Rove’s PowerPoint Presentation Revealed During Oversight Hearing
Rove’s PowerPoint Presentation Revealed During Oversight Hearing
In January, General Services Administration chief Lurita Doan and Karl Rove deputy Scott Jennings held a video conference with top GSA political appointees, “who discussed ways to help Republican candidates.”
Jennings, the White House’s deputy director of political affairs, gave a PowerPoint presentation on Jan. 26 of polling data about the 2006 elections.
When Jennings concluded his presentation to the GSA political appointees, Doan allegedly asked them how they could “help ‘our candidates’ in the next elections.”
The Hatch Act explicitly prohibits partisan campaign activities on federal property.
During a House Oversight and Government Reform Committee hearing today, Rep. Bruce Braley (D-IA) questioned Doan about the contents of Rove’s PowerPoint presentation. Doan repeatedly claimed ignorance of the contents of the slides and the verbal presentation that Jennings made. So Braley reminded her with some examples from this “nonpartisan” briefing:
After showing the slides, Braley told Doan, “I think the American taxpayers have a very good reason to wonder whether the only ‘team’ that was being helped during this briefing was the Republican Party team.” Watch the full exchange:
The Gavel has several more clips from today’s hearing HERE.
UPDATE: TPMCafe has more on what’s in Rove’s presentation.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
Liars all.
March 28th, 2007 at 12:15 pmThis should surprise no one.
March 28th, 2007 at 12:15 pmIllegal, unethical, completely Rovian.
No lipstick on this pig.
Rove wouldn’t lie,would he?
March 28th, 2007 at 12:15 pmShort Doan: “uh. crap.”
March 28th, 2007 at 12:15 pmAnyone missing this hearing is missing a good time. I think Dan Burton just called Waxman a whore in a roundabout way.
“Nothing like a reformed lady of the night.”
CSPAN 3 is carrying this online.
March 28th, 2007 at 12:16 pmShe is so screwed.
March 28th, 2007 at 12:17 pmAnyone who knows PowerPoint, knows they can enter notes on a notes slide. I wonder if this presentation has those notes slides on how to present that slide to the presenation audience.
Theresa
March 28th, 2007 at 12:19 pmThey better check out the white house for some strange biological agents, seems like everyone who works there develops amnesia or a severe case of selective memory..
March 28th, 2007 at 12:21 pmYou tell em Rove!
March 28th, 2007 at 12:22 pmFire this woman. Fire her now.
March 28th, 2007 at 12:24 pmI want to see how the GSA’s efforts fall on that electoral map. Also, I want to know Doan’s role in making any such events happen.
Rove creates the presentation and Doan presents it. That’s conspiracy to violate the Hatch Act.
March 28th, 2007 at 12:24 pmDoan repeatedly claimed ignorance of the contents of the slides and the verbal presentation that Jennings made.
So here we are again. Either she is a liar and should be thrown out of her position or she is incompetant and shouldn’t be there in the first place.
March 28th, 2007 at 12:24 pmThere really is no bottom to this, is there? And still, caught red-handed once again, all they can do is tell another lie.
The Bush Administration - establishing new lows daily!
March 28th, 2007 at 12:25 pmI am buying stock in Depends Undergarments. With a surge of 29% of the population as new clientele it lookas like a winner.
March 28th, 2007 at 12:26 pmTony – We should probably administer a rigorous memory test to all elected officials before they take office. If they fail it they should be declared unfit.
March 28th, 2007 at 12:27 pmIt’s time for us to storm the Bastille! I get dibs on cornering Rove in his office like the stinking rat that he is — who’s bringing the guillotine?
March 28th, 2007 at 12:28 pmFirst, again….kudos for ignoring the trolls…..few that there may be
The people in charge of the White House are all part of a very dysfunctional emotionally disturbed culture. No accountability, lust for power, entitled, and finally…….screwed. There time is ending .
March 28th, 2007 at 12:29 pmAll my bags are packed, I’m ready to go
I’m standin’ here outside your door
I hate to wake you up to say goodbye
But the dawn is breakin’, it’s early morn
The taxi’s waitin’, he’s blowin’ his horn
Already I’m so lonesome I could die
So kiss me and smile for me
Tell me that you’ll wait for me
Hold me like you’ll never let me go
‘Cause I’m leaving on a jet plane
I don’t know when I’ll be back again
Oh, babe, I hate to go
PINK SLIP FOR YOU Ms. DOAN
March 28th, 2007 at 12:29 pmSo who can tell me the difference between her and the woman from the Justice Department that wants to plead the Fifth? Doan wasn’t able or didn’t do it so why should the other be able to?
March 28th, 2007 at 12:29 pmWhy is it that all of the Republicans in this administration have such faulty memories? They can’t seem to “recollect” a single god-damed thing under oath.
Seems to me, you’d want to hire qualified people to work at such a high level, and that as a qualification, they should be able to remember more than what they had for breakfast that morning.
Hacks.
March 28th, 2007 at 12:30 pmThose Loyal Bushies sure do know how to use the Reagan/Colonel Klink defense.
March 28th, 2007 at 12:30 pmSomeone should put together a video of all the Loyal Bushies saying “I don’t recall/I know nothink!”
Libby, Rove, Gone-zo, Doan. How many more Loyal Bushies are suffering from short term memory lapses?
Lends new meaning to the phrase “caught red-handed”, doesn’t it?????
March 28th, 2007 at 12:31 pmI like Braley. A lot.
You know, as a business owner, if one of my employees testified in front of a committee and every other word out of her mouth was “Uh, I don’t remember this,” and “uh, I don’t recall that from the meeting,” she would be FIRED for incompetence.
Then again, I don’t tolerate lying and corruption from my employees anyway.
Go, Rep. Braley. Kick her ass. There is NOTHING that I like better than exposing the stench of the GOP first thing in the morning with my coffee.
March 28th, 2007 at 12:31 pmThe conservatives on the committee are melting down.
March 28th, 2007 at 12:32 pm16 Comments and not a Troll is site? Cool! Must be waiting for their pathetic “But but Clinton…” talking points.
March 28th, 2007 at 12:32 pmOxyCon – I think you mean Sgt. Shultz.
March 28th, 2007 at 12:33 pmThose Loyal Bushies sure do know how to use the Reagan/Colonel Klink defense.
Wasn’t that Sergeant Schultz?
