Feeds

back to article Info on missing White House emails to remain missing

A federal district court judge in Washington D.C. just dealt a setback to an organization looking for answers about missing White House emails. Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly dismissed the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) after determining that the target of …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.
Thumb Down

Ladies and gentlemen

This is a shining example of a significant portion our nation's goverment at work. </sarcasm>

There is nothing more important than accountability--if you don't have proof, you're pretty suspiscious of some sort of wrong, even if there's no specifics.

Would I give my left big toe to live in Canada, but I hear there's a relatively strict work-force policy for immigration...

0
0
Flame

Remember Rosemary Woods?

Same shit, different Republican administration.

Guilty! Guilty! Guilty!

0
0
Flame

Missing information

Is missing.

Still.

0
0
Silver badge
Unhappy

I think it was better

when you could satisfy these megalomaniacs with a few blowjobs.

0
0
Silver badge
Happy

@Charles Manning

"I think it was better when you could satisfy these megalomaniacs with a few blowjobs."

I think you meant to say "I think it was better when these megalomaniacs could be satisfied with a few blowjobs."

Just a suggestion, from someone who's worried about you.

0
0
Flame

If you've nothing to hide you have nothing to fear...

Surely this Bull Shite line works both ways...

If Cheney's office and the President have nothing to hide...

More importantly, they are supposed to represent the people and are supposed to be accountable to the people. If anyone should be completely open and not hide anything, it should be OUR representatives in government; whether elected or civil servants.

0
0
Flame

Watergate?

Can anybody explain to me why this hasn't caused a backlash a thousand times worse than the Watergate scandal? That centred around 14 MINUTES of missing tape, we're talking about 7 MONTHS of missing communications here.

Don't tell me the backups failed, we all know that's bullshit. When you're the Whitehouse and your IT guys "lose" 7 MONTHS of backups, heads roll.

Society is sleeping.

0
0
Silver badge

So

Is it worth pointing out the judge in question is a Clinton appointee?

0
0
Black Helicopters

Spy novel

Straight out of a spy novel. Missing information right around the leadup to the Iraq war. Surely they must know how guilty this makes them look? Next we will be hearing that they got some terrorists to crash a plane into someones office to get rid of paper evidence (I just made that up, nothing that wierd could happen).

0
0

Nice friendly judge

I remember Judge Collar Kolleen-Kotelly (whatever). She was the one who let Microsoft off the hook after Judge Jackson found them guilty of breaking anti-trust laws.

She seems to be very friendly towards the Bush Administration (and his cronies and business acquaintances), so this decision doesn't really surprise me.

I guess it pays to have friends in high^H^H^H^Hlateral branch places.

-dZ.

0
0
Black Helicopters

@ Wayland Sothcott

"Next we will be hearing that they got some terrorists to crash a plane into someones office to get rid of paper evidence (I just made that up, nothing that wierd could happen)."

Nearly - You get terrorists to crash into 2 buildings then "mysteriously" have to demolish one close by that just happened to be about to indite a number of Bush's cronies and all the incriminating paperwork is in there.

Now that's weird and not remotely possible.

(BH as I am about to be "visited")

0
0

The NSA

... must have these messages. They're collecting everything these days.

0
0
Black Helicopters

@ nothing to hide / nothing to fear

that's the deeply poetic point, isn't it?

people being kidnapped all over the world and tortured, ahem, sorry "rendered" (makes after effects a very sinister application now - with it's mysterious "render queue") to obtain vital information about the war on terror...

Couldn't we just kidnap and torture *one* of them? I mean, seeing as legally they're not an agency (a distinction that makes the US justice system sound like an eight year old girl - "can too, can too, can too... cos they're not an *agency*) maybe they lost their rights like "enemy combatants" ("can too, can too, can too... cos they're not *soldiers*) and we can just... you know, do what's necessary in a war and all that tired crap.

I mean, if they're not with us, they're against us, right?

0
0
This topic is closed for new posts.