Skip to main content
Message Font: Serif | Sans-Serif
 
No. of Recommendations: 11
http://www.drudgereport.com/wh94a.htm

The damage to White House facilities is now estimated to top $200,000, according to insiders, with senior staffers now expressing concern that computer viruses may have been planted by bitter Clinton/Gore workers.

We all know that this is totally bogus, of course. That is, until it gets reported in tomorrow's Washington Post.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 15
with senior staffers now
expressing concern that computer viruses may have been planted by bitter Clinton/Gore workers.


Of course, this completly ignores the fact that the hard drives are removed from the computers, and replaced with new ones when the new administration takes over. On of the former presidents (sorry, can't remember which one) said that he was shocked upon starting to find that the computers wouldn't work until software had been installed, and he couldn't even find a paper clip.

Pretty difficult to leave a virus in a computer that doesn't even have an OS

David
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Pretty difficult to leave a virus in a computer that doesn't even have an OS

Yeah, but that means the NOSMOKE driver is missing too. That could cause serious damage to the PCs.

Rgds, Foollabaisse.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
he was shocked upon starting to find that the computers wouldn't work until software had been installed, and he couldn't even find a paper clip.

He obviously was expecting MS Office.

Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 25
The damage to White House facilities is now estimated to top $200,000, according to insiders, with senior staffers now expressing concern that computer viruses may have been planted by bitter Clinton/Gore workers.

MBARR it actually goes much further than this! I recently heard from three excellent sources (The Drudge Report, The Enquirer, and an intoxicated stranger on the street) that this morning at 2:48 AM former Clinton staffers actually BURNED DOWN the White House.

The Drudge just posted an excellent report on this. It seems that the Clinton staffers just walked in and burned the west wing. Things got a little out of hand and the rest of the building went down in flames shortly thereafter.

I DID NOT BELIEVE IT!!! UNTIL I SAW THE PICTURES ON THE ENQUIRER!!! They are very graphic!! Women and children burnt alive!

The drunken stranger who corroborated the story this morning really convinced me. He said that he lost his whole family in the fire. It made me cry. First the "W" keys on the keyboards. Then they release those viruses (anthrax?). Now they burn down the White House.

I think we should all pause for a moment of silence for all who died in the fire. Many of which where just working late at the White House looking for the missing "W" key!

Amen

Alex


Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Many of which where just working late at the White House looking for the missing "W" key!

Personally, I don't see the "drudgeworthiness" of a simple game of I Spy a W!


Jaipur
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Here, from no less a source than the New York Times:

http://www.nytimes.com/2001/01/26/politics/26WHIT.html

Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 5
Mr. Fleischer declined to discuss the vandalism in detail and said he did not know the value of the damage. His restrained response was in keeping, he said, with President Bush's efforts to promote greater civility in Washington.


Excuse me while I throw up.


Jaipur

Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 10
Mr. Fleischer declined to discuss the vandalism in detail and said he did not know the value of the damage. His restrained response was in keeping, he said, with President Bush's efforts to promote greater civility in Washington.

By declining to give us the facts of the vandalism, he is encouranging wild claims by Clinton-haters that hundreds of thousands of dollars in damage was done. Way to promote civility!
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 4
Notice also that the graffiti that was reported to be "on the walls" has now moved to the photocopiers!

Seems to me that some pranks had been pulled in the past, but past administrations have restrained from making it "newsworthy".

Gee, thanks for taking the high ground on this one, Bushstaff.

Jaipur
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 5
The most that the NY Times article says is... computer keyboards that have had the "W," the new president's middle initial, removed, computer and telephone lines that had been snipped and graffiti and obscene messages left in office copiers.

That's it? What about the fire? What about the burnt women and children? What about the anthrax virus being used to contaminate the drinking water? What about the pack of man eating hounds released (suspiciously) on the lawn?

Why the cover up? Why won't they tell the truth?!

Mr. Fleischer declined to discuss the vandalism in detail and said he did not know the value of the damage. His restrained response was in keeping, he said, with President Bush's efforts to promote greater civility in Washington.

WOW! That's swell!! He probably doesn't know the value because it must be so immense! Right? Ari Fleischer is such a kind caring man! :-)

;-) (wink, wink)

Alex

Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 6
<Seems to me that some pranks had been pulled in the past, but past administrations have restrained from making it "newsworthy".

