Rappin’ Karl
Remember the Nixon tapes? They brought him down. What will this do?
Party-issued laptops now a White House headache
When Karl Rove and his top deputies arrived at the White House in 2001, the Republican National Committee provided them with laptop computers and other communication devices to be used alongside their government-issued equipment.
The back-channel e-mail and paging system, paid for and maintained by the RNC, was designed to avoid charges that had vexed the Clinton White House — that federal resources were being used inappropriately for political campaign purposes.
Now, that dual computer system is creating new embarrassment and legal headaches for the White House, the Republican Party and Rove’s once-vaunted White House operation.
Democrats say evidence suggests the RNC e-mail system was used for political and government policy matters in violation of federal record preservation and disclosure rules.
In addition, Democrats point to a handful of e-mails obtained through ongoing inquiries suggesting the system may have been used to conceal such activities as contacts with lobbyist Jack Abramoff, who was convicted on bribery charges and is now in prison for fraud.
And yet Sandy Berger’s Theft of classified documents continues to get a bye. I hope his wrists have recovered.
@1
What does that have to do with this case? If Berger destroyed documents then it’s just as bad and should be dealt with, but it has nothing to do with this.
Where do you get that, “well they do it to, so it’s ok if we do it” attitude?
We should all be upset, and we should all demand better. If anything we should be more upset when it’s our own party that’s in the wrong. Not bicker over who wronged first.
It really isn’t a, “but Sandy Berger kicked my chair first, wahhh wahhh” sort of a thing.
You’ll probably remember a lot of arguments which sounded like that if you think back to when you were about 5 years old.
Grow up.
#1
Please read #2 carefully. Nothing is more tiresome than this childish tact. It’s the last refuge of a losing argument usually reserved for the kindergarten playground.
If I remember correctly, just having such a system is illegal under some statute.
Anyone else hear that, too?
to #4
I would be fine if they had separate laptops and cell phones that were to be used only for party business, like fund raising. But if they are used for anything related to any type of executive policy, no way. It is just that policy and fund raising are so closely tied in this administration.
Has anyone noticed the new feature “content link” to insert ads. For Karl Rove it talks about furniture. I assume that is an ad for Karl’s Furniture. This could create some interesting ads.
@1
oh and I actually looked into the berger thing just to see what you were talking about.
you might find this interesting
from wikipedia:
“Berger eventually pled guilty to a misdemeanor charge of unauthorized removal and retention of classified material on April 1, 2005.”
he was fined 50,000 dollars, and ordered to serve 2 years of probation and to perform 100 hours of community service.
in addition, I’m not sure if you knew, but he didn’t actually destroy any documents
“After a long investigation, the lead prosecutor Noel Hillman, chief of the Justice Department’s public integrity section, stated that Berger only removed classified copies of data stored on hard drives stored in the National Archives, and that no original material was destroyed.”
from the wall street journal
“We called Justice Department Public Integrity chief prosecutor Noel Hillman, who assured us that Mr. Berger did not deny any documents to history. ‘There is no evidence that he intended to destroy originals,’ said Mr. Hillman. ‘There is no evidence that he did destroy originals. We have objectively and affirmatively confirmed that the contents of all the five documents at issue exist today and were made available to the 9/11 Commission.”
so not only are you making an idiotic childish argument, but even the subject and basis of your flawed argument are in fact false.
please provide any statements which you believe to supercede the word of the Justice Department Public Integrity Chief Prosecutor
Greg Allen asked above, “If I remember correctly, just having such a system is illegal under some statute.”
The answer:
“White House officials have communicated with DOJ staffers about the attorney purge, using email accounts maintained by the Republican National Committee in possible violation of the Presidential Records Act,” according to Truthout, a political website. For example, J. Scott Jennings, Special Assistant to the President and Deputy Director of Political Affairs, used an sjennings@gwb43.com email account to query a DOJ official about the pending US attorney vacancies.
Roger Matus
Blog: Death By Email
8 – TruthOut usually gives an “original” source with a link, which often is the AP or some other site that is less overtly political. Not always, but usually. In this case, though, the only piece I found (dated March 26 – http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/032607R.shtml ) cited mostly Rep. Henry Waxman, who does not love the Bush maladministration. A search in Google News didn’t turn up anything like this in other media.
Maybe I just missed it. Corroboration through other sources of what amounts to an accusation of criminal misconduct by Republican Party officials would boost credibility of the TruthOut piece. Anybody know of any other sources?
Lacking another source, I’d say – put this report into that big, gray “maybe” space reserved for stories that mostly serve someone’s political agenda. Even if it seems as if they’re likely true.
to: #2 && #7
Dude, did you even read poster #3? Cuz you just got pwned. oh, and by the way
😛 (trying to communicate on a childish level here)
#2 What does that have to do with this case? If Berger destroyed documents then it’s just as bad and should be dealt with, but it has nothing to do with this.
I’m surprise you’re not savvy to this.
It’s called media noise. Whenever conservatives sense they are losing control of a story, they create noise.
They have hundreds of ’em — at least one or two for every subject. Some favorites are Chappaquiddick, Monica Lewinsky, “Able Danger”, Robert “KKK” Byrd, Hanoi Jane, etc etc.
But don’t feel bad, the “liberal” media falls for this noise tactic almost every time.
David, wiki has the story wrong. Sandy Berger in his plea, pled guilty to cutting up documents with scissors. Anyone else would be in jail for doing what he did. Also, these WERE original documents, not printouts from a hard drive. The confusion is that there were several copies of the documents made at the time for different people in the administration. So Sandy Berger’s archive documents could have had handwritten notes that were not on the other copies, and would not be on any hard disk versions.
Nevertheless, this is irrelevant to the current scandal. Obviously, the Democrats real reason for the request is to get a look at the GOP political strategy going forward.
By the way, this could never bring down the administration, as they could just wipe the e-mails Microsoft style.
#13, Mike
You forget the fact that the Justice Committees in both houses already have some documents from Republican Party servers. Erasing the emails from the servers would be Obstruction of Congress. Of course, that means nothing to this Administration.
Yes it would be, but that’s the reality. I state it as a fact because it already happened in the last administration, and even the right-wing press barely noticed it.