I Would Like Rove And Bush To Eat My Asshole
The corruption of the current White House is fucking amazing, especially considering George told us he was going to bring honor and respectability back to the presidency. The guy is the ultimate example of everything that the Founding Fathers feared. Using tax dollars to aid Republican candidates in elections is just one more example.
Top Commerce and Treasury Departments officials appeared with Republican candidates and doled out millions in federal money in battleground congressional districts and states after receiving White House political briefings detailing GOP election strategy.
What a bunch of cunts. Plain and simple. Between 2001 and 2006, the Treasury Department received White House political briefings on how they could aid Republican candidates. The Commerce Department received four briefings. These actions are quite simply not allowed, as defined by the Hatch Act, which bans the use of government resources for campaign activities.
Under the Hatch Act, Cabinet members are permitted to attend political briefings and appear with members of Congress. But Cabinet members and other political appointees aren't permitted to spend taxpayer money with the aim of benefiting candidates.
The White House is already being investigated by the House Oversight Committee to determine whether the administration violated the Hatch Act by briefing at least 15 federal agencies.
During the briefings at Treasury and Commerce, then-Bush administration political director Ken Mehlman and other White House aides detailed competitive congressional districts, battleground election states and key media markets and outlined GOP strategy for getting out the vote.
After the briefings, Commerce and Treasury political appointees made public appearances and grant announcements that just happened to benefit GOP interests. That sounds like it completely violates the Hatch Act. I wonder how the Democratic Congress will fail to do anything about it? Unfortunately, violations are not illegal. They are treated as administrative matters and usually lead to suspension or termination of those who violate the ban.
The law needs to be changed so that these type of actions are illegal. Why would a loyal follower care about violating the act? They would lose their job, but probably end up with a cushier position somewhere else due to their partisan actions.
Take Commerce Secretary Don Evans, who just happened to be Bush's former campaign finance chairman. He made eight appearances with Republican incumbents during competitive races. While there he handed out millions of dollars in grants and made public announcements. He has already left the Commerce Department, so he will not be punished. I would like to at the very least, hold his head in a toilet and flush it.
The guy who took over for Evans, picked up right where the big E left off.
In 2006, Evans' successor, Carlos Gutierrez, and his aides also made public announcements with several Republican congressional incumbents, including in the battleground states of Missouri, Pennsylvania and New Mexico. Weeks before the 2006 election, Gutierrez and Congresswoman Wilson announced $3.45 million in grants for Albuquerque organizations. Also in the weeks before the election, a deputy secretary and Republican Sen. Rick Santorum announced that the department would be investing $2.25 million in Philadelphia.
You tax dollars at work, helping those poor, poor Republicans. Don't get mad Democrats, just sit back and take it.
White House Continues to Violate the Hatch Act
The Hatch Act is a New Deal-era federal law that was initially passed to help stem the spread of communism and patronage within the federal government. It prohibits federal employees from engaging in a specific list of political activities. Among them are the following prohibitions
These federal and D.C. employees may not
engage in political activity while:
-on duty
-in a government office
-wearing an official uniform
-using a government vehicle
-wear partisan political buttons on duty
The penalties for violating the Hatch Act are not criminal, but they are clear and stiff.
An employee who violates the Hatch Act shall be removed from their position, and funds appropriated for the position from which removed thereafter may not be used to pay the employee or individual.
The reason Im bringing this up is because for the second time in three weeks, a scandal has erupted over obvious violations of the Hatch Act. First it was the administrations use of Republican National Committee e-mail addresses for official federal business. Never one to stop while they were ahead, the White House admitted today that they had as many as 20 briefings for federal employees on certain GOP election prospects while on government time.
White House spokesman Scott Stanzel said briefings were held at other federal agencies besides the GSA, for a total of about 20 most in 2006 and a couple in 2007. They were conducted by White House political director Sara Taylor or Jennings, her deputy. It had been known that other briefings had been held, but not how many.
Others were held in previous years as well, but Stanzel said the White House hasn't kept a count of how many.
Bush spokeswoman Dana Perino said no laws were broken and that the White House counsel's office signed off on the effort.
"It's not unlawful and it wasn't unusual for informational briefings to be given," Perino said. "There is no prohibition under the Hatch Act of allowing political appointees to talk to other political appointees about the political landscape in which they are trying to advance the president's agenda."
Oh, well if White House counsels office said it was legal than it must be on the up-and-up, right? Theyve certainly never used a dubious legal interpretation to justify anything untoward before, have they? Of course not.
Unfortunately for the Bushies, some Democrats have some problems with the administrations interpretation of relevant events.
They have alleged that at the end of the January presentation at GSA, Administrator Lurita Doan asked all present to consider how they could use the agency to "help our candidates" in 2008. They also question whether the PowerPoint demonstration Jennings used violated the Hatch Act.
Asking federal employees to use the Government Services Administration to help Republican candidates win is a far, far cry from having informational briefings. If the Democrats accusations are true (and knowing this administration they probably are,) then there should be a whole heaping helping of people losing their jobs.
That is, of course, if the Special Counsel chosen to investigate these issues within the White House doesnt lose his job first.
The Office of Special Counsel, led by Scott Bloch, is in charge of enforcing the Hatch Act. At the same time, Bloch himself is being investigated by the Bush administration on separate matters, including his enforcement of the Hatch Act.
[
]
At the same time that Bloch is investigating the White House, the Bush administration is investigating Bloch for his handling of Hatch Act cases as well as a complaint filed against Bloch by a group of career Office of Special Counsel employees and four public interest groups.
The complaint alleges that Bloch created a hostile work environment with retaliatory acts against his employees. It states that 12 career employees were involuntarily reassigned because they were believed to have been involved in whistle-blowing. The complaint, being handled by the Office of Personnel Management's inspector general, also alleges that Bloch did not enforce bans against discrimination based on sexual orientation in the federal work place.
"The OPM investigation is a completely separate matter," said Loren Smith, a spokesman for Bloch, who has denied the allegations in the complaint.
Debra Katz, an attorney representing the employees, alleged that Bloch launched the investigation into political activity at the White House because he feared repercussions from the investigation of his own activities.
In other words, were never going to get to the bottom of this. And the White House skates away as law-breakers yet again.