[Spliffdaddy]

First we had to replace all the keyboards with missing W's. Then we had to buy new furniture for the White House because Hillary took it with her.

Now we have to shell out over a half million dollars for an illegal ill-fated effort at discrediting a witness.

Bill would have defended himself, but he had to give up his license to practice law (on his last day in office) in a plea bargain that kept him out of jail.

http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/11/03/li...ipp/index.html

[MacGorilla]

Hey, hey. Linda Tripp was slime of the lowest kind.

[eklipse]

Originally posted by MacGorilla:
Hey, hey. Linda Tripp was slime of the lowest kind.

Ugly bitch too.

[stupendousman]

...and for that, she deserves to have her rights violated by the government!

Harumphf!!!

[petehammer]

Originally posted by Spliffdaddy:
First we had to replace all the keyboards with missing W's

Nope.

Remember all those stories about Bill Clinton and his friends trashing the White House and Air Force One--you know, the stories about torn carpets, scratched walls, and stolen champagne flutes that seemed to affirm, with uncanny timing, George W. Bush's promise to bring "dignity" back to the presidency? In the week after Bush took office, CNN's Kelly Wallace quoted unnamed administration sources describing "trash everywhere." NBC's Andrea Mitchell, relying on equally mysterious Bush personnel, described the devastation of "phone lines cut, drawers filled with glue, door locks jimmied so that arriving Bush staff got locked inside their new offices." Other reports soon followed, none quoting named sources. In fact, as TAP's own Joshua Micah Marshall pointed out in Slate, the White House press corps ran with this story "without requiring one White House staffer to go on the record about specific vandalism or to provide any physical evidence."

Now we know why: The Bushies--especially White House press secretary Ari Fleischer--were lying. First, an official at Andrews Air Force Base confirmed that nothing was missing from Air Force One. (So where did Fox News hack Tony Snow get his info that silverware and porcelain dishes with the presidential seal were missing, that the presidential plane "looked as if it had been stripped by a skilled band of thieves--or perhaps wrecked by a trailer park twister"? Good question.) And on May 17, the General Services Administration reported that with regard to the White House, aside from a few missing W's on computer keyboards and a handmade sign labeled "Office of Strategary," the "condition of the real property was consistent with what we would expect to encounter when tenants vacate office space after an extended occupancy."

The Kansas City Star and the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette were quick to report the GSA's conclusions, and a smattering of news coverage followed. Surely CNN, NBC, and other major media outlets will be issuing prompt and prominent retractions.

Nicholas Confessore

[MacGorilla]

Yes, I like the urban myth these "vandalism" episodes have become. Kinda like like Al Gore saying he invented the Internet, which he never said.

[maxelson]

In a classic move well worn and utilized by the "other" side, I'll give you this:
Yeah, but it ain't costing the US taxpayers 230 billion to clean up after Slick Willie.

[zigzag]

I agree that we shouldn't have to pay $600,000 to a duplicitous, money-grubbing b*tch on behalf of the Clinton political apparatus. I also agree that we shouldn't have had to pay Ken Starr and his hacks $6 million to wire Tripp and investigate details of the President's sex life. I also agree that we shouldn't have had to spend close to $80 million on investigations that effectively went nowhere in order to satisfy the political aspirations of Clinton's opponents. I say we throw the bums out.

[nredman]

Originally posted by eklipse:
Ugly bitch too.

totally

[Zimphire]

What a humanitarian.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...linton04m.html

[Nonsuch]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
What a humanitarian.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...linton04m.html

Actually charging to appear at an event! The nerve of the man!

[Jansar]

Originally posted by eklipse:
Ugly bitch too.

When John Goodman portrayed her on SNL wearing a blonde wig, he made her look way more attractive.

[Y3a]

I use to work for the company that was hired to fix the PC's and replace the ruined keyboards. In March '01, Photos were released showing the damage. I guess it was a hoax too.......


Afer all that BS in Fla (hanging chad's etc) over 25 newspapers and other news organs brought accountants, and the like to 'go over' the ballots. By every group of 'standards' used, Bush STILL WON. That's why the results were so low key in presentation. You wouldn't know that by listening to the presidential candidates on the left.