Gee, thanks for taking the high ground on this one, Bushstaff>

Bingo. It's like they are already trying to distract us from looking behind the curtain

For example, I'd never heard of the complaints below from past transitions until today (note my effort at bipartisanship):

"Clinton administration officials complained bitterly yesterday about numerous "Bush-Quayle" stickers they found plastered on desks when they moved into the White House in 1993. Some maintained that phones and computers had been disabled. . . .

When Virginia Gov. James S. Gilmore III took office in 1998, his aides accused the fellow Republicans on the outgoing staff of George F. Allen, now a U.S. senator, of disabling the telephone-answering system, emptying toner from all the copiers and leaving all the computers in a big pile."
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 11
>>By declining to give us the facts of the vandalism, he is encouranging wild claims by Clinton-haters that hundreds of thousands of dollars in damage was done. Way to promote civility! <<

Yup,
It is called 'Manipulation' of the truth. It is par for the dubya course and I predict we will see much more of it. Although in a closed bush shop, we will probably just be fed pablum laced with a gag and most of us will go quietly to sleep and they will do whatever they care to do.....blech. WELCOME TO HELL!
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 3
Bingo. It's like they are already trying to distract us from looking behind the curtain

For example, I'd never heard of the complaints below from past transitions until today (note my effort at bipartisanship):

"Clinton administration officials complained bitterly yesterday about numerous "Bush-Quayle" stickers they found plastered on desks when they moved into the White House in 1993. Some maintained that phones and computers had been disabled. . . .

When Virginia Gov. James S. Gilmore III took office in 1998, his aides accused the fellow Republicans on the outgoing staff of George F. Allen, now a U.S. senator, of disabling the telephone-answering system, emptying toner from all the copiers and leaving all the computers in a big pile."


So vandalism is okay because no one complained about it in the past. Just like drunk driving was okay and sexual harassment was okay and racism was okay because it was always going on.

Just because something happened in the past doesn't mean it's right.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 8
Just because something happened in the past doesn't mean it's right.

Boy did you miss the point.

This crapola was not newsworthy before, but thanks to the "new civility" White House, it now is!

Jaipur
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 5
Just because something happened in the past doesn't mean it's right.

That's right, it doesn't. But it also means that this bs about the Clinton administration consisting of a bunch of low-lifes and disrespectful of govt property (as if they are the only ones that do it) should stop.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 8
<So vandalism is okay because no one complained about it in the past. Just like drunk driving was okay and sexual harassment was okay and racism was okay because it was always going on.

Just because something happened in the past doesn't mean it's right.>

I believe you missed the point. The comments are about the spin and focus on the issue this week as contrasted in the lack of spin and focus on the issue in past transitions.

Of course, vandalism is bad and past occurences don't justify present ones, but, respectfully, I think you're reaching if even by analogy you put in the same classification of offenses as drunk driving, sexual harasssment, and racism.

CKB
(ignoring opportunity for drunk driving crack)

Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 8
Boy did you miss the point.

This crapola was not newsworthy before, but thanks to the "new civility" White House, it now is!


There's a difference between "missing the point" and "trying to divert attention from the point."

SLL
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
So are you all saying that this behavior is acceptable?

*Phone lines were cut, rendering them inoperable.

*Voice mail messages were changed to obscene, scatological greetings. One Bush staffer had his grandmother call from the Midwest. She was horrified by what she heard on the other end of the line.

*Many phone lines misdirected to other government offices.

*Desks found turned completely upside down and trash deliberately left everywhere.

*Computer printers that were filled with blank paper but interspersed with pornographic pictures and obscene slogans that would be revealed only as items were run off the computer.

*'W' keys weren't just pried off more than 40 keyboards, some were glued on with Superglue; some were turned upside down and glued on.

*Filing cabinets glued shut.

*VP Office space in the Old Executive Office Building found in complete shambles. Mrs. Gore had to phone Mrs. Cheney to apologize, first reported by Rich Galen's Mullings.

*Lewd MagicMarker graffiti found on one office hallway.


I'm confused. Please elighten me.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 6

By declining to give us the facts of the vandalism, he is encouranging wild claims by Clinton-haters that hundreds of thousands of dollars in damage was done. Way to promote civility!


My sentiments exactly.

How do we know and what proof is there that this vandalism is not the work of the conservatives within the white house?

And why not prosecute - why this misguided benevolence from the conservatives all of a sudden? The answer is simple - it is the word of the Clinton staff against the word of the Bush staff - in other words a non-event.

Somebody, anybody - needs to tell Bush and his staff that they have the presidency now and that it is ok to let go of Clinton. But it appears that having accomplished their one and only goal, they will go on demonizing Clinton for the next 4 years.

What's next, graffiti in the Bush bedroom?

-=Ajax=-
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Uh, eNlighten.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 4
Please elighten me.

You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink.


Jaipur
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
How do we know and what proof is there that this vandalism is not the work of the conservatives within the white house?

Isn't this what Elian's relatives in Miami did? They spent several hours after the raid trashing the house, then called reporters in the morning.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 8
>>I'm confused. Please elighten me. <<

The bush camp is expert at presenting misleading facts to sway public opinion to their agenda.....telling something that is either a blatant lie ,stating something half-way with just enough information to ensure misleading interpretations (to which they can actually go back and honestly say 'gee, i never said that"). They are deceptive and self serving and many of us don't have all the facts and we are loathe to make judgements without them. This gives them all the latitude they need to play. Simplified: We are the lambs....they are wearing sheeps clothing and they think we are lunch. Lots of lambs turn into goats due to fear.I've a friend that says the Chinese have a saying that goes : "May you live in interesting times." It is meant as a curse.Things are getting more interesting by the minute!
Rebecca >:3(who is quite disgusted with the shearing!)
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 4
The bush camp is expert at presenting misleading facts to sway public opinion to their agenda.....telling something that is either a blatant lie ,stating something half-way with just enough information to ensure misleading interpretations (to which they can actually go back and honestly say 'gee, i never said that"). They are deceptive and self serving and many of us don't have all the facts and we are loathe to make judgements without them. This gives them all the latitude they need to play. Simplified: We are the lambs....they are wearing sheeps clothing and they think we are lunch. Lots of lambs turn into goats due to fear.

That all depends on what the definition of "is" is.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 4
The bush camp is expert at presenting misleading facts to sway public opinion to their agenda.....telling something that is either a blatant lie ,stating something half-way with just enough information to ensure misleading interpretations (to which they can actually go back and honestly say 'gee, i never said that"). They are deceptive and self serving and many of us don't have all the facts and we are loathe to make judgements without them.

Ah, I see. So what you are saying is that the Clinton team always presented nothing but the facts to the press and public and let people make their own judgements, whereas the Bush team only tells you what they want you to know. Well, that IS enlightening. Thank you.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
The bush camp is expert at presenting misleading facts to sway public opinion to their agenda.....telling something that is either a blatant lie ,stating something half-way with just enough information to ensure misleading interpretations (to which they can actually go back and honestly say 'gee, i never said that"). They are deceptive and self serving and many of us don't have all the facts and we are loathe to make judgements without them. This gives them all the latitude they need to play. Simplified: We are the lambs....they are wearing sheeps clothing and they think we are lunch. Lots of lambs turn into goats due to fear.

>>That all depends on what the definition of "is" is. <<
There is more than one definition of 'is' where you are? Where are you and what are the choices? ;)
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 5
<Ah, I see. So what you are saying is that the Clinton team always presented nothing but the facts to the press and public and let people make their own judgements, whereas the Bush team only tells you what they want you to know.>

Just because something happened in the past doesn't mean it's right.

CKB
(does that sound familiar?)
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Just because something happened in the past doesn't mean it's right.

CKB
(does that sound familiar?)


Yeah, but it's not significant enough to complain about.

(does that sound familiar?)
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
<Yeah, but it's not significant enough to complain about.

(does that sound familiar?)>

No
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 3
<Yeah, but it's not significant enough to complain about.

(does that sound familiar?)>

No


It should.

http://boards.fool.com/Message.asp?mid=14204153
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 3
<<<Yeah, but it's not significant enough to complain about.

(does that sound familiar?)>>>

<<No>>


<It should.>

thanks for the link. I read it. Didn't see the words "significant", "enough", or "complain" nor was that even the theme of the post you linked.

let me guess. reading comprehension isn't one of your strengths?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Just because something happened in the past doesn't mean it's right.

So you admit the Republicans are guilty as well!

Why didn't you say so in the first place?

What were you trying to hide?

Anyway, if they did $200,000 worth of damage they should be prosecuted for it. To let them get away with it and then make cowardly leaks to the Dredges is being soft on crime.

Worse, it's being wimpy.

And I didn't vote for the wimpy Bush.

I voted for the dumb Bush.

Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2


Somebody, anybody - needs to tell Bush and his staff that they have the presidency
now and that it is ok to let go of Clinton. But it appears that having accomplished
their one and only goal, they will go on demonizing Clinton for the next 4 years.

What's next, graffiti in the Bush bedroom?

-=Ajax=-


You don't think the guilty parties should be held liable? I'd like to see what happened if you destroyed $200,000 of White House property.

Naj
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
I'd like to see what happened if you destroyed $200,000 of White House property.

See what I mean?

So, where did you come up with this figure?

Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1


The bush camp is expert at presenting misleading facts to sway public opinion to their
agenda.....telling something that is either a blatant lie ,stating something half-way with
just enough information to ensure misleading interpretations (to which they can
actually go back and honestly say 'gee, i never said that"). They are deceptive and
self serving and many of us don't have all the facts and we are loathe to make
judgements without them. This gives them all the latitude they need to play.


You do remember the last eight years of Clinton/Gore?

Misleading, lies, sexual harassment, lying to grand juries, fundraising from the White House, what 'is' is, 'I did not have sex with that woman,', etc.

Your post is a pathetic piece of parc. The man has been in office for less than a week, and the former staffers did their best to trash the White House on the way out. Very sad.

naj
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 3
You don't think the guilty parties should be held liable? I'd like to see what happened if you destroyed $200,000 of White House property.

Naj



Huh? I wrote And why not prosecute - why this misguided benevolence from the conservatives all of a sudden?

The reason Bush is not prosecuting Naj is because the real vandals are his own people. Is that difficult to understand? This whole thing is a lie - pure fantasy.

-=Ajax=-



Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 3
the real vandals are his own people. Is that difficult to understand? This whole thing is a lie - pure fantasy.

-=Ajax=-


Unless you have some proof of this, I think I will put your theory down as fantasy.

One reason that they may not be prosecuting is that it would be extremely hard to. How do you prove which departing staffers actually engaged in vandalism and which ones just left their offices dirty?

Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2

One reason that they may not be prosecuting is that it would be extremely hard to. How do you prove which departing staffers actually engaged in vandalism and which ones just left their offices dirty?

I agree with you Ned and I will take your argument one step further: And how do you prove which incoming Bush staffers actually engaged in vandalism?

This is nothing more than conservative paranoia. If Bush has no intention of prosecuting he should have kept this from becoming a news story.

-=Ajax=-
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 4
This is nothing more than conservative paranoia. If Bush has no intention of prosecuting he should have kept this from becoming a news story.


That much I agree with, but I do find the idea that this was all Bush's (or his staff's) doing to be laughable. That is just liberal rationalization.


Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
the former staffers did their best to trash the White House on the way out.

Actually, the attempt was half-hearted at best. I'm sure they could have done more damage, if they really tried.

And it wasn't the White House, it was the Old Executive Office Building.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2


The reason Bush is not prosecuting Naj is because the real vandals are his own
people. Is that difficult to understand? This whole thing is a lie - pure fantasy.

-=Ajax=-


I'm sorry, didn't realize you were delusional today. I'll leave you alone now. (tiptoeing out of the white room....)

Naj
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1

This is nothing more than conservative paranoia. If Bush has no intention of
prosecuting he should have kept this from becoming a news story.


Wasn't another liberal on this board blaming Bush for not giving 'the whole story' earlier to the media? Now GWB (like he's the one he goes to the press, jeez) isn't supposed to say anything?

Are you really this crazy?

Naj
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 5
The reason Bush is not prosecuting Naj is because the real vandals are his own
people. Is that difficult to understand? This whole thing is a lie - pure fantasy.

-=Ajax=-



It is opium induced hallucinations such as these that make it so difficult to present any fact based rebutal to the charges against the ex-staffers. And to be honest i think they DID trash their offices before they left. Remember we are talking about politicians not grown ups. And before all the Democrats jump in with their cries of "they stated it" and "but but but what about when they did this or that"...I think the Republican political machine is just as twisted...just in a different sort of way.

Greg
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 5

Ok, we admit it, we trashed the white house. We are aliens from another dimesion. Bill Clinton rented us a room for the night in exchange for campaign contributions and 3 females of our species. To us it was a hotel room and therefore had to be trashed as is the custom on your world. We took all the W's as mementos. we asked elvis if this was ok since he has been with us for years and is our guiding light on earthly matters. He was very honored to hear that Bush plans to hang a black velvet likeness of "the King" in the oval office. To GW he says "uhhh thank ya very much uh-huh".

geeb-Xom-527
Commander of the zempian empire

P.S. The big brown cloud over houston looks very nice from up here
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
I'd like to see what happened if you destroyed $200,000 of White House property.

