- Joined
- Oct 12, 2009
- Messages
- 23,909
- Reaction score
- 11,003
- Location
- New Jersey
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian - Right
Washington Post said:By Carol D. Leonnig and David Nakamura October 8 at 11:40 PM
As nearly two dozen Secret Service agents and members of the military were punished or fired following a 2012 prostitution scandal in Colombia, Obama administration officials repeatedly denied that anyone from the White House was involved. But new details drawn from government documents and interviews show that senior White House aides were given information at the time suggesting that a prostitute was an overnight guest in the hotel room of a presidential advance-team member — yet that information was never thoroughly investigated or publicly acknowledged.
The information that the Secret Service shared with the White House included hotel records and firsthand accounts — the same types of evidence the agency and military relied on to determine who in their ranks was involved. The Secret Service shared its findings twice in the weeks after the scandal with top White House officials, including then-White House Counsel Kathryn Ruemmler. Each time, she and other presidential aides conducted an interview with the advance-team member and concluded that he had done nothing wrong.
Meanwhile, the new details also show that a separate set of investigators in the inspector general’s office of the Department of Homeland Security — tasked by a Senate committee with digging more deeply into misconduct on the trip — found additional evidence from records and eyewitnesses who had accompanied the team member in Colombia. The lead investigator later told Senate staffers that he felt pressure from his superiors in the office of Charles K. Edwards, who was then the acting inspector general, to withhold evidence — and that, in the heat of an election year, decisions were being made with political considerations in mind. “We were directed at the time . . . to delay the report of the investigation until after the 2012 election,” David Nieland, the lead investigator on the Colombia case for the DHS inspector general’s office, told Senate staffers, according to three people with knowledge of his statement.
(Emphasis above is mine)
Aides knew of possible White House link to Cartagena, Colombia, prostitution scandal - The Washington Post
Not only did the WH and Carney lie about who was involved and what they knew according to the WaPo story - apparently the WH gave the IG and inspectors instructions to delay the report until after Obama's 2012 election. The question becomes did anyone involved in the investigation lie to other government organizations like the IG or lead inspector? White House volunteer, Jonathan Dach, who's father is a wealthy donor to Dem causes is also curious. Secret Service Director Mark Sullivan gave WH lawyers information that Dach had registered a prostitute in his room yet, lead WH lawyer Ruemmler found "no credible information" of Dach's involvement. Dach works in the Office on Global Women’s Issues at the State Department. The House may take this up and issue further investigations as to the details and get testimony of those involved and named in the story.
(Emphasis above is mine)
Aides knew of possible White House link to Cartagena, Colombia, prostitution scandal - The Washington Post
Not only did the WH and Carney lie about who was involved and what they knew according to the WaPo story - apparently the WH gave the IG and inspectors instructions to delay the report until after Obama's 2012 election. The question becomes did anyone involved in the investigation lie to other government organizations like the IG or lead inspector? White House volunteer, Jonathan Dach, who's father is a wealthy donor to Dem causes is also curious. Secret Service Director Mark Sullivan gave WH lawyers information that Dach had registered a prostitute in his room yet, lead WH lawyer Ruemmler found "no credible information" of Dach's involvement. Dach works in the Office on Global Women’s Issues at the State Department. The House may take this up and issue further investigations as to the details and get testimony of those involved and named in the story.
I'm shocked. The WH and Carney lied?:shock:
Actually, it's a day that ends in "y" so it's standard daily fare from them.
Yes, it sucks, but press secretaries always lie and run cover for their administration.
McClellan said he was scripted to deny to reporters that Bush had given the okay to White House political chief Karl Rove and Lewis (Scooter) Libby, Vice President Cheney's chief of staff, to leak intelligence on the Plame case.
Scott McClellan: I was ordered to lie - NY Daily News
(Emphasis above is mine)
Aides knew of possible White House link to Cartagena, Colombia, prostitution scandal - The Washington Post
Not only did the WH and Carney lie about who was involved and what they knew according to the WaPo story - apparently the WH gave the IG and inspectors instructions to delay the report until after Obama's 2012 election. The question becomes did anyone involved in the investigation lie to other government organizations like the IG or lead inspector? White House volunteer, Jonathan Dach, who's father is a wealthy donor to Dem causes is also curious. Secret Service Director Mark Sullivan gave WH lawyers information that Dach had registered a prostitute in his room yet, lead WH lawyer Ruemmler found "no credible information" of Dach's involvement. Dach works in the Office on Global Women’s Issues at the State Department. The House may take this up and issue further investigations as to the details and get testimony of those involved and named in the story.
A column by New York Times public editor Byron Calame August 13 reveals that the newspaper withheld a story about the Bush administration’s program of illegal domestic spying until after the 2004 election, and then lied about it.
On December 16, 2005, the Times reported that President Bush had authorized the National Security Agency (NSA) to monitor thousands of telephone conversations and e-mails in the US without court approval. At the time, the Times acknowledged that it had, at the urging of the Bush administration, withheld publication of the story, saying it held its exposé back “for a year.” This time frame suggested that the newspaper made the decision to withhold publication of the story after the 2004 presidential election.
