Berkeley CSUA MOTD:Entry 38567
Berkeley CSUA MOTD
 
WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ
http://csua.com/feed/
2018/10/20 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular
10/20   

2005/7/12-13 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Domestic/911] UID:38567 Activity:high
7/12    Today's White House press briefing
        http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/07/20050712-4.html
        "Let's let the investigation take place, and let's let the
        investigators bring all the facts together and draw the conclusions
        that they draw, and then we will know the facts at that point."
        Translation:  Dubya buys time for Roveian general to execute on GOP
        plans, with expectation that Rove will come out fine anyway since the
        base doesn't really care.
        In case you didn't figure it out yet:  Dubya's current and future
        position is he will only be firing people for illegal acts with
        convictions, not for merely being "involved" in the Plame affair as
        a previously reported position.
        \_ I call flip-flop on them!
        \_ From http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/09/20030929-7.html
           (My quotes are going to be partial for emphasis.  See the page above
           for the full context.)
           Q: has the President tried to find out who outed the CIA agent?
           ...
           McClellan: if someone leaked classified information of this nature..
           ...
           McClellan:  the President believes leaking classified information is
           a very serious matter
           It's fairly clear that McClellan was saying that anoyone in the WH
           who leaked classified info would be gone.  It doesn't appear that
           Rove did that.
           \_ Why would you say that it doesn't appear that Rove didn't leak
           \_ Why would you say that it doesn't appear that Rove leaked
              classified info?
              \_ Because saying "You know the reason he got that job is because
                 his wife is in the CIA" may not have revealed classified info.
                 \_ But that isn't what he said. He said his wife was a
                    CIA operative. Pretty clear cut what that means.
                 \_ Because the CIA is in the habit of calling for
                    investigations by the DoJ just because...
                 \_ that sounds like a leak of classified info to me.
                    I guess it depends on what the meanings of "leak" and
                    "classified" are.
                    "I did not leak classified info to that man, Mr. Cooper!"
                    \_ Is being in the employ of the CIA classified?
                       \_ When it is, yes.  You're deliberately being obtuse.
                            \_ huh?
                               \_ When the person's affiliation needs to be
                                  secret, it's classified.  You're an idiot.
                          The CIA requested an independent investigation.  It's
                          been ongoing for 2 years. if there was no there there
                          don't you think it would have been wrapped up with a
                          bow by now.
                          \_ I'm not being obtuse, you're being a dumbass.
                             We'll find out at the END of the investigation if
                             he violated the law.  If he did, he should be out
                             of there.  If he didn't, shut the fuck up.
                             \_ Yawn. The man's guilty. This is just what he's
                                been caught at. I say hang 'im.
                             \_ The END of the investigation... in 2010? 2020?
                             \_ Uh, I hate to be a nancy about this, but you
                                should write, "If he did, I should shut the
                                fuck up.  If he didn't, you should shut the
                                fuck up."  Are you an undergrad?
                                \_ Actually, no.  I'm no lefty partisan, but I
                                   also don't want someone who would leak
                                   classified info in the WH.  So if he's found
                                   to be guilty, I'll join the chorus demanding
                                   that he be fired.
                                   \_...but until then, Shut the Fuck Up?
                                      \_ Yeah, let's all stfu until the
                                         investigation is over.
                                         \_ Can't we complain about the
                                            previous pronouncements that Rove
                                            had nothing to do with the Plame
                                            affair, and that it was ridiculous
                                            to suggest that?
                                            \_ He never said he had nothing to
                                               do with it. Just that it was
                                               a ridiculous suggestion. Maybe
                                               he means the whole situation is
                                               worthy of ridicule.
2018/10/20 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular
10/20   

You may also be interested in these entries...
2013/2/10-3/19 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Uncategorized/Profanity] UID:54603 Activity:nil
2/10    I like Woz, and I like iWoz, but let me tell ya, no one worships
        him because he has the charisma of an highly functioning
        Autistic person. Meanwhile, everyone worships Jobs because
        he's better looking and does an amazing job promoting himself
        as God. I guess this is not the first time in history. Case in
        point, Caesar, Napolean, GWB, etc. Why is it that people
	...
2012/12/18-2013/1/24 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:54559 Activity:nil
12/18   Bush kills. Bushmaster kills.
        \_ Sandy Huricane kills. Sandy Hook kills.