See what I mean?

So, where did you come up with this figure?


I think I know:

100 government-procured keyboards at $2,000 each.

-- Tony

Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
It is opium induced hallucinations such as these that make it so difficult to present any fact based rebutal to the charges against the ex-staffers. And to be honest i think they DID trash their offices before they left.


You think that the Clinton staffers trashed their offices before they left and because you think this you just assert - without proof what-so-ever - that this is a fact.

When someone else thinks that it is the Bush staffers that trashed the White House offices you call this opium induced hallucinations?

This is very naive to say the least - you need to get out more often.


-=Ajax=-
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
You think that the Clinton staffers trashed their offices before they left and because you think this you just assert - without proof what-so-ever - that this is a fact.

When someone else thinks that it is the Bush staffers that trashed the White House offices you call this opium induced hallucinations?


What would the Bush gang have to benefit from this? Clinton and gore are now nonfactors. however i don't think they would risk the embarassment if the truth got out.

Greg
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
What's next, graffiti in the Bush bedroom?


I think the first order of business is to board up the "Monica Bathroom". Then change the mattress in the Lincoln Bedroom. As for the Bush bedroom, that bed will be shared, for a change!

KoKo
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 3
Are you really this crazy?

Didn't you once complain about personal attacks?

Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 3

Didn't you once complain about personal attacks?

I believe it was more along the lines of liberals attacking me if I said something 'mean' but not attacking anyone else for similar reasons. I have been hit with far worse than I have ever given out here. Plenty o' F-bombs, too.

Look at it this way, 'crazy' isn't exactly a legal or medical term, is it?

Anyone who thinks the Bush staff made up lies about cut phone lines, broken computers, and graffiti on the walls needs to refill their pharmaceuticals, or get stronger ones.

Or live in reality.

Naj
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 3
The whole question is moot...

dubya just issued an executive order telling his people to turn the keyboards upside down and use the "m" key in place of the "w".
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 4
Anyone who thinks the Bush staff made up lies about cut phone lines, broken computers, and graffiti on the walls needs to refill their pharmaceuticals, or get stronger ones.

Well, thanks for the gratutitous judgement of my or anyone else's medical condition.

The fact is, we as the public have no idea the extent of any damage done. So I think the comments about how disrespectful the staff was are ridiculous. I would not put it above the Bush staff to NOT tell us just so people can make any wild claim they please.

Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
In the land of Liberals... This'll be fun...

http://www.msnbc.com/news/522351.asp#BODY
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
and yet another... ha ha

http://www.msnbc.com/news/521714.asp
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
No, it's more like vandalism and thievery are just fine if it's one of your Liberal friends.....

http://www.msnbc.com/news/521153.asp#BODY
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Typical Clinton sleaze...6 more years!!!! ...LMAO

http://www.msnbc.com/news/520046.asp#BODY

Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Give me a break. This is from "your" W Post...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A53705-2001Jan26.html
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
More of the same stuff you post on other boards, Ajax. No big surprise to me. This "vandalism" may be relatively trivial (compared to the Clinton thievery that went on the whole time THEY were in office), but you can't POSSIBLY think the reporting was untrue..??.. haha

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A53538-2001Jan26.html
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
And now the Dems are ganging up on Gore... So.. No More Gore?

The Washington Times account: "The centrist-leaning Democratic Leadership Council said yesterday that Al Gore lost the 2000 presidential election because he ran as 'a big-government liberal' whose class-warfare rhetoric turned off new-economy swing voters.


"In a bitter broadside attack on the party's left wing, which threatens to reignite the intraparty ideological wars that divided Democrats in the 1970s and 1980s, DLC leaders said Mr. Gore made a mistake when he turned his back on the more centrist, coalition-building themes Bill Clinton used and turned instead to a divisive 'us-versus-them' strategy that backfired."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A45389-2001Jan25.html
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 4

Well, thanks for the gratutitous judgement of my or anyone else's medical condition.

The fact is, we as the public have no idea the extent of any damage done. So I think the comments about how disrespectful the staff was are ridiculous. I would not put it above the Bush staff to NOT tell us just so people can make any wild claim they please.


Dude, first, get a sense of humor. Someone said the same exact thing to me on this very board, and I thought it was hilarious.

