EXCLUSIVE EMAILS: Jack Abramoff Describes Relationship With President Bush
EXCLUSIVE EMAILS: Jack Abramoff Describes Relationship With President Bush
ThinkProgress has obtained emails written by Jack Abramoff in which the fallen lobbyist personally describes his relationship with President Bush. They depict a relationship far more extensive than has been previously reported.
The emails written by Abramoff was addressed to Kim Eisler, the national editor of Washingtonian magazine. The Washingtonian recently reported on the existence of several photographs showing Abramoff and Bush together. Eisler is also the author of Revenge of the Pequots, a book about tribal politics for which Abramoff was interviewed.
In the emails, Abramoff describes meeting Bush “in almost a dozen settings,” and details how he was personally invited to President Bush’s private ranch in Crawford, Texas, for a gathering of Bush fundraisers in 2003. Abramoff did not attend, citing a religious observance.
Abramoff emailed Eisler about his invitation to Crawford and his decision not to attend:
NO, IT WAS THAT I WOULD HAVE HAD TO TRAVEL ON SATURDAY (SHABBOS). YES, I WAS INVITED, DURING THE 2004 CAMPAIGN. IT WAS SATURDAY AUGUST 9, 2003 AT THE RANCH IN CRAWFORD.
The White House has continually downplayed the relationship between Abramoff and President Bush. At a January 26 press conference, President Bush said “You know, I, frankly, don’t even remember having my picture taken with the guy. I don’t know him.”
But according to Eisler, Abramoff told him that the two have met almost a dozen times, shared jokes, and spoke about details of Abramoff’s family:
HE HAS ONE OF THE BEST MEMORIES OF ANY POLITICIAN I HAVE EVER MET. IT WAS ONE IF [sic] HIS TRADEMARKS, THOUGH OF COURSE HE CAN’T RECALL THAT HE HAS A GREAT MEMORY! THE GUY SAW ME IN ALMOST A DOZEN SETTINGS, AND JOKED WITH ME ABOUT A BUNCH OF THINGS, INCLUDING DETAILS OF MY KIDS. PERHAPS HE HAS FORGOTTEN EVERYTHING. WHO KNOWS.
Check back with ThinkProgress for more details about Abramoff’s relationship with Bush and other high-profile figures.
UPDATE: Mr. Eisler has informed us that he sent us two sections of one email he recieved from Jack Abramoff, rather than two seperate emails.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
234 Responses to “EXCLUSIVE EMAILS: Jack Abramoff Describes Relationship With President Bush”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
For the latest news, legal documents and timelines in the Abramoff scandal, visit the "Abramoff/Delay Scandal Resource Center."
February 8th, 2006 at 2:56 pmDing, Ding, Ding, Ding, Ding, Ding,
You are the winner of the $64,000 question!
February 8th, 2006 at 3:00 pmCertainly if the truth becomes known it will be bad skating for President Bush. President Bush is not the first president to practice lying but certainly he is refined down to a slate art. The man is playing his role in the unraveling of the greatest nation ever and what is his role to mislead through lies and deception the American people, while they furnish the money and the blood for his ill guided ignorant adventures.
February 8th, 2006 at 3:02 pmUh...wow? Am I watching the little-bit-faster part of a slow-motion explosion? Sure seems like it.
You rock. Keep on.
February 8th, 2006 at 3:03 pmStrangers indeed. President Bush and Jack Abramboff are Best Friends...till the end.
February 8th, 2006 at 3:03 pmLet me guess, the Washingtonian is a "Liberal, nut job, moonbat, fever swamp, rag" of a publication, right?
February 8th, 2006 at 3:08 pmAnd don't forget about Karl Rove.
February 8th, 2006 at 3:11 pm#6 - For Truth,
Not at all. The Washingtonian is a Washington life magazine that focuses mostly on lifestyle issues. It is a nonpartisan magazine and not does lean to the left (and if anything, leans to the right).
February 8th, 2006 at 3:13 pmDoes anyone have a listing of all George Bush's lies? I feel like I've gone down a rabbit hole and come up someplace strange
February 8th, 2006 at 3:14 pmYet another one of the endless lies that come from the mouth of the boy emperor exposed. When God made Bush, he must have placed his anus on his face because everything that comes out of his mouth/anus is nothing but lying shit.
February 8th, 2006 at 3:15 pmBe careful of forgeries here.
February 8th, 2006 at 3:17 pm#9
February 8th, 2006 at 3:18 pmSkeptic,
I don't think my computer would handle the size of that file.
I love Abramoff's Pious Jew act.
He's a man of god!
February 8th, 2006 at 3:23 pmExactly! I haven't even read the text of the e-mails, and I can already see numerous inconsistencies with the fonts, the types of electrons used to transmit the documents, etc. In fact, by amazing coincidence, Powerline has a refutation of these e-mails already written and ready to go.
February 8th, 2006 at 3:23 pmAssuming that ties with Abramoff indicate criminal activity of all second parties is incredibly presumptuous. Assuming that high up polititians remember $1K donations is ludicrous.
I fail to see how this is bigger news than the corrupt local Democratic government of Louisiana embezzling funds that should have gone towards the strengthening of the levees. Abramoff's foulups didn't cause people to die. Oh but this gets pushed aside because it's negative of the Left.
Bipartisan site? I think not. (pulled from "Terms of Use" agreement)
February 8th, 2006 at 3:24 pmScotty's going to go from saying "Bush doesn't know Abramoff" to he can't talk about an "ongoing investigation"
February 8th, 2006 at 3:24 pmand what kind of typewriter was used to produce these emails, hmmm?
(inspired by, and dedicated to the good gentleperson from #11)
February 8th, 2006 at 3:25 pmFilm at eleven.
February 8th, 2006 at 3:29 pmWhhhhhaaaaatttttt????
You can see electrons?
February 8th, 2006 at 3:30 pmimatt - you come here supposedly to debate, but you start attacking the people here.
No one here is saying the Democrats are great. But to say something without providing proof is not very smart either.
I will state these and should you provide evidence to your claim, I will provide evidence to mine.
How did LA embezzle money?
What I do know is that Bush was told by the Army Corp of Engineers that the levies needed to be beefed up. However, Bush cut funding to the Army Corp of Eng. for doing this.
Abramoff was on Bushes transition team. Don't you think that Bush would have to know him for him to be on his transition team? Do you really believe that just anyone is going to be allowed to work on this team without being well known or by influence of money?
February 8th, 2006 at 3:31 pmI fail to see how the Bush administartion being corrupt isn't the biggest story since Richard Nixon's corruption.
February 8th, 2006 at 3:31 pm#21
February 8th, 2006 at 3:31 pmI know, I couldn't even think of a response to that.
the types of electrons used to transmit the documents
Were they partisan electrons? Demoquarks or Republitrons?
February 8th, 2006 at 3:33 pmIt's easier to spoof an email than a memo.
February 8th, 2006 at 3:34 pm#16
February 8th, 2006 at 3:34 pmmds,
I think someone dropped some acid in your kool-aid.
Just How Friendly was Bush and Abramoff?...
Think Progress gives us a hint...
February 8th, 2006 at 3:35 pmI think it's funny Bush had this reputation of a great memory. He would remember people's names after shaking hands, so the stories told.
February 8th, 2006 at 3:35 pmNo reason to spoof. These guys loved writing stupid e-mails thinking they were safe. You don't remember the e-mails, that were not refuted, where Scanlon and Abramoff referred to Christians as "whackos"?
February 8th, 2006 at 3:36 pm#13 Fuck Condi "white-as-Rice" and the broom she rode in on.
February 8th, 2006 at 3:39 pmI don't know what #11, 16, and 19 are reading but I see no descrepancies with font. Maybe your mind is led to believe something other than what your eyes see. True, until we see the full email/correspondence we can't be sure if they are true unless we hear it straight from the horses mouth. But I'm sure some other scandal will come out to eclipse this and will all soon be back page news like Plame gate...what's up with that? Every time we think we have Bush with a scandal to rock the White House another one pops up...this should be damning but it has allowed the administration to efectively ellude condemnation.
February 8th, 2006 at 3:40 pmI agree with you RemoveBush #22
imatt, please provide the facts that LA Democrates embezzled the levee funds.
February 8th, 2006 at 3:41 pmJust saying, if you know what you're doing, you can dummy up an email that looks like it's from one person, when in fact it's not.
It's in the headers. If you don't know what to look for, you can't tell the difference.
Take a look at this over at Carnegie-Mellon's CERT Center to see what I mean.
February 8th, 2006 at 3:44 pm#34
The troll are just reading todays Republican talking points
February 8th, 2006 at 3:44 pmbush since oyu've got a great memory ..explain this...
February 8th, 2006 at 3:44 pmimatt,
Your website is probably getting more traffice now that you are blogging here. I'm not sure, but this blog likely gets a lot more traffic than any other political blog.
February 8th, 2006 at 3:45 pmI have been wrong all this time: the President does, in fact, know Jack. Learn something new every day.
February 8th, 2006 at 3:47 pmamazing that it could have such a flawless memory and at the same time be so illiterate, inarticualte, addled, inept, and otherwise crippled by years of alcohol and drug abuse. Or perhaps it is playing dumb, like prince hamlet, which would evince a horrifying level of cunning, and might explain practically the whole thing. How could it have such a keen memory??
February 8th, 2006 at 3:50 pmDoes anyone have a listing of all George Bush’s lies?
I don't think we have enough letters to complete it.
February 8th, 2006 at 3:50 pmOh, my, who would assume such a tewwible, tewwible thing?
No, this information just points out that the Prez, as he did in re/Ken Lay, has--shall we say--stretched the truth. Or maybe shrunk it is a better way to put it.
As for the $1k donation? Abramoff was a Bush Pioneer--would you care to deny that public record, IMatt? He helped raise $100,000 for the campaign.
February 8th, 2006 at 3:52 pmBrokeback Capital "Jack- I just can't quit you!"
February 8th, 2006 at 3:56 pmHere is a video of Bush using his iron trap memory.
Via Crooks and Liars
February 8th, 2006 at 3:59 pmhttp://movies.crooksandliars.com/Funniest_Video_of_the_Year_1.wmv
Bush's enablers will never admit the truth about their dear leader. They simply refuse to see it. They have to know these basic facts.
1). Karl Rove and Abramoff were founding members of the Young Republicans twenty years ago.
2). Their respective staffs moved from one to other almost seamlessly.
3). Bush doesn't make a move without consulting Karl Rove.
Bush claiming he doesn't know Jack Abramoff is just not credible. It's a lie. But admitting their boy king tells lies leads to other uncomfortable questions so they snap and yelp and stomp their feet. It's downright pavlovian.
February 8th, 2006 at 3:59 pmTry it. Say "Bush lies" in the comments of any blog that allows them and watch them come to his defense. They will question your mental health, your patriotism, your manhood but they will not debate the facts or merrits. They can't.
They have nothing to show for their unending loyalty and yet they keep the faith. Odd really. Years from now, when the passions of this time and place fade and history has made it's judgement, these same people will be telling their children how they never really liked that guy.
22: I don't attack the people - I have no problem with the people. I respond to inaccurate information when I can. The Army Corp of Engineers spent 430 million in upgrading the levees, which apparently was not enough - the LA local government didn't complain. Just last week the governor claimed to congress that she knew the levees were outdated an inadequate - but what did she do to fix them? Nothing. A cat5 hurricane hit in 1969, so the local gov't had AMPLE time to raise their voices enough to get things fixed right.
Passing the buck seems to be a trend with the local government in Louisiana. No president would say "Screw LA, let's use the money elsewhere" - if anyone believes that, they have other problems as well. I did not like Clinton, but I don't believe he actively set out to cause destruction.
February 8th, 2006 at 4:00 pmHey, don't you guys remember the staged videoconference that Bush had with some troops from Iraq? In that teleconference he wanted us to believe that he had a good enough memory to remember a random soldier on sight. It was great theater. This same man now wants me to believe that he can't remember a member of his own transition team that charged $25,000 for a meeting with Bush and raised hundreds of thousands of dollars for Bush's reelection? Say it with me folks.....give me a f*%&$ing break.
February 8th, 2006 at 4:01 pmYeah, you all are going to trust a convicted felon here?
February 8th, 2006 at 4:02 pm39: I didn't post to generate traffic. I make no money off my site and it takes up time I really don't have. Could care less if people read it or not, it's just a ranting post so I don't drive my wife crazy.
February 8th, 2006 at 4:02 pmIt’s easier to spoof an email than a memo.
Comment by knobboy — February 8, 2006 @ 3:34 pm
Is this the talking point du jour? All evidence pointing to the fact that Pres Bush knew Abramoff is fake?