March 28th, 2007 at 12:33 pmFirst, again….kudos for ignoring the trolls…..few that there may be
The people in charge of the White House are all part of a very dysfunctional emotionally disturbed culture. No accountability, lust for power, entitled, and finally…….screwed. There time is ending .
Comment by s — March 28, 2007 @ 12:29 pm
When the people in the White House are gone, the trolls will be gone.
March 28th, 2007 at 12:34 pmAs least we know that members of the current administration will not be able to write any memoirs.
March 28th, 2007 at 12:34 pmI just love the name Lurita.
March 28th, 2007 at 12:34 pmSounds like something you catch female fish with.
Wasn’t Roan already being investigated for giving a contract to her friend a couple of weeks ago. That last minute of the tape is priceless. Love that Braley guy.
March 28th, 2007 at 12:35 pmWelcome to OVERSIGHT. The cockroaches hate the bright lights, don’t they? Wheeee!
March 28th, 2007 at 12:35 pmWorth every penny of tax dollars for Rove to try to keep the Congress out of the hands of the Islamists and their allies.
March 28th, 2007 at 12:36 pmI know Im gonna sound like a peacenik, cuz I am, but do you see the third photo from top to bottom, the one with the map of the US? It says at the title: Battle. Do they really know what a battle means? Why do they have to use war-like words to describe what should be a political strategy?
This sounds paranoic but do you realize the war-like environment that your governments since the first days of your country have put you in? Do you realize why so many people with complex inferiority or frustration in their personal lives crave at the words “victory” and “success” even if they mean killing innocent people? Welcome to the Matrix.
March 28th, 2007 at 12:38 pmWow!! About 1/5 to 1/4 way thru, discussing the slide that depicts Democratic election targets, Rep. Braley asks Doan “Well, you’re familiar with what the word ‘target’ means, right?”.
And Doan answers
“I, I think we could say that I’m one right now, yes.”
She thinks she’s a target (of a criminal probe). This displays knowledge of guilt (IMHO). !!!
March 28th, 2007 at 12:38 pmWould you think that anybody with a job like head of GSA would learn to take notes at meetings. And if they have notes shouldn’t they look at them and take them with before they testify to congress?
March 28th, 2007 at 12:39 pmIf you are basically that incompetent or that big of liar, whichever, shouldn’t you resign immediately?
SHAME - SHAME! CAUGHT WITH THE FINGERS IN THE COOKIE JAR AGAIN! THE GOP IS “GOING DOWN” LIKE THE RSS TITANIC - AND FAST!
They broke the law (Hatch Act) and now we will have to send them to prison. Oh well……’just another day at the Bush white house” I guess!
March 28th, 2007 at 12:39 pmWhere are our lovable Trolls to explain their alternate reality on this? Jake’s takes on the world (along with Patrick1’s) are always so fascinating, like peeping into the mind of the truly deranged.
March 28th, 2007 at 12:40 pmHey, I got the right show, didn’t I? So I didn’t “recall” the right character! Last time I watched Hogan’s Heroes had to be over 20 years ago. And besides, it’s not like I’m trying to cover up a crime I committed last year or something.
March 28th, 2007 at 12:40 pmWasn’t that Sergeant Schultz?
Comment by gummitch — March 28, 2007 @ 12:33 pm
You guys are making me chuckle because if my father was alive he would know the answer to this too. Thanks for the GOOD memories.
March 28th, 2007 at 12:40 pm#33: that’s it??? Rove and his flunkies violate the law and that’s what you come up with? PLUS, it didn’t even work! Rove and the Republicans got that butts HANDED TO THEM in the November elections. Wheeeee!
March 28th, 2007 at 12:40 pmThey really are just a ‘Republican-sanctioned Puppy Slaughterhouse’ video away from rock bottom, aren’t they?
No amount of Karl Rove partisan PowerPoints will help them get out of the gaping hole they’ve dug for themselves by November 2008…
March 28th, 2007 at 12:41 pmOff topic,
Anybody know if there’s a problem with Digby’s site?
I can’t get into it.
March 28th, 2007 at 12:42 pmThe most restrictive measure was brought about by Republicans in the Senate. -Wikipedia Hatch Act
Oh Please, Bill lied under oath, that excuses everything any perverted GrOPer act or lie we ever did, if only George Sr. Hadn’t vetoed that bill in 1990 this wouldn’t have been more than a kerfuffle.
March 28th, 2007 at 12:42 pmWorth every penny of tax dollars for Rove to try to keep the Congress out of the hands of the Islamists and their allies.
Comment by Patrick1 — March 28, 2007 @ 12:36 pm
You mean these sorts of people:
http://i3.photobucket.com/ albums/ y99/ ElaineSupkis/ clnfeb/ Bush-kissing-Saudi-small.gif
March 28th, 2007 at 12:43 pmWelcome to the Matrix.
Comment by Juan C — March 28, 2007 @ 12:38 pm
That’s EXACTLY what it is…
March 28th, 2007 at 12:45 pmWorth every penny of tax dollars for Rove to try to keep the Congress out of the hands of the Islamists and their allies.
Comment by Patrick1
Umm Remember whos hand George was holding? Besides your just spouting more insane Mcarthyism fear factor BS.
Where is Halliburton moving too P1?
March 28th, 2007 at 12:47 pmI don’t think she’s saying she’s guilty. She’s repeating a talking point the right wing has been using for a few weeks: “Oversight by democrats is really their “targeting” loyal government officials in baseless investigations to get even and waste taxpayer dollars. Democrats’ investigations are distracting America in a time of war, they are dangerous, and such investigations “target” innocent people to draw focus from Democrats’ lack of any real leadership.”
She believes she didn’t do anything wrong. And she would do it again if she could.
March 28th, 2007 at 12:48 pm#39
Comment by OxyCon
I think that everyone was just proudly showing off their useless knowledge memory retention. I was going to say something too before I saw the responses. Anyway I do get a kick out of the Schultz analogy. These repugs are nothing but bumbling Nazi-wanna-be’s who know nothing.
March 28th, 2007 at 12:49 pmThere’s a rat in me kitchen what am I gonna do?
There’s a rat in me kitchen what am I gonna go?
I’m gonna fix that rat thats what I’m gonna do,
I’m gonna fix that rat.
When you out on the street,
March 28th, 2007 at 12:50 pmYou practice lies and deceipt
And you scandalize my name
But when I catch you up
I’m gonna pull you up
I’m gonna check-out inside your brain
[UB40]
In looking up a word Craig Ferguson uses on late night television, cockahoop, which is what we are today. I found in Webster’s the perfect description of Jake, cockalorum, 1. a little man with an exaggerated idea of his own importance 2. boastful talk; crowing.
March 28th, 2007 at 12:52 pmCockahoop 1 in very high spirits, elated 2. boastful, conceited.
So sometimes Jake is a cockahoop cockalorum.
This is all well and good. However not until Faux and Friends and Rush tell their loyal lap dogs about this those who support the Chimp and his illegalities will continue to do so. Where is a blow job when the nation really needs one? Calling Jeff Gannon. Calling Jeff Gannon
March 28th, 2007 at 12:53 pmI miss the good old days when the balconies were filled with viewers and reporters who had the ability to yell when stuff doesn’t pass the bullsh*t test.
March 28th, 2007 at 12:54 pmJeff: Your “loyal” government officials are only loyal to the Republican party. Bush believes he only needs to serve those people who voted for him. I, for one, believe we should enforce the laws that are on the books. It seems you’d prefer if we ignore potential criminals. Heck, we are “at war” after all. I guess I don’t understand how this investigation is distracting us from the war. Bush himself does all he can to hide the war from the American people.
March 28th, 2007 at 12:54 pmI just saw the entire video.
The lady just wanted to die right there. She says she doesnt remember, that she just looked those slides yesterday, but she remember that this was done during lunch hours? Ha ha ha.
This is democracy, ladies and gentlemen.
March 28th, 2007 at 12:54 pm“It might have appeared to go unnoticed,
but I’ve got it all here in my heart.
I want you to know I know the truth, of course I know it,
I would be nothing with out you.
Did you ever know that you’re my hero,
and ev’rything I would like to be?
I can fly higher than an eagle,
’cause you are the wind beneath my wings.”
We know you know it, Lurita. But just knowing the truth isn’t enough sometimes.
March 28th, 2007 at 12:54 pmSection 7324 of The Hatch Act provides an exemption to the ban on political activities to:
(i) an employee paid from an appropriation for the Executive Office of the President; or
(ii) an employee appointed by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, whose position is located within the United States, who determines policies to be pursued by the United States in the nationwide administration of Federal laws.
While I am hardly an expert on the Hatch Act, it would appear at first glance that Rove, Jennings and Doan are covered by the exemptions and, thus, did not violate the Hatch Act.
March 28th, 2007 at 12:55 pmJeff: If this is not your position, but you’re simply sharing what you believe to be the “Republican talking point,” then ignore my accusations.
March 28th, 2007 at 12:56 pmShe believes she didn’t do anything wrong. And she would do it again if she could.
Comment by Jeff — March 28, 2007 @ 12:48 pm
Is that you Jake?
I believe I can still wear a bikini but I can’t.
“Democrats’ investigations are distracting America in a time of war, they are dangerous, and such investigations “target†innocent people to draw focus from Democrats’ lack of any real leadership.â€
Why is congress flying over to Iraq to fight the enemy, if we ever figure out who the enemy is?
The job of congress is oversight. That’s what they’re doing now that they neglected to do the last six years to get us into this mess.
March 28th, 2007 at 12:56 pmHer flippant, defiant tone is not doing her any favors. Who does she think she is?
March 28th, 2007 at 12:58 pm‘Cause I’m the Waxman, Yeah, I’m the Waxman!
March 28th, 2007 at 12:58 pmOh… My… God.
March 28th, 2007 at 12:59 pmYou lying rat. You lying coniving rats!
I swear to god, these people need to be smashed! Period! Fire them all!!! Yesterday!!!!!!
Pin her down, don’t let her weasel out! That is disgusting! Refuses to acknowledge the hand in front of her face! This is no different than Mafia, organized crime behavior. No different. Prosecute them all!!!…………
While I am hardly an expert on the Hatch Act
Comment by Exley — March 28, 2007 @ 12:55 pm
I believe this is the only sentence in your post that holds any relevance.
March 28th, 2007 at 12:59 pmThe “Scooter Libby Defense” statement… “I do not have a recollection…” These Republic Party members need to start taking Gingo to improve their memories. This is why we need transcripts when interviewing members of the Republic Party. It a way of refreshing their memories.
March 28th, 2007 at 1:01 pmand with the advice and consent of the Senate
Comment by Exley — March 28, 2007 @ 12:55 pm
You seem to have missed that point in your reading comprehension…
March 28th, 2007 at 1:01 pmI believe this is the only sentence in your post that holds any relevance.
Comment by shane — March 28, 2007 @ 12:59 pm
LOL… Yep
March 28th, 2007 at 1:02 pm#56- I DON’T THINK SO- _but_ you have a bright future ahead of you with this idiotic administration ; possibly helping Little Al Gonzo, interpret Federal law. May be a very short career, however- I wouldn’t suggest _buying_ in the D.C. area
March 28th, 2007 at 1:03 pmExley wishes. :) So much for “first glance.” Good try.
March 28th, 2007 at 1:04 pmThe fact that this poster is ignoring the bobbing and weaving of Doan and looking for ways for her to be “covered” just illustrates my point about these trolls. No honesty, no integrity. The truth is not their interest. Ass covering is. Their time is truly ending…Veritas is right. When this lying bunch of criminals in control of the American people’s White House is gone, the cover your ass trolls like Exley, Jake, Patrick1 etc….. will also be gone.
Actually, Shane, my citation to statute is directly on point. ThinkProgress cites the Hatch Act, but fails to note that all of the officials supposedly involved in this Power Point briefing appear to be exempt from the Act’s prohibitions on political activity.
Read the cited provisions again.
March 28th, 2007 at 1:05 pmUnbelievable,
Doan WAS confirmed by the Senate. She falls under category (ii).
March 28th, 2007 at 1:07 pmActually, Shane, my citation to statute is directly on point. ThinkProgress cites the Hatch Act, but fails to note that all of the officials supposedly involved in this Power Point briefing appear to be exempt from the Act’s prohibitions on political activity. Read the cited provisions again. Comment by Exley — March 28, 2007 @ 1:05 pm
Follow your own advice dum bass. Your claim is that Rove isn’t under salary from the Executive branch? You’re right - you aren’t an expert. Neither do you have any common sense - idiot.
March 28th, 2007 at 1:08 pm“i truly dont remember”
“i really & truly dont remember”
“i honestly dont remember”
i do beleive she doesnt remember, she doesnt seem too bright.
March 28th, 2007 at 1:10 pm“While I am hardly an expert on the Hatch Act, it would appear at first glance that Rove, Jennings and Doan are covered by the exemptions and, thus, did not violate the Hatch Act.
Comment by Exley — March 28, 2007 @ 12:55 pm”
I don’t see that…..
(i) an employee paid from an appropriation for the Executive Office of the President; or
There is ZERO evidence that ANY appropriation was provided for this employee.
(ii) an employee appointed by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, whose position is located within the United States, who determines policies to be pursued by the United States in the nationwide administration of Federal laws.
I don’t know…. But did she become confirmed by the Senate???
If she did not, then this exception DOES NOT APPLY.
March 28th, 2007 at 1:10 pmExley is a true Repub. Keep saying whatever you wish until your vocal chords wear out. Doesn’t matter what you say….just keep saying it!! LOL
March 28th, 2007 at 1:11 pmRemoveBush,
Rove and Jenning, as WH staffers, are “paid from an appropriation for the Executive Office of the President.” So, they fall under category (i).
Doan was confirmed by the Senate. So, she falls under category (ii).
March 28th, 2007 at 1:13 pmWhen all this boring law talk begins to pop up in the threads, I just like to summarize what we should be discussing here using VerbalKint´s words:
March 28th, 2007 at 1:13 pmunbelievable,
Man that photo is pricelss, a gay Dubya kissing his boss!
March 28th, 2007 at 1:13 pm“Democrats’ investigations are distracting America in a time of war, they are dangerous, and such investigations “target†innocent people to draw focus from Democrats’ lack of any real leadership.â€
Sounds like something right from a RWN’s lips.
George is the “War President” the “Decider” and the “Commander in Chief ” if the pundits and parrots are so dang worried about distracting \/\/ from his photo-ops then maybe he should stop clearing brush and taking trips to latin America and focus on his debacle he helped to create and stay in Iraq.
March 28th, 2007 at 1:17 pmOMG
I’m so sick of the “I don’t remember” defense. How can Bush hire all these idiots with no memory of anything happening ever?
March 28th, 2007 at 1:18 pmVVGFU,
Read the cited passage again. You are obviosuly confused. I am saying the exact opposite of your misinterpretation. Rove and his deputy Jennings, as White House staffers, are “paid from an appropriation for the Executive Office of the President.”
So, they fall under category (i) and, thus, are exempt from the Hatch Act’s ban on political activity.
I hope this clears up your considerable confusion.
March 28th, 2007 at 1:18 pmI do a lot of strategy presentations and view even more every year and I can remember EVERY SINGLE ONE. I may not be able to recreate one from the top of my head but if someone hands me any presentation from the past 5 years I would remember the context and the content.
This I don’t remember stuff is absolute garbage or these people or complete morons.
March 28th, 2007 at 1:18 pm“RemoveBush,
Rove and Jenning, as WH staffers, are “paid from an appropriation for the Executive Office of the President.†So, they fall under category (i).
Doan was confirmed by the Senate. So, she falls under category (ii).
Comment by Exley — March 28, 2007 @ 1:13 pm”
I think your reaching on both….. Since NEITHER of us are a lawyer, we will have to leave that to the lawyers…..
One last comment about the law though…
Do they “who determines policies to be pursued by the United States in the nationwide administration of Federal laws.”
If they do not determine policies or in the nationwide administration of Federal Laws, then they still don’t fall under this exception…..
Just because they work for the president does NOT mean they have a blank check….
March 28th, 2007 at 1:19 pmToo funny! One of the conservative members on the committee took his full time to talk about Clinton. I wouldn’t have believed it if I hadn’t seen it with my own eyes!
March 28th, 2007 at 1:19 pm#76 exactly. The truth factor, however, is of no importance to the “cover your ass trolls”….the cost is of no consequence. They comb through the law, foaming at the mouth, for anything they could possible suck off of and twist to protect the status quo…….which is a lying, stealing, blood thirsty group of Republicans presently in power. Keep them in power!……..the truth be damned. I have nothing but contempt for the Exleys of this world. They cause A LOT of suffering. They just don’t care. They care about the appearance of being right and having power….even if that power is short lived. Their time is ending….
March 28th, 2007 at 1:21 pmWho determines policies to be pursued by the United States in the nationwide administration of Federal laws.
Doan was not determining polices for admininstration of federal laws Exley, she was cheerleading for Republicans candidates, THEY are NOT FEDERAL LAWS. Rove does not create FEDERAL LAWS.
March 28th, 2007 at 1:22 pmRove is a POLITICAL ADVISOR
What part of Political confuses you Exley?
When has ROVE ever NOT shilled for GOP interests?
March 28th, 2007 at 1:27 pmOMFG. You should warn people about how funny this is before they watch. I almost spit my sandwich all over the keyboard. I loved it when she says “Yes I know what target means, like I am right now”… oh my sides hurt. Sic em. There enough corruption to investigate in this administration for YEARS of investigations.
March 28th, 2007 at 1:27 pmI should not be surprised at the White House abuse of powers in the mixing of their activities with political party work but I continue to be dumbfounded by their blatant illegal behavior.
March 28th, 2007 at 1:28 pmIt seems they are so self-assured and confident in their power that laws and statutes simply do not apply to them — they never even consider that what they do is illegal — it’s just their nature.
That they are collectively so unaware of the impropriety, not to mention unaware of the laws of this government, is obvious and unacceptable.
WOW, she is so OBVIOUSLY lying!!!
March 28th, 2007 at 1:29 pmI was a political appointee and I was told I couldn’t even put a Democratic campaign sticker on my vehicle because it would be in violation of the Hatch Act, and you’re telling me OUR TAX DOLLARS at GSA were going to help Rove keep his Republican majority???? FIRE HER! FIRE HER NOW!
DAMN RIGHT YOU ARE A TARGET, MS. DOAN.
March 28th, 2007 at 1:30 pmUh Jeke, buddy. The Hatch Act is a federal law….
March 28th, 2007 at 1:31 pm#57. Were either Jennings or KKKarl Rove subject to Senate confirmation for their jobs? The answer is no. Therefore this part of the law doesn’t apply.
Bottom line is they used Federal facilities and equipment for partisan purposes. That is a violation of Federal law. Granted nobody in the Bush Abomination gives a rats anal pore about the law, but to the rest of us its a big deal.
March 28th, 2007 at 1:32 pmRemoveBush,
Do they “who determines policies to be pursued by the United States in the nationwide administration of Federal laws.†If they do not determine policies or in the nationwide administration of Federal Laws, then they still don’t fall under this exception….
I would agree. If it is determined Doan, as head of GSA, does not determine policies in the administration of federal laws, she would be subject to the prohibitions of the Hatch Act. Her status is unclear.
I do think, however, that Rove and Jenning fall clearly under category (i) and are exempt.
March 28th, 2007 at 1:32 pmRemember…..trolls aren’t concerned about her obvious lying. Just remember that. They are only concerned with finding a way to wiggle out of the predicament….period.
Simple
March 28th, 2007 at 1:33 pmI think Mr. Braley has a point - and should get an answer - when I hear him ask “Big” Labour why they only seem to support Democrats.
And as for the Hatch Act - Does Chuck Shumer know about it? Apparently not….
March 28th, 2007 at 1:35 pmDoan WAS confirmed by the Senate. She falls under category (ii).
Comment by Exley — March 28, 2007 @ 1:07 pm
It’s her ACTIVITIES that aren’t approved, which it seems like that is what the passage implies.
It’s hard to tell, having re-read it because you post things out of context…
March 28th, 2007 at 1:36 pmI do think, however, that Rove and Jenning fall clearly under category (i) and are exempt.
Comment by Exley
Even though they did a pressentation to a group of federal employees? If they did it to a group like the White House Staff yeah okay but this seems a little thin to defend.
March 28th, 2007 at 1:37 pmSo, they fall under category (i) and, thus, are exempt from the Hatch Act’s ban on political activity.
I hope this clears up your considerable confusion.
Comment by Exley —
Now, we can deal with the issue of what was presented, as you have dealt with their right to do so. Do you think this a valid use of GSA resources? And what of the others? Were they also covered?
That fact that she accepted the congressman’s take on things is very telling. She wasn’t taking the Fifth, she was in essence pleading nolo contendre, with a Reagan twist.
March 28th, 2007 at 1:38 pmcowboy,
I was employed by the US Government BEFORE the Hatch Act and I wasn’t allowed to put a political bumper sticker on my car nor could I have political buttons on my clothes. I could lose my job if I was caught talking politics at work. And all this before the Hatch Act. So presenting Republic Party strategies while working in a building paid for by taxpayers, I say… not on my tax dollar.
Strange… it’s Watergate all over again.
March 28th, 2007 at 1:38 pmEveryone that Rove is involved in is getting railed. He’s like the anti-Midas. King Turdblossom..everything he touches turns to shite. If I got a call from him I would pretend to be an answering machine.
March 28th, 2007 at 1:39 pmI think Mr. Braley has a point - and should get an answer - when I hear him ask “Big†Labour why they only seem to support Democrats. Comment by valiant venus — March 28, 2007 @ 1:35 pm
You haven’t figured that out yet - Anorexia girl? Because you CONS hate working people so much…
And as for the Hatch Act - Does Chuck Shumer know about it? Apparently not…. Comment by valiant venus — March 28, 2007 @ 1:35 pm
Ah, the pin the tail on everyone else when you get caught defense - most commonly expressed as Clinton Derangement Syndrome.
Our Mighty Anorexic today believes that it’s OK to break laws if you’re the GOP, because the Dems do it to! What a weak, and st*pid defense to justify the “culture of corruption”. You’re a stupid little child, aren’t you venus?
March 28th, 2007 at 1:39 pm“I do think, however, that Rove and Jenning fall clearly under category (i) and are exempt.
Comment by Exley — March 28, 2007 @ 1:32 pm”
I don’t.
They fall into the BUDGET for the president, but they do not fall under any appropriations….
You do realize what an APPROPRIATION is for don’t you????
It’s for what was NOT planned under the budget…… It’s like Petty Cash…..
Does Rove fall under Petty Cash???? NO! He falls into the presidents budget! Not a appropriation…
March 28th, 2007 at 1:40 pmRemember…..trolls aren’t concerned about her obvious lying. Just remember that. They are only concerned with finding a way to wiggle out of the predicament….period.
Simple
Comment by s
Or try to point out that someone else did it too.
March 28th, 2007 at 1:40 pmThe Republicans got so obsessed with maneuvering to stay forever in power, they completely forgot there would be no place to hide once they got in power. They’re delusional white males who think they’re brilliant.
March 28th, 2007 at 1:40 pmI do think, however, that Rove and Jenning fall clearly under category (i) and are exempt. Comment by Exley — March 28, 2007 @ 1:32 pm
Yes, but as usual when you try to avoid the truth, you miss the big picture son. This *presentation* calls for using federal activities in those states to violate the Hatch Act. Or did you miss that key fact? Of course you did… Dum bass.
March 28th, 2007 at 1:40 pmMan that photo is pricelss, a gay Dubya kissing his boss!
Comment by Rocks911 — March 28, 2007 @ 1:13 pm
Google ‘Bush kiss’ and be amazed at how man men he kisses and how few women…. Works like a charm on the trolls who call us the Islamofascists :) LOL
March 28th, 2007 at 1:40 pmHere’s a link to the provision of the Hatch Act so all can digest. Pay particular attention to the sections where it discusses what Federal employees may not do while on official duty or in a Federal facility (building)
http://www.osc.gov/ha_fed.htm
March 28th, 2007 at 1:40 pmExley,
This powerpoint presentation presented as it was violates the Hatch Act, period.
March 28th, 2007 at 1:40 pm“Big†Labour Comment by valiant venus
Piss off, wanker.
March 28th, 2007 at 1:40 pmMan that photo is pricelss, a gay Dubya kissing his boss!
Comment by Rocks911 — March 28, 2007 @ 1:13 pm
Google ‘Bush kiss’ and be amazed at how man men he kisses and how few women…. Works like a charm on the trolls who call us the Islamofascists : ) LOL
March 28th, 2007 at 1:41 pm[…] particular, watch this amazing video clip, and you can see someone who has no moral fiber whatsoever. […]
March 28th, 2007 at 1:41 pmWatching the hearings on Cspan3. Now she is getting whacked over the head by Tierney. This is just hilarious.
By the way, the “I don’t remember” meme is proof positive that Republicanism leads to early onset of Alzheimer’s disease. Time to ship them all off to the old age home!
March 28th, 2007 at 1:43 pmYoos guys,
The kissing photo of Bush with his boss is Photoshopped. Hey I think its a great pic, but its fake. C’mon folks, I think we all should be wary of those kinds of photos, cuz when they are not so freindly…
March 28th, 2007 at 1:45 pmI think
Comment by valiant venus — March 28, 2007 @ 1:35 pm
That’s where your argument went to hell…
As always… LOL
March 28th, 2007 at 1:46 pmWorks like a charm on the trolls who call us the Islamofascists :) LOL
Comment by unbelievable
Ha!! That makes me laugh loud!!
March 28th, 2007 at 1:48 pmWayne,
“The Hatch Act prohibits Federal executive branch employees from engaging in political activity while on duty”
True enough. BUT, the statute has a specific definition of who is an “executive branch employee.” (There have been court cases on the issue of whether or not an individual should be considered an “executive branch employee” as that term is defined in the statute).
Section 7324 lists some exemptions from the definition. Given the language of 7324, it would appear that Rove, Jennings, and Doan are NOT “executive branch employees” as defined by the Hatch Act.
March 28th, 2007 at 1:49 pmNo wonder this administration’s illegal activities have a Watergate-like sound to them:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BM0zJl9Bxk8
About 4 minutes into the film, check out the interview with the young republican.
March 28th, 2007 at 1:51 pmThe kissing photo of Bush with his boss is Photoshopped. Hey I think its a great pic, but its fake.
Comment by ForTruth — March 28, 2007 @ 1:45 pm
There are many other shots of the same two people in the same pose by different photographers… As well as many other photos of him kissing other men.
March 28th, 2007 at 1:53 pm“If you really want an accurate interpretation of what that powerpoint presentation slide means, please, y’know, I would ask you to ask someone who’s much better at lying than me.”
March 28th, 2007 at 1:54 pmI smell jail time… ;-)
March 28th, 2007 at 1:55 pmUnbelievable,
Gimme some links for more of those photos from different angles. I would like to see them. The one provided seems to have a “seam” in-between the two faces. They look photoshopped to me.
March 28th, 2007 at 2:00 pm#114…..bull
March 28th, 2007 at 2:01 pmKarl Rove, you will be remembered as The Worst Presidential Advisor Ever. Ha ha!
March 28th, 2007 at 2:04 pmhttp://images.google.com/ images?hl=en&q=Bush+kiss&btnG=Search+Images&gbv=2
Scroll through as he kisses so many people, they are placed randomly amid the others…
March 28th, 2007 at 2:08 pmHearings are back on CSPAN 3. Lynch just demolished Doan, saying that he was deeply troubled by her selective losses of memory, and that, maybe, she should have taken the fifth. Waxman is on her case now. He just told her that one of her responses was “Clintonian”. This is better than watching a movie!
March 28th, 2007 at 2:08 pmSince our resident scholar [snerk] seems to have missed my query, I’ll repost:
Comment by Exley —
Do you think this a valid use of GSA resources? And what of the others? Were they also covered?
March 28th, 2007 at 2:08 pm“This is better than watching a movie!”
It is! LOL!
March 28th, 2007 at 2:10 pmThe kissing photo of Bush with his boss is Photoshopped. Hey I think its a great pic, but its fake.
Comment by ForTruth
No there was several photos of it, unfortunately most places that had the archives, like Yahoo, have been scrubbed and the old links don’t work anymore.
Kinda like the Abramhof picture scrub that happened.
March 28th, 2007 at 2:19 pmDoan is following the pure heart, empty head defense:
http://www.discourse.net/ archives/ 2007/ 03/ gonzales_tries_the_pure_heart_empty_head_defense.html
Pure heart = brown bag lunch teambuilding meeting
Empty head = don’t know what these slides mean
- Tom
March 28th, 2007 at 2:20 pmhttp://images.google.com/ images?hl=en&q=Bush+kiss&btnG=Search+Images&gbv=2
Scroll through as he kisses so many people, they are placed randomly amid the others…
Comment by unbelievable
Cool Google didn’t scrub them
Thanks for the link =)
March 28th, 2007 at 2:20 pmBarfly,
I believe my answers were contained in my previous posts. Section 7324 contains certain certain executive department officials to engage in political activity and exempts such officials from the ban on political activity “in any room or building occupied in the discharge of official duties by an individual employed or holding office in the Government of the United States or any agency or instrumentality thereof;.”
Again, read the relevant section, Barfly.
As for the “others,” you reference, they are not identified by name or title, so it is impossible to know if any or all of them fall under the exceptions of Sec. 7324.
March 28th, 2007 at 2:25 pmCool Google didn’t scrub them
One of the few major companies run by honest people who aren’t paranoid and haven’t sold out :)
Thanks for the link =)
Comment by Wayne — March 28, 2007 @ 2:20 pm
Anytime : )
March 28th, 2007 at 2:30 pmExley’s situational ethics on display: “BUT, the statute has a specific definition of who is an “executive branch employee.†(There have been court cases on the issue of whether or not an individual should be considered an “executive branch employee†as that term is defined in the statute).
Section 7324 lists some exemptions from the definition. Given the language of 7324, it would appear that Rove, Jennings, and Doan are NOT “executive branch employees†as defined by the Hatch Act.”
The Hatch Act was amended in 1993 to give federal employees more freedom to engage in political activities on their own time. Under the 1993 amendments, Section 7324 of the Hatch Act provides that officeholders “paid from an appropriation for the Executive Office of the President” may engage in “political activity while on duty.”
So, essentially, what Exley is arguing is that there might be a technicality by which Rove can escape prosecution based on how his pay is processed and accounted for. That’s the kind of weasly obfuscation I have come to expect from Exley.
March 28th, 2007 at 2:41 pmHas Doan resigned yet? I have to go get the kids from school and don’t want to leave the TV!!!
March 28th, 2007 at 2:43 pmExley:
What do you think about this?
March 28th, 2007 at 2:46 pmBlueDog,
If you do not like the 1993 amendments to the Hatch Act, which were passed by a Democratic Congress and signed by a Democratic president, I suggest you contact your representative and senator and asked the amendments be repealed.
Until they are repealed, that is the law. Work to change it.
March 28th, 2007 at 2:48 pmDavid…
I am not sure upon what part of that passage you want me to comment. It seems to be a pretty accurate representation of the Court’s jurisprudence regarding congressional intrusions on the authority of the executive branch.
March 28th, 2007 at 2:53 pmDamn I forgot to change my Exley name back to Jake!!
March 28th, 2007 at 2:55 pmAlright,
I thinkt the Bush-kisses are a mixed bag. I think some of the photos are real and some are not. Like I also think this one is not real either. I think its easy to believe all the photos since most are real. Yes most are real, but a couple are not.
Gotto go eat lunch now, we will re-visit this later if necessary.
March 28th, 2007 at 2:56 pmI agree — just some things to keep in mind during all these “oversight” hearings. Further:
March 28th, 2007 at 2:58 pmOnce again, partial posts with insufficient analysis, Exley.
Do you know whether or not these individuals qualify for the exemption?
Are they paid “from an appropriation for the Executive Office of the President”? If so, show us.
or, are they ” employee[s] appointed by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, whose position[s are] located within the United States, who determines policies to be pursued by the United States in the nationwide administration of Federal laws.”?
If so, show us the facts which prove these individuals do in fact hold such positions.
Do you belong to any of the teams of lawyers who are pouring over the Hatch Act and all relevant case law to determine if and to what extent the law was violated?
If not, doesn’t that put you into a clAss all your own?
March 28th, 2007 at 3:00 pmGo Congressman Braley! Go Congressman Waxman!
March 28th, 2007 at 3:00 pmIn re Sealed Case, the D.C. Circuit also expressly held that the President’s constitutionally protected interest in confidentiality extends to conversations among his immediate advisers for which the President is not even present. See 121 F.3d at 750.
March 28th, 2007 at 3:04 pmThey are doing exactly what the Nixon crowd talked about doing. Either forget or plead the fifth. It seems to be straight from the playbook.
See:
http://badattitudes.com/ MT/ archives/ 2007/ 03/ past_is_prologu.html
March 28th, 2007 at 3:07 pmMy favorite, given everyone quoting U.S. v. Nixon lately:
March 28th, 2007 at 3:11 pmLet’s get back to the core issue here.
Which of you trolls wants to defend this statement:
It is perfectly fine for US Attorneys to decide which cases to prosecute based on political, rather than legal bases.
It is OK for pressure to be brought to bear on a US Attorney to threated their job if they don’t prosecute cases based on political pressure brought by the Executive branch.
It is actually better if our legal system is based on political slant rather than law.
If you want to take up the argument, inquiring minds would like to know…
March 28th, 2007 at 3:13 pmNo doubt: Liar or underqualified for the role.. I go for underqualified as I thnk she really doesn’t know whats going on… she is just so jazzed to be in the power of the office that she belives she can do no wrong and does not think about implications of her actions, regardless of what she actually does or does not do… typical of Repubs.
March 28th, 2007 at 3:18 pm” Lurita, Lurita…why can’t ‘cha be true???”
March 28th, 2007 at 3:22 pmNico needs a new job. Nothing to see here:
http://www.macsmind.com/ wordpress/ 2007/ 03/ 28/ the-waxman-circus/
March 28th, 2007 at 3:23 pm“Lurita, Lurita…why can’t you be true?”
March 28th, 2007 at 3:23 pmEmail her. lurita.doan@gsa.gov. I’m certain she would love some feedback from her “testilying”.
March 28th, 2007 at 3:37 pm#92 Exley
I would agree. If it is determined Doan, as head of GSA, does not determine policies in the administration of federal laws, she would be subject to the prohibitions of the Hatch Act. Her status is unclear.
It’s not a policy position. She’s an administrator. Her job is to manage procurement and to see to the efficient use of expenditures by the government. And that’s something she also failed in. She doesn’t determine overall policies.
March 28th, 2007 at 3:58 pmExley - back up a sec - TP is saying that Hatch prohibits partisan campaign activity “on federal property” - without regard to who. Whether the perps were “executive branch employees” doesn’t seem to be the substance of the violation.
March 28th, 2007 at 4:02 pmChimpeach,
I think it is up for debate at to whether she falls under category (ii). She may. She may not. Like I said, there have been court cases decided on whether someone is an executive branch “employee” as that term is defined by the statute.
Tom,
As I read, Sec. 7324 the exemption for some executive branch officials seems to exetnd to the use of federal government property:
Sec. 7324: (a) An employee may not engage in political activity—
(2) in any room or building occupied in the discharge of official duties by an individual employed or holding office in the Government of the United States or any agency or instrumentality thereof;
Okay, that seems clear. But the next paragraphs provide exceptions to this prohibition:
(b) (1) An employee described in paragraph (2) of this subsection may engage in political activity otherwise prohibited by subsection (a) if the costs associated with that political activity are not paid for by money derived from the Treasury of the United States.
(2) Paragraph (1) applies to an employee—
(B) who is—
(i) an employee paid from an appropriation for the Executive Office of the President;
OR
(ii) an employee appointed by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, whose position is located within the United States, who determines policies to be pursued by the United States in relations with foreign powers or in the nationwide administration of Federal laws.
March 28th, 2007 at 4:10 pm[…] at Thinkprogress and The […]
March 28th, 2007 at 4:12 pm#114 Exley
The Hatch Act doesn’t just apply to the Executive branch. It’s all federal employees. Maybe this would help:
Federal Hatch Act Advisory:
Working for a Partisan Campaign
March 2, 1998
This letter is in response to your request for an advisory opinion concerning the Hatch Act. Specifically, you ask whether the Act would prohibit you, as an employee of the General Services Administration, from working on a U.S. Senate campaign. In your letter you state that you will be soliciting signatures for nominating petitions, arranging speaking venues, distributing campaign literature, speaking on behalf of the candidate, handling media relations and working at the polls.
The Hatch Act Reform Amendments of 1993 (5 U.S.C. §§ 7321-7326) generally permit most federal government employees to actively participate in partisan political management and partisan political campaigns. While employees are now free to engage in many types of political activity, they are prohibited from engaging in political activity while on duty or while in a room or building occupied in the discharge of official duties. Additionally, employees are prohibited from soliciting, accepting or receiving political contributions, except in limited situations dealing with employee and labor organizations.
Generally, most employees may participate in activities such as the ones that you have listed. The Act would not prohibit you from collecting signatures for a nominating petition, writing speeches, working with the media, distributing campaign literature or from working at the polls. For your information I have enclosed our booklet, Political Activity and the Federal Employee. Please call me at 800-854-2824 if you have any questions.
March 28th, 2007 at 4:17 pmPerhaps the Administration has finally got something right - maybe we should try WATERBOARDING some of these Bushies to find out what they really know!
March 28th, 2007 at 4:26 pmWell….
If anyone still gives a crap, the pictures of Bush kissing the Saudi guy are fake. Look at the one I posted. Look at Bush’s forehead, light is shining off it from a non-existent light source, where it should be a shadow from the Saudi dude’s head. And I can see the seam where the two heads were put together. So yes Bush is a wierd kisser, and the Lieberman one was real, but there is also some Photoshopped pics. I ain’t an expert on Photoshop, but I can use it, and make stuff look just as good as some of these photos.
March 28th, 2007 at 4:37 pmAs for the “others,†you reference, they are not identified by name or title, so it is impossible to know if any or all of them fall under the exceptions of Sec. 7324.
Comment by Exley —
Ducking and weaving this early? What about my question about the propriety of them using government resources for a clearly partisan purpose? Or is it too banal for you to answer?
We’re talking about taxpayer bucks being spent - your answer?
March 28th, 2007 at 4:44 pmEx - sounds to me then it’s a question of who paid for the pc and software that was used to produce the presentation, for the video-conferencing equipment that was used to broadcast it, and where the audiences of these presentations were. Therefore, Rove, Jennings and Doan could all be guilty of violating the Act, without respect to the account #’s their personal paychecks are drawn from.
The spirit of the Act is clearly to prevent partisans from highjacking we the people’s bought and paid for infrastructure to advance their own partisan interests, and as such, is exactly the kind of legislation we need to have to help prevent any political party from building a self-perpetuation apparatus within the organs of government using federal tax revenues to cover their overhead.
Hatch (so-named for old Orrin?) sounds like something Republicans would have pushed through back in the days when it seemed to them that they’d never control congress again, and were evinced of a concerted Democratic plot to ensure same.
March 28th, 2007 at 4:57 pmThey make Nixon look like a saint.
March 28th, 2007 at 5:06 pmHatch (so-named for old Orrin?)
– tom baker
The Hatch act was named after Senator Carl Hatch of New Mexico
March 28th, 2007 at 5:08 pmtyvm Wayne, as I was too lazy to check for myself.
March 28th, 2007 at 5:14 pmThe Doan-Rove scandal reminds me of a Hatch Act controversy that erupted at USDA during the Cliniton administration–and which was aggressively pursued both by the Justice Department and the Republican Congress.
The question is, will Republicans be as diligent in ferreting out potential Hatch Act violations in the Bush administration as they were when Clinton was in the White House?
And one wonders if any of the government employees attending GSA chief Lurita Doan’s “team building” lunch at the GSA subsequently received on the job favors after the brown bag discussion of the House and Senate seats Karl Rove has targeted to take back Congress.
The Hatch Act Time Machine at Mulch.
March 28th, 2007 at 6:01 pmWorst F*cking Administration in U.S. History
March 28th, 2007 at 6:31 pmHang her.
March 28th, 2007 at 6:45 pmThere’s also a question of were these employees required to attend a lunch meeting where they supposedly brought lunch. So then she’s saying lunch wasn’t paid for by GSA or Republican Party. Wonder if that’s true. And was attendance non-GSA purposes mandatory. That could open a whole can of worms.
March 28th, 2007 at 6:45 pmInteresting.
http://OsiSpeaks.com or http://OsiSpeaks.org
March 28th, 2007 at 7:51 pmThe Chewbacca Defense would have been better…
March 28th, 2007 at 9:08 pmNotice how Lurita Doan plays ignorant, and cannot even understand the written English language when presented with the PowerPoint slides? Then she betrays her ignorance with quick little quips, like “Target - that’s what I am right now.” And sorry Congressman, I didn’t mean to call you Senator, I know you are a representative - I guess that’s a demotion. Oh well, I won’t get into that right now…”
Very clever woman for being sans memory, intelligence, or conscience.
Compare how well-behaved the Democrats were with this tom-foolery with how James Inhofe behaved toward Al Gore, who was there to testify on behalf of all the people on the planet, and was not there because he had been accused of wrong-doing.
March 28th, 2007 at 10:25 pmLet’s take a step back from the rage, grab some popcorn and enjoy the show. Could anyone here, a year ago, have foreseen being able to watch Republican hack after Republican hack dragged before Congressional hearings and nailed to the wall? This is like a million wet dreams at once.
March 28th, 2007 at 10:33 pm[…] Think Progress » Rove’s PowerPoint Presentation Revealed During Oversight Hearing: […]
March 28th, 2007 at 10:51 pmDoan YOU KNOW WHAT THE HELL YOU’RE DOING OR SAYING, Lurita, YA VILE BITCH?????? LYING SKANK AND TOADY OF Bushland Uber Allies and FAT-F*CK Rove!!!!!
March 28th, 2007 at 11:17 pmApparently, Republicans think that STUPIDITY, ARROGANCE, FORGETFULNESS and LAWBREAKING are the new Family Values they keep espousing. What a waste of time, money and intelligence and they wonder why people no longer want to vote?!
March 29th, 2007 at 2:16 amThey should show this exchange in Trial Advocacy Classes in Law School. Classic brilliant cross examination. Never let them have a leg up.
March 29th, 2007 at 3:19 amIf they weren’t liars they wouldn’t be called politicians.
March 29th, 2007 at 11:35 amcan’t put them all in one bucket, chyken - that would be stupid of anyone.
March 29th, 2007 at 12:18 pm[…] For those who have suspected but have been bothered by not being able to prove that Rove is doing something wrong, take a look at Thinkprogress.org’s article on Rove’s election strategy powerpoints. […]
March 29th, 2007 at 12:24 pm[…] doan, if this is awkward or uncomfortable for you in any way, please signify by acting like a slaphappy […]
March 29th, 2007 at 2:05 pmCuriouslin wants to know: If we can impeach a president for lying to Congress about his sex life (which affects only his immediate family,)
how is it possible that we have not impeached a president who has lied to Congress and illegally started a war? GW’s decision affects families in the U.S. as well as in Iraq.
I know a lie is a lie is lie, but give me a break. There’s a great deal of difference between sexual improprieties and the slaughter of American and Iraquis.
March 29th, 2007 at 4:51 pm[…] Doan said it was just a brown bag lunch. Makes no difference. The Hatch Act prohibits using federal resources for political activities. See TPMmuckraker, Think Progress […]