http://drudgereport.com/wh93a.htm

XXXXX DRUDGE REPORT XXXXX WED JAN 24, 2001 18:51 ET XXXXX

WHITE HOUSE OFFICES LEFT 'TRASHED': PORN BOMBS, LEWD MESSAGES; LEGAL PROBE CONSIDERED

**Exclusive Details**

The Bush Administration has quietly launched an investigation into apparent acts of vandalism and destruction of federal property -- after incoming Bush staffers discover widespread sabotage of White House office equipment and lewd messages left behind by previous tenants!

Harriet Miers, 55, Assistant to President Bush and staff secretary will be investigating possible legal ramifications of the White House trashing and possible theft, the DRUDGE REPORT has learned.

"Miers is just beginning her investigation," a well-place source said late Wednesday from Washington. "The level of the trashing is very troubling, this is not just 'W' keys missing from keyboards."

The damage left by departing Clintonites goes "way beyond pranks, to vandalism", said a close Bush adviser.

White House employees aren't waiting to be interviewed by Miers. They are providing names of the worst malefactors, previous occupants of specific offices.

Photographic and audio evidence is being collected -- as the full scope of the damage becomes clear.

Bush's staff has been cautioned not to go public with the extent of the damage and the worst is being closely held among very top staffers for fear of leaks. But, according to sources, so far Bush officials have found:

*Phone lines were cut, rendering them inoperable.

*Voice mail messages were changed to obscene, scatological greetings. One Bush staffer had his grandmother call from the Midwest. She was horrified by what she heard on the other end of the line.

*Many phone lines misdirected to other government offices.

*Desks found turned completely upside down and trash deliberately left everywhere.

*Computer printers that were filled with blank paper but interspersed with pornographic pictures and obscene slogans that would be revealed only as items were run off the computer.

*'W' keys weren't just pried off more than 40 keyboards, some were glued on with Superglue; some were turned upside down and glued on.

*Filing cabinets glued shut.

*VP Office space in the Old Executive Office Building found in complete shambles. Mrs. Gore had to phone Mrs. Cheney to apologize, first reported by Rich Gallen's Mullings.

*Lewd MagicMarker graffiti found on one office hallway.

Developing...

-- (Sheeple@Greener.Pastures), January 24, 2001

Answers

Given the take-no-prisoners fanaticism we see even on this obscure forum, this kind of thing sounds entirely predictable, for any change of administration that changes parties, in either direction.

At one time I wondered why democracy was so non-portable across cultures, when Western materialism (which results at least partially from our political form) is just the opposite. Lately, however, I've begun to realize that while greed is universal, tolerance is something people grant only under duress. It's just not natural.

So the question is NOT whether we can picture some of our forum participants doing such things, the question is whether we can imagine any who wouldn't. That's a tough challenge...

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), January 24, 2001.

Talk about croaking frogs! No sooner does Matt Drudge say the word about a few White House staffers then Flint decides that us forumites are somehow guilty of the mess. What an ass!

-- Flint is a Frog (flint.is.a.frog@croak.com), January 24, 2001.

wow. No sooner do I point out that some forumites are intolerant, than an anonymous example immediately jumps up to illustrate this. I suppose I might have mentioned that some forumites also attack what was not said, because froggy here illustrated that too.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), January 24, 2001.

"So the question is NOT whether we can picture some of our forum participants doing such things, the question is whether we can imagine any who wouldn't."

Translation: Croak, croak.

-- Flint is a Frog (flint.is.a.frog@croak.com), January 24, 2001.

It's good to have adults back in the White House.

-- (Paracelsus@Pb.Au), January 24, 2001.

Flint, you are the most accomplished martre I've ever come across.

Keep up the faith, I'm sure you'll be proven right in the end.

-- Bemused (and_amazed@you.people), January 25, 2001.

This speaks for itself...I am amazed that anyone would, or could, even try to defend it...

-- Uncle Bob (unclb0b@aol.com), January 25, 2001.

go back too GODS WORD & YOU WILL UNDERSTAND, Where we are headed. clue=it's gonna get worse!!!!!!!

-- al-d (dogs@zianet.com), January 25, 2001.

I don't think the Frog man is trying to defend these actions (if they actually occured in the first place). I think Frog was offened at Flint saying he couldn't imagine any of us not doing these things. For the record, that offended me too.

