• news
  • SUNDAY OCTOBER 28 2007 9:00 AM

Democrats Fuck Whisleblowers In Their Whistle Holes

Submitted by FearTheReaper

Edited by erin_broadley

Tags: Democrats, Department of Justice, House Judiciary Committee



This would be an amusing story if it wasn’t so fucked up. The Democrats have had a tough time getting to the bottom of whatever bullshit has been going on at the Justice Department. The White House has refused to turn over email and pertinent documents, while telling witnesses that they should refuse to testify. Alberto Gonzales flat out lied to Congress on several occasions and will probably be prosecuted. So, this summer Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee had a good idea: They set up a way for people inside the Justice Department to whistle blow secretly.

Members of the Committee set up a form on their website that employees of the Justice Department could fill out confidentially.


Although the panel said it would not accept anonymous tips, it assured those who came forward that their identity would be held in the "strictest confidence."


Today, Democrats completely exposed all of the whistleblowers in such an idiotic manner that it is startling: By putting their names in the “to” field, instead of “bcc.”


But in an email sent out today, the committee inadvertently sent the email addresses of all the would-be whistleblowers to everyone who had written in to the tip line.


Ah, oops. Hey, thanks for helping us out, okay if we shove a pipe up your ass? The email went to every person who had ever used the website form. That means email addresses went to every whistle blower, reporter, supervisor or whoever else filled out the form. Maybe even a few right wing assholes, who filled out the form with the message, “Go fuck yourself.” The best part of the story is the reason the mass email was sent in the first place.


To announce careful new procedures about to be put in place by the committee for reviewing the tips received through the committee's website.


Not with this email, though. After this one. Seriously, after this email, it’s all going to be good. Trust us.

So, what to do if you are the committee? You just made a horrendous error that completely fucked over a lot of people who were tying to do good. How about sending out a second email to recall the original email, that also included everyone’s email address in the “to” field?

Will somebody get this asshole away from the computer before he emails porn to his grandma? The Committee explained the situation:


A technological error in a recent communication inadvertently disclosed certain email addresses. The Committee has not begun its review of the emails, and does not know if any of them are in fact from Justice Department employees as opposed to private citizens expressing more general views. The Committee apologizes for any concern this error may have caused, and is making every effort to protect the confidentiality of those who chose to provide information on the tip line.


Uh, yeah, okay. Too bad some of the whistleblowers have already complained to the media and the committee. And there is good reason for them to complain, as some of the emails were sent straight to Lucifer himself.


Some of the email addresses appear to be transparently fake, but there's also, much more troubling, a vice_president@whitehouse.gov carbon copied on the email, which is the public email address for Vice President Dick Cheney.


Enjoy work on Monday! Satan was just carbon copied about how you fucked him over.

Here’s the email that was sent out.


Subject: Important notice re House Judiciary Committee tip line, e-mails.

You are among the people who have submitted e-mails to the U.S. House Judiciary Committee on its Web site tip line for Department of Justice employees to report allegations or concerns regarding possible wrongdoing involving the Department. This message is to inform you that the Committee is now ending the tip line and has voted to approve procedures governing the confidentiality of the e-mails received.

Under these procedures, only Members of the Judiciary Committee, and Committee staff specifically designated by the Democratic Chairman or Ranking Republican Member, will have access to the e-mails, and they are prohibited from removing any e-mail from Committee offices. Any broader disclosure of any e-mail would first require a vote of the Committee to authorize it. It would be the Committees intent to consult with the sender of any e-mail before any such vote takes place.

This message is also to advise you that you have three business days – until 11:59 p.m. on Tuesday, October 30 – to notify us if you wish to withdraw your e-mail rather than have it reviewed by the Committee under these procedures. If you so notify us, your e-mail, along with any records pertaining to its submission, will be destroyed. If you do not so notify us, we will conclude that you have agreed to submit your e-mail to the Committee under these procedures.

Any request that an e-mail be withdrawn should state in the subject space "PLEASE WITHDRAW E-MAIL," and should include in the body of the request the e-mail address under which your e-mail was submitted, if different than the one used to make the request to withdraw. It should also specify the date and time, if known, or the approximate date and time, that the e-mail was submitted.

Thank you for your interest in the Judiciary Committees work.


It’s weird you would say that, because I am not so interested in the Judiciary Committees work anymore.

Keep up the good work, Democrats!