Pray tell, is this some sort of a vast conspiracy?
February 8th, 2006 at 4:03 pmHow dare you call Dear Leader a liar, don't you know this will only help the terrorists? Why do you love terrorists so much?
February 8th, 2006 at 4:04 pmNope. No conspiracy. Just an exhortation to be careful. And skeptical.
February 8th, 2006 at 4:09 pm#15. "I love Abramoff’s Pious Jew act.
He’s a man of god!"
Comment by The Liberal Avenger — February 8, 2006 @ 3:23 pm
The neo-con wingnuts are all pious religious hypocrites of one sect or other. It appears to be a REQUIREMENT to be a Republican.
February 8th, 2006 at 4:10 pmSo, now Gary Ruppert's stance is that the number one lobbist for the republican party is a felon and can't be trusted.
WE SAID HE CAN'T BE TRUSTED YEARS AGO, CATH UP.
February 8th, 2006 at 4:11 pm#34 & #37
We are referring to and joking about "scandal" from the election '04 in which Dan Rather got pwn3d by some douchebags.
ps Welcome to the club!
February 8th, 2006 at 4:11 pmCHIMPEACH!
February 8th, 2006 at 4:12 pmNo, it was not enough and there still isn't being enough spent.
More time and energy is being spent on turning the poor neighborhoods into "green space"
February 8th, 2006 at 4:13 pmYeah, you all are going to trust a convicted felon here?
Comment by Gary Ruppert — February 8, 2006 @ 4:02 pm
As usual, Mr. Ruppert trails the facts by a long shot:
Why is it illegal for Jack Abramoff to give money to someone? He gave the legal limit, and he did it without strings.
Comment by Gary Ruppert — January 3, 2006 @ 12:58 pm
It took you almost a month, but you finally acknowledged Abramoff is crooked. We'll talk about Abramoff friendship with Pres Bush next month. Deal?
February 8th, 2006 at 4:14 pmComment by imatt
"The Army Corp of Engineers spent 430 million in upgrading the levees, which apparently was not enough - the LA local government didn’t complain. Just last week the governor claimed to congress that she knew the levees were outdated an inadequate - but what did she do to fix them? Nothing. A cat5 hurricane hit in 1969, so the local gov’t had AMPLE time to raise their voices enough to get things fixed right."
Thats true that there was 430 million spent, but the Corp also told Bush that the levees required more work and funding. Bush just scoffed and reduced the funding to the Army Corp of Engineers. This is a fact, just like him cutting funding for education while saying that we should support education.
Do you not see the double talk here?
February 8th, 2006 at 4:15 pmimatt, your logic is that local officials did not complain loudly enough. They did, in fact, complain. Just because you did not here it does not mean it did not happen. In fact, the Army Corp of Engineers was responsible for the levees and is controled by the federal govt.
I know facts don't fit into your worldview but if you try them it might suit you:
http://www.factcheck.org/article344.html
Walter Maestri, emergency management chief for Jefferson Parish, told the Times-Picayune:
Walter Maestri: It appears that the money has been moved in the president’s budget to handle homeland security and the war in Iraq , and I suppose that’s the price we pay. Nobody locally is happy that the levees can’t be finished, and we are doing everything we can to make the case that this is a security issue for us.
February 8th, 2006 at 4:21 pm
in typical republican fashion, they try to change the subject. I fell for it. I think it works better if they use outlandish claims.
February 8th, 2006 at 4:24 pmIt's OK Jack, Dubya needs to spend some time away from you, OK? Just until the posse rides by, savvy? Remember when Enron broke, despite the fact that Enron was the single largest contributor to Dubya's Texas governor campaign, despite revoking the California price caps almost as soon as he took office, when the brown stuff hit the fan, I went from 'Kenny-Boy' to 'Kenny-Who?'. Stay cool, man, you'll get your pardon.
February 8th, 2006 at 4:28 pmBush said “You know, I, frankly, don’t even remember having my picture taken with the guy. I don’t know him.â€
You will deny me thrice before the cock crows.
February 8th, 2006 at 4:29 pm.
#17, this is in the 'we're bastards, but not as big a bunch of bastards as these people' category of troll misdirection. Let it go, people. Seen this before, 'yes but what about Clinton/Carter/Kennedy(any Kennedy)?'.
February 8th, 2006 at 4:32 pmI think we all need to be cautious of info that "falls" into our hands. We don't need another Memogate to allow the GOP to escape another scandal. Be careful and let's not over play our hand here. The public has already bitten on the "Culture of Coruption" theme, don't allow the GOP to reframe this important campaign issue!
February 8th, 2006 at 4:33 pmI think you will be interested in this email from Ralph Reed to Enron lobbyist Richard Shapiro that confirms the tight relationship between Jack Abramoff and Rep. Tom DeLay - and Susan Ralston, who has been Deputy White House Chief of Staff Karl Rove's personal assistant since 2001. I would like to know what you think about this pair of Enron emails.
Dr. Gene Nelson http://www.AnAmericanScam.com website
http://orange.sims.berkeley.edu/~atf/enron/enron.cgi
The sender of the message to Richard Shapiro, who was Enron's Vice-President of Regulatory Affairs and principal D.C. lobbyist, was Ralph Reed, president of Century Strategies, LLC of Washington, DC. Ralph's firm's website is http://censtrat.com
From: ralph@censtrat.com abramoff is arguably the most influential and
effective gop lobbyist in congress. i share several clients with him and
have yet to see him lose a battle. he also is very close to Delay and could
help enormously on that front. raised $ for bush. until december 31 he can
be reached at 202-661-3851. he assistant is Susan Ralston.
___________
http://orange.sims.berkeley.edu/~atf/enron/enron.cgi
Search for string "H-1B" in Enron Emails
From: Chris Long
To: jane.allen@enron.com, steven.kean@enron.com, Richard Shapiro , joe.hillings@enron.com, cynthia.sandherr@enron.com, Stephen Burns , tom.briggs@enron.com, Sue Nord , Carolyn Cooney , james.steffes@enron.com
Cc:
Bcc:
Date: 04 Oct 2000 02:02 PDT
Subject: House Passes H-1B Visas; Bill Now Awaits Clinton's Signature
Finally, the H-1B visa increase has passed the House and Senate and is on its
way to the President for his signature. Jane Allen reviewed the provisions
of the legislation which meet Enron's requirements. Enron has been a part of
the Americans Business for Legal Immigration (ABLI) which has championed this
legislation.
Thanks to Allison Navin and Amy Fabian for great support on this issue.
EMPLOYMENT
House Passes H-1B Visas; Bill Now Awaits Clinton's Signature
In a strangely abrupt end to the protracted and often rocky debate on H-1B
visa increase legislation, the House late Tuesday approved a Senate-passed
bill by voice vote, and sent the measure to the White House for President Clinton's signature.
The bill is largely designed to increase the number of skilled foreign
workers who can be hired by high technology companies, and Clinton has
pledged to sign it.
House Republican leaders made the decision late Tuesday to bring the H-1B
visa increase legislation up for debate and vote under a suspension of the
rules, just hours after the Senate had approved the identical legislation in
a 96-1 vote. House leadership made the call after most members already had
left for the day--a move that invited criticism from some Democratic
legislators who complained about being caught off guard.
Democratic leaders were informed about an hour beforehand that floor debate
on the measure would begin. After a brief debate, the bill was approved by
voice vote--even though House Republican leaders had initially said that they
intended to bring the measure for a roll call vote today. The decision to
press forward was reached amid a House Republican leadership meeting, and a
second private meeting held among Majority Leader Armey, Rules Chairman
Dreier and Judiciary Immigration Subcommittee Chairman Lamar Smith, R-Texas.
"I don't think there was much talk, if any, across the aisle," said one high
tech lobbyist. "I think they [Republicans] felt they had to strike while the
iron was hot." This lobbyist also noted that key House Democrats--including
Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-Calif.--had signaled early in the day that they were
amenable to taking up the Senate-passed bill, which is similar to H-1B
legislation sponsored by Dreier and Lofgren.
A spokeswoman to Minority Leader Gephardt expressed disappointment in the
short notice Democrats were given, calling it an "infantile" way to
legislate. "Let us know what the schedule is, that's common courtesy," she
said.
Smith was likewise displeased, although for different reasons. The Senate
bill differs sharply from Smith's own version of the legislation, which was
reported out of committee earlier this year. In his floor statement, Smith
congratulated Dreier, but insisted there was "no credible study" showing a
shortage of skilled American workers to fill the high tech jobs.
Said a Smith aide: "Time ...has overtaken [efforts] to produce a balanced bill."
Lofgren, who said she had to be summoned back to Capitol Hill for Tuesday's
debate, called the Senate legislation "a very good bill that should become
law. I'm glad I was able to get into the carpool lane and get here in time
to talk about why this bill deserves our support," she joked.
Dreier acknowledged that debate on the bill had taken the two parties down
a "bumpy" road, but said he was pleased at the bipartisan outcome.
House Republican leaders had been hesitant to bring the H-1B legislation up
earlier this year, out of concerns that Democrats would use it as a platform
from which to attack Republicans on their immigration stances--those relating
to Latinos in particular.
But while Democrats such as Lofgren and Judiciary ranking member John
Conyers, D-Mich., indicated they would continue to press for a package of
Hispanic immigration provisions backed by the White House, they did not dwell
on the subject.
Democrats were more vocal with their concerns that the Senate bill could not
include a revenue raising device included in the Dreier-Lofgren bill, which
doubled the fee that employers will have to pay to hire an H-1B visa workers.
Under the House bill, that money would go for education programs to ensure
that American workers earn the skills needed to fill these high tech jobs in
the future. Rather than amend the Senate bill, however, Dreier introduced a
stand alone bill designed to adjust the fee. The H-1B measure raises the visa
caps to 195,000 per year through FY2003.
By Pamela Barnett
February 8th, 2006 at 4:35 pmof National Journal's CongressDaily
I know most of the posts about the e-mails being fake are jokes, but it seems to me like these are e-mails Abramoff has been sending recently. It sounds to me like if you ask him, he'll tell you he knew Bush. I'm sure he's a little pissed off that all his good friends who he raised so much money for are now denying they know him.
Assuming that ties with Abramoff indicate criminal activity of all second parties is incredibly presumptuous.
We are not making that assumption (a lot of Republicans *are* making that assumption when they say it is a bipartisan scandal). But what this shows is that Bush was likely lying about his relationship with Abramoff. I have a problem with the President lying no matter what, and I think the fact that he's lying about his relationship makes it more likely that his hands are dirty here.
Assuming that high up polititians remember $1K donations is ludicrous.
Abramoff raised over $100k for Bush, and he was a strategist as much as a fundraiser.
I fail to see how this is bigger news than the corrupt local Democratic government of Louisiana embezzling funds that should have gone towards the strengthening of the levees. Abramoff’s foulups didn’t cause people to die. Oh but this gets pushed aside because it’s negative of the Left.
The corruption of politicians working in concert with lobbyists, and repeated dishonesty by politicians, threaten the very foundation of our government and nation. And the programs cut by Republican legislators in the pocket of lobbyists, the wars started and mishandled by Republicans who have increased their power by gaming K-street and abusing lobbyist/corporate contributions, do result in people dying.
But if Democrats really did embezzle funds in NO, I think that's a big story too. I think this country is big enough for more than one news item at a time.
February 8th, 2006 at 4:36 pm#13
I would vote Yes if they included all the muslim countries. All those fundamentalists in Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, etc... will got nuts every time their authority is questioned...sound like anyone else we know?
February 8th, 2006 at 4:37 pmJust a word about these pictures of Jack Abramoff and President Bush that Reflections deleted because they say they weren’t “relevantâ€. I want to see the pictures for myself in order to make my own judgment as to their “relevance.†That is for me and anyone looking at the pictures to decide, not the White house and not the president of Reflections. She had no business doing what she did.
I want to see ALL of the pictures taken that day with President Bush and all the people who got to have their picture taken with him. I want to see the body language the president uses when he’s pretending to shake the hand of somebody he doesn’t know and when he’s shaking the hand of someone he does know and likes a lot. I want to see if he puts his hand on the shoulder of people he doesn’t know and if he puts his elbow around the neck of those he does. I want to compare the level of personal intimacy exhibited in each picture.
If after looking at ALL the pictures taken that day, you couldn’t tell the difference between the people that the president didn’t know and those he did, then I would agree that the pictures have no “relevanceâ€. But I am not going to take the word of Reflections, and I am certainly not stupid or naive enough to believe the White House.
February 8th, 2006 at 4:40 pm59: (HOT! TIP!)