A fact is a fact, but truth is an opinion.

[petehammer]

Originally posted by Y3a:
I use to work for the company that was hired to fix the PC's and replace the ruined keyboards. In March '01, Photos were released showing the damage. I guess it was a hoax too.......

What company was that and, pray tell, where are those photos?

A hoax is a hoax.

[Gee-Man]

There might be more to this story than meets the eye (emphasis mine):

Joe Conason, Salon - November 4, 2003

Linda Tripp's very valuable privacy
Irony is not quite adequate to describe the outcome of Linda Tripp's lawsuit against the Pentagon, which yesterday agreed to pay her $595,000 for invading her privacy. In addition to her cash windfall, the betrayer of Monica Lewinsky's confidences also has managed to spin her own story, at least in this error-ridden CNN account. Tripp always insisted that she sacrificed her young friend on the altar of "truth," so she shouldn't mind a few corrections for the record.

According to CNN, "Tripp sued the government when Pentagon officials leaked information from the government background investigation about her, which included the fact that she was arrested as a juvenile in a case involving drinking alcohol; she was never charged." Almost every statement in that paragraph is false -- and could easily have been checked against Tripp's actual arrest record, which has long been posted here on the Smoking Gun.

Tripp was 19 years old when she was arrested for grand larceny in the alleged theft of money and a watch from two men at a motel in upstate New York. Whether she was "drinking alcohol" or not, that had nothing to do with the charges against her (which were later reduced in a plea bargain to "loitering"). More important, perhaps, no Pentagon official leaked the story of Tripp's arrest to New Yorker reporter Jane Mayer, who was the first to report it in March 1998. In the course of preparing a profile of Tripp, Mayer learned about the arrest from Tripp's stepmother.

Like any competent reporter, Mayer had taken the information she got from the stepmother, filed a request at the local police station where Tripp had been busted, and got a facsimile of the arrest report.

At the time, Tripp's arrest was germane not so much because of anything it revealed about her youthful character but because it proved she had lied on her application for a top Pentagon security clearance. That Defense Department form required the applicant to disclose any prior arrest -- and indeed, the form itself warns that failure to disclose such information in pursuit of a security clearance may constitute a felony offense. When Tripp omitted the information about her 1969 arrest from the DOD form and then signed it, she violated those provisions (an offense for which she has never been punished).

The Pentagon couldn't have revealed Tripp's arrest record to Mayer for a very simple reason: Nobody there knew about it. What the Pentagon officials told Mayer was that they had no record of Tripp's arrest. This was the "invasion of privacy" underlying her subsequent lawsuit and the barrage of right-wing propaganda that pilloried Mayer and the Pentagon.

So Tripp is being paid almost $600,000 because Pentagon spokesmen told the New Yorker that the Defense Department knew of no arrests in her background.

The settlement negotiations with Tripp's lawyers were overseen by the Justice Department, which represented the Pentagon in her case. I wonder whether Attorney General John Ashcroft or Solicitor General Ted Olson signed off on this payoff.

Conason does appear to have his facts in order here. I'll admit that I haven't followed this story, but it does sound rather fishy.

[Y3a]

<< What company was that and, pray tell, where are those photos? >>

The company was GMRI, and the photos were either NEWSMAX.com or Drudge.

Also, I worked at the National Y2K-ICC in DC, and our project manager used to be the tech lead for the White house E-Mail system. They had to show the Justice Dept. where the back-ups really were.

So much for ancient history.

[MacGorilla]

Linda Tripp complaining about her privacy being invaded? The irony...

[adamk]

Originally posted by Y3a:
<< What company was that and, pray tell, where are those photos? >>

The company was GMRI, and the photos were either NEWSMAX.com or Drudge.

a link would have been nice...

anyway, so i did look and found two articles:
GAO Probes Vandalism by Clinton White House
an excerpt:

Claire Buchan, a Bush administration spokeswoman, said the White House counsel's office had photographs of the vandalism, but did not explain why they were not offered to the GAO when the agency first requested proof of vandalism.