  • PERMALINK
  • PRINT
  • Digg This
  • Email To A Friend
 

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2

Next

Comments
Varuka_Salt

Varuka_Salt

I'm lost
October 2006

OCT 28, 2007 11:47 AM

Fantasyland ? O RLY?
Research...I duz it.
Why would you want to defend a total asshole like Gonzales anyway? He's one of the biggest asshats of all time.

Varuka_Salt

Varuka_Salt

I'm lost
October 2006

OCT 28, 2007 12:20 PM

Took like .002 seconds on Google to come up with that too. My cut n paste keys are exhausted!

jpaul256

jpaul256

Spring, TX
June 2006

OCT 28, 2007 12:36 PM

bald_eagle said:

varukasalt said:
Fantasyland ? O RLY?
Research...I duz it.
Why would you want to defend a total asshole like Gonzales anyway? He's one of the biggest asshats of all time.


Research and documentation!? eeek How irresponsible of you.



Your link is to an OPINION piece maintained by someone on the left. Again, outside of the wishes of the moveon.orgasmics, there is ZERO chance that Gonzalez will be prosecuted for perjury.

Also, can you point to the section in my original comment where I defended Gonzalez?

I didn't think so.

Stating that Gonzalez won't be prosecuted is not a defense of the man.

soulcompromise

soulcompromise

I'm lost
November 2006

OCT 28, 2007 12:47 PM

I would probably just withdraw my email if I was on the list.

jpaul256

jpaul256

Spring, TX
June 2006

OCT 28, 2007 12:47 PM

bald_eagle said:
It's a statement of opinion. I guess when it's your own, expressing it doesn't make you irresponsible.



I respectfully disagree. Mixing fact and opinion is a tactic being adopted by the worst of the left and the right and is one of the reasons why getting information from the internet is a recipe for disaster. Standards related to debate and composition have been thrown out the window.

FearTheReaper

FearTheReaper

NEWSWIRE

I'm lost

OCT 28, 2007 12:50 PM

What's worse?

An author trusting the words of a former US Attorney?

Or a pathetic guy in Texas attempting to stop the truth?


The U.S. Inspector General may recommend criminal prosecution of departed Attorney General Alberto Gonzales at the conclusion of an investigation, possibly as early as next month, the fired former U.S. attorney for Western Washington told a Spokane audience Friday.

His refusal to open a federal criminal investigation into voter fraud allegations in Gov. Chris Gregoire's razor-thin victory over Republican challenger Dino Rossi in 2004 may be the reason he was fired, John McKay told the Federal Bar Association.

McKay said he was summoned to Washington, D.C., in June and questioned for eight hours about possible reasons for his firing by investigators with the Office of Inspector General, who will forward their final report to Congress.

"My best guess is it will be released sometime next month,'' and likely will include recommendations for criminal prosecutions of Gonzales and maybe others, McKay said.

It was reported last week that Gonzales has now retained a high-profile defense lawyer, and apparently is refusing to answer questions from the Inspector General, which could signify the investigation is nearly complete, McKay said.

"The chief law enforcement officer for the United States should not lie under oath,'' McKay told the bar association.



And in case you want to blather more ignorance out of your fat mouth:


John Larkin McKay, a member of a prominent Republican family in the state, attended the University of Washington, where he received a Bachelor of Arts degree in political science in 1978. After working as an aide to Congressman Joel Pritchard (R-WA) in 1978-79, McKay earned his law degree at Creighton University in Omaha, Nebraska in 1982. He was admitted to the Washington State Bar and joined the Seattle law firm of Lane Powell Spears Lubersky in 1982, eventually becoming a litigation partner with that firm. During this time, he was admitted to practice before the United States District Court, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, and the United States Supreme Court.



It is one thing to want to be willfully ignorant by only listening to one source of news - obviously Fox and Rush -but don't attempt to push your ignorant views on others. You are often wrong and your blathering anger will not stop reality from making you constantly looking like an enormous asshole.

attn_ho

attn_ho

Brooklyn, NY
February 2004

OCT 28, 2007 12:52 PM

jpaul256 said:

bald_eagle said:
It's a statement of opinion. I guess when it's your own, expressing it doesn't make you irresponsible.



I respectfully disagree. Mixing fact and opinion is a tactic being adopted by the worst of the left and the right and is one of the reasons why getting information from the internet is a recipe for disaster. Standards related to debate and composition have been thrown out the window.



youre a joke.