-- Tarzan the Ape Man (tarzan@swingingthroughthejunglewithouta.net), January 25, 2001.

It's good to have adults back in the White House.

-- (Paracelsus@Pb.Au), January 24, 2001.

I'll add a corollary, "Good riddance to low life scumbag, trailer trash who doesn't know how to shut up!"

How anyone can defend the Clintons is beyond me!

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), January 25, 2001.

Flint, you are not speaking truths here. I couldn't see Ford or Bush senior doing anything like this at all. Give me a break if you think Republicans in the past have done this to the dems taking office.

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), January 25, 2001.

Maria:

I have no information on prior administrations one way or another. However, I see similar extremes being expressed on this forum from both ends of the political spectrum, and I suspect that people are people either way. I haven't seen any indication that Republicans are congenitally considerate while Democrats are congenitally childish.

However, saying everyone here would do such things is a bit overboard. There is a minority I'd expect it from, but only a small minority. However, it doesn't take many to do what's been reported here, and there were many thousands of candidates to do it. If 50 or so were all that were responsible, 50 people can do a lot of damage...

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), January 25, 2001.

For the record Flint, before it gets buried by spin, here's what you said:

So the question is NOT whether we can picture some of our forum participants doing such things, the question is whether we can imagine any who wouldn't. That's a tough challenge...

-- Tarzan the Ape Man (tarzan@swingingthroughthejunglewithouta.net), January 25, 2001.

I say we fine the Clintons whatever the costs to clean up their mess. I heard that only Mrs. Gore had the decency to apologize to Mrs. Cheney for the mess in the VP's office.

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), January 25, 2001.

Unless you can prove that the Clintons themselves defaced the offices, or ordered/encouraged their staff to, the only people who should be fined for cleaning would be the people who actually did it. I'm sure that you have had co-workers, employees, direct reports, even children, who have done nasty things that you didn't know about and would not have condoned had you known. Should you yourself then be fined for the bad behavior of others?

-- Tarzan the Ape Man (tarzan@swingingthroughthejunglewithouta.net), January 25, 2001.

Give me a break if you think Republicans in the past have done this to the dems taking office.

Maria- Yesterday I was listening to one of those news talk shows ("Hardball" on MSNBC?) during which they were discussing this. According to the person being interviewed (a former white house "advisor"?), similar acts, albeit to a much lesser degree, were indeed undertaken by the George H Bush staff when they left the white house. One example he mentioned was that much of the office furniture had been placed on top of each other and piled to the ceiling in a number of rooms. I got the impression a number of other "less than professional" acts had also taken place.

I'd also have to agree with what Tarzan just posted. You can't legitimately hold the Clinton's responsible for this unless you know for a fact they had prior knowledge and had given their approval.

-- CD (costavike@hotmail.com), January 25, 2001.

Flint,

Republicans are congenitally congenial. Have a really nice day. :-)

-- (nemesis@awol.com), January 25, 2001.

Tar, we have laws now where parents can be fined or jailed for their children's bad behavior. You've taken me literally here, I wrote it tongue in cheek but now that you challenge it I find it might have some merit. He obviously condoned it and that in and of itself in unacceptable; the scumbag should be held responsible.

Do you think Clinton really didn't know it was going on? The Clinton with a steel-trap mind. The Clinton who knows all. The Clinton who micro-managed every detail of his administration. Nah, not that Clinton.

CD, albeit to a much lesser degree That *is* the question. Where does prank become vandalism? IMO these actions crossed over.

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), January 25, 2001.

He obviously condoned it and that in and of itself in unacceptable; the scumbag should be held responsible.

We don't even know that he KNEW about it let alone that he condoned it.

Do you think Clinton really didn't know it was going on? The Clinton with a steel-trap mind. The Clinton who knows all. The Clinton who micro-managed every detail of his administration. Nah, not that Clinton.

Do you have any idea how many staffers there are in the White House at any given time? The number is well into the hundreds. I don't care how smart or anal retentive you are, you can't keep track of all the activities of that many people, particularly when you're planning a move, resolving a lawsuit, and trying to develop a legacy. And that's assuming that the damage occured in the first place and was caused by the White House staffers.

