What is Digg?98 Comments
- Junkyarddawg, on 10/12/2007, -6/+49Rove is a henchman. Bush, Cheney, Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld - those, and a couple more, are the guys I'd like to see arrested. OK, Rove too, but he's not a primary target. I'm not sure it's technically possible for the executive branch to commit treason, but ideally that's the charge I'd like to see against them. They've betrayed the USA and everything it stands for. Stood for.
*All* upcoming presidential candidates - Giuliani, Clinton, Obama, McCain, Edwards, Paul, etc - all seem OK to me, at least compared to Bush, but regardless of who is the next president it'll take decades to reverse the damage the Bush administration has wrought. They've ruined US reputation, alienated allies, destroyed or corrupted all major government institutions, destroyed the economy, given powerful incentives to every rogue nation on earth to get nukes... and perhaps worst of all, they've ruined people's trust and set a new standard for partisanship and underhandedness in politics. They've poisoned the well. - slashdotted, on 10/12/2007, -2/+26"Federal law requires the preservation of electronic communications sent or received by White House staff," says the handbook that all staffers are given and expected to read and comply with.
"As a result, personnel working on behalf of the EOP [Executive Office of the President] are expected to only use government-provided e-mail services for all official communication."
The handbook further explains: "The official EOP e-mail system is designed to automatically comply with records management requirements."
And if that wasn't clear enough, the handbook notes -- as was the case in the Clinton administration -- that "commercial or free e-mail sites and chat rooms are blocked from the EOP network to help staff members ensure compliance and to prevent the circumvention of the records management requirements."
source: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/blog/2007/04/12/BL2007041200941.html?referrer=digg - littlebylittle, on 10/12/2007, -6/+28One thing that surely needs to happen:
http://www.apfn.org/LEAK-GATE/arrestedRove.jpg - littlebylittle, on 10/12/2007, -4/+21The US Economy IS Destroyed. In fact, it's bankrupt and living on borrowed money. It's the biggest bankruptcy mankind has ever racked up. 9.x Trill and counting.
And the Middle Class keeps getting squeezed into non-existence.
Take your "Leftist" term and Buzz Off. - EntropyMan, on 10/12/2007, -3/+19Rove has outlived his 9 lives. He's not the key architect of all of the horrible BushCo policy. But he's one of the main behind-the-scenes attack dogs. And he's broken the law so many times, it's an embarrassment to the world that he's not already in jail. It's never too late.
- EntropyMan, on 10/12/2007, -4/+19You're assuming they care about quaint notions like "law."
- KazamaSmokers, on 10/12/2007, -3/+17Wow. The Digg Republican Guard shows up right on schedule to fire off a round of "B-b-b-but Clinton"s.
- paulbjensen, on 10/12/2007, -3/+15Tony Blair did...
- raynar, on 10/12/2007, -2/+14a few reasons:
1) people dont care, and prefer to lie low. "If it doesnt happen to me then I dont care" is that attitude in this country
2) who says we would get straight answers anyways? They're politicians, its against their rules to give a straight answer
3) the days of the government answering to the people are long gone. today the government answers to money, whether its oil, arms manufacturing, or whoever else donates to the campaign - EntropyMan, on 10/12/2007, -4/+16I'd say so. If Rove et al. used RNC email accounts to routinely send/receive official information, say, national security information (even a Bush trip on AF1 is considered national security), then they've violated a whole other (and more serious) set of laws. What are the chances there's anything related for foreign policy, or our occupation of Iraq, for example?
In fact, if they've admitted to using these RNC email systems for official business, I think we have an obligation to go beyond the US attorney probe and see what kinds of other things have been passing over the open internet. I wouldn't support publishing RNC-campaign emails, or even letting dems see those as a matter of course. But some independent party needs to look at all of the emails now and see how bad the breach has been. - the6thReplicant, on 10/12/2007, -2/+13Either the next president Dem or Rep has as its first mission to scale back the Executive power (like what happen after Nixon and what pissed off Rumsfeld and Cheney - hello Patriot Act) or every President will do the same as Bush, some a bit less, but mostly a bit more.
- alappat1, on 10/12/2007, -5/+15yay for another cover-up for the bush admin
just a question- why isn't bush or any of his cronies investigated fully and the information given to public- or more importantly why doesn't the public get off their collective asses and start demanding answers- i am usually more forgiving in nature- but when this much erosion of integrety in a government occurs maybe people need to be thrown in jail for few yrs when they start doing these things and i mean high level officials. Having the threat of jailtime should keep them clean enough. - littlebylittle, on 10/12/2007, -3/+13The "Patriot" Act needs to be thrown out completely. Whatever we really need for Security needs to be put in a whole new Bill and debated.
All of Bush's Signing Statements and Executive Orders need to be reviewed as well. Just like Bush did with Clinton's. - ucbrave92, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9you have to remember the same government "lost" their emails and thinks it's okay, is the same government that is trying to get ISPs to log every little thing you do online and store it for years.