*sigh.
Resulting in trashing a site I plainly stated was nothing more than a ranting post. Name calling should be left in Middle School.
You know, I respect anyone's opinions here that actually shows some intelligence. Most posts don't - as they are nothing but name calling Bush bashing whitty comments. Those that DO think through your comments and post, you help show that not all Lefties or Righties are ignorant.
Bashing Bush does no one any good (except may make someone feel smart) without providing information as to why one thinks that way. Saying "Bush Lied" or some other whimsical quote is not providing evidence.
I figured this site was here to help argue the points, not to bash persons.
February 8th, 2006 at 4:42 pmBut was Bush at his ranch like place (pig farm)
February 8th, 2006 at 4:44 pm0n 9 August, 2003?
Yeah, he forgot Abramoff. Like he forgot that he's supposed to obey the law. Like he forgot that Iraq really DIDN'T have WMDs. Like he forgot about his little awol period in the service, or about the warnings that Bin Laden was going to attack with planes. "UH FUHGOT"
February 8th, 2006 at 4:47 pmMy seven year old doesn't get away with that crap.
Why Mr. Abranoff could not travel in Saturday to meet our commander in chief?
What the hell means SHABBOS? Is SHABBOS more important that the president?
February 8th, 2006 at 4:47 pmThis is background noise.
You lefties need to put up or shut up. Are you willing to support strong lobbying reform? What are your ideas on the budget? AND what is your plan for Iraq and the War On Terror.
You can talk Jack A all you want. Do you have a reform agenda other than fear and smear? Because if you don't, you will be in for the shock of your life come November. You cannot compete with Republicans if all you do is attack. Have you learned nothing since 2000? You can't beat Karl Rove with two bit scandals. He is SMARTER than you. AND he will take your hate and strangle you with it at the polls. AGAIN!
February 8th, 2006 at 4:48 pmimatt... evidence is given constantly on this site. Half the time I spend reading in the day is following links provided here.
February 8th, 2006 at 4:48 pm#83
There is no way to reform it, the WHOLE thing (both sides) is broken, it will take years or drastic measures.
February 8th, 2006 at 4:50 pmShabbos is a hebrew word for Sabbath. Orthodox Jews (and somehow Abramoff claims to be one) cannot work or travel on the Sabbath. Joe Lieberman is the same way.
February 8th, 2006 at 4:53 pmimatt,
If most of this doesn't involve intelligent debate, then why do you stay? Are you trying to generate more traffic to your site, or have you been recruited? You are fighting an unwinnable battle here.
February 8th, 2006 at 4:54 pmHey imatt - At least people here do carry on a debate. You say name calling, and yes some does occur. But over all there is debate here until one person, generally the bush supporters, start calling people here names.
I tried going over to RedState.org to discuss the topics but was banned. You'll notice that in none of my posts to you I have in any way called you a name, but I have held you to the facts. RedState considered this offensive and banned me. However, one of the Republican posters could call me a "moonbat".
You see, the problem is that debate should discuss the facts. Let me demonstrate the facts to you.
1) Bush was not elected in the first election. The supreme court appointed him.
2) Bush did nothing before 9/11 to prevent it. Despite the PDB that stated "bin laden determined to strike the US". Despite all of the intelligence community jumping up and down about the terrorists.
3) Bush forced the FBI to stop investigating the bin laden family
4) Bush did nothing when the country was under attack. He sat there even though he was supposedly told we were under attack. This is a great leader who just sits there.
5) Bush LET bin laden get away and states: "I really don't think about him much" and "bin laden will be our number 1 priority and we will not rest until he is captured or killed".
6) Bush falsifies intel to take us into war. He tells Blair that he is going in with or without the UN approval. (what did Sadam have to do with 9/11?).
7) Bush says that he supports education, but cuts 1.7 billion from education.
8) Bush says that only 400B will be cut from the budget for medicad, but in fact it's 800B.
9) Bush says that he does not know Abramhoff, but he was on his transition team and raised over 120,000 dollars for his presidency.
I could go on, but I think you get the point. (I HOPE)
February 8th, 2006 at 4:55 pmWhat a sad, depressing cesspool these Republicans are wallowing in. How any Americans think the two parties are equally corrupt is beyond me.
February 8th, 2006 at 4:56 pm#90 - the Clintons, maybe. I doubt Bush's personal lawyer could wind up dead in a corn field and get away with it on this site.
Here's what we'll say about corruption - "everybody does it" Sound familiar? Get a positive agenda or prepare to lose.
February 8th, 2006 at 4:58 pm87: Sometimes I need to reflect on what the opposing side really thinks. I really am interested in what both sides have to say. I'm no blind Bush follower, ie Illegal Immigration, just as I don't believe Clinton was 100% bad.
I don't expect anyone at all to post on my site, as it draws a different audience.
Just because I don't agree with someone doesn't mean I don't hang out with them. I have plenty of friends that are polar opposites of me - call it "Friendly debate."
February 8th, 2006 at 4:59 pm89: The "Terms of Use" of this site says it's run by a non-partisan operation. That's all I was mentioning earlier. Criticism of a site isn't trashing it. You, sir, were trashing a site and a poster.
February 8th, 2006 at 5:02 pmBashing Bush does no one any good (except may make someone feel smart) without providing information as to why one thinks that way.(...)
I figured this site was here to help argue the points, not to bash persons.
Comment by imatt — February 8, 2006 @ 4:42 pm
Information is provided all the time in this blog. All you have to do is read it. Like this one for example: Bush Resurrects False Claim That Congress Had "Same Intelligence" On Iraq
Or this one: Abramoff: The House That Jack Built
You are new to this blog. Everytime someone new starts posting, we have to go over the same points over and over again: "Iraq had WMDs", "Abramoff gave money to Democrats"... It gets old quickly and some of us don't have the patience.
February 8th, 2006 at 5:03 pm#91
Clinton. Yeah, you get a cookie. What the heck does Clinton have to do with this Abramhoff thread?
Abramhoff is a Republican creation, solely. They stand alone in this corruption. And if I recall when the Dems were held accountable for their misdeeds they lost power. And those misdeeds were nothing like this. I think they were for borrowing money out of some Congressional fund and it was legal but still unethical in the minds of most. This Repub scandal should collapse this party. If it doesn't well you'll get away with fooling the public again. Hope yer proud.
February 8th, 2006 at 5:05 pmWalter: I told those fucks down at the league office a thousand times that I don't roll on Shabbos!
Donny: What's Shabbos?
Walter: Saturday, Donny, is Shabbos, the Jewish day of rest. That means that I don't work, I don't get in a car, I don't ride in a car, I don't pick up the phone, I don't turn on the oven, and I sure as shit don't fucking roll! Shomer shabbos!
February 8th, 2006 at 5:05 pm#91 Rightly so...
Who wound up dead in a corn field? And what were you implying by bringing it up?
February 8th, 2006 at 5:06 pm#96 - "everybody does it."
February 8th, 2006 at 5:06 pm#98 - Vince Foster. Corruption is everywhere
February 8th, 2006 at 5:07 pm#83
Solutions have been provided from the left for years now. But just like with science you righties ignore anything not spoon fed to you.
Here is my spoon for you ...but just a bite..if you want more go to your favorite search engine.
http://www.americanprogress.org/site/pp.asp?c=biJRJ8OVF&b=1376283
http://www.americanprogress.org/atf/cf/%7BE9245FE4-9A2B-43C7-A521-5D6FF2E06E03%7D/QDR.PDF
Or here is one of my personal suggestions.
A secret manhattan project for energy independance. Why secret? Because OPEC will go ape shit if they found out we are really going to cut them off in a couple years.
What would the secret program do? It would build many pebblebed nuclear reactors that will be used for 1) mass generation of hyrdogen from water by generating the electricity needed to split hydrogen from water. 2) generation of electricity that will be used to feed Americas powergrid. Finally setup the distribution system as part of the normal gas distribution system so that when the switch comes it will be able to be sudden. All of this would take around 10 years but it is far more doable than what we did with the nuclear bomb in secret. But to do it would require a will of iron from the top down to make it happen. If they can keep area 51 a secret there is nothing stoping them from doing this in secret.
February 8th, 2006 at 5:07 pm#99
February 8th, 2006 at 5:11 pmDoes what? Breathe, crap, eat?
#100 Rightly so...
I didn't know that Fort Marcy Park was a "corn field". I thought it was a park.
And Mr. Foster committed suicide, due in no small part to the fact that he suffered from depression. But I still would like to know what you're implying.
February 8th, 2006 at 5:11 pm#90 - Yeah, sure, whatever ... Hillary killed Vince Foster, with the candlestick, in the cornfield, after she gave him a blowjob ... give it a rest. It's your turn under the microscope, and this time the Petri dish actually has something growing in it. Let the impeachmene hearings commence!
February 8th, 2006 at 5:12 pm#99 so if everybody does it, shouldn't we start by nailing this Abramoff nest of crooks to the wall first? Put them all away...right?
February 8th, 2006 at 5:13 pm88: I'll address each one.
First, I visit this site because people like you choose to have intelligent debate. RedState.org is not a site I visit, and for that specific reason.
1) Bush was elected in accordance to the Electoral College. If popular vote should outweigh electoral college, then put forth legislation to your congressman to get it changed. This has been beat into the ground before.
2) How do we know what's going on behind the scenes? What of programs like Able Danger and Eschelon? I guess they don't exist.
3) Because he had all the intelligence he needed. They had been investigating since Clinton was in office.
4) If Bush jumped up and ran out, it would have caused mass hysteria - and you know it. How would YOU have reacted? I would have been stunned as well.
5) If Bush was to claim Bin Laden was still top priority, people would uproar saying Iraq was back burner. Lose-lose situation.
6) Bush did NOT falsify info. he passed on information he believed was reliable, and apologized when he found out it was not. Saddam is known to have supported the Taliban.
7) In which departments? The solution to the education problems in our country is not to simply throw money at it. The problem lies in the lack of enthusiasm of the students, and how the bar constantly gets lowered. I saw this first hand.
8) Where is that data? Ever consider 800B is being cut, but 400B is being created in new programs inside medicade? (I don't think the government should subsidize medical treatment anyway.)
9) I cannot imagine the number of people that the president has met in the past 6 years. If he has said "I remember him" the media would expect Bush to remember intricate details, then criticize him for lying about remembering. It's a vicious cycle.
I do get the point, that we disagree on many things. When i was referrring to people not backing their attacks up, it wasn't directed at people like you.
February 8th, 2006 at 5:15 pmI love this idea that someone spoofed these emails from Abramoff to Eisler. Did it never occur to anyone that Eisler wrote first and Abramoff replied? So how in the fuck would anyone know to spoof a reply?
February 8th, 2006 at 5:17 pm#91 is right, we need a positive agenda. We need short simple sound bites that say "we believe in this and that strongly." Hopefully, we will be right more often than this Administration's abyssmal batting average. One good thing about these 5 years, is that some issues that I was unsure about have now become crystal clear. Whatever Bush's stand, I take the opposite. Gay Marriage, I'm for it now. Life is so black and white now. Interracial Marriage: I'm for it! We survived Hitler and we will survive this crowd. Verifed voting paper trail and everything will be ok.
February 8th, 2006 at 5:19 pmWow, did he just say that?
February 8th, 2006 at 5:20 pm[...] Bush’s close relationship with Jackoff Abraham. [...]
February 8th, 2006 at 5:22 pmI'm thinkin' Jack wants to remind BushCo how much he has over them. His unpatriotic scandalous activities will be handled carefully and he will come out smelling like roses.
February 8th, 2006 at 5:23 pmEqual justice for all...... my ass!
If Bush's lawyer showed up dead the way Foster did, I am sure you all would say he was murdered.
OK - corruption cuts both ways. We know the Clintons were liars. People are finding that out about Bush. Do yourself a favor and don't run your campaign on a no-brainer. K? If you wanna win, you better have an agenda or you will get dragged through the mud like you have NEVER seen. Don't make it personal. You won't win - just ask John Kerry about that.
February 8th, 2006 at 5:24 pmCopy the e-mails and send them to the federal prosecutor.
February 8th, 2006 at 5:25 pm#17 imatt I fail to see how this is bigger news than the corrupt local Democratic government of Louisiana embezzling funds...
Don't change the subject. You have to really work at it to miss the mountain of evidence of relationships between Abramoff and the White House. And, putting things in perspective, you can't find another person, who has as many ties to the White House as Abramoff has, that the president can't remember. Abramoff didn't just give a $1000 contribution to Bush-Cheney. He was a Pioneer. That's $100,000.
If you've convinced yourself that there's no relationship between Bush and Abramoff, then you're the only one. Nobody else here is buying it.
February 8th, 2006 at 5:26 pmI believe Bush. I know he doesn't read, and sure as hell can't type. therefore, he doesn't use a computer.
February 8th, 2006 at 5:30 pmimatt,
Here are some facts for you regarding the fact that Alberto Gonzales lied at the hearings on Monday. I would like for you to comment without an attack. I am only posting facts here, backed up by links to the original sources, which are for the most part from the White House web site.
Russ Fiengold gave a speech in the Senate yesterday where he laid out the facts for Why Bush's warrantless wiretapping is illegal. Let's see if you truly want to have a debate or if you are blowing smoke.
Raw Story
Febraury 7, 2006
Amidst flurry of Bush attacks, Feingold hits Congress wiretaps: 'Congress has lost its way'
Besides the already popular:
White House
April 20, 2004
President Bush: Information Sharing, Patriot Act Vital to Homeland Security
Feingold gave us a new one:
I went and got the whole thing for ya.
White House
July 14, 2004
President's Remarks at Ask President Bush Event
Yesterday in his unsworn in "testimony" Alberto Gonzales said that when Bush was talking about getting court orders, he meant roving wiretaps only.
Washington Post
February 6, 2006
U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee Holds a Hearing on Wartime Executive Power and the National Security Agency's Surveillance Authority
Clearly, the new quote that I have provided here states "In other words, the government can't move on wiretaps or roving wiretaps without getting a court order."
Then Russ had this quote:
White House
June 9, 2005
President Discusses Patriot Act
This would be why he wasn't sworn in. He just lied.
February 8th, 2006 at 5:32 pmimatt - Fair enough.
1) Bush was elected in accordance to the Electoral College. If popular vote should outweigh electoral college, then put forth legislation to your congressman to get it changed. This has been beat into the ground before.
Fair enough, I think this issue has been beat into the ground as well, just pointing out some facts.
2) How do we know what’s going on behind the scenes? What of programs like Able Danger and Eschelon? I guess they don’t exist.
They do exist. In fact Eschelon is how Bush is wiretapping Americans. And Able Danger has been killed by Bush because it would show that he had plenty of evidence prior to 9/11 that shows he failed HORRIBLY.
3) Because he had all the intelligence he needed. They had been investigating since Clinton was in office.
Yes, but the PDB and the intelligance officers, CIA, and FBI, jumping up and down should have caused more attention to the facts.
4) If Bush jumped up and ran out, it would have caused mass hysteria - and you know it. How would YOU have reacted? I would have been stunned as well.
No one said he had to JUMP UP, but he should have gotten up calmly and said excuse me I have an important issue that just came up.
5) If Bush was to claim Bin Laden was still top priority, people would uproar saying Iraq was back burner. Lose-lose situation.
No! He is not even trying to capture him. This is the point. Also, without his terrorist of choice on the loose, how does he get the American public to cower in the corner. So there is not interrest in him catching/killing him.
6) Bush did NOT falsify info. he passed on information he believed was reliable, and apologized when he found out it was not. Saddam is known to have supported the Taliban.
No! He picked information that indicated what he wanted congress to know. Despite that the information stated the exact opposite of what he was passing as truth. There is a difference between cherry picking and passing valid information.
7) In which departments? The solution to the education problems in our country is not to simply throw money at it. The problem lies in the lack of enthusiasm of the students, and how the bar constantly gets lowered. I saw this first hand.
So now it matters what department? The bill is cutting educational benefits. Who cares if it's in agricuture or science? We need students, and we need educated Americans.
8) Where is that data? Ever consider 800B is being cut, but 400B is being created in new programs inside medicade? (I don’t think the government should subsidize medical treatment anyway
Unfortunately, I don't have time to read the budget, but the president originally told the American public that the cut was 440B, but I just heard on the radio that the cuts are actually 800B. Of course that does not make it true, but it came from a congressman being interviewed so I would bet that it is probably factual.
"9) I cannot imagine the number of people that the president has met in the past 6 years. If he has said “I remember him†the media would expect Bush to remember intricate details, then criticize him for lying about remembering. It’s a vicious cycle."
No, but don't you think that someone who was a "Pioneer" to raising over 120,000 dollars for a president, and being in the WH over 200 times in the first 10 months of the presidency that he had to of known him?
February 8th, 2006 at 5:33 pmYou lefties need to put up or shut up. Are you willing to support strong lobbying reform? What are your ideas on the budget? AND what is your plan for Iraq and the War On Terror.
The first reform is removing from office the people who created and abused the current system. You can't reasonably discuss reforming the system when the people who are responsible for the reform, and the people governed by the reform, are the same people whose abuse of the system make reform necessary.
So let's talk about lobbying reform, but let's also talk about putting people in office who we can trust to act in the spirit of that reform.
February 8th, 2006 at 5:34 pm[...] Props to Think Progress for getting their hands on emails from Abramoff detailing his numerous meetings with President Bush. [...]
February 8th, 2006 at 5:38 pmImpeachment time! Abramoff and illegal surveillance of American citizens are enough for me. Trouble is, then we get Cheney, who, it is hard to believe, could only be worse.
February 8th, 2006 at 5:39 pmUnfortunately this isnt enough.We have seen "smoking guns" from Downing street,the NYT,among other places and they werent enough to get him into any real trouble.
What is needed is an e-mail or other records from the White House that confirms their cozy relationship and they arent releasing it.They will claim that its just another lobbyist hyping his relationship with Bush.
They probably all have been destroyed like the ones from the plame investigation.
The good news is another republican is calling for a full investigation into the illegal wiretaps on her commitee.
Despite all the evidence,its amazing that people still try to defend him here.Its clear that it doesnt matter what he does no matter how heinous,dead enders will defend him rather than admit they were wrong about him.
It will always go back to the "librals".Never mind the fact that many centrists and conservatives feel the same way about him.
February 8th, 2006 at 5:41 pm#106)
1) If the supreme court stayed out of it Florida supreme court was going to allow a full state wide recount. If that happend Gore won. If that happened the electoral collage would have been for Gore.
2) When you see that bush didnt take the warnings seriously and went on vacation and his neocon buddies were doing business deals with the Taliban then you can see that what was going on outside the doors not behind them were not right. Clinton took several actions against Saddam and terrorists. Bush didnt do squat until after 911.
3) There is nothing to respond here to. "He had all the evidence he needed" ... really? Like those videos of the bin ladens at one of Osamas sons weddings WITH Osama? And then they get flown out of this country before the FBI can question them?
4) You must think Americans are all wussies like you. Mass hysteria? OMFG Look! Bush is going to take care of business what will we ever do?!?!?!
5) If Bush had made Osama #1 priority there would have been no Iraq. People are not going to get in an uproar BECAUSE you are going after Osama... what twillight zone are you living in?
6) Bush was told by the CIA before his State of the Union address that the Iraq yellow cake info was found to be forgeries. Then Bush went out and told the world about the yellow cake, but not the forgeries. People were talking about the faked Iraq info and the push for war despite IAEA findings BEFORE the war and they were ignored.
7) Throwing money is not the solution to anything that is besides the point. The solution is to hire scientists that study human learning and have them come up with what needs to be taught instead of people like the Intelligent Design prone state school commisions that are not human learning experts just people that got elected.
8) That money is being sent to Iraq dont kid yourself.
9) Bush knew this guy. Bush knows he knew him. But then again having met a guy 12 times doesnt make it a buddy buddy situation. It CAN make it a business relationship though. And we all know it was about money not friendship.
You conveniently leave out info so you can pretend you are not lieing or that you stand on solid ground. In the Internet age that trick dont work no more.
February 8th, 2006 at 5:41 pm#124 - No we don't because Cheney will be in that impeachment. The evidence shows he's just as guilty, so he would go down as well.
February 8th, 2006 at 5:42 pmI love people like "Rightly So" who are proud of the fact that Republicans will win despite their corruption and dishonesty.
"You can't beat us with that because we'll just lie about it" is basically what he's saying. Proudly.
It's just like the Republicans who acknowledege their party is wrong about gay marriage, but still proudly say things like "If the Democrats want to be the part of gay marriage, they'll keep losing elections."
It doesn't matter what you do as long as you win. Your Republican party.
February 8th, 2006 at 5:43 pmLINKING!
LINKING!
LINKING!
Many thanks, ThinkProgress!
February 8th, 2006 at 5:43 pmThe "their all corrupt" soundbyte is a critical talking point, that Conservatives and the corporate, right-wing media, constantly try to push.
I know alot of people who don't vote, because they believe that "their all corrupt", and it doesn't matter who they vote for.
These same people side with progressives on taxes, National Health Care, and raising the minimum wage. I'ts important, to make people think that "their all corrupt", because it suppresses voter turnout.
A higher voter turnout would result in more progressive policies, that help the middle class and the poor. This is why that "their all corrupt" myth is propagated.
February 8th, 2006 at 5:48 pmbush also sneak in the privatizing of ssi in the current budget.
Bush's Social Security Sleight of Hand
By Allan Sloan
The Washington Post
Wednesday, February 8, 2006; Page D02
If you read enough numbers, you never know what you'll find. Take President Bush and private Social Security accounts.
Last year, even though Bush talked endlessly about the supposed joys of private accounts, he never proposed a specific plan to Congress and never put privatization costs in the budget. But this year, with no fanfare whatsoever, Bush stuck a big Social Security privatization plan in the federal budget proposal, which he sent to Congress on Monday.
His plan would let people set up private accounts starting in 2010 and would divert more than $700 billion of Social Security tax revenues to pay for them over the first seven years.
If this comes as a surprise to you, have no fear. You're not alone. Bush didn't pitch private Social Security accounts in his State of the Union message last week.
First, he drew a mocking standing ovation from Democrats by saying that "Congress did not act last year on my proposal to save Social Security," even though, as I said, he'd never submitted specific legislation.
Then he seemed to be kicking the Social Security problem a few years down the road in typical Washington fashion when he asked Congress "to join me in creating a commission to examine the full impact of baby boom retirements on Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid," adding that the commission would be bipartisan "and offer bipartisan solutions."
But anyone who thought that Bush would wait for bipartisanship to deal with Social Security was wrong. Instead, he stuck his own privatization proposals into his proposed budget.
"The Democrats were laughing all the way to the funeral of Social Security modernization," White House spokesman Trent Duffy told me in an interview Tuesday, but "the president still cares deeply about this. " Duffy asserted that Bush would have been remiss not to include in the budget the cost of something that he feels so strongly about, and he seemed surprised at my surprise that Social Security privatization had been written into the budget without any advance fanfare.
Duffy said privatization costs were included in the midyear budget update that the Office of Management and Budget released last July 30, so it was logical for them to be in the 2007 budget proposals. But I sure didn't see this coming -- and I wonder how many people outside of the White House did.
Nevertheless, it's here. Unlike Bush's generalized privatization talk of last year, we're now talking detailed numbers. On page 321 of the budget proposal, you see the privatization costs: $24.182 billion in fiscal 2010, $57.429 billion in fiscal 2011 and another $630.533 billion for the five years after that, for a seven-year total of $712.144 billion.
In the first year of private accounts, people would be allowed to divert up to 4 percent of their wages covered by Social Security into what Bush called "voluntary private accounts." The maximum contribution to such accounts would start at $1,100 annually and rise by $100 a year through 2016.
It's not clear how big a reduction in the basic benefit Social Security recipients would have to take in return for being able to set up these accounts, or precisely how the accounts would work.
Bush also wants to change the way Social Security benefits are calculated for most people by adopting so-called progressive indexing. Lower-income people would continue to have their Social Security benefits tied to wages, but the benefits paid to higher-paid people would be tied to inflation.
Wages have typically risen 1.1 percent a year more than inflation, so over time, that disparity would give lower-paid and higher-paid people essentially the same benefit. However, higher-paid workers would be paying substantially more into the system than lower-paid people would.
This means that although progressive indexing is an attractive idea from a social-justice point of view, it would reduce Social Security's political support by making it seem more like welfare than an earned benefit.
Bush is right, of course, when he says in his budget proposal that Social Security in its current form is unsustainable. But there are plenty of ways to fix it besides offering private accounts as a substitute for part of the basic benefit.
Bush's 2001 Social Security commission had members of both parties, but they had to agree in advance to support private accounts. Their report, which had some interesting ideas, went essentially nowhere.
What remains to be seen is whether this time around Bush follows through on forming a bipartisan commission and whether he can get credible Democrats to join it. Dropping numbers onto your opponents is a great way to stick your finger in their eye. But will it get the Social Security job done? That, my friends, is a whole other story.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-
February 8th, 2006 at 5:49 pmCan we impeach him now? Huh, can we? Please?? Pretty please with sugar on it???
February 8th, 2006 at 5:51 pm#83:
YOUR politicians are completely in charge...
YOU guys are responsible for the ideas, etc, since YOU'RE the ones that were "elected"...
If THEY can't do their JOB, then tell THEM to STFU and resign.
February 8th, 2006 at 6:10 pmSaddam is known to have supported the Taliban.
Do tell. Please. I think I would like to hear that one.
February 8th, 2006 at 6:10 pmPut yourself in Jack's shoes, or in this case, his handcuffs. Would you go quietly and be the fall guy for everybody else? If you were him, who is going to be in the slammers for years to come, wouldn't you want to be the star of as huge a story as possible? Mr. President, heeeeeer comes Jack!
February 8th, 2006 at 6:12 pmI think a lot of people feel their vote doesn't count anyway, after seeing the last 2 elections in Florida and Ohio, my wife sure feels that way, she sees no point in voting.
February 8th, 2006 at 6:18 pmTong,
Exactly.
You can go down as the corrupt lobbiest or you can go down as the guy who brought down the most corrupt administration in history. What will sound better in the history books.
February 8th, 2006 at 6:19 pmI notice that the minute that I post hard facts showing Alberto Gonzales to be a liar, Mr "I only want to debate" imatt disappears.
February 8th, 2006 at 6:20 pm[...] ThinkProgress ThinkProgress has obtained emails written by Jack Abramoff in which the fallen lobbyist personally describes his relationship with President Bush. They depict a relationship far more extensive than has been previously reported. [...]
February 8th, 2006 at 6:27 pmI have hypothocized before. You take a mass IQ average of the 75 million voting Liberals, and Mass IQ average of the 75 million voting conservatives, which one would be higher?
I use these estimates because it seems half of the entire public does not vote, and the other half that does, is evenly divided.
How many members of MENSA are Liberal vs. Conservative? (you know that club where people can join if they have an IQ of 130 or more).
Just wondering here.
February 8th, 2006 at 6:29 pmA lobbyist claimed to be closer friends with the president than he actually was? Stop the presses!
February 8th, 2006 at 6:29 pmImatt wrote Abramoff’s foulups didn’t cause people to die.
February 8th, 2006 at 6:33 pmHow do you know women in the sweatshops in
Saipan haven't died. I wonder why Congress hasn't taken care of DeLay and Abramoff's mess there.
BEWARE OF FORGERIES? LET ME SET THIS RECORD STRAIGHT
The paperwork that Dan Rather got his hands on---WAS NOT FORGED, REPEAT, WAS NOT FORGED. Much of the information spewed out by a bunch of "alleged" computer experts was wrong. I can not only prove it, but I can point to references that definitively dispose of all that clap trap about proportional space etc. All that the various media outlets ever had to do on that case was THEIR JOBS and they would have discovered that there wasn't every forgery. They were just too eager to go after Rather. Mary Mapes, the producer on that show, lays it all out as it occured and it is clear that the entire episode was master-managed by some group.
Additionally, if you search for the AWOL project then you will find out that the records are authentic and not forged. You will also discover that Bush went AWOL.
February 8th, 2006 at 6:33 pmHow this group of ugly actors can so buffalo a nation of people is beyond me. It is clear that they have lied over and over and the reason is simple. They wanted to be wealthy and rich beyond everybody's wildest dreams so that they can punish the world for making them feel inferior. The fact is: they are all inferior for a variety of reasons that should be manifestly clear.
Dude, you call that trolling. We are used to a much higher caliber here. Please go to a red site and come back when you are better prepared.
February 8th, 2006 at 6:34 pm#138 For Truth,
Please, whatever you and your wife do, don't skip voting!
We all agree that while we would like for the Democratic Party to be the answer to all our problems, we're all realistic to know that it has problems.
I personally believe that the best thing for the country is to get rid of all Democratics and Republicans in Congress and start over with other parties. This will take several years to do, but we could do it within six years if we all stick together as a nation. (By then all Senators will have faced one re-election bid.)
The main obstacle is that the two major parties have set the system up to favor incumbents and their two parties in particular. What the people need to do is to vote for someone who isn't from the two major parties. If a third party candidate is running for president, the best thing we can do is to vote for him or her (unless the person is a total whack job like Ross Perot.) If a candidate from a third party gets at least five percent of the national vote (no electoral votes), then that party can be eligible for federal matching funds in future elections. This is the goal we should be aiming for.
Once other political parties can start getting federal matching funds, you will begin to see the influence of the DEmocratic and Republican parties diminish. A two-party system is obviously better than a one-party system, but even more parties (and more views from which to draw a consensus) is even better.
So, even if it's to vote for someone from a different party, it's important for you and your wife to go vote.
Remember: If you don't vote, the polticians win.
February 8th, 2006 at 6:35 pmFirst, I visit this site because people like you choose to have intelligent debate. RedState.org is not a site I visit, and for that specific reason.
Comment by imatt — February 8, 2006 @ 5:15 pm
Really? But you do watch FauxNews, yes?
6) Bush did NOT falsify info. he passed on information he believed was reliable, and apologized when he found out it was not. Saddam is known to have supported the Taliban.
He did not pass on information that was reliable. First Cheney et al set up their own intelligence operation that would pay people to tell them what they wanted to hear -Chalabi & the Iraqi Natinal Council- while disregarding anybody who told them Chalabi was unreliable.
Then, when passing the intelligence on to Congress, Pres Bush left out all the caveats in the information he had, presenting a scenario where Iraq was a greater threat than it actually was.
Saddam supported the Taliban? Do you have links? Evidence?
9) I cannot imagine the number of people that the president has met in the past 6 years. If he has said "I remember him" the media would expect Bush to remember intricate details, then criticize him for lying about remembering. It’s a vicious cycle.
Jack Abramoff was a Republican Pioneer twice: once in 2000 and again in 2004, for raising over $100,000 for George Bush's presidential campaigns. Abramoff and his wife contributed towards George Bush's recount fund. In 1997, Abramoff got then-Texas Gov. Bush to write a letter in support of the Mariana Islands' school choice proposal. And Pres Bush cannot recall to "ever having met" Abramoff?
February 8th, 2006 at 6:37 pmHow many members of MENSA are Liberal vs. Conservative?
I was in MENSA. Count one for the Liberals.
February 8th, 2006 at 6:37 pmGary,
You totally got called out on this thread boy, you are proving to be just another hack that doesn't have any principle, and says whatever he can at the time to justify his position, just like your leaders do. You have so many lies to cover, soon enough, the contradictions are easy to find. Remember adults telling us as children, "if you use another lie to cover up a lie, it just digs your hole deeper". I am glad you went away for now, it shows how lame you are.
February 8th, 2006 at 6:41 pm147,
Don't fret dude, we are gonna vote, my wife just gets emotional about it and has bad days. She was taught to vote as a young person, I wasn't, but I learned to do it on my own.
February 8th, 2006 at 6:43 pmgeorgie know tell mommy the truth, did you cut down that cherry tree?
February 8th, 2006 at 6:46 pm"Dude, you call that trolling. We are used to a much higher caliber here. Please go to a red site and come back when you are better prepared.
Comment by Spudge_Boy — February 8, 2006 @ 6:34 pm"
Not trolling at all, just pointing out a rather obvious flaw in this story. Now, if you had a copy of Abramoff's invitation to visit the president's ranch....
February 8th, 2006 at 6:47 pm#151 For Truth,
Okay, I'll relax. :)
Jane and I didn't start voting until 1992 when, let's see, I forget who it was, some really impressive, literate, intelligent young governor from one of the southern states who could speak extemporaneously about foreign policy without hemming and hawing and struggling to find words was running. Now what was his name? Oh, it will come to me. :)
We've been voting ever since (except for the local elections in which most of the candidates are unopposed.)
I voted for Grandpa Al Lewis for governor of New York (may he rest in peace.) I was trying to help a third party get enough votes to get matching funds the next time. Same thing when I voted for Nader. I knew that Al Gore would win New York State, so my not voting for him wouldn't have mattered. You got to do what you can to get those other parties recognized.
Sometimes winning isn't the only victory possible.
February 8th, 2006 at 6:50 pmSo, you are saying that you wouldn't make friends with the republican "super lobbiest" that gave you $100,000 in campaign funding, in order to receive the title "pioneer"?
Wow, I make frineds with anybody that gives me $5.
February 8th, 2006 at 6:55 pmA lobbyist claimed to be closer friends with the president than he actually was? Stop the presses!
This reflects such a misunderstanding of who Abramoff was that it must be dishonest.
February 8th, 2006 at 6:59 pmGee, I thought Abramoff was just some anonymous lobbyist who gave money to both Democrats and some other political party.
February 8th, 2006 at 7:09 pmCheck the fonts! The kerning!
February 8th, 2006 at 7:19 pmI just love the thought of Jack sitting in his study, all alone, abandoned by his friends . . . and plotting his revenge. Whatever happened, we'll know about. Because Jack knows he's getting screwed by his beneficiaries, and he's going to screw them back. And who can blame him?
February 8th, 2006 at 7:20 pmIf you wanna win, you better have an agenda or you will get dragged through the mud like you have NEVER seen.
Disingenuous trolls? Nah, couldn't be. The GOP would never drag someone through the mud. Through flaming pools of excrement, but never the mud.
Nice straw man arguments, though.
February 8th, 2006 at 7:21 pmDon’t make it personal. You won’t win - just ask John Kerry about that.
Indeed, maybe someone should ask him whether personal attacks can affect one's campaign for political office. Better yet, ask Max Cleeland.
NOTE TO ROVE: Get better shills!
February 8th, 2006 at 7:25 pmmelior in France,
Do you think people use Quark Express to type set their e-mails beofre they are sent?
February 8th, 2006 at 7:36 pmBush's foul ups DIDN'T cause DEATHS ? WMD's in Iraq+over 2300 DEAD service men aren't considered "death by foul-up? WOW!!
February 8th, 2006 at 7:41 pmso, you're basically admitting that republicans have the market cornered on character assassination, sliming, lying and impugning. that's nice! great work! and you also seem to have no qualms about it. what a wonderful human being you sound like.
i especially like the bit where you tie it all back into clinton -- that was a master stroke. yes, everything wrong with the world today is clinton's fault; he screwed things up so badly that bush just hasn't had a chance. clinton's been out of office five years now and he's still the best excuse you can come up with. thanks for setting me straight on that. you are simply a genius. i don't know why you don't have a job with the rnc. or do you?
funny, it seems to me that bill clinton is basically the most popular and revered [former] politician *in the world* right now. wonder what he did to deserve that? funny, i know more than a few people that didn't even vote for clinton when he was president that now wish aloud that we could have him back.
i wonder why bush doesn't command the kind of uncensored, unscreened adulation that clinton does?
BECAUSE BUSH HAS BEEN UTTERLY INCOMPETENT, NEGLIGENT, CORRUPT, INEPT, DIVISIVE, DISHONEST and CRIMINAL.
and all this time i thought republicans were all about accountability. heh. barry goldwater spinning in his grave right about now...
but the real problem here is there's still about 30% of america that don't want to admit they bet on the wrong horse. twice.
February 8th, 2006 at 7:42 pm#Just saying, if you know what you’re doing, you can dummy up an email that looks like it’s from one person, when in fact it’s not.
It’s in the headers. If you don’t know what to look for, you can’t tell the difference.
Take a look at this over at Carnegie-Mellon’s CERT Center to see what I mean.
Comment by knobboy — February 8, 2006 @ 3:44 pm
Oh yeah I see where Rovers next Move is gonna be Spudge?
U see watt I see? yes Carnegie Mellon has some great Computer science folks. And it can be done.
Hmm Ok, in simplest terms, let us cover quickly please, if you will, the spoofing of emails. The SMTP protocol is insecure, there is no validation on many servers.
Yes its possible to find an open email server and use say the telnet program to send 'Spoofed" emails, I used to send the boss ones from made up lawyers, or angry customers, just to mess with him, then watch him repeat thru the office what so so said, =0)
Any way, it is possibe to spoof emails, yet few people KNOW how to really do it, even then the IP number would be recorded on that open email server.
By OPEN email server I mean that you dont need a password or account to send an email thru telnet (windows program telnet.exe)
Anyway the White House and dang near every Email is monitored (carnivore types) .
As an IT person, whom has set up the business databases Ic an Tell you THIS for damn sure
Though people in the Office deleted the Emails sent to them, and from the email server , off premises, The emails were captured as they were SENT to here computers IP address and were and are kept in logs. =)
Now thats perfectly legal in Texas because its the Owners Computer and he/she CAN monitor its use. Im telling you this purely for media propaganda reasons and also to secure your employment -- mr ho
So much for deleting emails and SPOOFING from a 'company' computer. I seriously doubt that cheney or bush knew how to do this.. SPudge will surely Find a point I missed here, backdoors perhaps..
Spudge..comments please.
February 8th, 2006 at 7:42 pmmr ho,
You are correct in spoofing. It is very hard to do, especially with the crack down on spam. normally, the person sending the e-mail would need to be using a Linux or Unix distro to do it right.
But, when it comes to e-mails coming and going from the White House, we must consider:
I love this stuff. You see, it doesn't end there. There are two Executive Orders attached to the PRA. Check out this first one:
What exactly is Bush hiding?
Transparent my ass!
February 8th, 2006 at 7:59 pmAbramoff Emails Show Extensive Ties to Bush...
So much for the "I don't know who he is" excuse....
February 8th, 2006 at 8:02 pm[...] Seltsam nur, dass Abramoff das schlicht und ergreifend anders sieht. Think Progress hat eMails in denen Abramoff über seine Begegnungen mit Bush berichtet. Dabei seien die Gespräche nicht nur förmlich gewesen, sondern durch aus auf familärer Ebene gehalten worden. The guy saw me in almost a dozen settings, and he joked with me about a bunch of things, including details of my kids,” Abramoff is said to have written. “Perhaps he has forgotten everything. Who knows?” [...]
February 8th, 2006 at 8:10 pm[...] Seltsam nur, dass Abramoff das schlicht und ergreifend anders sieht. Think Progress hat Mails, in denen Abramoff über seine Begegnungen mit Bush berichtet. Dabei seien die Gespräche nicht nur förmlich gewesen, sondern durch aus auf familärer Ebene gehalten worden. The guy saw me in almost a dozen settings, and he joked with me about a bunch of things, including details of my kids,” Abramoff is said to have written. “Perhaps he has forgotten everything. Who knows?” [...]
February 8th, 2006 at 8:17 pmI think that imatt is earnest. Wrong but earnest. He may just come around to seeing the light. But imatt, really you got to stop with right wing talking points, those will not work here. We are too informed and smart for that. Please continue to read blogs like tp and I highly recommend Buzzflash.com. Read Powerline and redstate and any other right wing site too. Get informed. Everybody is entitled to their own opinion, but not their "own" facts. I do not agree with every "left" leaning view, I am more of a centrist - I think most Americans are closer to the center, unfortunately both partys have moved to the right - and in doing so we have ended with the very extreme right in power. This is not good for the country anymore than the extreme left would be. Communism is to the extreme left, like Fascism is to the extreme right. Both threaten our beloved democracy. The point of this thread is that Abramoff represents corruption - so much so that Bush attempts to distance himself from him. He is lying and we do not want him to get away with it. Not saying that the Democrats are immune to corruption, but to say that the Abramoff scandal is bi-partisan is just a LIE.
February 8th, 2006 at 8:19 pmBush resigns...Cheny pardons him and the two flee fugitive warrants..........
February 8th, 2006 at 8:26 pmhow media outlets equate the two...this is from a pro Bush blog...and it is true....so Democrats face a comparison to the Republicans no matter how disgraceful Delay and Ambramoff are....is it fair no....but it's how the game is being played, I'd like to see a full on press by Democrats to put forth strong reforms in clear terms and distance themselves from Republicans.....
quote
Democrats Caught With Lobbyist Doing Their Finances
By Matt Margolis at 03:56 PM
On Monday, it was revealed that a number of Democrats employed a lobbyist to handle the financing of their political action committees and campaigns... Including Harry Reid and Ted Kennedy! Caught red handed, they're now cutting ties to the lobbyist...
Interesting isn't it. They claim the high road on ethics, corruption, and accuse Republicans of being under the control of lobbyists, and yet it took a media report to get them to cleanse themselves of their inappropriate ties to a lobbyist.
unquote
February 8th, 2006 at 8:28 pmimat and other trolls this one is for you, have a moment of honest retrospection and dare to view
February 8th, 2006 at 8:36 pmhttp://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/2/7/232634/5867
The Kerning on these emails is wrong. Pajamasline laughed at Rather, laughed at Durbin, they'll laugh at this.
February 8th, 2006 at 8:39 pm#172
February 8th, 2006 at 8:45 pmyou are missing the point. To say that that many members of congress of both parties are corrupted by lobbyist and money is a fair statement. But to say that ABRAMOFF gave to democrats is a LIE. And as such should be called that.
what is the point of your post? Democrats did receive money from Abramoff clients SO WHAT? If Jack robs Peter to give money to Tom (who then does favors for Jack), and Peter then gives some money to Paul - is Paul now as corrupt as Tom? Get a clue.
SHABBOS are more important that meeting with the president?humm...
Let me get this right. Gentiles meet with our Leader at the tip of a hat, but not Jewish orthodox hats... come on we are not in Israel or do we and I just do not know? or was Mr. Abranoof too busy sending money to snipers school with the money of minority "moroons" American Indians?
This SHABBOSbusiness is way behond my comprehesion, that means that you do not work on Saturdays but then go "work" on Sundays when everyone is busy in church until after Monday football night? No wonder, that Abranoff go to manipulate everyone in the game. What a sneaky guy now I understand why he went in a treanch coat to the court house.
BTW is to there an English word for SHABBOS?Something like Thanksday?
February 8th, 2006 at 8:54 pm[...] [Permalink] No Comments so far Leave a comment RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI Leave a comment Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTMLallowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong> [...]
February 8th, 2006 at 9:10 pm[...] Read more Relations [...]
February 8th, 2006 at 9:12 pm#175 the post wasn't about Democrats taking from Abramoff, but how UNFAIR it is to be lumped with him, thus I quoted an article where that was being done as Democrats had used a lobbyist.
no where in my post did I equate Abramoff giving to Democrats.....read the whole thing...my words in the beginning...the Blog post in the quotes.
February 8th, 2006 at 9:14 pm"They depict a relationship far more extensive than has been previously reported."
...yeah, the relationship they reported was non-existent...that's less extensive than reality...black is white, you know...
February 8th, 2006 at 9:40 pmImat your facts are wrong on the levis. First , it was known going back to the 1960s that the levis needed rebuilting when camille (?) hit.
Funds were to be allocated by the FEDs who are in charge of building and maintaining the levis.. The funds were never however fully funded in all those years.
For example even if I wanted to pay for dredging out the bayou I live on, I cant do it,, the Amru Corp of Engineers has jurisdiction and must do it. I cant even build a dock w/o the FEDs approving it.
The Army Corp of Engineers in order to prevent flooding up and down the Mississipi built levis. This sped the water up in the Mississippi and also reduced the silt. The delta area instead of continuing to build up because of the Corps changing the flow of the Missippi, eroded and what silt was in the Missippi was carried out into the Gulf instead of being deposited ( and ends up mucking the water up all the way to the west of Galveston). New Orleans and the whole gulf coast of LA losts its protection and is losing miles of wetlands per year which proted New Orleans and was a major fishery.
Pls also note that outside engineers have found the Army Corp of Engineers work sucked and was piss poor on the work they had been doing.
In 2000 a plan costing $18 billion was put forth to correct the damage the Army Corp of Enginneers had caused and rebuild the delta area and the levis to handle a cat 5. However the Bush administration would not support this plan. In fact they cut the normal maintenance allocation that dated back to Camille every year. The 18 billion would be cheap compared to what its now going to cost us and has already cost us. But what the heck we were better served spending upto two trillion in Iraq!
Regards
February 8th, 2006 at 9:49 pmWhat the hell are you talking about? Kerning is a type setting term. e-mail does not give a crap about kerning, everything is sent plain text or html.
February 8th, 2006 at 9:53 pm#179
February 8th, 2006 at 10:00 pmI guess I was not clear. But I stand by my post, your non-sequiter has nothing to do with Bush distancing himself from Jack by LIEING.
Why is the abramoff scandal not gaining traction? Is the average voting american so jaded by corruption in politics that they will not respond to this scandal?
February 8th, 2006 at 10:02 pm#183, neither was I....what I was clumsily trying to say in quoting a pro Bush blog was the tact put forth to somehow equate the Ambramoff scandal with Democrats and how unfair it is....yet MSM perpetuate that myth.....it's been a dreadully long work day and perhaps I wasn't clear in my post.
February 8th, 2006 at 10:05 pm#185 point taken. thanks.
#184
I think it is because that most Americans assume
some level of corruption in their politicians, that is
why many people do not even bother to vote. Politicians
are held in the same regard as used car salesman.
Also the MSM plays down that this is a repug issue,
and the talking heads of the right wing (including
tweety, and of course a-holes like limbaugh, hannity
etc) are very busy doing damage control for their
masters. Unfortunately this is very effective. On
top of that - and I hate to say it - but most
people get "if Al-Queda is calling someone in the
U.S we want to know why" but not "culture of
corruption". Not sure how better to convey the
level of damage done to the American people by
the pay-to-play system. But I am not a highly paid
democratic strategist - but I wish to God they would
come up with something that is equally dumbed down
but effective. Something like "GOP party of the RicH"
Or "GOP hates the poor". And make this mantra stick
until conservative is as repugnant to the mind of
many - like "liberal" had/has become.
Aside from the war, people are DYING and SUFFERING
February 8th, 2006 at 10:52 pmin this country as a direct result of the gop
policies. The gop decries - welfare - but has no
problem with policies that help exporting of jobs -
that exacerbates unemployment. They give the very
rich even more tax breaks - while breaking the back
of the middle class - and litterally crushing the
poor.
Is anyone surprised that Bush would lie about his relationship with a crooked lobbyist? Look how fast he ran away from his good friend "Kenny Boy" Lay when Enron tanked. Never mind that "Kenny Boy" furnished the Bush campaign the corporate jet and helped finance the bloodless coup d'etat in Florida in 2000! (Full disclosure: I live in Florida and witnessed first hand the angry "mobs" of "citizens" storming the Miami/Dade Co. election offices in order to stop the recount). So what if they were Congressional staffers sent from Washington by Tom DeLay on Jack Abramoff's dime! They had 5 Supreme Court Justices on the payroll! Has nothing this man has lied about risen to the level of high crimes and misdemeanors yet? Oh silly me, he hasn't lied about a blow job yet so I guess we should all give him a pass on lying us into another Vietnam with what Al Franken calls the campaign of "Fears, Smears and Queers". History will show these crooked, self-serving, incompetant would be emperors to be the darkest stain on American politics. But only if fight back and regain "our" democracy. Otherwise it's game, set and match and historians will only be able to write what the New American Taliban approve of (I'm King George Bush, and I approved this message!)
February 8th, 2006 at 10:52 pmDubya and Abramoff have been friends for years, but the press does not want to tell the truth because they are paid off! The so-called Free Press NO longer exists in America!
February 8th, 2006 at 10:54 pmI believe that here are pictures of Bush with Abramoff in the White House on 12/22/2003.
http://server3.pictiger.com/img/161731/picture-hosting/colage-2.php
These were grabbed off archive.org the night that the story broke about Reflections Photo pulling Abramoff photos. It wasn't too hard to figure out where these would be found on the internet archive...so I grabbed them.
TDP
February 8th, 2006 at 11:00 pmSlow Night....
I've been busy with some real life stuff tonight for the Rat Family, so this will be it. In an effort to make it clear I've been paying attention, here are a few blog entries worth your time: AmericaBlog shows......
February 8th, 2006 at 11:12 pm[...] Think Progress » Jack Abramoff Describes Relationship With President Bush Sounds like they were much closer than Mr. Bush would like the public to know. In hiding those photos the White House only made people more curious about exactly what they were trying to hide. [...]
February 8th, 2006 at 11:18 pmAbramoff, DeLay, Bush, and Frist:
Let the impeachmenet process begin!
:)
February 8th, 2006 at 11:22 pmTHE SCANDAL SHEET
1. Memogate: The Senate Computer Theft
2. Doctor Detroit: The DOJ's Bungled Terrorism Case
3. Dark Matter: The Energy Task Force
4. The Indian Gaming Scandal
5. Halliburton's No-Bid Bonanza
6. Halliburton: Pumping Up Prices
7. Halliburton's Vanishing Iraq Money
8. The Halliburton Bribe-apalooza
9. Halliburton: One Fine Company
10. Halliburton's Iran End Run
11. Money Order: Afghanistan's Missing $700 Million Turns Up in Iraq
12. Iraq: More Loose Change
13. The Pentagon-Israel Spy Case
14. Gone to Taiwan
15. Wiretapping the United Nations
16. The Boeing Boondoggle
17. The Medicare Bribe Scandal
18. Tom DeLay's PAC Problems
19. Tom DeLay's FAA: Following Americans Anywhere
20. In the Rough: Tom DeLay's Golf Fundraiser
21. Busy, Busy, Busy in New Hampshire
22. The Medicare Money Scandal
23. The Bogus Medicare "Video News Release"
24. Pundits on the Payroll: The Armstrong Williams Case
25. Ground Zero's Unsafe Air
26. John Ashcroft's Illegal Campaign Contributions
27. Intel Inside ... The White House
28. Duck! Antonin Scalia's Legal Conflicts
29. AWOL
30. Iraq: The Case for War
31. Niger Forgeries: Whodunit?
32. In Plame Sight
33. Abu Ghraib
34. Guantánamo Bay Torture?
Now we can add #35 ... Abramoff Scandal!
February 8th, 2006 at 11:26 pmthe pertinent question is whether bush gave jack a nickname. that's the clincher.
February 9th, 2006 at 12:52 am#176: BTW is to there an English word for SHABBOS?Something like Thanksday?
Comment by Censor
I shared a kitchen in a college dormitory with an orthodox rabbi's daughter and served as her "Shabbos Goy," meaning that as a non-Jew, I occasionally turned on lights and answered the phone, etc. for her so that she could technically get around the interdictions of not turning on electricity, etc. on Shabbos from Friday night to Saturday evening. "Shabbos" can be translated into English as "Sabbath," although the interdictions that apply on the orthodox Jewish Sabbath may be different from those followed by certain Christian groups. (And variations in practices apparently exist even among Orthodox Jews.)
#193, I don't blame you for missing a scandal or two, as there has been so many of them that it's hard to keep up. But you seem to have forgotten Gannon(Guckert)gate, the gay hooker who got into White House press conferences and at other mysterious occasions, as well. This one certainly warrants a column separate from
February 9th, 2006 at 1:59 am#24. Pundits on the Payroll: The Armstrong Williams Case
#193 Thanks for the list. I'm sure there are many more.
For a real President any of these might be considered scandalous.
Start with the treatment of our soldiers alone.
Undermanned, STOP LOSS, no armor, BAD armor, Polluted water, white phosphorous, DU posioning, no exit strategy, no pictures of coffins allowed, Coffins shipped under cover of night and as freight, homeless vets, VA cuts with vets waiting for a year for an appointment, Benefit cuts, Charging the wounded for their armor, No Attendence of Bush at any soldiers funeral.
I was just going to say, I'm going from blog to blog and scandal to scandal and it's a disaster on every thread.
Bush's boat is sinking fast from a hundred gaping holes. Someone needs to throw him a big ass ANCHOR.
These lying bastards can do nothing well, nothing good and nothing right.
February 9th, 2006 at 2:31 amSorry I've had a long day at work: I should have written in the second paragraph of #195: "as there have been so many of them"--not "as there has been so many of them."
February 9th, 2006 at 3:17 amAnd thanks, mparker, for adding some in #196 (although there are probably still more that we can't quite recall at this point).
Satan is the god of this world and the father of all lies and liars. What more can we say? Some here do not realize that both sides lie, cheat and steal because both the Democrats and the Republicans were created by the same cabal to keep us playing this stupid game of right/left, Democrat/Republican. They created Democracy such as it is and then Communisim to counter Democracy. Chaos is his game, hope you guess his name.
February 9th, 2006 at 6:14 amAs for me I will never play his game of right/left anymore. Wake up my friends, come out of the Matrix and face the evil of both sides, both sides are his and as long as he can keep each of the sides at each others throats then he wins and we lose.
I am a memeber of Prisonplanet.tv and infowars.com. Come help us to expose the evil of both sides and take back our country before it's too late. It is possible.
#189 TDP Thanks for the link. If these are all of the Bush-Abramoff pictures in question then, after looking them over for myself, I do not see anything in these pictures to suggest anything one way or the other. The President, to me, appears to be acting with Abramoff like he would have with anybody posing for those shots (from what I can see). Again, assuming that this is all of them, then I do not see any relevance. But I appreciate the opportunity to make my own judgment on that.
February 9th, 2006 at 8:23 amYeah, you all are going to trust a convicted felon here?
Comment by Gary Ruppert — February 8, 2006 @ 4:02 pm
As usual, Mr. Ruppert trails the facts by a long shot:
Why is it illegal for Jack Abramoff to give money to someone? He gave the legal limit, and he did it without strings.
Comment by Gary Ruppert — January 3, 2006 @ 12:58 pm
It took you almost a month, but you finally acknowledged Abramoff is crooked. We’ll talk about Abramoff friendship with Pres Bush next month. Deal?
Comment by Gregor Samsa #64
Gregor Samsa!
How dare you dredge up Scary Pookbutt's sordid past comments!
You're mean and despicable, and...
I'm sure as heck glad you're on our side!
I imagine Scary Gary's feeling "raaather (sic) faint" right about now...
hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!!!
February 9th, 2006 at 9:04 amLet the impeachmenet process begin!
:)
Comment by Blakers #192
Blakers,
LMAORAOTF
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!
Great post!
Wooonderful pictorial presentation
February 9th, 2006 at 9:12 am[...] Recently released e-mails from crooked lobbiest/homoeroticist Jack Abramoff suggest that President George W. Bush is–as so many Flypaper Theorists already know–a lying sack of steaming monkey shit. Some of the Jacksters comments: [...]
February 9th, 2006 at 9:45 amWhy do people think that Democrats do not belive in God@ just because you don`t go around pertending your so God like doesn`t make you saved . I believe God will judge at the end .J ust because Democrates dos`t make them lairs Shame on Repubs How much damage is going to be done to this country before they go.?
February 9th, 2006 at 11:34 amregarding Bush and Abramoff................DUH!!!
February 9th, 2006 at 12:02 pmI wonder what Jack Abramhoff's chimp-bestowed nickname might be?
February 9th, 2006 at 12:39 pm[...] Some interesting e-mails have come to light. As one might imagine, President Bush might be a little chummier with Jack Abramoff than he’s letting on. Either that, or it’s just the boasts of a weasely lobbyist. I’m sure more details will be forthcoming from Scott McLellan (snicker). “HE HAS A GREAT MEMORY! THE GUY SAW ME IN ALMOST A DOZEN SETTINGS, AND JOKED WITH ME ABOUT A BUNCH OF THINGS, INCLUDING DETAILS OF MY KIDS. PERHAPS HE HAS FORGOTTEN EVERYTHING. WHO KNOWS.” (Jack Abramoff, supposedly, from Think Progress) [...]
February 9th, 2006 at 12:46 pmhttp://www.avengingangels.org
February 9th, 2006 at 1:43 pm[...] First published by ThinkProgress yesterday. Tune in. [...]
February 9th, 2006 at 6:20 pm[...] Think Progress » EXCLUSIVE EMAILS: Jack Abramoff Describes Relationship With President Bush [...]
February 9th, 2006 at 6:35 pm[...] Washingtonian editor Ken Eisler, the recipient of the Abramoff emails first obtained by ThinkProgress, appeared tonight on CNN’s Situation Room. Despite Scott McClellan’s insistence earlier today that Bush and Abramoff were not friends, Eisler points to evidence suggesting otherwise. BLITZER: What about the president? What kind of relation did the President have with him? [...]
February 9th, 2006 at 8:26 pm[...] E-mails from Jack Abramoff sent to a journalist cast doubt on the Bush Adminstration’s claim that Bush only met Abramoff a few times. Read about the e-mails here. [...]
February 9th, 2006 at 9:07 pm[...] Abramoff releases e-mails that depict a relationship far more extensive than has been previously reported. Link [...]
February 10th, 2006 at 1:12 amJack A loves George B way a lot, but was it really meant to be?
February 10th, 2006 at 10:37 am[...] As White House Press Secretary Scooty McCliar continues to downplay the relationship of the Preznit with convicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff, the truth manages to squirt out - and Scooty is now dodging questions: In an interview last night, Eisler confirmed the contents of the e-mail and said he recently provided portions of it to the liberal Web log ThinkProgress because he thought he was dealing with a fellow reporter. The blog posted the contents of the Abramoff-Eisler communication. [...]
February 10th, 2006 at 11:13 am[...] CNN’s Situation Room last night covered ThinkProgress and the Abramoff e-mails, highlighting their importance in telling a different story from the Bush administration’s spin. [...]
February 10th, 2006 at 11:41 amCHIMPEACH!!!
2006 THE YEAR OF THE CHIMPEACHMENT
February 10th, 2006 at 11:56 amFace it, George Bush and his administration are nothing but a group of pathological liars. When is America going to wake up to this fact and have this cretin impeached??? You have Iraq, torture, Abramoff, spying, & the Valerie Plame leak. How much do the American people really know WHAT Bush and his administration knew prior to the 9/11 catastrophe. Face it, these people can't tell the truth, yet they expound on their "Christianity"!!!
February 10th, 2006 at 12:23 pm"Assuming that ties with Abramoff indicate criminal activity of all second parties is incredibly presumptuous. Assuming that high up polititians remember $1K donations is ludicrous."
I would agree with that, however when the President denies knowing someone he apparently knows, you have to ask, why is he lying (again)?
February 10th, 2006 at 1:07 pm"You have Iraq, torture, Abramoff, spying, & the Valerie Plame leak."
Not to mention failure as a leader, with failed health care and social security initiatives and ballooning deficit and Katrina response, and failure to capture or kill Osama Bin Laden (remember him, the one responsible for 9/11, sorry, but it seems this administration was too fixated on bad Iraq war policy then justice for 9/11). I don't understand how anyone can defend this President, democrats or republicans.
February 10th, 2006 at 1:22 pmCost of doin business dumb dumbs. Get over it.
Also Friday, an Associated Press report showed that the Democrat who's been leading the attacks portraying Abramoff's activities as a Republican scandal had extensive contacts of his own with the lobbyist.
Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid wrote at least four letters helpful to Indian tribes represented by Abramoff. The Nevada senator's staff also regularly had contact with the lobbyist's team about legislation affecting other clients.
The activities are detailed in billing records and correspondence obtained by The Associated Press. They occurred over three years as Reid collected nearly $68,000 in donations from Abramoff's firm, partners and clients.
Reid's office acknowledged having "routine contacts" with Abramoff's lobbying partners and intervening on some matters, but said none of his actions were affected by donations.
February 10th, 2006 at 7:01 pmThe President's press secretary claims Bush doesn't personally know Abramoff. That may or not be true, but he cetainly knows him professionally and perhaps Biblically.
February 10th, 2006 at 9:38 pmAll this talk about Bush's various lies, tickled a nerve and so I went to my Old Books section, wherein I keep books not more than 5 years old and I found: Big Bush Lies, a list of the 50 most telling lies by George Bush, edited (I sure would've hated that job)in 2004, by Jerry Barrett. I'm not gonna bore you with all 50. Just a couple. Here's the one on Global Warming:
Lie # 1: Global Warming has not been proven and needs further study. (On Bush's refusal to let the USA join the Kyoto Protocol)
Well, it's nice to know how quickly we can now prove a Bush lie, well, a lie. If nothing else, the balmy 75 & 80-degree weather we've had here in North Texas in January and persisting into February have convinced me. It was hard enough for this former NY'er to get used to wearing shorts on Christmas Day--my bad, the South's the South and that's where I am, up to me to get accustomed--but shorts all through January up through February 8 was enough to tell me that yes indeedy, Global Warming's here to stay, with all the horrors that it will bring (We all by now know that hurricane strength is fed by warmer waters. Katrina hell--that was '05. It's now '06--can you learn how to say Cat-6?)
Here's another Big Bush Whopper; The air was safe in downtown Manhattan immediately after 9/11. The air in fact was full of asbestos particulate that hung for months over most of lower Manhattan and the particulate cloud at times reached up into upper Manhattan and at times into Brooklyn and Queens, depending on how the wind blew. The fact is, that there is now so much asbestos damage to so many people's lungs that the Asbestos Industry's rushing out an "Asbestos Fund" composed of the most niggardly, paltry amounts that Johns Manville & Business Associates/Investors/Friends, think that they can get away with--pushed by an ad using a War Veteran, saying that he doesn't want The Gummint paying for the asbestos injuries he got during some conflict that he doesn't name--he wants The Asbestos Fund to pay for his injuries and the rehabilitative medicine that he needs. (Can you say 'Harry & Louise', and think of Medicare Part D? Quick!) This of course is to forestall the millions upon millions of lawsuits which are now a-borning, filed by people who realize that just by living in NYC (not to mention being anywhere near Ground Zero during the hunt for the dead and the later cleanup), their lung function has been compromised and their lives are going to be brutally cut short by asbestos damage to their lungs. My personal view is that those lawsuits should name as co-defendants, all of Bush's Saudi friends and erstwhile dinner companions (at Crawford) who actually BANKROLLED AND CARRIED OUT 9/11--after which Bush's Gallup Poll approval rating rose from the miserable low 40s where it was in July 2001, to the stunning 94% where it stood right after 9/11.
Last Big Bush Lie I'm Gonna Show You (Yay! Actually, my fingers are getting tired! I should've found out what kind of liniment Jerry Barret used on his fingers to finish all 50 Big Bush Lies! Here it comes--) Environmental Regulations Damage The Economy And Cost Jobs. Well. After 5 Bush years, we are strip-mining coal just as we did right after WWII. We are proposing to cut the tops off of our mountains!!!!! To find MORE COAL. Folks--in many urban areas, our air now has got more particulate coal dust in it had before there were ever any environmental regulations written! In fact Christie Whitman, the staunch Head of the EPA under the Bush Administration (and only a NYer could appreciate Bush's wry sense of humor, appointing the Mayor of New Jersey, the filthiest state in the Union, to be head of the EPA)--the stench from Bush's so-called Clean Air Initiative (translation--belly up to the bar, pigs, the trough is wide open) even reached her nostrils, to the point where she quit her post IN PROTEST OF THE SO-CALLED 'Clean Air Initiative' in a letter to Bush that said plainly what she thought about his Initiative, and maybe even him. I'm sure if you all Google Christie Whitman's Letter of Resignation as the Head of the FDA, Bush Administration 2000, you can enjoy all the juicy details. And as for Clean Air Regulations costing jobs--well, the record proves that we have had NO environmental regulation at all of ANY kind. Howcome then that our jobs all went to China and India anyway???
Well that's it folks. Only three Bush lies and my fingers are blown. And we didn't even get into WMDs, and 'Saddam did 9/11' (well I did touch on that a little) or the cynical, dismal farce of 'No Child Left Behind'. That one alone deserves a longer comment even that this one was, but I'm not up for it now and quite likely I never will be, either--probably cause I kind of have a soft spot in my heart for our kids and the fact that they're our-- America's--future, sentimental sloppy patriotic idiot that I am.
February 10th, 2006 at 10:18 pmScuse me. Did I say that Christie Whitman was the MAYOR of New Jersey, when I meant to say that she was the GOVERNOR of that state? My REAL BIG BAD. That's what I get for spending too much time between the covers of BIG BUSH LIES by Jerry Barret.
February 10th, 2006 at 10:25 pmDid you misrepresent yourself as a journalist and endanger your organizations non-profit tax status in obtaining this information?
http://anklebitingpundits.com/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=3132
A response is required I think.
February 11th, 2006 at 12:31 amHey Pale Cast of Thought aka Idiot... WHAT "non-profit status"?
February 11th, 2006 at 8:53 amI suppose one can't expect a right-winger to be able to research things for themselves... like whether or not CAP is a not-for-profit organization.. After all, they depend on others to do their thinking for them.
[...] The TIME article leads with a report on the Abramoff emails, first published by ThinkProgress. [...]
February 11th, 2006 at 4:37 pmA typical White House dinner/party has a HUGE crowd, often hundreds, invited. They all line up and wait forever to have their photo taken with the president and first lady. They shake your hand, you introduce yourself, flash, move on. The entire meeting is about 5 seconds.
February 12th, 2006 at 1:34 pmcensored pics:
http://tekgnosis.typepad.com/tekgnosis/2006/02/president_bush_.html
February 12th, 2006 at 6:12 pm[...] This follows on the heels of the emails that ThinkProgress was first to publish last week between Abramoff and Kim Eisler, the editor of Washingtonian. This is one of the excerpts from the emails: HE HAS ONE OF THE BEST MEMORIES OF ANY POLITICIAN I HAVE EVER MET. IT WAS ONE IF [sic] HIS TRADEMARKS, THOUGH OF COURSE HE CAN’T RECALL THAT HE HAS A GREAT MEMORY! THE GUY SAW ME IN ALMOST A DOZEN SETTINGS, AND JOKED WITH ME ABOUT A BUNCH OF THINGS, INCLUDING DETAILS OF MY KIDS. PERHAPS HE HAS FORGOTTEN EVERYTHING. WHO KNOWS. [...]
February 13th, 2006 at 11:02 pmThis administration is proof positive of how the Right wing controls this country. Lying about sex with an intern was enough to bring down a great and charismatic leader, while Bush and co. can lie, mislead, steal, skirt the laws, leak the I.D. of CIA operatives (Treason!!)and catagorically defy all the ethics that are supposed to be inherent in our political system. I cannot understand how this man still has a 42% approval rating! Are the neocons willing to sacrafice all that America stands for just to force their religious hypocracy on all of us? And if so , don't they understand that this will destroy their way of life along with the people they seek to control? We are all in serious trouble if this mafia style administration is allowed to remain in office. Wake up people, this man is not looking out for anyone but himself and the wealthiest 1% of the nation!!!
February 15th, 2006 at 12:47 pmcould use send e-mail connections--otherwise good.
February 18th, 2006 at 8:26 pmThe latest: Government of Malaysia says a low, low price of only $1.2 Million, payable to Jack Abramoff, was the cost of getting an audience with King George.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-abramoff15feb15,0,5644434.story?coll=la-home-headlines
February 21st, 2006 at 9:31 am[...] Think Progress EXCLUSIVE EMAILS: Jack Abramoff Describes EXCLUSIVE EMAILS: Jack Abramoff Describes Relationship With President Bush ThinkProgress has obtained emails written by Jack Abramoff in which the fallen lobbyist personally describes his [...]
February 26th, 2006 at 4:37 am[...] Washington Post’s media critic covers ThinkProgress’ role in releasing the Abramoff emails about President Bush. 10:45 am | Comment (0) [...]
February 27th, 2006 at 10:46 amFunny! The RIGHT can't even get their FACTS right!
http://highvizpr.blogspot.com/20...ing- tribal.html
idiots at HUMAN EVENTS ON LINE over a steak
February 28th, 2006 at 1:26 pmWRONG LINK -- THIS IS THE RIGHT LINK FROM THE RIGHT WING SITE -- (SIGH) ]
http://highvizpr.blogspot.com/2006/02/sad-human-events-twisting-tribal.html
February 28th, 2006 at 1:28 pmAnother byproduct of the scandal are attempts by some to blame the Indian tribes for the scandal. Here's a link to a piece from the chief executive of the Mille Lacs Band of Ojibwe Indians who has an interesting perspective on this.
http://www.startribune.com/562/story/304641.html
March 17th, 2006 at 5:01 pmhi
March 18th, 2006 at 11:54 pmDeLay Defense Fund, Abramoff, Corruption!
Those who BACKED MUST GET PACKED!
"I don't think we need to line the pockets of our cronies, said, Gammage who's been accusing Perry of being part ofa corrupt political machine stretching from Texas to Washington" - Associated Press
"The state also has a standing $15,000 a month lobbying contract with the Federalist Group which employed U.S. Rep Tom DeLay's former chief of staff, Drew maloney." - Associated Press
"Perry aide was at toll road meetings"
"Firm he was consulting for at the time later won lucrative contract" - Express News Austin Bureau
DeLay defense Fund, Abramoff, Corruption
THOSE WHO BACKED MUST GET PACKED!
April 13th, 2006 at 6:59 pm[...] Think Progress EXCLUSIVE EMAILS: Jack Abramoff Describes EXCLUSIVE EMAILS: Jack Abramoff Describes Relationship With President Bush ThinkProgress has obtained emails written by Jack Abramoff in which the fallen lobbyist personally describes his [...]
April 28th, 2006 at 2:36 am[...] But Kim Eisler, national editor of the Washingtonian magazine and friend of Abramoff, told Think Progress that “Jack considered Hastert a reliable ally for his clients.” [...]
May 26th, 2006 at 1:10 pmHe forgot about "Kenny Boy" Lay when the shit hit the fan. Why did anyone think it would be different with Abramoff?
May 29th, 2006 at 12:24 am[...] But Kim Eisler, national editor of the Washingtonian magazine and friend of Abramoff, told Think Progress that “Jack considered Hastert a reliable ally for his clients.†[...]
June 1st, 2006 at 10:18 amthe chief executive of the Mille Lacs Band of Ojibwe Indians who has an interesting perspective on this.
June 6th, 2006 at 2:42 amEco International Lottery Headquarters
August 21st, 2006 at 1:03 pmCustomer Service
Ref: IPL/4249859609/WP1
Batch: AT-040SB06-03
FINAL AWARD RESULTS:
We happly announce to you the draw of the Eco International Lottery Sweepstake Online Lottery International programs held on the 21st of August 2006 in UNITED KINGDOM Your e-mail address attached to ticket number: 2752246896 with Serial number 652-662 drew the lucky numbers:16-4-13-24-46-2, which subsequently won you the lottery in the 2nd category. You have therefore been approved to claim a total sum of US$2,500,000.00 (Two million,Five Hundred Thousand United States Dollars) in cash credited to file ktu/9023118308/03.This is from a total cash prize of US $ 25 Million dollars,shared among the first Ten (10) lucky winners in this category.All participants were selected randomly from World Wide Web site through computer draw system and extracted from over 100,000 companies. This promotion takes place annually Please note that your lucky winning number falls within our West African booklet representative office in Africa as indicated in your play coupon.In view of this, your US$2,500,000.00 (Two million,Five Hundred Thousand United States Dollars) would be released to you by our payment office in Africa. Our African agent will immediately commence the process to facilitate the release of your funds as soon as you contact him.
For security reasons, you are advised to keep your winning information confidential till your claims is processed and your money remitted to you in whatever manner you deem fit to claim your prize. This is part of our precautionary measure to avoid double claiming and unwarranted abuse of this program by some unscrupulous elements.Please be warned. To file for your claim, please contact our fiduciary agent:
Name: Mr Ronald Wilson
E-mail: lottery_claims_agent0003@yahoo.se
He is your agent, and responsible for the processing and transfer of your winnings to you. YOUR SECURITY FILE NUMBER IS W-91237-H67/B4 (keep personal). Remember, your winning must be claimed not later than (30th August, 2006).You are required to forward the following details to help facilitate the processing of your claims and certificate which will facilitate the release of your winnings.
1. Full Names:
2. Residential Address:
3. Phone Number:
4. Fax Number:
5. Occupation:
6. Sex:
7. Age :
8. Nationality:
9. Present Country:
10.Your Reference/Batch Numbers:
To avoid unnecessary delays and complications, please quote the above information in any correspondences with us or our delivery firm Congratulations once more from all members and staffs of this program.Thank you for being part of our promotional lottery program.
Sincerely,
RACHAEL MILLER
Eco International Lottery Co-ordinator.
baby blessing outfit
October 2nd, 2006 at 12:04 pmhttp://allhalloweencostumes.net/baby-blessing-outfit.html
[url=http://azfreeringtones.com/ringtone-samsung-t309.html]ringtone for samsung t309[/url]
October 6th, 2006 at 7:19 pm[link=http://azfreeringtones.com/ringtone-samsung-t309.html]ringtone for samsung t309[/link]
http://azfreeringtones.com/ringtone-samsung-t309.html
[...] We’re thankful people send us Jack Abramoff’s email. [...]
November 23rd, 2006 at 9:52 amu succ wee wee
December 7th, 2006 at 12:46 pmfurniture
December 9th, 2006 at 11:28 am[...] Flashback: Abramoff: “[Bush] has one of the best memories of any politician I have ever met. … The guy saw me in almost a dozen settings, and joked with me about a bunch of things, including details of my kids. Perhaps he has forgotten everything. Who knows.” 7:30 pm | Comment (0) [...]
January 8th, 2007 at 7:30 pmsir actually i complited vb.net course in feb 2006. but certificate not produced. already many times i heared to mr.sathish. but that person say any time certificate not comming.i complited at chennai ssi computer education at tambaram west, above new india assurance ltd.i am working at mumbai how is it received tell me immediately
January 24th, 2007 at 8:02 amPrivate Jet Charters...
PROAIR offering all aviation services under one umbrella differentiates them from any competitors....
November 8th, 2008 at 1:29 amPrivate Jet Spain...
PROAIR offering all aviation services under one umbrella differentiates them from any competitors....
January 1st, 2009 at 9:20 am