What is Digg?62 Comments
- obliviousfool, on 10/11/2007, -2/+65In a sense he's already under subpoena. There is an outstanding subpoena for e-mails that Rove has (so far) refused to comply with. The deadline has been extended once. If he can't come up with the e-mails because he won't then he is breaking the law by obstructing justice and being in contempt of congress. If he can't come up with the e-mails because they were "deleted" he has broken the law because he is in violation of the presidential records act. I wish they would ratchet up the pressure on him, but he is Bush's "made man." Any attack on him is essentially a direct attack on the president. Not that that's a bad thing, IMO.
- Glofern, on 10/11/2007, -5/+59How much more can we take until we finally get Rove to testify???? All roads seem to lead to him but always seem to leave him crawl room out like a snake.
- AnaHadWolves, on 10/11/2007, -0/+51I think what a lot of people are missing in the US Attorney/Arkansas attorney firing fiasco is this: the Republicans have decided that Senator Hillary Clinton will be (1) the Democratic candidate for President in 2008 and (2) that she has become a very formidable opponent.
As the Arkansas US Attorney, where Hillary was First lady and attorney, Karl Rove's "boy" could then potentially dig and dig and dig into whatever he/she could find at Karl's behest. It's called "opposition research". As Karl Rove's "mole", the US Attorney could even...surprise, surprise...file new and spurious charges against Hillary in the campaign.
Never forget that Karl Rove is filthy dirty. Never forget that he and his ilk play dirty. Never forget that Karl Rove is immoral, unethical and has no conscience; for him, the ends justify the means.
In the Bush Maladministration, nothing happens by accident; there was a reason why Karl Rove's buddy was "planted" there just in time for the 2008 election. The reason? Dirty tricks that would bring a tear to Richard Nixon's yellow eyes. - NoahVail, on 10/11/2007, -2/+47By the time this ship goes down all the rats will be gone...
- EntropyMan, on 10/11/2007, -2/+41I think that's the idea. "Last one out, turn off the country."
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -1/+34
"Never forget that Karl Rove is filthy dirty. Never forget that he and his ilk play dirty. Never forget that Karl Rove is immoral, unethical and has no conscience; for him, the ends justify the means."
Just restating one of the truest statements ever made on Digg... - swrostmore, on 10/11/2007, -0/+32I'm tired of hearing about subpoenas being "authorized," its about time to *serve* them don't you think?
- swrostmore, on 10/11/2007, -0/+27The entire Rove political machine is going down for illegal voter caging, the only thing stalling the inevitable is Rove's refusal to comply with the subpoena for the infamous emails.
- EntropyMan, on 10/11/2007, -1/+22I believe Griffin was also the very WH aide who slipped that same PATRIOT act provision in under the nose of Sen Specter (i.e., without his knowledge, but essentially in his name). And let's not forget that he's already a felon. The GOP likes felons, apparently, as long as they're loyal.
- geronimo, on 10/11/2007, -0/+20Bud Cummins was replaced by Tim Griffin ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy_Griffin ) with no senate approval, he was installed by using a provision snuck into the patriot act that allowed for no senate approval of appointed US attorneys. This provision has since been stricken down, but Tim Griffin still remains. The patriot act is supposed to help us fight terrorism. No one has yet justified Tim Griffin being US attorney, he is just there and they don't want to justify him because everyone knows this is totally against our system of checks and balances.
- mauiwowi, on 10/11/2007, -3/+22For those who missed the story the emails are available via bit torrent etc courtesy of the BBC, who bought all sorts of similar domain names in the hope of getting a typo - which in fact they did .
Looking @ 'em you can see why he doesn't want to produce 'em. - Sultana, on 10/11/2007, -0/+17Agreed. I've been waiting for them to do so for quite some time...I can't figure out what's taking them so long!
- Joscarfas, on 10/11/2007, -0/+16It is just amazing to hear these liars insist there was nothing wrong in the firing of these Us Attorneys meanwhile everybody involved seems to be cutting out and running.
Just like NoahVail said: "By the time this ship goes down all the rats will be gone..."
And this will end in just pure political theater.
Can the democrats just cut the crap and "Slam-Dunk" this case? - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -0/+14why doesn't the oversight committee get off their butts and just subpoena rove already?
/seriously - obliviousfool, on 10/11/2007, -0/+13This wasn't entirely missed. Google "attorney firings swing states" or similar. The MSM and congress do seem clueless about this, but the blogs seem to have it figured out. The US Attorneys who were replaced were all in swing states for the 2008 election. In other words, Gonzales and Goodling and every one seem clueless during testimony, but it is impossible for this to have happened by chance.
Here's one good, almost MSM article, about this.
http://www.salon.com/opinion/blumenthal/2007/03/15/rove_attorneys/index.html
Here is Rove talking about swing states for '08.
http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/002982.php
"QUESTION: In 2008, what states do you think are going to be the swing states?...
