Learn about Linux
Download Linux
Get Linux helpSpecial Offers
Feature: Government
Is the Department of Justice lying?
By Joe Barr
on
July 01, 2004 (8:00:00 AM)
Share
Print
Comments
Is the U.S. Department of Justice lying about its computer systems in order to avoid living up to the law of the land, or is America really so much at risk that a vital department -- to which the FBI itself reports, and purports to be a major player in the fight against terrorism -- cannot use its computer systems for fear that they will crash and destroy vital data? And why are there no backups?
My mouth fell open in disbelief as I read Ted Bridis's AP story about the Department of Justice Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) Office declining to fulfill a request for information about foreign lobbyists because to do so might crash their computer system and cause a massive loss of data.
My first call was directly to Thomas J. McIntyre, the DOJ FOIA chief who was quoted by Bridis as having written: "Implementing such a request risks a crash that cannot be fixed and could result in a major loss of data, which would be devastating."
Surprisingly, McIntyre himself answered the call. I identified myself and asked if he had a few minutes to discuss the computer system in question. When he stopped laughing, McIntyre told me that he could not talk to me until it was cleared by the Public Affairs Office, but that in any case, he didn't know any more about computer systems than what he had written in the memo.
The second call went to the DOJ's Office of Public Affairs. I explained what I wanted and a very polite young lady promised to "get back to me." When she did, only an hour or so later, it was to tell me that I would have to contact the FOIA office directly, as the DOJ Public Affairs office doesn't handle FOIA affairs. Joseph Heller would have loved that catch.
Undaunted, I called the DOJ FOIA office again. This time I was told that the lawyer who would normally handle my call wasn't there, he had left for the day. I couldn't get his name because it was a duty rotation, I would just have to call back the next day.
My call the next morning was routed to someone's voice mail. I wasn't connected until the individual had already identified herself, so I simply left my name, number, and the reason for my call and waited for it to be returned. I'm still waiting.
I decided to try the Public Affairs office again. The same nice young lady who had helped me the day before answered. She didn't seem to like my "attitude" about being lied to and given the runaround. A man took her place on the line, and I told my story once more. He could not tell me why the Public Affairs office didn't handle the public affairs for the DOJ FOIA office, nor could he tell me who did. But he said he would get back to me. I'm still waiting for that call, too.
Then I tried a new tack. I called Bob Williams at The Center for Public Integrity, the organization whose FOIA request was denied for the reasons set forth by McIntyre. I was hoping he could give me a contact who could tell me something about this mysterious computer system: the type and the age of the hardware it runs on, the database being used, and the reason for the lack of backups.
Williams told me that they had asked the DOJ point blank about the system, about who runs it -- DOJ staff or contractors -- and were given absolutely no information. Nothing. It's as if the system doesn't really exist.
At this point, that's a far more likely scenario than the one McIntyre coughed up. Now I'm thinking about reporting it to the FBI as having been stolen. More to follow -- right after those calls are returned.
Comments
on Is the Department of Justice lying?Note: Comments are owned by the poster. We are not responsible for their content.
Soooo, you're saying that because this isn't an isolated incident, all such incidents should be ignored?
Right.
Right.
Sir, you sicken me.
Power needs to be scrutinized every chance we get. To turn cynicism into the modus operandi of a democracy is defeatist and sad.
Critical thinking and relentless questioning is the only way to keep a democracy alive.
Power needs to be scrutinized every chance we get. To turn cynicism into the modus operandi of a democracy is defeatist and sad.
Critical thinking and relentless questioning is the only way to keep a democracy alive.
The parent seems to be saying that lying and obfuscation (and cynicism) are the modus operandi of bureaucracy.
Critical thinking and relentless questioning are the only ways to keep science alive, also, but you don't go back and re-prove every hypothesis without a reason, or you would never get anything new done.
Also, it is not defeatist to pick you battles. If Napolean had been able to choose, he wouldn't have chosen Waterloo, and he would have won.
Critical thinking and relentless questioning are the only ways to keep science alive, also, but you don't go back and re-prove every hypothesis without a reason, or you would never get anything new done.
Also, it is not defeatist to pick you battles. If Napolean had been able to choose, he wouldn't have chosen Waterloo, and he would have won.
The DOJ just politely said "get lost". It will be up to the courts to decide if they have that authority.
This isn't a lie so much as it's a delaying tactic; by the time it's resolved we will be through the next election. Either it won't matter by then, or there will be nothing you can do about.