           \_ bitch
	...
2012/3/26-6/1 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Domestic/President] UID:54347 Activity:nil
3/26    Things I learned from History: Lincoln was photographed with
        killer. Lincoln had 3 male lovers (he was bisexual!).
        Kennedy had an affair with a Nazi spy. Elenore Roosevelt
        was a lesbian!!!  Nerdy looking Ben Franklin was a suspected
        killer and quite a ladies man. WTF???
        \_ Did it mention anything about Washington and the cherry tree?
	...
2011/5/1-7/30 [Politics/Domestic/911] UID:54102 Activity:nil
5/1     Osama bin Ladin is dead.
        \_ So is the CSUA.
           \_ Nope, it's actually really active.
              \_ Are there finally girls in the csua?
              \_ Is there a projects page?
              \_ Funneling slaves -> stanford based corps != "active"
	...
2010/11/8-2011/1/13 [Politics/Domestic/Abortion] UID:53998 Activity:nil
11/8    Have you read how Bush says his pro-life stance was influenced
        by his mother keeping one of her miscarriages in a jar, and showing
        it to him?  These are headlines The Onion never dreamed of
	...
2010/11/2-2011/1/13 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan] UID:54001 Activity:nil
11/2    California Uber Alles is such a great song
        \_ Yes, and it was written about Jerry Brown. I was thinking this
           as I cast my vote for Meg Whitman. I am independent, but I
           typically vote Democrat (e.g., I voted for Boxer). However, I
           can't believe we elected this retread.
           \_ You voted for the billionaire that ran HP into the ground
	...
2010/5/26-6/30 [Politics/Foreign/Asia/China] UID:53845 Activity:nil
5/26    "China could join moves to sanction North Korea"
        http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100526/ap_on_re_as/as_clinton_south_korea
        How did Hillary manage to do that when we're also asking China to
        concede on the economic front at the same time?
         \_ China doesn't want NK to implode. NK is a buffer between SK and
            China, or in other words a large buffer between a strong US ally and
	...
2013/4/18-5/18 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/SIG] UID:54660 Activity:nil
4/18    "MSNBC Host Blames NRA for 'Slow' Boston Investigation: 'In the
        Business of Helping Bombers Get Away With Their Crimes'"
        http://www.csua.org/u/zwf
        \_ The NRA has a lot to answer for.
        \_ Oh, for fuck's sake.  We don't put taggants in gunpowder because it
           interferes with the proper functioning of a round of ammuntion.
	...
2013/2/18-3/26 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/SIG] UID:54608 Activity:nil
2/18    F U NRA:
        http://preview.tinyurl.com/auazy6g (Sandy Hook Truthers)
        \_ http://preview.tinyurl.com/bqreg8d
           This shit makes me weep for America.
        \_ I didn't see any mention of the NRA on that page.  Did you mean "FU
           Crazy Conspiracy Theorists?"  Or do you have this really great
	...
2011/11/2-30 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/Immigration] UID:54209 Activity:nil
11/2    "NYC arrest records: Many Occupy Wall Street protesters live in luxury"
        http://www.csua.org/u/uml (news.yahoo.com)
        'Many "Occupy Wall Street" protesters arrested in New York City
        "occupy" more luxurious homes than their "99 percent" rhetoric might
        suggest, a Daily Caller investigation has found.'
        \_ "Many"? How many? This is a classic weasel word.
	...
2010/12/20-2011/2/19 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:53980 Activity:nil
12/20   "Assange.s lawyer wants investigation of leaks (about Assange)"
        http://www.csua.org/u/s6i (news.yahoo.com)
        Speaking of eating one's own medicine ......
        \_ http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/03/27/wikileaks
           The War on Wikileaks and Why It Matters
	...
2008/12/9-12 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:52211 Activity:nil
12/9    Can someone shed some light on the Blagojevich arrest?
        http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/7773717.stm
        \_ Apparently, he was trying to turn his power to appoint
           Obama's replacement on the Senate into financial gain
           for himself.  Straightforward abuse of public power.
           If he were demanding concessions for his state, he
	...
2008/11/25-12/2 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:52106 Activity:nil
11/25   State of California decides that complaint against Mormon Church
        for violating political financing laws is worth investigation:
        http://tinyurl.com/6e6mxb (SF Gate)
        \_ There's an editorial in the Chronicle today from a high school
           student who is mad people said mean things to him when he
           went to a Yes in 8 rally.  They were mean!  MEAN I TELL YOU.