ROVE: You know, I think in 2008, there will be a number of states which will be competitive that are familiar states: Pennsylvania, Michigan, Ohio, maybe not Florida, Colorado, Arkansas, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Nevada, Iowa, New Mexico."
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/5/17/85051/5699
Someone on Kos figured out the odds of the US Attorney firings and all these swing states coinciding by accident. It has a very nice table showing all the weird activity.
For those who don't know, Tim Griffin, the guy who was appointed in Arkansas was head of Rove's "opposition research" group in the 2000 election. That is, the guy who was appointed to be US Attorney in Arkansas is a loyal Rove aide who was in charge of finding out nasty stuff about Gore in the 2000 election. That's hardly an appointment without political consideration! The most crucial position to the most loyal guy. - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -0/+9No GOP operatives on this board yet?
Hmmm. Interesting. - EntropyMan, on 10/11/2007, -2/+11o·ver·sight /ˈoʊvərˌsaɪt/ –noun
1. an omission or error due to carelessness;
2. unintentional failure to notice or consider; lack of proper attention;
3. supervision; watchful care: a person responsible for the oversight of the organization.
Apparently, they're using one of the first two definitions of the word, perhaps both.
/seriously. - feckineejit, on 10/11/2007, -0/+9When can we stop lying to each other about what is really going on and hiding behind patriotism and finally admit that this is wrong and Bush & his appointees are in place becuase of illegal activities?
- EntropyMan, on 10/11/2007, -2/+10All good points. But even if Griffin finds nothing to use, Arkansas is a southern state that naturally favors Clinton. The more Griffin can do to undermine that, the better for the GOP. So I at least expect to see more false prosecutions of democratic election fraud, and more attempts to disenfranchise democratic voters.
However, the only way to get rid of Griffin at this point is to impeach his bosses. - geronimo, on 10/11/2007, -0/+8There is no defending the indefensible. They may talk about Clinton, Kerry., etc. but they will never address issues brought up here. I think many are scared of the monster they created.
- obliviousfool, on 10/11/2007, -2/+10mauiwowi, yes, but let's not confuse things. We have a smattering of e-mails which were sent to the wrong domain over a period of years. Those e-mails do seem to indicate that Rove should comply with the subpoena for the *rest* of the e-mails, but the complete body of e-mail traffic is unavailable.
- halleyscomet, on 10/11/2007, -5/+11@EntropyMan
Nah, turning it off before they leave would be entirely too energy conscious of them. They need to burn MORE fossil fuels, not LESS. - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -2/+8This two-party system is screwed. And I don't think I need to give reasons for that.
I believe they should amend the constitution so it limits the party from being part of both white house and congress. Either they run for Congress or White House. - mauiwowi, on 10/11/2007, -1/+7Same old 'but what about Clinton?' blah blah blah that's the only defense against Bushco.
Try committing murder and go into court saying 'but what about Manson?'
Yah Clinton's opposition sure kept quiet over his scandals. - faskippy, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6Now this is what I call a "trickle down effect"! Since the emails are now available, it shouldn't take long for them to serve all of the subpoenas they need to, right? Well, let's just see what they do. Goodling should be recalled to explain her caging remarks, to elaborate on exactly what her definition of caging is. They should take those "lists", and go name by name. It needs to be done quickly, if you ask me. Rat, meet corner.
- Dumbledorito, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5In other news, the Bush administration has announced that all illegal activities can be laid squarely on whoever most recently quit and skipped town.
When asked if they should be believed, a White House spokesman said "pretty please?" - torgos, on 10/11/2007, -2/+6Fry that no-lipped bitch. The country needs to be cleansed of this *****, and they all need to BURN! Or maybe she should just release a sex-tape a la Paris Hilton, and then everyone will love her for no particular reason...just because.
- PhilLesh69, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4Rove is untouchable. He's a guy that never even graduated college, and all he ever accomplished was dumping pounds of junk mail in your mailbox. He's a dirt bag.
Has anyone ever heard of Samford Wallace? He's the spam king. If you had an email address, you got 35 to 40 spam emails in you inbox every day from 1997 to 2003, because of him. Karl Rove is the postal mail equivalent of spamfor wallace.
But, he saves us from terrorists, he's a bush friend, he knows the guy that saved us from the terrorists, dick cheney, so we have to love him!
You guys who actually believe the above sentence are FOOLS!! - dshPls, on 10/11/2007, -2/+6It's like everything politicians promise, by the time it's actually done it's half-assed and too late.
- faskippy, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Carefull, some idiot will come on board and call you a conspiracy theorist and a terrorist.
- kd1s, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3They're really bailing like rats from a sinking ship. I also note the futility of such action because those subpoenas still have to be answered.