FearTheReaper

FearTheReaper

NEWSWIRE

I'm lost

OCT 28, 2007 12:54 PM

attn_ho said:

jpaul256 said:

bald_eagle said:
It's a statement of opinion. I guess when it's your own, expressing it doesn't make you irresponsible.



I respectfully disagree. Mixing fact and opinion is a tactic being adopted by the worst of the left and the right and is one of the reasons why getting information from the internet is a recipe for disaster. Standards related to debate and composition have been thrown out the window.



youre a joke.



From a guy whose "facts" all happen to be not true.

FearTheReaper

FearTheReaper

NEWSWIRE

I'm lost

OCT 28, 2007 01:05 PM

bald_eagle said:

jpaul256 said:

bald_eagle said:
It's a statement of opinion. I guess when it's your own, expressing it doesn't make you irresponsible.



I respectfully disagree. Mixing fact and opinion is a tactic being adopted by the worst of the left and the right and is one of the reasons why getting information from the internet is a recipe for disaster. Standards related to debate and composition have been thrown out the window.



FTR said he probably will be prosecuted. You said there's no chance in hell that he will be prosecuted. What's the difference, other than one of the opinions being yours?

You later stated it as a plain fact - he won't be prosecuted. Now who's mixing fact and opinion?



Hold on, he's jerking off.

BlastProcessing

BlastProcessing

USA
OLD SKOOL

OCT 28, 2007 02:43 PM

jpaul256 said:

bald_eagle said:

varukasalt said:
Fantasyland ? O RLY?
Research...I duz it.
Why would you want to defend a total asshole like Gonzales anyway? He's one of the biggest asshats of all time.


Research and documentation!? eeek How irresponsible of you.



Your link is to an OPINION piece maintained by someone on the left. Again, outside of the wishes of the moveon.orgasmics, there is ZERO chance that Gonzalez will be prosecuted for perjury.

Also, can you point to the section in my original comment where I defended Gonzalez?

I didn't think so.

Stating that Gonzalez won't be prosecuted is not a defense of the man.



This is kinda tangential, but what's with your hardon for misspelling Alberto Gonzales' name?

JunkyardAngel

JunkyardAngel

San Gabriel, CA
February 2006

OCT 28, 2007 03:06 PM



POLITICS: Democrats Fuck Whisleblowers In Their Whistle Holes



Please. . .where exactly is the whistlehole located? Diagram, please.


SockPuppet

SockPuppet

I'm lost
July 2006

OCT 28, 2007 05:13 PM

JunkyardAngel said:


POLITICS: Democrats Fuck Whisleblowers In Their Whistle Holes



Please. . .where exactly is the whistlehole located? Diagram, please.



You can find it yourself with this simple test:

- Whistle. ("Dixie" works pretty well, if you can remember the tune.)

- Now, locate the hole you whistled with.

... And you're done.

tongue

Clidna

Clidna

Canada
January 2005

OCT 28, 2007 07:56 PM

jpaul256 said:

bald_eagle said:

jpaul256 said:
FTR said:


Alberto Gonzales flat out lied to Congress on several occasions and will probably be prosecuted.



This is a completely irresponsible and erroneous statement. There isn't a chance in hell that Gonzalez will be prosecuted for anything.

You need to learn to separate fact from the fantasies that exist only in your head.


This first half of the statement is quite factual. The second half is clearly an opinion. How is this irresponsible?



I was clearly speaking to the notion that Gonzalez would be prosecuted for perjury.

I don't know about you, but I find the mixture of fact and opinion - IN THE SAME SENTENCE - to be irresponsible. It is a Coulter type move that is a disservice to both the author and the reader.



Strangely enough, most of us are intelligent enough to be able to tell the difference for ourselves... you don't have to protect us anymore.

As for the actual issue, it doesn't surprise me... I've been trying to teach people about the BCC option for years, and it's in one hole, out the other. wink

Element_103

Element_103

Apo, AE
September 2005

OCT 29, 2007 08:13 PM

Have to sadly agree with Clidna about trying to educate knuckleheads about the BCC option. I've even written a step-by-step tutorial that covers pretty much every online and even some dial-up ISP email accounts. If anyone would like a copy just send me a PM. Works great for emailing your friends who forward you forwards of forwards with forwards of numerous email addresses forwarded in every TO field. tongue

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2

Next

featured interviews