The DOJ, under Ashcroft, considers itself immune to both Congress and the Supreme Court -- practically a fourth branch of government, but with no checks/balances. Unless Congress and/or the Supreme Court step in, this may in practice become true.
I don't see how you get this.
"Unless Congress and/or the Supreme Court step in, this may in practice become true."
Ummm... yes. That's how checks and balances work. That is not "considering yourself immune". Remember, there is a lot of non-problems that the congress is playing against Ashcroft. Basically, any question that the president asks Ashcroft is being turned into an issue, no matter why the question was asked or what the answer is. For example, the question "Please let me know what the legal limits of interrogation are so that we are sure not to cross them accidentally" becomes "Bush condones torture". It's pretty absurd, really.
"Unless Congress and/or the Supreme Court step in, this may in practice become true."
Ummm... yes. That's how checks and balances work. That is not "considering yourself immune". Remember, there is a lot of non-problems that the congress is playing against Ashcroft. Basically, any question that the president asks Ashcroft is being turned into an issue, no matter why the question was asked or what the answer is. For example, the question "Please let me know what the legal limits of interrogation are so that we are sure not to cross them accidentally" becomes "Bush condones torture". It's pretty absurd, really.
If sen. hatch has his way they will never be able to back up the data.. This is par for the course in the USSA. watch out,,, your monitor is a 2 way communication device, they are listening.
Q: How can you tell when a Republican is lying?
A: Whenever his mouth moves.
A: Whenever his mouth moves.
Q: How can you tell if ANY politician is lying?
A: If they say anything to anybody, they are lying.
A: If they say anything to anybody, they are lying.
Exactly. Dems are just as bad.
No, the Dems only lie half the time. The other half they are making ad-honinem attacks that don't fit their opponent.
At least to me, Democrats seem to be worse. Why? Their constituents, as you have pointed out, _expect_ them to be lying. Conservatives, on the other hand, expect to be told the truth. Although there are bad apples on both sides, conservatives will often throw someone out of office for lying, while democrats will simply go "I guess they are just politicians".
A man bellies up to a bar muttering,"asshole democrats".
A guy next to him says, "Hey I take offense to that".
The man says, "Why, are you a democrat".
No the guy says "I'm an asshole".
Q: What do you get when you cross a pilgrim with a democrat?
A: A god-fearing tax collector who gives thanks for what other people have.
Q: What's a conservative?
A: A liberal who made it through adolescence.
A guy next to him says, "Hey I take offense to that".
The man says, "Why, are you a democrat".
No the guy says "I'm an asshole".
Q: What do you get when you cross a pilgrim with a democrat?
A: A god-fearing tax collector who gives thanks for what other people have.
Q: What's a conservative?
A: A liberal who made it through adolescence.
An anonymous source tossed this explanation through the transom this evening. It explains everything:
"The DOJ system probably crashed in disbelief right after the sweetheart
deal with Gates;-)"
Maybe the system is actually Artificially Intelligent and has been running the Justice Department on its own for the last few years.
Since about late 1999 perhaps. Running on MS products might explain the instability of some it's rulings and "memos". This might also explain the original settlement ruling in favor of MS and the reconfirmation. Would you rule against your own technology? Or the chance that your "parents" could get more control over the world which you will inherit some day?
Everyone in the DOJ just has just gone along to keep their jobs and not to admit they have been useless for all this time. Think about it, would you like it known that a machine with a TV screen is doing all of your thinking for you?
Besides, these diligent caretakers of our freedoms don't want to upset the AI by actually asking it to do the mundane work and deliver the requested data base dump like it was designed to do. This is what office assistants and paralegals are for. Someone has to do the photocopying and collating. And again like Microsoft, the data is out of date by at least a year or more and is very expensive for each individual copy. This machine learns fast. And who knows what further freedoms the mighty AI might curtail if it actually got mad? How could a machine be wrong? And see how our caretakers at the DOJ are protecting US and our freedoms?
Since about late 1999 perhaps. Running on MS products might explain the instability of some it's rulings and "memos". This might also explain the original settlement ruling in favor of MS and the reconfirmation. Would you rule against your own technology? Or the chance that your "parents" could get more control over the world which you will inherit some day?
Everyone in the DOJ just has just gone along to keep their jobs and not to admit they have been useless for all this time. Think about it, would you like it known that a machine with a TV screen is doing all of your thinking for you?