The only issue I have with this is that it's much too late to start impeachment proceedings against Bush or Cheney. - FrothyA, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Roving Roving Roving
The Bush wagon is falling
Run 'n' hide! - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Run Karl Run!!!
- cwgannon, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Spot on.
- mauiwowi, on 10/11/2007, -2/+4True, yes. I think those are plenty to implicate Rove tho. I'm sure those involved 'burned' all of the actual evidence.
Almost unbelievably the US govt has confirmed their authenticity, whether they will be admissible I don't know. - ichbinladen, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Reese Witherspoon with a dab of *****.
- lvbuckeye, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2quote=swrostmore
"EVERYTHING illegal that the White House does, you guys bitch about!!!! Can't you give it a rest??? Everyone knows it's not a crime if the president OKs it, so why don't all you liberal mooninites quit whining?"
please tell me that was sarcastic? - weaksnyc, on 08/14/2009, -2/+4Stepcousin...
"one of the biggest..."
How can you possibly even begin to back that statement up. He flies a lot and has a big house.... explain how that is different from any other politician? And as for those other politicians, how many of them are doing the traveling to promote awareness, as opposed to promoting themselves? - ichbinladen, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Karl Rove was probably hittin' it.
- PhilLesh69, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Without question, the administration's catastrophic war in Iraq is the single overarching issue that has convinced a large majority of Americans that the country is "heading in the wrong direction." But the war itself is the outcome of an imperial presidency and the abject failure of Congress to perform its Constitutional duty of oversight. Had the government been working as the authors of the Constitution intended, the war could not have occurred. Even now, the Democratic majority remains reluctant to use its power of the purse to cut off funding for the war, thereby ending the American occupation of Iraq and starting to curtail the ever-growing power of the military-industrial complex.
- fason1007, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1dshpls means "Dipped in *****, PLeaSe!" as is demonstrated by his posts on DIGG.
@ dshpls: did mommie not love you enough when you were a baby? - peaceordeath, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2hahahahahahaahahahahaahaahahahahaha jump. ship.
- EntropyMan, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2Almost like the love child of Reese Witherspoon and the Creature from the Black Lagoon.
Maybe it's just a bad photo. - lateralus, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Or getting flipped. You know what I mean?
- halleyscomet, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1@crazywarthog
And yet, despite the massive budgetary crunch and the looming threat of a bankrupt nation within a few decided, the Bush Administration spends TRILLIONS on a war of choice started over a personal grudge.
I miss the days when the Republicans were the budget hawks. If Ronnie's GOP had been in charge for the last 7 years, we'd have budget surplus and a reduced national debt. Instead, we have a larger debt than the USA incurred during all of WWII so The Shrub could "get" the guy who wanted to kill his father, and to keep Iraq from switching to the Euro for trading oil.
Can we PLEASE get these nanny state big spenders out of the GOP???????? - lateralus, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Witherspoon with an pinch of Gweneth Paltrow.
Judges? - stepnw1f, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Ah yes..... the noose tightens ever so slowly. Slow enough to see all the corruption before the REAL hammer falls.
- PhilLesh69, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article17708.htm
In politics, as in medicine, a cure based on a false diagnosis is almost always worthless, often worsening the condition that is supposed to be healed. The United States, today, suffers from a plethora of public ills. Most of them can be traced to the militarism and imperialism that have led to the near-collapse of our Constitutional system of checks and balances. Unfortunately, none of the remedies proposed so far by American politicians or analysts addresses the root causes of the problem.
http://www.press.uchicago.edu/Misc/Chicago/511928.html
"What happened here was the gradual habituation of the people, little by little, to being governed by surprise; to receiving decisions deliberated in secret; to believing that the situation was so complicated that the government had to act on information which the people could not understand, or so dangerous that, even if the people could not understand it, it could not be released because of national security. And their sense of identification with Hitler, their trust in him, made it easier to widen this gap and reassured those who would otherwise have worried about it.
"This separation of government from people, this widening of the gap, took place so gradually and so insensibly, each step disguised (perhaps not even intentionally) as a temporary emergency measure or associated with true patriotic allegiance or with real social purposes. And all the crises and reforms (real reforms, too) so occupied the people that they did not see the slow motion underneath, of the whole process of government growing remoter and remoter. - gpollard, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1She looks a lot like Reese Witherspoon
- mauiwowi, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1I think your question is actually 'Were you whining then?'
I wasn't then or am I now, I only want a reasonable accounting in all the cases.
I don't think you can argue that the dems are out to get Bush more than the gop was to get Clinton. In the Clinton cases it was only that party that was involved but they had to drop the Lewinsky thing for example because the vast majority of their constituents were against them
In this case it's the dems who seem to be impotent and it's the majority of people who are outraged.
Not feeding you any more today troll. -
Show 51 - 62 of 62 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is