- paulbjensen, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10It's always the cover-up that makes things worse...of course pre-emptive judging is wrong, unless it's to do with enemy combatants!
- Navicerts, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10Have I written to congressmen? - Yes, and it didn't make a *****-lick of difference. There is no way for the public to "collectively demand an investigation". Our country has been hijacked, please help.
- Phearce, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10Seriously. Were talking about coverups and law-breaking. I mean, if you can impeach a president for getting a BJ, why aren't we calling for impeachment over the mess the Bush administration has wrought?
- SOULEVENT, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8The Democrats have moved so far left they are socialist?
isnt that the Fascist calling the kettle black. Shouldnt you be out murdering more Americans and takin away more of our Freedoms and making money all the while? Digg doesnt need you, stick to equating Lies with Patriotism, its what your best at. - ghandi69, on 10/12/2007, -4/+12"He who is willing to give up liberty for security deserves neither."
- littlebylittle, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10From Watergate to e-Gate! We've come a long way! ... Not.
What? It's some of the same effing people? - littlebylittle, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8whether its oil, arms manufacturing ... drugs.
The Big Three currencies in the world today. - slugicide, on 10/12/2007, -4/+11Say the e-mails are recovered. Is the investigation going to be limited to those related to the firings, or are we going to see dirty laundry in the headlines from now until election day? 'Cause I'm always looking for something juicy to digg...
- domlaw, on 10/12/2007, -4/+10No the Clintons did not do the same thing. The Clintons did not fire people for refusing to investigate Republicans on trumped up charges, so as to effect elections. Get your facts straight.
- BrianNowhere, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6You Clinton did it firsters are just so incredibly wrong. EVERY President startts his presidency with a new slate of US Attorneys. When they come in, they fire them all and start fresh with a new batch. So you might as well say Reagan did it first or Carter did it first or Linclon did it first. They ALL did what you are claiming Clinton did. That's not the problem.
Sometimes in a Presidents term one or two are fired for good reason throughout the term and this has been done with the purview of the Congress and Senate. NO OTHER PRESIDENT in the history of the USA has performed a purely blatant political purge of US attorneys in the fashion that Bush has done. I know that's a subtle fact and one your little right-wing bird brains will have trouble with but it's important. It was in fact a little known provision of the Patriot act that allowed Bush to fire them without reviewing the reason for firing them with Congress.
If you don't understand why it's a bad idea for US attorneys, who are charged with uncovering political corruption, to be free of political influence, then frankly you don't deserve the freedoms and liberties that so many have died to give you. It is YOU who are Un-American. - adarkmethod, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8and another thing.... Clinton isnt in charge anymore... so his ***** ups arent really too terribly pertinent in regards to fixing THIS administration. And I dont think too many people with common sense want Hill in charge either... Don't we use elected officials instead of monarchies to PREVENT families from controlling too much?
- EntropyMan, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6@themajor,
Please explain what part of this is so hard to understand. Firing prosecutors is LEGAL for any President and most do so at the start of their term. Firing prosecutors to get them to start or stop investigations is ILLEGAL. Had Republicans not applied pressure to the US Attorneys to investigate Democrats or ignore GOP corruption (which is also illegal and highly unethical in and of itself) and had they not STATED the USAs were being fired for political reasons, this would not be an issue. Put those two together, and "political reasons" = "criminal reasons."
If you need a historical analog to help you understand, read article of impeachment #4 against Nixon. Nixon fired Special Prosecutor Archibald Cox to stop the Watergate investigation. He had the RIGHT to fire Cox at any time, just as with these US Attorneys. But the fact that he did it to stop an investigation of his own corruption made it an impeachable offense aka obstruction of justice. And those weren't only Democrats drafting the articles, fool. - adarkmethod, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7and yeah... I didnt even touch on the abundant, and terribly cover-up corruption. Dear god, how many more times do these tards need to ***** up before someone will finally wipe the whitehouse clean of their money grubbing partisan asses.
- Fumz, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8Indeed! How dare those annoying fuddy duddy Democrats complain about Republicans breaking laws left and right. Don't they know hypocrisy is a Republican birthright? I wish they would all just leave the Republicans alone so they can be free to royally ***** up yet another endeavor... perhaps a third failed war?
- littlebylittle, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5I'm sure Michelle Malkin or Bill O'Reilly would.
- adarkmethod, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6uhh... laws were broken... again.
They didnt preserve those government related emails... which is required by law. And thats the best case scenario if they dont "find" them - adarkmethod, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7How were international relations then? How was the economy? How many US Soldiers died in Iraq? How many civilians did the US kill fighting the civil wars of other countries(and before anybody says something retarded, like none or some astronomical number, yeah, we did some ***** in South America that was less than ethical, and we were involved in Kosovo, but nothing like Iraq)
The difference, more than anything else, is diplomacy. It matters.