Such a delay was, in itself, unpardonable, and provoked angry criticism. Now we learn, from an interview with Executive Editor Bill Keller conducted by Calame, that internal discussions at the Times about drafts of the eventual article had been “dragging on for weeks” before the November 2, 2004, election, which resulted in a victory for Bush.
“The process,” the public editor notes, “had included talks with the Bush administration.” A fresh draft was the subject of discussion at the newspaper “less than a week” before the election.
Yeah, too bad we don't hold every administration accountable for wrong doing instead of partisan selection, then we might actually be able to clean Washington up.
There's something that always bothered me about the people who had the Press Secretary job, under any administration. They strike me as sneaky little henchmen.
There's something that always bothered me about the people who had the Press Secretary job, under any administration. They strike me as sneaky little henchmen.
It's "old news". It's another Republican witch hunt. "There's nothing there". This is more racist hate of our president. These things never happened. Bush started it. This is how they undermine our president in times of war. The Secret Service should remain secret. These are traitors.
I know I left a few out, but I wanted to get the progressive excuses out of the way...
Oh, and the president learned about it on tv...
What does Bush have to do with what happened in 2012?
Let's deal with the current problem shall we, not the fact Obama is at least as bad as Bush if not worse.
A column by New York Times public editor Byron Calame August 13 reveals that the newspaper withheld a story about the Bush administration’s program of illegal domestic spying until after the 2004 election, and then lied about it.
On December 16, 2005, the Times reported that President Bush had authorized the National Security Agency (NSA) to monitor thousands of telephone conversations and e-mails in the US without court approval. At the time, the Times acknowledged that it had, at the urging of the Bush administration, withheld publication of the story, saying it held its exposé back “for a year.” This time frame suggested that the newspaper made the decision to withhold publication of the story after the 2004 presidential election.
Such a delay was, in itself, unpardonable, and provoked angry criticism. Now we learn, from an interview with Executive Editor Bill Keller conducted by Calame, that internal discussions at the Times about drafts of the eventual article had been “dragging on for weeks” before the November 2, 2004, election, which resulted in a victory for Bush.
“The process,” the public editor notes, “had included talks with the Bush administration.” A fresh draft was the subject of discussion at the newspaper “less than a week” before the election.
Yeah, too bad we don't hold every administration accountable for wrong doing instead of partisan selection, then we might actually be able to clean Washington up.
Yes, it sucks, but press secretaries always lie and run cover for their administration.
McClellan said he was scripted to deny to reporters that Bush had given the okay to White House political chief Karl Rove and Lewis (Scooter) Libby, Vice President Cheney's chief of staff, to leak intelligence on the Plame case.
Scott McClellan: I was ordered to lie - NY Daily News
The secret service scandal is old news it's the cover up that's new news.
(Emphasis above is mine)
Aides knew of possible White House link to Cartagena, Colombia, prostitution scandal - The Washington Post
Not only did the WH and Carney lie about who was involved and what they knew according to the WaPo story - apparently the WH gave the IG and inspectors instructions to delay the report until after Obama's 2012 election. The question becomes did anyone involved in the investigation lie to other government organizations like the IG or lead inspector? White House volunteer, Jonathan Dach, who's father is a wealthy donor to Dem causes is also curious. Secret Service Director Mark Sullivan gave WH lawyers information that Dach had registered a prostitute in his room yet, lead WH lawyer Ruemmler found "no credible information" of Dach's involvement. Dach works in the Office on Global Women’s Issues at the State Department. The House may take this up and issue further investigations as to the details and get testimony of those involved and named in the story.
If this administration thought there would be a political benefit to it they'd lie about what day of the week it was. The sad part is that 90% of the media would then write stories blaming calendar companies for trying to mess up the democrats.
If this administration thought there would be a political benefit to it they'd lie about what day of the week it was. The sad part is that 90% of the media would then write stories blaming calendar companies for trying to mess up the democrats.
Greetings, tres borrachos. :2wave:
It's got to be a difficult job, and one I could not do. Being loyal to your boss is expected and it should be so, but when they get home and look in the mirror, I wonder what they see looking back at them. Do they ever say "I'm not getting paid enough to do this ****ing job?" Being on the firing line every time they make a statement can't be easy if they have any integrity at all, and it seems they don't last long either. The stress has got to be tremendous unless they totally agree with the agenda, which goes back to the person who is telling them what to say! "Like attracts like?"
Exactly. Just listen to them, listen to Josh, it's so obvious that they are running cover, and slippery as can be, nailing them down on a straight answer is like pulling hens teeth. And, being charged as the one to go before the public and defend everything an administration does is a heavy task, and PS's burn out quickly. Rarely do you see one last a term.
The secret service scandal is old news it's the cover up that's new news.
That is what is so disenchanting, it's acceptable for many that it's old news and they don't care if it's a cover up.
Heya ML.Its what they call Sgt Shultz Syndrome. :lol:
Its what I term PC fashionable for the left.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?