"If the GAO would like more information, we would be happy to complete a list and be helpful," Buchan said. "We stand by that list as provided to us by those involved in cleaning up and preparing the offices."

Ungar said he had seen the White House photographs, which surfaced on Internet sites Tuesday. But he said the images showed only messy conditions, not vandalism.

and
Clinton Hints at Paying for Damage

And Siewert said newspaper reporters aboard Clinton's final flight on Air Force One noticed nothing out of the ordinary.

"At one point," Siewert said, "as we were about to drink some toasts we hit turbulence, and eight or 10 glasses on a tray fell off and broke.

"I have since checked with the stewards, and apart from maybe one or two hand towels missing, that was it."

Earlier, the Washington Times reported just about everything aboard the specially equipped giant Boeing 747 that could be removed had been looted.

i did not see any photos of the damage.

seems to me like this is just another case of petty squabbling. bush, the incoming, was able to paint clinton, the outgoing, in an unfavorable light, and then when evidence was asked (because it wasn't initially offered), he took the high-road and decided to drop it. makes him look good. clinton offers to pay for everything, accepts responsibility, yet has no evidence put against him other than a few unfounded accusations. and the inflated, unresolved story is taken as truth.

adam

[Spliffdaddy]

where's the furniture Hillary stole?

[adamk]

Originally posted by Spliffdaddy:
where's the furniture Hillary stole?

oh, do you have photos showing the vacant spots where said furniture used to reside? a story detailing the events? i am asking because i want to know.

[Spliffdaddy]

Originally posted by adamk:
oh, do you have photos showing the vacant spots where said furniture used to reside? a story detailing the events? i am asking because i want to know.

Sorry to inform you.

It's all true

The National Park Service said yesterday it will "tighten" procedures to stop future presidents from leaving with a truckload of furniture that doesn't belong to them.
Park Service spokesman James McDaniel said the agency is undertaking an "internal review" to see if there's "something we can do to make the process better."

The action comes after Bill and Hillary Clinton were forced to return to Uncle Sam 19 pieces of White House furniture and household items they had shipped to their new home in Chappaqua.

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/arti...14/83049.shtml


edited to add:

There are people who believe the 'W's weren't pried from keyboards because that would be an act of vandalism - yet they obviously stole 19 pieces of furniture - which would be 'theft'.

[Zimphire]

That was pretty disrespectful.

Not that the Clinton's ever had respect for the white house.

[Spliffdaddy]

And with that, the thread comes to a close.

One of the most effective liberal-repellents ever created.

Truth.

*crickets chirp*

edited to add:


The Clintons rode into Pennsylvania Avenue on a pair of fine white stallions - riding high on their moral horses, they bemoaned the decay of morality, the greed and excess of the 80's, the savings&loan scams, and the crippling effect of big government.

Lo and behold, we find that the Clintons are armpit-deep in shady land deals, savings&loan fraud, bad moral judgement, theft of government property, purjury, and furthermore promoted efforts to federalize the healthcare industry - which would have doubled the size of government.

Good riddance, Bill and Hillary.

[Gee-Man]

Originally posted by Spliffdaddy:
And with that, the thread comes to a close.

One of the most effective liberal-repellents ever created.

Truth.

"Truth" appears to be a rather effective conservative-repellent as well. I noticed the crickets chirping rather loudly in response to my post. Will no one refute the fact that we taxpayers just paid Linda Tripp hundreds of thousands of dollars to settle a completely spurious lawsuit?

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by Gee-Man:
"Truth" appears to be a rather effective conservative-repellent as well. I noticed the crickets chirping rather loudly in response to my post. Will no one refute the fact that we taxpayers just paid Linda Tripp hundreds of thousands of dollars to settle a completely spurious lawsuit?

Had Bill be behaving himself none of it would have happened.

[adamk]

Originally posted by Spliffdaddy:
where's the furniture Hillary stole?

