their asses and do something about this after they watch American Idol
- LogicBomB, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4You know, I'm so tired of all this. I thought all the political scandals were amusing and interesting at first but it's just gotten to be an onion of *****. Fox News censoring / changing / editing the real news was honestly the last straw. Since then everytime I watch the news I listen for bias and it's just soaked with it. No idea how I never saw it before. I'm just so tired of this crap.
I'm Canadian too, I can't imagine how you guys must feel. - theNazz, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Very rarely did Bush/Cheney go 'on the record', so there won't be much to hide.
- swrostmore, on 10/10/2007, -2/+5LBJ takes the biscuit.
- terminal157, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3It would be called "probable cause" if he wasn't the president, he would be arrested and a deep investigation would begin.
- Felekar, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3What does his arrest record have to do with national security?
- insanebrain, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3what records ?
- nils, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Did the court also find a way to prevent shredding? Didn't think so.
- Gtitian, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Let's see... Rutherford B. Hayes.... Woodrow Wilson... those guys, yeah, pretty much as bad as it gets...
-
Show 51 - 100 of 107 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is