-- Tarzan the Ape Man (tarzan@swingingthroughthejunglewithouta.net), January 25, 2001.

So the question is NOT whether we can picture some of our forum participants doing such things, the question is whether we can imagine any who wouldn't. That's a tough challenge...

Flint: KISS MY ASS.

I like Tarzan was offended.

And FWIW, are you 'one' of the ones who wouldnt?

Then you have the nerve to belittle someone who called you on your arrogant holier than thou attitude?

Damn, I just had a 'scarey' thought, you arent my ex-husband are you?

I cant believe nobody but a few spoke up regarding your statement.

Rest easy Flint, I am one who wouldnt trash the place...

Again, I ask, WOULD YOU?????????????????????????????????

-- sumer (shh@aol.con), January 25, 2001.

That *is* the question. Where does prank become vandalism? IMO these actions crossed over.

Point taken, Maria.

-- CD (costavike@hotmail.com), January 25, 2001.

http://washingtontimes.com/national/inbeltway.htm

January 25, 2001

Inside the Beltway

John McCaslin

Political tidbits and other shenanigans from around the nation's capital.

Stripped bare The curators were warned to count the silver when the Clintons left the White House, and the Air Force, as it turns out, should have listened, too. Now that Bill Clinton is gone — after the longest goodbye anyone remembers — an Air Force steward tells us about the former president's "official" farewell flight to New York on Inaugural Day.

The presidential plane was "stripped bare." Since Air Force One is the plane only of the president, the designation of the Boeing 747 was changed from Air Force One to "Special Air Mission" and by the time Mr. Clinton boarded he was no longer the president. As a courtesy of President Bush, the plane was nevertheless equipped with all the presidential amenities Mr. Clinton had grown accustomed to during his two terms in office. But not for long. Missing from the plane on arrival in New York, Inside the Beltway is told, was all the porcelain china, silverware, salt and pepper shakers, blankets and pillow cases — most of it bearing the presidential seal. What most astonished the military steward was that even a cache of Colgate toothpaste, not stamped with the presidential seal, was snatched from a compartment beneath the presidential plane's sink. (The good news, we suppose, is that there was no halitosis on the return flight to Washington.)

-- (Sheeple@Greener.Pastures), January 25, 2001.

This proves once again that Repugs have no sense of humor. You are stiff-necked boring prigs. My kids at the House just wanted to give me a fun sendoff.

And you never even mentioned the Saran wrap on the toilet seats. Oooh that was a good one. A-hee, a-ha, a-hooooo-har-har-har!

-- (Bill@Chapaqua.dullsville), January 25, 2001.

sumer, I for one don't not read much of Flint's posts, merely skimming them. So, thanks for telling like it is and I agree with you.

Tar, Ya know I think we see *almost* eye to eye on a lot of subjects but we miss each other by a few inches. And that's assuming that the damage occured in the first place and was caused by the White House staffers. Hmmmm You weren't trusting that Linda Chavey spoke the truth about her live-in NOT being help. Here Clinton hasn't even spoken up (a sign to me for sure, and Mrs Gore knew so Mr Gore knew, so Clinton didn't? I question it) and yet you trust that he had no involvement. I'm not talking evidence, we need an investigation to have evidence. I'm talking about your gut feel. My gut tells me, this scumball knows every little detail that goes on in the big house. He is a lot of things and stupid isn't one of them.

Sheeple, that article indeed shows the extent Clinton knew what was going on.

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), January 26, 2001.

You weren't trusting that Linda Chavey spoke the truth about her live-in NOT being help.

Linda Chavez was very upfront about harboring an illegal alien and giving her money for chores. Clinton hasn't even been asked whether or not he knew what happened.

Here Clinton hasn't even spoken up (a sign to me for sure, and Mrs Gore knew so Mr Gore knew, so Clinton didn't? I question it) and yet you trust that he had no involvement.

BURN THE WITCH!

Seriously, the fact that Clinton hasn't said anything isn't proof of diddly squat. I've never publicly spoken about DB Cooper. Does this now make me a suspect? Moreover, I've never said there was no involvement of Clinton, only that there is no proof that Clinton was involved, condoned, or even knew of any vandalism that took place at the White House.

Got it? I'm going to say it one more time slowly so it sinks in.

There is no proof that Clinton was involved, condoned, or even knew of any vandalism that took place at the White House.