Besides, these diligent caretakers of our freedoms don't want to upset the AI by actually asking it to do the mundane work and deliver the requested data base dump like it was designed to do. This is what office assistants and paralegals are for. Someone has to do the photocopying and collating. And again like Microsoft, the data is out of date by at least a year or more and is very expensive for each individual copy. This machine learns fast. And who knows what further freedoms the mighty AI might curtail if it actually got mad? How could a machine be wrong? And see how our caretakers at the DOJ are protecting US and our freedoms?
Reminds me of when the Department of Agriculture took all their Internet firewalls offline because they were getting in the way. That was a few years ago, but could they still be setup that way....
Or the 6 consecutive (every three years or so) 5 year projects for revamping the IRS' computer systems. That one should be almost done now, once the consultants get finished up...
The traffic control upgrade went really smoothly, I hear. Everyone's been on the new systems for years now... uh-huh.... yeah, that's it.
If you don't believe that this could be a real reason, you haven't ever been involved with computers and the government.
Your tax dollars at work, folks.
Or the 6 consecutive (every three years or so) 5 year projects for revamping the IRS' computer systems. That one should be almost done now, once the consultants get finished up...
The traffic control upgrade went really smoothly, I hear. Everyone's been on the new systems for years now... uh-huh.... yeah, that's it.
If you don't believe that this could be a real reason, you haven't ever been involved with computers and the government.
Your tax dollars at work, folks.
I've been a life-long republican, but never have I actually been ashamed to admit it until I saw Fahrenheit 911, and finally got an explanation for shipping bin laden's family the hell out of the US overnight.
Now, the DOJ is free to ignore FOIA reqs. by abusing delaying tactics, and probably criminally lying to the public.
At some point, somebody is going to ask why the hell we bother maintaining a two party system when neither acts as a control of corruption for the other.
For you democrats out there, I believe the applicable term is 'impeachment'. What the hell are you people waiting for? It would solidify your base while casting substantial doubt in the minds of serious republicans about their no longer illustrious leader. It needn't be carried through to fruition, but taking it into the election cycle is one of the better ways to get that sad sack Kerry into office.
Now, the DOJ is free to ignore FOIA reqs. by abusing delaying tactics, and probably criminally lying to the public.
At some point, somebody is going to ask why the hell we bother maintaining a two party system when neither acts as a control of corruption for the other.
For you democrats out there, I believe the applicable term is 'impeachment'. What the hell are you people waiting for? It would solidify your base while casting substantial doubt in the minds of serious republicans about their no longer illustrious leader. It needn't be carried through to fruition, but taking it into the election cycle is one of the better ways to get that sad sack Kerry into office.
Talk about FUD!! Getting your education from Fahrenheit 711!!! (Yes I meant "711"), and Moore. Anyone who is a "Life Long<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...fill in blank here" and is swayed on ANY point of view without hearing from multiple VARIED sources, doesn't really know what they believe.
So another government agency has mismanaged our tax dollars. And now they are doing there best to cover it up. Big surprise. What's worse is the crap being slung back and forth by the chimps! Come on, anyone who says that they can take a mess as big as the Government and it's myriad of bloated organizations, and be able to cut all of the agendas and waste out is lying to you. That is the nature of power. Corporate, or government.
So let's get politically bi-polar and post tripe to the Open-Source boards because we have nothing better to do. I am getting tired of all of the political FUD-slinging that goes on here. It's OK when it's about Companies like SCO and M$, but get over the rest of it. It's sounding like the "tin-foil hat club" around here....
nuff said.
So another government agency has mismanaged our tax dollars. And now they are doing there best to cover it up. Big surprise. What's worse is the crap being slung back and forth by the chimps! Come on, anyone who says that they can take a mess as big as the Government and it's myriad of bloated organizations, and be able to cut all of the agendas and waste out is lying to you. That is the nature of power. Corporate, or government.
So let's get politically bi-polar and post tripe to the Open-Source boards because we have nothing better to do. I am getting tired of all of the political FUD-slinging that goes on here. It's OK when it's about Companies like SCO and M$, but get over the rest of it. It's sounding like the "tin-foil hat club" around here....
nuff said.
I cannot disagree too loudly, we've begun to see a lot of politics in these sites. But a quick examination of who contributes what to whom (Microsoft, "big tobacco" --> ADTI for example). But the current administration really does have a *serious* penchant for secrecy, a condition that I take very seriously. Though a bit cynical, I hold to the premise that cockroaches do not like sunshine.
