Abramoff-Bush photos
By on Jan 26th, 2006 at 1:59 pm
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Business
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Glenn Beck
Global Warming
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Sports
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Tea Party
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
Now I wonder, what else have they had deleted or destroyed. This country is a very scary place right now.
January 26th, 2006 at 2:05 pmExcellent job, Winston Smith!
January 26th, 2006 at 2:09 pmWhat is the problem here?
The fact is that getting rid of photos is not a crime.
January 26th, 2006 at 2:10 pmNext up to be deleted: portions of the constitution that Pres. Bush doesn’t like!
We can’t have the founding fathers label Pres. Bush’s actions ‘illegal’ just because he decides to break the law! What’s wrong with our founding fathers, anyway? Why do our founding fathers hate America and love the terrorists?
January 26th, 2006 at 2:11 pmActually the White House might be right. Bush is a prostitute and Abramoff is a panderer, they work together on Republican concerns, documentary evidence is sufficient without adding photographs which are only useful for decorating dart boards and the inside of kitsch chamberpots.
January 26th, 2006 at 2:11 pmSo, as the neocon wire-tapping defense goes:
“You shouldn’t care what is seen if you have nothing to hide…”
Can they also say “double standard”?
January 26th, 2006 at 2:13 pmNo Gary it’s no problem. Would you like me to delete the pictures I have of your wife in a compromising position as well? Or how about those pictuers from Abu Griab? Are those no problem?
Those that don’t find this story disturbing are not being honest with themselves.
January 26th, 2006 at 2:15 pmWhy do our founding fathers hate America and love the terrorists?
Comment by Democrat Soldier — January 26, 2006 @ 2:11 pm
Apparently so… According to the neocons they were also crazy, yet they don’t seem to be in any hurry to leave this crazy nation founded by a bunch of crazy eccentrics, do they? Just trying to make it back like it was in the tyrannical motherland that our forefathers had escaped…
January 26th, 2006 at 2:15 pmSorry, my mistake. Bush and his supporters aren’t concerned about honesty.
January 26th, 2006 at 2:16 pmIt would not stun me if Josh Marshall were making up parts of his story in order to bash the President
January 26th, 2006 at 2:18 pmDoes this ever seem remarkable infantile to anyone else? Like a two year old trying to hid the crayons behind him and swearing he never saw the purple crayon that drew lines on the wall paper in the living room. They can’t swear that Bush didn’t meet Abramoff, and plenty of evidence exists. What are they trying to do?
January 26th, 2006 at 2:18 pmP.S. Has anyone ever tried to shellac pictures onto the bottom of cheap chamberpots? Do you think there is a market?
#6 – Unbelievable, I think we should hold the current administrations standards to themselves: If you didn’t illegally spy on American citizens, open up your records and show us the conversations you illegally spied on!
If you didn’t do anything wrong, then you habe nothing to hide. . . . .
January 26th, 2006 at 2:18 pmGary Ruppert – No it is not, but being part of the criminal activities of Jack Off is. This is why the president is destroying evidence, which could be a crime if it is proven that he committed a crime in the first place. This will show that he knew and had ties, and since he is destroying evidence now there is no limits to what illegal acts this guy will do in the future to hide the crimes the American people have not found out about.
So you see, it is very important to him. I can’t wait until the link is tied to him and he is also charged with obstruction of justice, destroying evidence, and many many more.
January 26th, 2006 at 2:19 pm#3: Weakest troll-post yet! You could try a little harder, Gary.
But keep up with the “The fact is…” nonsense. Very amusing.
January 26th, 2006 at 2:19 pmNo Gary, it wouldn’t stun me either. I mean look at all the stories that Bush has made up. If the pres can than surely Josh can as well.
January 26th, 2006 at 2:19 pmIf it turns out that the photo documents the commission of a crime and the person or persons who are party to destruction of the photos knowingly destroyed evidence of that crime, then destroying the photos is a crime.
January 26th, 2006 at 2:22 pm#10 – It would not stun me if the President were making up parts of his story to bash Josh Marshal.
January 26th, 2006 at 2:22 pmIt would not stun me if Bush made up stories in order to bash the Josh Marshall
January 26th, 2006 at 2:24 pmPhotos of the President with Jack Abramoff is not evidence of any wrongdoing, and I doubt that the Department of Justice would ask for photos.