	...
Cache (8192 bytes)
www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/07/20050712-4.html
The President had a good visit this mornin g with four leaders of the Senate on the Supreme Court nomination proces s It was a good bipartisan discussion that the President had with Senat ors Specter and Leahy, and Senators Frist and Reid. The President talked about the importance of moving forward in a dignified and civilized way during the nomination process. Today's meeting underscores the Presiden t's commitment to consulting closely with members of the Senate. The con sultative process is an important part of the nomination process, and th e President takes his responsibility very seriously. The President spent a good bit of time visiting with the senators about t he timing of moving forward on the hearings for a potential nominee. The President continues to visit with members of his senior staff and look over the backgrounds and rulings of potential nominees, and he looks for ward to continuing to consult with members of the Senate. He wants to he ar their views and their ideas as we move forward, and I think the consu ltations, you can expect, will continue even after he makes his decision and makes his nominee known. we've consulted with mo re than half the Democratic Caucus; we continue to reach out to others, and this process is something that continues. Secondly, this afternoon the President looks forward to welcoming some bi partisan leaders to talk about passing comprehensive energy legislation. The House and the Senate have both moved forward on comprehensive energ y legislation that will reduce our dependence on foreign sources of ener gy. And so the President will have the bipartisan leaders from the energ y committees, as well as the Senate Finance and House Ways and Means Com mittee over this afternoon to talk about the importance of moving forwar d and resolving remaining differences and getting this to his desk by th e August recess. This is a high priority for the President of the United States. We have an unemployment rate that is now at its lowest since September of 2001, at 5 percent. B ut there's more we need to do to continue to keep our economy strong. But we also need to address the root causes of high e nergy prices, and four years is long enough. We are long overdue in acti ng on energy legislation, and so the President looks forward to discussi ng with these leaders how we can move forward and get this done quickly. The President and Mrs Bush wil l welcome President Uribe of Colombia and Mrs Uribe to their ranch in C rawford, Texas, on August 4th. The President looks forward to continuing his dialogue with President Uribe on our shared efforts to protect and promote democracy, human rights and the rule of law, fight terrorism and drug trafficking, and promote prosperity through economic growth and op portunity. Q Scott, in the wake of this meeting this morning, is he willing to consi der expanding the number of candidates for the Supreme Court? He's alrea dy looking at more than a half a dozen choices. Is there a consensus can didate among these choices, or is he going to expand the number of candi dates? MR McCLELLAN: Well, I don't want to rule things in or out. The President has expressed publicly that over the course of the next few weeks -- he said this last week, actually -- that he would narrow that list down an d focus on a handful of potential nominees. At that point, he would look forward to sitting down and visiting with those potential nominees. The President takes his constitutional responsibility seriously. And that's why he is going through a thorough and deliberate process as we move forward. the White House is consulting with members o f the Senate; the President is visiting with his key advisors as we move forward to discuss potential nominees and their rulings and their backg rounds. The President wants to see someone appointed of high integrity, of high intellect, someone who will faithfully interpret our Constitutio n and our laws, and not try and make law from the bench. He's going to look at a diverse group of individuals -- he is looking at a diverse group of individuals, and when he has more t o say on it, then he will do so at that point. Q Scott, some Democrats are calling for the revocation of Karl Rove's sec urity clearance. MR McCLELLAN: John, I think there's a lot of discussion that's going on in the context of an ongoing investigation. This is based on some news r eports that came out recently. I think you heard me talk about the impor tance of helping this investigation move forward. I don't think it's hel pful for me from this podium to get into discussing what is an ongoing i nvestigation. I think it's most helpful for me to not comment while that investigation continues. And these are all issues that some are trying to raise in the context of news reports. I don't think we should be prej udging the outcome of any investigation at this point. Q But the issues of security clearance and criminal investigations are of ten on very separate tracks. So does the President see any reason, any n ecessity, at least in the interim, to revoke Karl Rove's security cleara nce? MR McCLELLAN: John, the President -- first of all, let me back up -- som e of you asked a couple of questions about does the President still have confidence in particular individuals, specifically Karl Rove. I don't w ant to get into commenting on things in the context of an ongoing invest igation. So let me step back and point out that any individual who works here at the White House has the confidence of the President. They would n't be working here at the White House if they didn't have the President 's confidence. And in terms of security clearances, there are a number o f people at the White House that have various levels of security clearan ce. And I'm confident that those individuals have the appropriate securi ty clearance. I haven't gone around looking at what those security clear ances are. Q But, Scott, are you suggesting -- I think it's pretty clear to everybod y at this point you don't want to comment on the investigation. But the President has also spoken about this when asked. Q Well, he has spoken about these questions that have come up as part of a leak investigation. So does he retain confidence in Karl Rove, specifi cally? Any individual who works here at the White House has the President's confidence. They wouldn't be working here if they didn't have the President's confidence. That's why I stepped back from this an d talked about it in the broader context. Now, these questions are coming up in the context of an ongoing investiga tion, and I stated long ago, you all will remember, that the investigati on is continuing, I want to be helpful to the investigation, I don't wan t to jeopardize anything in that investigation, and that's why I made a decision and the White House made a decision quite some time ago that we weren't going to get into commenting on questions related to that inves tigation. Q But isn't the difficulty that you have said to the public, dating back to 2003, affirmatively, Karl Rove is not involved, and now we have evide nce to the contrary? MR McCLELLAN: Again, if I were to get into discussing this, I would be g etting into discussing an investigation that continues and could be prej udging the outcome of the investigation. After that point, I also remember goin g and testifying in this investigation. I remember well individuals who are involved overseeing this investigation expressing their preference p ersonally to me that we not get into discussing what is an ongoing inves tigation. I think that's the way to be most helpful as they move forward , and that's why I'm in the position that I am. I'm not going to get int o jumping on every news report as the investigation continues and trying to comment on them, because I don't think that's helpful. So I think you have to step back from any individual news story or indivi dual reports. I look forward to talking about some of these matters once the investigation is complete. I welcome the opportunity to talk about some of these questions, but I d on't think it's appropriate to do so at this time. Q Let's just -- just one fina...
Cache (8192 bytes)
www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/09/20030929-7.html
War authorization 12:18 PM EDT MR McCLELLAN: Good afternoon. This afternoon the President will welcome and congratulate the 2003 Stanley Cup Champion New Jersey Devils to the White House. Later this afternoon, the President looks forward to meetin g with congregational rabbis. This is the Jewish high holy days, and it is a time for prayer and reflection in the Jewish community. Today's mee ting is part of the President's ongoing commitment to reaching out to fa ith-based leaders who make our nation stronger. And then, following that meeting, the President looks forward to signing the Do Not Call legislation, which affirms the FTC's authority to mainta in the Do Not Call Registry. This action, combined with the FCC's announ cement earlier today that they will enforce the Do Not Call rules, is a victory for the millions of Americans who have registered some 50 millio n phone numbers on the registry. Americans have the right to reduce the number of unwanted solicitations they receive. The Do Not Call Registry is a valuable way for them to stop the nuisance of annoying calls. And with that, I will be glad to jump right into questions. Q Scott, has anyone -- has the President tried to find out who outed the CIA agent? MR McCLELLAN: Well, Helen, that's assuming a lot of things. First of all , that is not the way this White House operates. The President expects e veryone in his administration to adhere to the highest standards of cond uct. Secondly, there -- I 've seen the anonymous media reports, and if I could find out who "anony mous" was, it would make my life a whole lot easier. MR McCLELLAN: But we've made it very clear that anyone -- anyone -- who has information relating to this should report that information to the D epartment of Justice. MR McCLELLAN: Well, there's been no information that has been brought to our attention, beyond what we've seen in the media reports, to suggest White House involvement. Q Will the President move aggressively to see if such a transgression has occurred in the White House? Will he ask top White House officials to s ign statements saying that they did not give the information? MR McCLELLAN: Bill, if someone leaked classified information of this nat ure, the appropriate agency to look into it would be the Department of J ustice. So the Department of Justice is the one that would look in matte rs like this. Q You're saying the White House won't take a proactive role? MR McCLELLAN: Do you have any specific information to bring to my attent ion suggesting White House involvement? Q Would you not want to know whether someone had leaked information of th is kind? MR McCLELLAN: The President has been -- I spoke for him earlier today -- the President believes leaking classified information is a very serious matter. And it should be -- Q So why doesn't he want -- MR McCLELLAN: -- pursued to the fullest extent -- Q Right, so why -- MR McCLELLAN: -- by the appropriate agency. And the appropriate agency i s the Department of Justice. Q Why wouldn't he proactively do that, ask people on the staff to say tha t they had not leaked anything? MR McCLELLAN: Do you have specific information to suggest White House in volvement? I saw a media report that said "senior administration officia ls." That's an anonymous source that could include a lot of people. I've seen a lot of "senior administration officials" in media stories. Q Scott, when you say that it should be pursued by the Justice Department -- Justice has not said whether it actually is conducting an investigat ion. Does the President want the Justice Department to investigate this matter? MR McCLELLAN: If someone leaked classified information of the nature tha t has been reported, absolutely, the President would want it to be looke d into. And the Justice Department would be the appropriate agency to do so. MR McCLELLAN: That's a question you need to ask the Department of Justic e My understanding is that if something like this happened and it was r eferred to the Department of Justice, then the Department of Justice wou ld look to see whether or not there is enough information to pursue it f urther. But those are questions you need to ask the Department of Justic e Q But, Scott, something like this did happen, right? Bob Novak had inform ation he should not have had, that he was not authorized to have. So som ething -- MR McCLELLAN: Terry, all I can tell you is what I've seen in the media r eports. And I've seen different statements in the media reports from, th e CIA hasn't confirmed or denied that this was a covert agent for the CI A; I've seen media reports to suggest that it was referred to the Depart ment of Justice, and that -- and comments the Department of Justice woul d look into it. Q So the President of the United States doesn't know whether or not this classified information was divulged, and he is only getting his informat ion by reading the media? Q He does not know whether or not the classified information was divulged here, and he's only getting his information from the media? MR McCLELLAN: No, we don't know -- we don't have any information that's been brought to our attention beyond what we've seen in the media report s I've made that clear. You said this morning, "The President knows" that Karl Rove wasn't involved. MR McCLELLAN: Well, I've made it very clear that it was a ridiculous sug gestion in the first place. I saw some comments this morning from the pe rson who made that suggestion, backing away from that. And I have spoken with Karl Rove -- Q But how does -- MR McCLELLAN: I'm not going to get into conversations that the President has with advisors or staff or anything of that nature; Q But the President has a factual basis for knowing that Karl Rove -- MR McCLELLAN: I said it publicly. I said that -- Q But I'm not asking what you said, I'm asking if the President has a fac tual basis for saying -- for your statement that he knows Karl Rove -- MR McCLELLAN: He's aware of what I've said, that there is simply no trut h to that suggestion. Q Does he know whether or not the Vice President's Chief of Staff, Lewis Libby -- MR McCLELLAN: If you have any specific information to bring to my attent ion -- like I said, there has been nothing that's been brought to our at tention. You asked me earlier if we were looking into it, there is nothi ng that's been brought to our attention beyond the media reports. But if someone did something like this, it needs to be looked at by the Depart ment of Justice, they're the appropriate agency charged with looking int o matters like this -- Q Well, you do know that they are looking at it, don't you? MR McCLELLAN: -- and so they're the ones that should do that. Q But, Scott, it gets to the question if you know, if the President knows that Karl Rove was not involved, then maybe you can tell us more about what the President specifically is doing to get to the bottom of this, o r what has he ordered to be done within the White House to get to the bo ttom of this? MR McCLELLAN: The President wants anyone, anyone who has information rel ating to this to report that information to the appropriate agency, the Department of Justice. That's what the President wants, and I've been ve ry clear about that. Q Is the President convinced that there was no White House involvement in this? MR McCLELLAN: Well, if I could get "anonymous" to 'fess up, that would m ake my life a whole lot easier. MR McCLELLAN: But there has been nothing -- there has been absolutely -- Q Does the President -- MR McCLELLAN: I'm answering that. Q Scott, does he know -- is he convinced that no one in the White House w as involved with this? MR McCLELLAN: There has been absolutely nothing brought to our attention to suggest any White House involvement. The media reports cite "senior administration official, " or "senior administration officials." That's why it's a ppropriate for the Department of Justice, if something like this happene d, to look into it. Q Those media reports are wrong, as far as the White House is concerned? MR McCLELLAN: Well, we have nothing beyond those media reports to sugges t there is White House involvement. MR McCLELLAN: Ther...