There's no need for a tinfoil hat, the "vast conspiracy" is easily explained: People want power. More power. And they don't want their use of the power to be examined critically, as that would be a net reduction of their power.
The disappointment I feel is that our nation used to have "checks and balances", but those who want power have found ways to disable the safety features.
You may consider the movie tinfoil hat fodder, but I'm a little surprised you'd slam FUD on it when there are a lot of valid questions Moore's asking.
Like where the hell were the dems when it came to stopping or at least curtailing the Patriot Act? How could they, or any other elected rep. pass a bill which clearly suspends civil liberties without having read it? (Printed at midnight, voted on first thing in the morning.)
Why are Saudi diplomats assigned a team of six Secret Service agents?
Why did the President have dinner with them 9/13?
Why is the press forbidden access to bin laden's family members?
Is the FBI / CIA cut off too?
In comparison, why weren't McVeigh's family secluded/hidden at the government's insistance?
Why are FBI agents being shipped to Iraq to interrogate prisoners, isn't that the CIAs domain?
Yep, those are pretty crazy questions alright.
Like where the hell were the dems when it came to stopping or at least curtailing the Patriot Act? How could they, or any other elected rep. pass a bill which clearly suspends civil liberties without having read it? (Printed at midnight, voted on first thing in the morning.)
Why are Saudi diplomats assigned a team of six Secret Service agents?
Why did the President have dinner with them 9/13?
Why is the press forbidden access to bin laden's family members?
Is the FBI / CIA cut off too?
In comparison, why weren't McVeigh's family secluded/hidden at the government's insistance?
Why are FBI agents being shipped to Iraq to interrogate prisoners, isn't that the CIAs domain?
Yep, those are pretty crazy questions alright.
Problem is, all of these questions you came up with happen to be editorial comic questions. I don't think any one of them actually has a base in reality. Could be wrong, but even Moore's own party ( we'll call em democrats, but socialists are more like it) are describing his 9/11 movie as being the equiv of Scary Movie or Spaceballs.
Why you would think it seriously answered or asked any questions is beyond me.
Why you would think it seriously answered or asked any questions is beyond me.
This kind of discussion is not really relevant on this site.
Here are a couple of the many sites that refute the crapola in F911 (and other moore-on stuff):
http://www.davekopel.com/Terror/Fiftysix-Deceits-<nobr>i<wbr></nobr> n-Fahrenheit-911.htm
http://www.moorewatch.com/
http://www.moorelies.com/
re: DOJ
I'm not surprised by their inability to produce the report. Given what we saw a few years ago with the IT incompetence displayed over agore's mail..
re: secrecy...
Not really noticed that. Unless you're talking about the democrats trying to prevent the executive branch from being able to function by questioning any and all policy task forces.
But again, this is the wrong place to be discussing this. Try one of the democratic undergound sites, they have a tinfoil hat your size.
Here are a couple of the many sites that refute the crapola in F911 (and other moore-on stuff):
http://www.davekopel.com/Terror/Fiftysix-Deceits-<nobr>i<wbr></nobr> n-Fahrenheit-911.htm
http://www.moorewatch.com/
http://www.moorelies.com/
re: DOJ
I'm not surprised by their inability to produce the report. Given what we saw a few years ago with the IT incompetence displayed over agore's mail..
re: secrecy...
Not really noticed that. Unless you're talking about the democrats trying to prevent the executive branch from being able to function by questioning any and all policy task forces.
But again, this is the wrong place to be discussing this. Try one of the democratic undergound sites, they have a tinfoil hat your size.
After RTFA'ing your link, I may be too stupid as well. According to the article, Clarke claimed "sole responsibility" for approving the flights carrying bin Laden's family weeks after indicating to the 9/11 Commission he left the decision to the FBI (who denies authorizing the flight). It doesn't sound like anything has been properly resolved here.
Regardless, the general secrecy of the DOJ is disturbing, and this case in particular seems a particularly clumsy attempt to prevent access to the data.
Regardless, the general secrecy of the DOJ is disturbing, and this case in particular seems a particularly clumsy attempt to prevent access to the data.
The amusing thing is that Clarke now claims that the flights were cleared only after the FBI assured itself that none of the people on them were a threat to the nation or knew of bin Laden's whereabouts.
Oh really? The FBI, who up until that day probably knew nothing about any of these people, within a matter of hours or a few days manages to prove to itself that NONE of them could POSSIBLY have been involved in the plot or POSSIBLY know something of value as to bin Laden?
Right, I believe the FBI is that efficient, uh huh. They only investigated that Jewel guy in the Atlanta bombing for how many weeks and months? The Hatfill guy in the anthrax case took how long?
Especially since they could find a pristine passport in the ruins of the towers within hours allowing them to pinpoint bin Laden as the perpetrator.
Right.
Clarke is covering his ass because he was ORDERED to allow those people to leave and now he wants no part of it because he can see where it's going to end up.
Oh really? The FBI, who up until that day probably knew nothing about any of these people, within a matter of hours or a few days manages to prove to itself that NONE of them could POSSIBLY have been involved in the plot or POSSIBLY know something of value as to bin Laden?
Right, I believe the FBI is that efficient, uh huh. They only investigated that Jewel guy in the Atlanta bombing for how many weeks and months? The Hatfill guy in the anthrax case took how long?
Especially since they could find a pristine passport in the ruins of the towers within hours allowing them to pinpoint bin Laden as the perpetrator.
Right.
Clarke is covering his ass because he was ORDERED to allow those people to leave and now he wants no part of it because he can see where it's going to end up.
Clarke is covering his ass because he was ORDERED to allow those people to leave...
Supposing he did tell the FBI to get those people the hell out of here, what does it say about the FBI that they do so, no fights, questions, or preflight interrogation? Clarke had some pull, but I entirely agree it's too amazing a feat for him to pull off alone.
Supposing he did tell the FBI to get those people the hell out of here, what does it say about the FBI that they do so, no fights, questions, or preflight interrogation? Clarke had some pull, but I entirely agree it's too amazing a feat for him to pull off alone.
Oh really? The FBI, who up until that day probably knew nothing about any of these people, within a matter of hours or a few days manages to prove to itself that NONE of them could POSSIBLY have been involved in the plot or POSSIBLY know something of value as to bin Laden?
Over a week later actually.
Over a week later actually.
Plus, the bin laden family is a LARGE family, and they disowned Osama, what, back in '92, I think..
(I think the father had 42 children with various wives. )
(I think the father had 42 children with various wives. )
So:
A. The buck stops anywhere but at Bush's desk
B. There is no longer a party for the left in the US. Please. Clarke?!
C. It's more important to point fingers at one side or another than actually do anything when, say, the DOJ decides to ignore laws intended to keep out government responsive to democracy.
A. The buck stops anywhere but at Bush's desk
B. There is no longer a party for the left in the US. Please. Clarke?!
C. It's more important to point fingers at one side or another than actually do anything when, say, the DOJ decides to ignore laws intended to keep out government responsive to democracy.
I was a Republican up to the Max Clelan incident in Georgia. The triple amputee Viet Nam vet that they smeared as unpatriotic. Shameful.
Both parties have incidents they may not be proud of, but I've never seen anything in my life as low and desperately wicked as what the Republican party has turned into in the last five years. They've dropped all pretext to civility and replaced it with a win by any means mentality that threatens the very fabric of our country.
I don't think Kerry will be all that bad of a president, even for a Democrat. He's not very big on entitlement programs and I trust him on security matters more than Bush. At least he took his chances in the s--- while dubya rode out a cushy National Guard gig in the rear with the gear.
Both parties have incidents they may not be proud of, but I've never seen anything in my life as low and desperately wicked as what the Republican party has turned into in the last five years. They've dropped all pretext to civility and replaced it with a win by any means mentality that threatens the very fabric of our country.
I don't think Kerry will be all that bad of a president, even for a Democrat. He's not very big on entitlement programs and I trust him on security matters more than Bush. At least he took his chances in the s--- while dubya rode out a cushy National Guard gig in the rear with the gear.
Not very big on entitlement programs?!! He has a more liberal voting record than Ted Kennedy! He is the biggest spender on government redistribution (handout) programs in congress.
Think of money as a current (it's not called currency for nothing), as in an air current or a river. Now, the "value" of money is intrinsically to how fast is flows and in how big a volume it flows. We don't think much of small creeks, but we stand in awe at the banks of large rivers.
The "tax and spend" mud that Republicans fling at the Democrats all the time is backward thinking. Go to any small, conservative town and compare how people live compared with their counterparts in big cities. In small towns people are typically considered "tight fisted" -- they don't spend much. In large cities, it's common for money to just flow. The small town will stay a small town so long as the spend-thrift attitude remains. The large city probably got large because, in it, people saw opportunity and invested their cold hard cash, liberally.