Meanwhile, 2006 is shaping up well for the GOP, get ready for a 60+ Seat Republican Senate Majority, with Senator Kennedy (MN), Senator Harris (FL), Senator Ricketts (NE), Senator Raese (WV), Senator Steele (MD), Senator McGavick (WA), Senator Bouchard (MN), and Senator Kean (NJ).
The fact that the Democrat Party is siding with the terrorists will make their chances of picking up seats non-existant.
January 26th, 2006 at 2:25 pmGary-
In your dreams.
January 26th, 2006 at 2:27 pmThere’ll be a huge GOP tide in November.
Remember 2002?
The Democrat Party will gain nothing in 2006 because their obvious pro-Mullah stance in regards to Iran.
January 26th, 2006 at 2:28 pmNope, deleting a photo is not ilegal. But, deleting photos when every news organization in the world are looking for those photos shows a cover-up, retard.
January 26th, 2006 at 2:31 pmDrum beating deleted too? Where did it go?
http://www.humaneventsonline.com/article.php?id=11829
January 26th, 2006 at 2:33 pmNevermind, it’s back…strange.
January 26th, 2006 at 2:34 pmCover-ups only apply to covering up illegal actions. Not to legal actions.
January 26th, 2006 at 2:36 pmYes, we know, the only person you believe tells the truth is your King George.
January 26th, 2006 at 2:36 pmUnfortunately, it’s the Republican’s who hate America. It’s why they’re trying to destroy the foundation on which America was built: the Constitution.
Just because Pres. Bush is violating the constitution is no reason for the Republicans to want to destroy it!
Just because American citizens want to practice their right under the first amendment and criticize the president’s misguided and failed policies doesn’t mean the Republican’s should destroy the Constitution!
Once the Republican’s end up back in the minority, they’ll come to realize how wrong-headed their misguided support for a lying President and big-government over the American citizen really is.
Hypocrisy, they party is Republican, and thy President is George ‘W’ Bush!
January 26th, 2006 at 2:37 pmYeah, because you know how courts just hate photographic evidence.
January 26th, 2006 at 2:38 pm#21 – Again, Gary, in your dreams.
January 26th, 2006 at 2:39 pmDamn Gary…you are on a roll. I’m going to have to bust open a whole case of crackers for you.
January 26th, 2006 at 2:40 pmbbbrraawwwwccckkk!
Riiiiiiiiiiggggghhhhht.
Who is it that is in bed with the Iranians? You need to get out more.
January 26th, 2006 at 2:41 pmI think it’s somewhat amusing, because if Pres. Clinton had destroyed the blue dress on which he left DNA evidence, the Republicans would have been frothing at the mouth over his illegal actions! (Well, frothing more than they currently do in exasperation over anyone questioning their actions.)
Since the evidence, however, now paints Pres. Bush as corrupt, their standards have changed.
Hypocrisy, thy party is Republican!
January 26th, 2006 at 2:41 pmHere’s the link to Bush siding with the Iranians.
http://hrw.org/english/docs/2006/01/25/iran12535.htm
January 26th, 2006 at 2:41 pmSo, now you are saying that collecting bribes is legal. Wow, you are deranged.
January 26th, 2006 at 2:43 pmGary,
It is Bush, not Democrats, who enables Al Qaeda and fosters terrorism. A vote for Bush/GOP is the same as a vote for Bin Laden because a vote for the Bush/GOP is a vote for more incompetence and more negligence.
Trident
“His breathtaking arrogance is exceeded only by his incompetence.”
January 26th, 2006 at 2:43 pmBob Herbert on George W. Bush, January 26, 2006
#31 – Spudge_Boy, You’re so on-target I weep at how unworthy I am of your example!
You are so good at pointing out the hypocrisy of the current administration that I’m sure the trolls are frothing at the mouth! Maybe they’ll take their marbles and go play with someone who not debunk their lies and misinformation.
January 26th, 2006 at 2:45 pmIf Bush has nothing to hide, why is he directing that the photographs be destroyed? Something not right here. Oh and to Gary Ruppert, are you a PAID RNC staffer? Do facts matter to you, eh Gary?
January 26th, 2006 at 2:49 pmDemocrat Soldier,
I am only pointing out the facts. Don’t weep, just take notes, copy links and keep up[ the good work. You do just fine.
January 26th, 2006 at 2:51 pmYeah, cover-ups do only happen when there is a crime involved. You are finally starting to make a little sense.
January 26th, 2006 at 2:51 pmNeo-Cons are always quick to accuse liberals of crimes, even when they have no proof, but when the shoe is on the other foot, they somehow manage to alter reality and conveniently ignore the evidence.
Destroying the photos is the same kind of thing Enron did with their financial records. It is against the law when there is an ongoing investigation.
Again, time for a perp-walk for the W and his criminal gang.
January 26th, 2006 at 2:53 pmDemocrat Soldier. Getting the facts is reason I come here. Judd, Nico and the others give us pertinent facts about daily events and people like Spudge (and a host of others including yourself) help solidify the facts with excellent searching capabilities.
January 26th, 2006 at 2:53 pm“Cover-ups only apply to covering up illegal actions. Not to legal actions.”
Comment by Gary Ruppert — January 26, 2006 @ 2:36 pm
Tell that to Clinton – or was getting a bj “an illegal action”?
January 26th, 2006 at 2:56 pmwere you saying the same thing to your friends when the photo of kerry and fonda was being used against him.
cory
January 26th, 2006 at 2:58 pmGary is correct. The senate is going to be Republican for a very long time. He’s not correct on all the races(Harris?, Ricketts? Others?) but I don’t see the senate flipping.
January 26th, 2006 at 2:58 pmHey Gary,
Get a life! Where the &%$#&? is your head?
January 26th, 2006 at 3:02 pmWhat? I thought one shouldn’t be worried as long as there is nothing to hide. So, WE shouldn’t hide from big brother, but big brother can hide anything he wants.
January 26th, 2006 at 3:14 pmWhy is it surprising? She’s a GOP donor.
http://www.fundrace.org/neighbors.php?type=loc&addr=&search=Search+by+Location&zip=22204
January 26th, 2006 at 3:19 pmNO BODY,
January 26th, 2006 at 3:22 pmNO CRIME
#It would not stun me if Josh Marshall were making up parts of his story in order to bash the President
Comment by Gary Ruppert — January 26, 2006 @ 2:18 pm
It would stun me if The preznit did something that he didnt deserve a bashing for.
January 26th, 2006 at 3:42 pmDestroying evidence is generally a crime. Abramoff has already admitted to bribery, so the active effort by the administration to destroy evidence around an ongoing criminal investigation could constitute yet another ‘high crime’ and impeachable offense.
The republicans are so afraid of the truth they attempt to destroy all evidence of it. How sad. I pity them that their frame of reality is so weak that the truth threatens them. Poor things.
January 26th, 2006 at 4:17 pmYes, deleting phots may not be criminal in this case but it clearly is a cover up. Something doesn’t have to be technically criminal for you to cover up. Cheating on your partner isn’t a crime but it gets “covered up” every day. Meeting many times with an admitted slimeball/briber, then lying openly about it, then using sophistry and censorship to hide it all might not be “illegal.” It is still pretty low. Whatever happened to all that integrity that was going to be restored?
January 26th, 2006 at 4:57 pm“There’ll be a huge GOP tide in November. Remember 2002?” –Gary Ruppert
Yes, we do. That’s the second major election your beloved traitors stole through the Diebolding of America, in which THIRTY STATES lost their recount rights.
Since you don’t care about legal elections, I don’t expect that to bother you.
But as for the NSA crimes, they join FOURTEEN MAJOR FEDERAL CRIMES BY BUSH (and his cronies) DOCUMENTED BY THE CONYERS REPORT.
• Conspiracy to Defraud the United States
• Misuse of US Funds
• The Anti-Torture Statute
• The War Crimes Act
• The Whistleblowers Protection Act
• Statute Barring Retaliating Against Witnesses
• Obstruction of Congress
• The Lloyd-La Follette Act (preventing testimony to Congress)
• Geneva, Hague Conventions
• UN Convention Against Torture, Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment
ANY investigation by an independent prosecutor will be the end of your Boy Wonder.
So keep on smiling, Gary. If the coup continues to destroy American values, you win! If we get TEN CENTS WORTH OF JUSTICE, your former-Republican party is going to have a hard time borrowing $4.50 for a cup of corporate Joe.
January 26th, 2006 at 6:51 pm