In your rush to judegment (or is that condemnation?) you have ignored the fact that everyone in America is innocent until proven guilty. You have let your hatred of Bill Clinton blind you to the fact that no one has even asked him about this issue. Don't you think you're jumping the gun, just a little?

When, exactly, did Mrs. Gore apologize to Mrs. Cheney?

I'm not talking evidence, we need an investigation to have evidence.

Good. NOW you're talking sense. In this country, we have an investigation first to find out what happened, THEN we make decisions about who to accuse of exactly what.

I'm talking about your gut feel. My gut tells me, this scumball knows every little detail that goes on in the big house.

That's the problem. You're relying on your "gut" rather than your brain. You've thrown logic and reasoning out the window in favor of having one more thing to hold against Bill Clinton. Good night woman, there hasn't even been an inquiry yet and you're ready to hang him from the nearest tree! I sincerely hope that you never sit on a jury.

-- Tarzan the Ape Man (tarzan@swingingthroughthejunglewithouta.net), January 26, 2001.

Tar, (shaking head in disbelief) Didn't I admit that it was tongue in cheek? Why do you ignore, Oh nevermind.

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), January 26, 2001.

No, your tongue in cheek comment seems directed at your original post only. There is nothing to indicate any humor in your subsequent posts.

-- Tarzan the Ape Man (tarzan@swingingthroughthejunglewithouta.net), January 26, 2001.

Tar, I specifically never CAPITALIZE any words because I don't want to come off as argumentative. Yet I see a lot of captial letters in your posts. Sorry, don't know the "ins and outs" of forum decorum. I can assure you that even if my posts didn't have humor, it wasn't meant to be hard ass.

You wrote: There is no proof that Clinton was involved, condoned, or even knew of any vandalism that took place at the White House. When I in fact had previously posted: I'm not talking evidence, we need an investigation to have evidence.

Now why would you beat the point by bolding and highlighting your comment in a separate paragraph, when I admitted it in my previous post?

Tar, I think (no proof mind you, just a gut feel which I use just as much as I use my brain - I can assure you of this), you like to argue.

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), January 26, 2001.

Tarzan:

Good point, and exactly the same point I was trying to make to FS about the NAACP case. FS finds the Florida officials guilty, and there hasn't been an inquiry yet, just a list of allegations. The fact that you reserve your observations for those who jump to conclusions YOU dislike is significant. Where were you when FS was jumping to foregone conclusions based on gut reactions?

Still, this mess speaks ill of the departing administration, and the buck does stop at the top. Clinton may have had no clue what happened until he read it in the papers, but he nonetheless bears ultimate responsibility. In the words of the prophet, never trust the prince whose minister cheats you.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), January 26, 2001.

The story that hit the news today was not about the mess they left behind, but the mess of stuff that they took when they left. Yipes.

"So the question is NOT whether we can picture some of our forum participants doing such things, the question is whether we can imagine any who wouldn't. That's a tough challenge... "

As for Flint's hypothetical fantasy forumite challenge - I didn't see shortsheeting the Lincoln Bedroom on the list, so maybe I'm off the hook. It would have nothing to do with partisanship - {more of a raw talent or character flaw}.

-- flora (***@__._), January 26, 2001.

Wow, I cannot believe the idiocy on display in this thread. Do you people actually BELIEVE that just because Matt Drudge and the Washington Times "reported" this that it's actually true?

Oh, but they're both VERY reputable "news" sources! (laughter)

Strange, isn't it? No one else is reporting this -- not the AP, not the Washington Post, not the NY Times ...

Isn't that weird? I mean, if it was such an ugly, horrible, awful crime that happened, if it was indeed such a scandal, wouldn't every paper in the nation rush to print this "news"?

Now Drudge is "reporting" that Bush has decided "brush off" these "pranks" -- oh, how statesmanlike, how noble of our leader!

You people actually believe this hard-right crap like it's true, like it's news!

It's phoney! It's manufactured propaganda!

Until I see HARD EVIDENCE, that's DOCUMENTED EVIDENCE that this alleged criminal conduct occcurred, I wouldn't believe an ounce of what Drudge or the Washington Times reports.

Even Flint bought this! Talk about naive hard-right fools who suck manufactured propaganda!

