Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Drudge says "White House Trashed"....

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
supercrash Donating Member (412 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-14-04 10:36 AM
Original message
Drudge says "White House Trashed"....
This was probably Rove's first work in the White House....We heard that the Clinton administration trashed the White House on their way out

Wasn't this a lie ?.

http://www.drudgereport.com/wh93a.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Touchdown Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-14-04 10:38 AM
Response to Original message
1. Yes it was a lie.
The GAO investigated and found nothing missing, except the things that belonged to the Clinton's and their staffs. Nothing was damaged, and NO, the Ws were not removed from the keyboards.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NoKoolAid Donating Member (3 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-14-04 11:32 AM
Response to Reply #1
10. GAO says the Ws were missing or damaged
Actually, the Ws WERE removed from the keyboards according to the GAO report which can be read here: http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d02360.pdf">GAO report
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Touchdown Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-14-04 11:36 AM
Response to Reply #10
11. Ok, let me amend that.
The Ws were not removed by anybody in the Clinton Administration.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TahitiNut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-14-04 12:21 PM
Response to Reply #10
15. Keys are designed to be removed/replaced.
On anything other than the cheapest keyboards, keys are designed to be removable. The reactionary complete replacement of keyboards merely missing keys was wasteful. The typical retail cost of a cheap keyboard without removable keys is about $20 ... far less than the GAO estimated.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
terrya Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-14-04 10:39 AM
Response to Original message
2. Yes, it's a complete lie.
Why is that asshole Drudge rehashing that bullshit again?

Goddamn, those right wing pricks just can't let go of Clinton, can they?

This story is 100%, grade A bullshit. Don't believe it for one millisecond.

Terry
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
supercrash Donating Member (412 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-14-04 10:41 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. No, NO, NO
I dug this up...Drudge is not pushing it

It shows how Bush is willing to disrespect the good name of the WH

Does anybody have a link to the GAO investigation ?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
brainshrub Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-14-04 10:41 AM
Response to Reply #2
4. Clinton's penis
Clinton's penis! Clinton's penis! Clinton's penis! Clinton's penis! Clinton's penis! Clinton's penis! Clinton's penis! Clinton's penis! Clinton's penis! Clinton's penis! Clinton's penis! Clinton's penis! Clinton's penis! AAAAHhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Clinton's penis!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jersey Devil Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-14-04 10:46 AM
Response to Original message
5. Drudge the Dem boxer short sniffer?
Too funny not to share:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ComerPerro Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-14-04 10:56 AM
Response to Original message
6. It was a disgusting and pathetic lie
The first thing these assholes do, to restore honor and dignity to the White House?

They show that anyone is fair game for their lies, and they show their disdain for truth.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sadiesworld Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-14-04 11:02 AM
Response to Original message
7. Didn't some repug order the GAO investigation
because he hadn't been let in on the joke?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
burythehatchet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-14-04 11:07 AM
Response to Reply #7
8. Bob Barr in his heyday
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
peekaloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-14-04 11:07 AM
Response to Reply #7
9. Bob Barr hahahahahahaha link (pdf)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Killarney Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-14-04 12:01 PM
Response to Reply #9
12. Wow, so it's true???
I always thought it was a lie. According to that GAO report, it's true.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
supercrash Donating Member (412 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-14-04 12:03 PM
Response to Reply #12
13. So they Clinton administration DID trash the WH ?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
supercrash Donating Member (412 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-14-04 12:13 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. Come on guys...
Are we all wrong about this issue ?

Did they really trash the place ?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
supercrash Donating Member (412 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-14-04 12:26 PM
Response to Reply #14
17. So I guess this confirms it...
The Clinton administration did trash the place...the report told us so

It kills me that the guys on Sean Hannity's board are right...and we are wrong

Don't we look stupid
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
peekaloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-14-04 12:28 PM
Response to Reply #14
18. pissing contest
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A34764-2002Jun11?language=printer

-------------
The report gave both sides some vindication. Bush aides said it validated their charges, and former Clinton aides said it proved the damage was minor and ordinary.
---------
Investigators were unable to corroborate some charges by the new Bush administration, because in some cases it was impossible to determine whether the damage was intentional and in other cases it was uncertain who was responsible.
Investigators also interviewed employees of the General Services Administration about what they had seen as they prepared the office space. "It was not possible to determine whether, in all cases, the reported incidents had occurred, when they occurred, why they occurred, and who may have been responsible for them," the report said.
---------
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TahitiNut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-14-04 12:24 PM
Response to Original message
16. WED JAN 24, 2001
Is there a good reason for rehashing/reposting a story that's over three years old?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Moderator DU Moderator Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-14-04 12:29 PM
Response to Original message
19. Locking - misleading/inflammatory (over three years old)
Rules to start discussion threads in the General Discussion forum.

1. If you start a thread in the General Discussion forum, you must present your opinion in a manner that is not inflammatory, which respects differences in opinion, and which is likely to lead to respectful discussion rather than flaming. Some examples of things which should generally be avoided are: unnecessarily hot rhetoric, nicknames for prominent Democrats or their supporters, broad-brush statements about groups of people, single-sentence "drive-by" thread topics, etc.

2. The subject line of a discussion thread must accurately reflect the actual content of the message.

3. The subject line of a discussion thread may not include profanity or swear words, even if words or letters are replaced by asterisks, dashes, or abbreviations.

4. The subject line and the entire text of the message which starts the thread may not include excessive capitalization, or excessive punctuation.

5. If you post an article or other published content which is from a conservative source or which expresses a traditionally conservative viewpoint, you must state your opinion about the piece and/or the issues it raises.

6. You may not start a new discussion thread in order to continue a current or recent flame war from another thread. The moderators have the authority to lock threads in order to contain flaming on a particular topic to only one thread at a time.

7. Discussion topics that mention any or all of the Democratic presidential primary candidates are not permitted in the General Discussion forum, and instead must be posted in the General Discussion: 2004 Primary forum.

Thank you for your understanding and cooperation,
DU moderator
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat May 25th 2024, 04:32 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC