Drudge says "White House Trashed"....

[supercrash]

This was probably Rove's first work in the White House....We heard that the Clinton administration trashed the White House on their way out

Wasn't this a lie ?.

http://www.drudgereport.com/wh93a.htm

[Touchdown]

1. Yes it was a lie.

The GAO investigated and found nothing missing, except the things that belonged to the Clinton's and their staffs. Nothing was damaged, and NO, the Ws were not removed from the keyboards.

[NoKoolAid]

10. GAO says the Ws were missing or damaged

Actually, the Ws WERE removed from the keyboards according to the GAO report which can be read here: http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d02360.pdf">GAO report

[Touchdown]

11. Ok, let me amend that.

The Ws were not removed by anybody in the Clinton Administration.

[TahitiNut]

15. Keys are designed to be removed/replaced.

On anything other than the cheapest keyboards, keys are designed to be removable. The reactionary complete replacement of keyboards merely missing keys was wasteful. The typical retail cost of a cheap keyboard without removable keys is about $20 ... far less than the GAO estimated.

[terrya]

2. Yes, it's a complete lie.

Why is that asshole Drudge rehashing that bullshit again?

Goddamn, those right wing pricks just can't let go of Clinton, can they?

This story is 100%, grade A bullshit. Don't believe it for one millisecond.

Terry

[supercrash]

3. No, NO, NO

I dug this up...Drudge is not pushing it

It shows how Bush is willing to disrespect the good name of the WH

Does anybody have a link to the GAO investigation ?

[brainshrub]

4. Clinton's penis

Clinton's penis! Clinton's penis! Clinton's penis! Clinton's penis! Clinton's penis! Clinton's penis! Clinton's penis! Clinton's penis! Clinton's penis! Clinton's penis! Clinton's penis! Clinton's penis! Clinton's penis! AAAAHhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Clinton's penis!

[Jersey Devil]

5. Drudge the Dem boxer short sniffer?

Too funny not to share:

[ComerPerro]

6. It was a disgusting and pathetic lie

The first thing these assholes do, to restore honor and dignity to the White House?

They show that anyone is fair game for their lies, and they show their disdain for truth.

[sadiesworld]

7. Didn't some repug order the GAO investigation

because he hadn't been let in on the joke?

[burythehatchet]

8. Bob Barr in his heyday

[peekaloo]

9. Bob Barr hahahahahahaha link (pdf)

http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d02360.pdf

[Killarney]

12. Wow, so it's true???

I always thought it was a lie. According to that GAO report, it's true.

[supercrash]

13. So they Clinton administration DID trash the WH ?

Whats with this ? http://www.whitehouse.org/news/2002/061302.asp

[supercrash]

14. Come on guys...

Are we all wrong about this issue ?

Did they really trash the place ?

[supercrash]

17. So I guess this confirms it...

The Clinton administration did trash the place...the report told us so

It kills me that the guys on Sean Hannity's board are right...and we are wrong

Don't we look stupid

[peekaloo]

18. pissing contest

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A34764-2002Jun11?language=printer

-------------
The report gave both sides some vindication. Bush aides said it validated their charges, and former Clinton aides said it proved the damage was minor and ordinary.
---------
Investigators were unable to corroborate some charges by the new Bush administration, because in some cases it was impossible to determine whether the damage was intentional and in other cases it was uncertain who was responsible.
Investigators also interviewed employees of the General Services Administration about what they had seen as they prepared the office space. "It was not possible to determine whether, in all cases, the reported incidents had occurred, when they occurred, why they occurred, and who may have been responsible for them," the report said.
---------

[TahitiNut]

16. WED JAN 24, 2001

Is there a good reason for rehashing/reposting a story that's over three years old?

[Moderator]

19. Locking - misleading/inflammatory (over three years old)

Rules to start discussion threads in the General Discussion forum.

1. If you start a thread in the General Discussion forum, you must present your opinion in a manner that is not inflammatory, which respects differences in opinion, and which is likely to lead to respectful discussion rather than flaming. Some examples of things which should generally be avoided are: unnecessarily hot rhetoric, nicknames for prominent Democrats or their supporters, broad-brush statements about groups of people, single-sentence "drive-by" thread topics, etc.

2. The subject line of a discussion thread must accurately reflect the actual content of the message.

3. The subject line of a discussion thread may not include profanity or swear words, even if words or letters are replaced by asterisks, dashes, or abbreviations.

4. The subject line and the entire text of the message which starts the thread may not include excessive capitalization, or excessive punctuation.

5. If you post an article or other published content which is from a conservative source or which expresses a traditionally conservative viewpoint, you must state your opinion about the piece and/or the issues it raises.

6. You may not start a new discussion thread in order to continue a current or recent flame war from another thread. The moderators have the authority to lock threads in order to contain flaming on a particular topic to only one thread at a time.

7. Discussion topics that mention any or all of the Democratic presidential primary candidates are not permitted in the General Discussion forum, and instead must be posted in the General Discussion: 2004 Primary forum.

Thank you for your understanding and cooperation,
DU moderator