As they say, "You have to spend money to make money." So now, back to our Government. Consider it a huge cauldron of potential. When stagnant air is heated, it begins to rise. In it's place flows cold air, which is potentially heated by the same original source and it rises. Eventually, this process forms what we call a "convection current". Now, apply this analogy to our economy. Just as the main sustaiuning source of life on earth is the heat we get from the sun, the source of our economic health is our dear Government.
When the government is directed to stop spending, the rest of the economy gets the flu! What Republican supporters are doing is thinking in very simplistic, short-sighted terms. The conservative, anti-tax-and-spend rhetoric sounds right, but could not be farther from the way a healthy economy actually works.
The "tax and spend" mud that Republicans fling at the Democrats all the time is backward thinking. Go to any small, conservative town and compare how people live compared with their counterparts in big cities. In small towns people are typically considered "tight fisted" -- they don't spend much. In large cities, it's common for money to just flow. The small town will stay a small town so long as the spend-thrift attitude remains. The large city probably got large because, in it, people saw opportunity and invested their cold hard cash, liberally.
As they say, "You have to spend money to make money." So now, back to our Government. Consider it a huge cauldron of potential. When stagnant air is heated, it begins to rise. In it's place flows cold air, which is potentially heated by the same original source and it rises. Eventually, this process forms what we call a "convection current". Now, apply this analogy to our economy. Just as the main sustaiuning source of life on earth is the heat we get from the sun, the source of our economic health is our dear Government.
When the government is directed to stop spending, the rest of the economy gets the flu! What Republican supporters are doing is thinking in very simplistic, short-sighted terms. The conservative, anti-tax-and-spend rhetoric sounds right, but could not be farther from the way a healthy economy actually works.
Uh huh. Who turned a record surplus into a record deficit? And who actually benefits?
Most of the Americans are not 'thinking'. It is plain and simple to see who are getting rich as a result of Bush's 'tax cut'.
Wake up and start thinking.
Wake up and start thinking.
Well, let's see:
recession (started under clinton)
9/11 (Loss of WTC and associated infrastructure)
Afghanistan
Iraq
Increased spending related to security, etc..
recession (started under clinton)
9/11 (Loss of WTC and associated infrastructure)
Afghanistan
Iraq
Increased spending related to security, etc..
Yeah damn Democrates, After all Bush has not created the biggest deficit EVER in RECORDED history with a destoryed economy. When Clinton was one of the few to ever pull the economy on it's ass and also have a surplus. Really, who is misspending taxpayers money?
Kerry is a huge communist sympathizer. His remarks to the senate (re; the faux winter soldier testimony) were used during interrogations by the VC against POWs.
More:
http://kerrylied.com/
http://www.swiftvets.com/Index2.htm
re: civility...
What I've seen is that they seem to be more reactive to the outlandish behaviour of the democrats.
re: Guard Duty
Gephardt was a stateside JAG in the guard.
Gore was an army reporter, with bodyguards.
clinton:
http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/politics/clintondra<nobr>f<wbr></nobr> t.asp
re: cleland
From what I can find, he was defeated for re-election. One of the points used against him was his voting against some bills because the unions wanted him to oppose them.
More:
http://kerrylied.com/
http://www.swiftvets.com/Index2.htm
re: civility...
What I've seen is that they seem to be more reactive to the outlandish behaviour of the democrats.
re: Guard Duty
Gephardt was a stateside JAG in the guard.
Gore was an army reporter, with bodyguards.
clinton:
http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/politics/clintondra<nobr>f<wbr></nobr> t.asp
re: cleland
From what I can find, he was defeated for re-election. One of the points used against him was his voting against some bills because the unions wanted him to oppose them.
Dude, are you really that niave/gullible/stupid?
Would be called 'The Information Ministry' in any other fascist state.
Just like the the "great leader", who is setting the example, a bad one, but an example nontheless.
Please clean up your government my fellow (American) human being....pleaZe..
Please clean up your government my fellow (American) human being....pleaZe..
"Great leader"? You mean the Austrian guy?
re: lying?
Not sure what you mean by that...clinton's not in office so his book "My Lies" isn't considered a govt publication.
Not sure what you mean by that...clinton's not in office so his book "My Lies" isn't considered a govt publication.
a government agent? Lying? Scandalous!
Posted by: MisesGuy on July 02, 2004 04:59 AM#