Originally posted by Spliffdaddy:
Sorry to inform you.

no need to be sorry. and thanks for posting the link. and in the process, you seemed to answer your own question.

i am not a bush-apologist, nor am i clinton-apologist. in fact, i am wary of all professional politicians. unfortunately, i don't see a return to citizen-politicians in the near future.

adam

[Y3a]

<< bush, the incoming, was able to paint clinton, the outgoing, in an unfavorable light, >>

Clinton was already several coats deep in paint by then, and "W" Bush is the one who DIDN'T want to make a big deal about it, just replace the stuff, fix the phones and get on with it.

I guess I hear more, living in the DC area, and I assume you people out in the sticks DON'T.

[Gee-Man]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
Had Bill be behaving himself none of it would have happened.

That's true, but irrelevant to this. Bill Clinton may have triggered the whole mess when his happy little guy got out of control, but Bill didn't force Linda Tripp to file what appears to be an obviously frivolous lawsuit. Neither did Bill force the Pentagon to settle the aforementioned frivolous lawsuit.

Linda Tripp should be responsible for her own actions. Too bad taxpayer money is now going towards her refusal to recognize this.

[Gee-Man]

Originally posted by Spliffdaddy:
Sorry to inform you.

It's all true (snip NewsMax story).

You should be wary of getting all your news from one source. I don't think that newsmax.com is the most reliable news source out there. I was curious, so I went looking for other information on this. I found out that, as with most things, the "truth" is more complex than either rabidly right-wing or left-wing sources would have you believe:

The Story Sofa

By Al Kamen
Washington Post
Thursday, April 19, 2001; Page A17

Remember the furniture flap over the Clintons moving items from the White House that some folks said were government property and not for the Clintons to take? It's not over yet.

After questions arose about the proper ownership of many items sent to the Clintons' home in Chappaqua, N.Y., the Clintons in early February shipped back $28,500 worth of furniture, including a coffee table, an armoire, a game table and some paintings.

Now it turns out the National Park Service, which handles gifts to the White House, has been reviewing the questioned items with the White House usher's office and contacting donors.

While some donors said they hadn't intended for their gifts to go to the Clintons, others said they had. Gifts to the White House are tax-deductible but gifts to the first family are not, a spokeswoman for former president Bill Clinton said, so it was easy to verify that people who didn't take deductions intended the items for the Clintons.

And wouldn't you know it, there's word that some items may have belonged to the Clintons after all. So some gifts, shipped at government expense to Chappaqua and returned by the Clintons at their expense, might now have to be reshipped to New York at government expense.

So, did the Clintons take White House furniture that didn't belong to them? In some cases, perhaps - in others, perhaps not. Was it their intention to steal the furniture, or were they telling the truth when they said they thought the items were gifts and belonged to them? Maybe, maybe not. I suppose what you will believe depends on what side of the political fence you sit on.

By the way, the answer to your question "Where's the furniture Hillary stole?" is simple: at the White House. Putting aside the controversial question if what she did was theft or an honest mistake, the items were returned.

[Zimphire]

Yeah Bill or Hillary would never lie.

They were returned because they were made to return them.

They didn't do it on their own free will.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
Yeah Bill or Hillary would never lie.

They were returned because they were made to return them.

They didn't do it on their own free will.

Why should they, if they had reason to believe the furniture was theirs?

And whaddaya know, in at least *some* cases, they were apparently *WRONGFULLY* made to return them.

I really don't see why anybody is interested in this crap.

The Linda Tripp settlement, however, I did find "interesting".

-s*

[Zimphire]

A lot of people steal things they think that is theirs.

Most thieves think everything is theirs.

[petehammer]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
A lot of people steal things they think that is theirs.

Most thieves think everything is theirs.

MacNN's bandwidth is not yours.

Thief.

[benb]

Originally posted by petehammer:
MacNN's bandwidth is not yours.

Thief.

Yea, and they are not making it publicly available so long as one abides by the T&C either. Retard.

[petehammer]

Originally posted by benb:
Yea, and they are not making it publicly available so long as one abides by the T&C either. Retard.

Whoosh! Joke flies over your head.

Thanks for calling me a retard and bringing me back to the 7th grade, where you must have typed that from one of the classroom Performas.