From the New York Post, Friday's edition,"
President Bush's staff is 'cataloging' vandalism to phones and computers by outgoing Clinton and Gore aides,' White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer said yesterday. "What we are doing is cataloging what took place," Fleischer said, adding the WH may or may not release a tally of the cost to taxpayers.

'Fleischer also confirmed that an apologetic callwas made to the office of VP Dick Cheney, but declined to say who made it.

Other sources at the WH say phone lines were cut, nasty graffiti was scribbled on the walls, in hallways and bathrooms, phone lines were forwarded to other offices, and pornographic voice mail left on machines.'

'In addition, several items were stolen from the Presidential plane and WH offices that had the Presidential seal on them.'


That's from the WH press secretary and his staff. I think we know the extent of the damage so far, and these are no longer 'wild claims,' wouldn't you say? Are the comments on this board about them still 'ridiculous' to you? It seems you are living in some fantasy land to respond like this.

It's a shame the Democratic staffers had to act like the pot-smoking nine-year olds they are, on their way out the door.
But then, why did we expect anything different??

Naj

ps Your apologies for people who destroyed taxpayer property is simply sad. I hope they pay for their crimes.

Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 3
That's from the WH press secretary and his staff. I think we know the extent of the damage so far, and these are no longer 'wild claims,' wouldn't you say?

No

Are the comments on this board about them still 'ridiculous' to you?

Comments about the monetary damage done are ridiculous, they have no basis in fact.

It seems you are living in some fantasy land to respond like this.

I don't find this in the least bit humorous.

Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 3
I don't find this in the least bit humorous.




Awwwwwwwwwww. Such a shame. Too bad so sad.

If I find a replacement sense of humor on sale, I'll bet it for you.

Naj
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 4
<That's from the WH press secretary and his staff. I think we know the extent of the damage so far, and these are no longer 'wild claims,' wouldn't you say? Are the comments on this board about them still 'ridiculous' to you? It seems you are living in some fantasy land to respond like this.>

Naj:

Seen any of today's papers? If you had, the resident of fantasy land must be you if you're still persisting in fanning the flames of the extensive damage claims.

In short, the stories say that in the face of calls for some factual support for claims of extensive damage, the Bush White House is beginning to back track from the Friday reports upon which you're still relying.

For example, even the commandier-in-thief said:

"There might have been a prank or two; maybe somebody put a cartoon on the wall, but that's okay"
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
If you had, the resident of fantasy land must be you if you're still persisting in fanning the flames of the extensive damage claims.

Naw, they'll probably just say it was a joke, get a sense of humor.

Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
In short, the stories say that in the face of calls for some factual support for claims of extensive damage, the Bush White House is beginning to back track from the Friday reports upon which you're still relying.

For example, even the commandier-in-thief said:

"There might have been a prank or two; maybe somebody put a cartoon on the wall, but that's okay"


I haven't seen these. Why, though, do I suspect they're not on the front page?

SLL
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 3
I haven't seen these. Why, though, do I suspect they're not on the front page?

heh, cause they're not.

http://washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A53681-2001Jan26.html
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 3
I haven't seen these. Why, though, do I suspect they're not on the front page?

heh, cause they're not.

http://washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A53681-2001Jan26.html


Thanks, Beth.

The accusers get front page, the truth comes out a bit further back in the paper. Liberal press, huh?

Perhaps here, at least, we who were sceptical of these exaggerated stories will get the apologies to which we're entitled.

But probably not.

SLL
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Perhaps here, at least, we who were sceptical of these exaggerated stories will get the apologies to which we're entitled.

But probably not.


Perhaps we'll get one of those terribly expensive Air Force One glasses or a hand towel.

Such felonious behaviour. Tsk Tsk


Jaipur
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0


Seen any of today's papers? If you had, the resident of fantasy land must be you if you're still persisting in fanning the flames of the extensive damage claims.


No, I haven't read them yet.

Naj
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1


Perhaps we'll get one of those terribly expensive Air Force One glasses or a hand towel.

Such felonious behaviour. Tsk Tsk


Jaipur


Ahh! Now I get it, Jaipur, it is OKAY to steal, as long as it isn't a big item. Thanks for the explanation.

Next.

Naj
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Ahh! Now I get it, Jaipur, it is OKAY to steal, as long as it isn't a big item. Thanks for the explanation.

Next.


I'll be back when you find a sense of humor. Maybe you could steal one!


Jaipur
Print the post Back To Top