And for ***** SAKE stop equating democrats and liberals, we're not the same ***** thing. - GLSmyth, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I think Rosemary Woods deleted them.
- lovek, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7"Tony Blair did..."
Effing brilliant. Bravo.
Seriously. One of the funniest things I've read in awhile.
Sorry for the comment spam, I just felt the need to say that. - littlebylittle, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4phearce,
We are. - jdzz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3What the hell? How can all of that emails got lost? what happened to the backup on the server? Don't they suppose to have redundancy on their server. Even small companies back up their email server. I smell something fishy in here.
- Iriel, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5For that last ***** time already: "He did it too!" does not make it right!
Is Clinton still in office? No, so stop trying to him again.
Before you say "every little slip in this administration is a scandal to you liberals", actually, they are scandals. You're just tired of hearing so many incriminating arguments because you refuse to believe that one panel of politicians can be so corrupt. I don't ***** care if every president in history has made recess appointments just to spite congress. It doesn't make it right.
If we keep justifying the wrongs of today by citing the past as a precedent for future corruption, then our ideals are dead. Welcome to an America controlled by politicians who are businessmen first and pay lip service to the people they "represent" as an afterthought. - uselessexpert, on 10/12/2007, -4/+7Is anything ever going to go right for Bush?
- HunterTV, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3First Rule of Effective Modern Government - If it's important, delete it immediately.
Second Rule of Effective Modern Government - Memorize the above rule and delete it immediately. - NSMike, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4How many damn scandals is it going to take to get this guy out of office? Someone find an intern willing to give him a blow job already!
- domlaw, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4From a conservative website:
The Gallup poll has come out with a survey showing 28% Republican party identification, compared with 33% Democratic and 38% independent. That's actually not particularly bad by the standards of recent history; the worse news is that independents are leaning heavily toward the Democrats.
Yeah people are starting to notice LOL. - pandira, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5Hannity uses this same tactic. Typical. The Democrats did things so it's OK for the Republicans to do it, too. Corruption doesn't justify corruption. Here's a wake up call for the Democrats...Clinton bombed Iraq during his entire administration, it was always relegated to the back pages. He bombed Serbia in an unconstitutional "war". He was in office when The A.P. Murrah bld. was bombed, and presided over the cover up http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=22518 The Democrats aren't any better than the Republicans and until people in this country figure that out NOTHING is going to change for the better.
- Hypermarkalan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I'm actually shocked that some internet geek with too much time on his hands hasn't tracked these damn things down yet and offered them to the highest bidding news outlet. This is the internet we're talking about. Anything is retrievable. Just ask Jennifer Aniston.
- TubaTechno, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3"And for ***** SAKE stop equating democrats and liberals, we're not the same ***** thing."
Isn't that the same as equating conservatives with republicans? - BlueScreenOD, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Here's a snippet from an email from one of the disclosed emails written by Kyle Sampson: “In recent memory, during the Reagan and Clinton Administrations, Presidents Reagan and Clinton did not seek to remove and replace U.S. Attorneys to serve indefinitely under the holdover provision.”
And besides, does it matter if Clinton did it too? I'm sure we could go back in time and justify every wrong thing Bush has ever done by finding a previous president who did something similar. It doesn't make it right. - whackaxe, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4scapegoats will be found, heads will roll, but after 7 years of scandal, you really think an email is going to get Bush impeached? Dream on, the adminstration still doesn't give a ***** about the law
- toefinder, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4Monica Gooding evoked the fifth amendment in order to avoid testifying. When congress wakes up they should give her immunity, then she would have no fifth amendment rights and would have to testify or face contempt of congress charges and do serious jail time. It's time to squeeze this administration . Take the gloves off and go after these Nazis. If there is anything I hate about the democrats it is that they are such a bunch of pussies.
- themajor, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3@entropy man
At the end of your comment you automatically assume that my bias is that of a republican. Was that simply because I made a comment that didn't bash Bush? That aside, you do make a valid point. It would be interesting to go back to the ones that Clinton fired to see what they were working on at the time and if there was any association with Clinton. Maybe if Bush fired all 93 then there wouldn't be scandal talk. Not saying that Clinton was doing anything shady, just saying it would be interesting to look at. - saigumi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2adarkmethod: Nope.. no BJ involved.
Reread history on the great thing known as perjury to a court and Linda Tripp. - littlebylittle, on 10/12/2007, -4/+6Number23 is a fool. All of our jobs are being sucked beyond our borders and everyone knows it.
"...the most efficient and best performing industrialized economy on earth," as long as you'll all work more for less. - stepnw1f, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4Hey doofey brainwashed right wingers:
These SCANDALS ARE REAL THIS TIME.If you didn't watch so much propaganda and listen to meat head propagandists like Rush Limpballs you'd know what the hell you were talking about. Go take you fairytales and bitch on some other board. -
Show 51 - 98 of 98 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 