-- Coup 2k (thanks@pubs!.com), January 26, 2001.

Coup 2K,

Guess you haven't listened to any of the news shows as of the past 24- 48 hours. My local news has had the story on, I've seen quite a bit of it on Fox, CNN has covered it, ABC news has covered it. (I will admit that I was very surprised to hear ABC mention it).

Hey... I was just reporting it. Pranks are pranks, but when does a prank end?

-- (Sheeple@Greener.Pastures), January 26, 2001.

Bush aides mum on reports of White House vandalism

By Anne E. Kornblut, Globe Staff, 1/26/2001

WASHINGTON - First they noticed some letter W keys were missing from White House computers. Then Bush officials said they began finding other peculiarities around the West Wing: a mirror hidden inside a bookshelf, a jacket vanished from where it was supposed to be.

By yesterday, the condition in which the Bush team found the administration buildings had blossomed into the sort of miniature scandale that Washington loves to hate, complete with racy headlines splashed across the Drudge Report and piercing questions at the daily White House briefing.

Was it true that pornographic material had been left on fax machines in the Old Executive Office Building? Was there graffiti scribbled in the halls? Had Tipper Gore really called Lynne Cheney to apologize?

No public evidence exists that Clinton and Gore staff members vandalized the White House or Old Executive Office Building.>/b>

In another administration, the queries might have been met with a wink and a pun or encouraged as evidence of a vast conspiracy in the opposite camp.

But in the new Bush administration, the reports are giving aides the perfect chance to advance the president's cause: appearing to ''change the tone'' by saying nothing at all.

Bush aides are not denying the accounts, circulated by anonymous sources and conservative pundits, of pornography, graffiti, and cut telephone wires. Instead, the administration is maintaining a proud silence, part of its ''no complaining, no whining'' approach to governance, said Cheney spokeswoman Juleanna Glover-Weiss.

''We are declining to elaborate,'' she said, when asked about an alleged phone call from the former vice president's wife to the current one, in which Tipper Gore reportedly apologized to Lynne Cheney for acts of vandalism that may or may not have occurred.

''I choose not to describe what acts were done that we found upon arrival, because I think that's part of changing the tone in Washington,'' White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said.

Fleischer continued: ''The question is: Do you have to blame somebody in this town? And bear with us. President Bush is not going to come to Washington for the purpose of blaming somebody in this town. And it's a different way of governing. It's a different way of leading.''

Bush has long presented himself as ''a uniter, not a divider,'' a politician skilled at bringing together political opponents and softening the rhetoric of partisan debate. And he pledged throughout the campaign to restore dignity to the Oval Office, a task he embarked on last week when he instructed staff members to wear appropriate attire - in other words, no blue jeans - into the presidential work space.

In the midst of the honeymoon Bush has enjoyed since his inauguration Saturday, the reports of unusual discoveries, starting with the missing ''W'' keys, at first seemed innocent, even humorous. White House aides readily admitted to their disappearance, and Fleischer voluntarily informed reporters that a flak jacket passed down to him from the previous press secretary, Clinton spokesman Jake Siewert, had disappeared.

The jacket has since been found, and administration officials have downplayed the seriousness of the ''W'' offenses. But the other reports - especially those trumpeted on the Drudge Report, the Web site maintained by Matt Drudge - have created a dilemma for the administration. Aware that any accusations about the past administration might appear to contradict the effort to ''change the tone,'' Bush officials have not even admitted conducting an investigation.

Yet they have created a certain amount of confusion - within the press corps, at least - by declining to offer details. At the same time, the administration is facing questions about its accountability to the public, especially where the cost to taxpayers is concerned. Fleischer refused to estimate how much the damage cost.

Fleischer instead offered a sort of blanket reprieve to his predecessors. ''The president understands that transitions can be times of difficulty and strong emotion,'' he said. ''He's going to approach it in that vein.''

Bush should know. When the victorious President Clinton and his troops seized the White House in 1993, they found the telephones a wreck, computers missing hard drives, and a departing staff that gave them the cold shoulder during the transition.

This story ran on page 12 of the Boston Globe on 1/26/2001. © Copyright 2001 Globe Newspaper Company.

-- In other words, it's all made up! (GOP@dopes.com), January 28, 2001.

off

-- (clean@up.crew), January 28, 2001.