Jump to content

bush Whitehouse Interfered With Climate Change Science


DomeGnome
 Share

Recommended Posts

Duh.

http://oversight.house.gov/documents/20071210101633.pdf

Conclusion:

The Committee s 16-month investigation reveals a systematic White House effort to

censor climate scientists by controlling their access to the press and editing testimony to

Congress. The White House was particularly active in stifling discussions of the link

between increased hurricane intensity and global warming. The White House also sought

to minimize the significance and certainty of climate change by extensively editing

government climate change reports. Other actions taken by the White House involved

editing EPA legal opinions and op-eds on climate change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

DomeGnome (12/10/2007)
yeah, I know that the systematic disinformation plan directed by the whitehouse is well known and documented.

I just thought that certain people should know that they're just part of the fool's tools.

;)

What is the status of the report? Has it been adopted yet? Who is responsible for it's content? Is it bipartisan?

Is this grounds for impeachment? How high up does it go in the "whitehouse"?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

snake (12/11/2007)

Real bi partisan investigation. Thats all congress has done since changing hands, investigated the Bush White house. Its a huge reason why their polling #s are so low. The dems are obsessed on Bush. I would love to see just a smidgeon of democrat efforts go into economic solutions for the future, stopping the enemy that wants us DEAD, tax reform, immigration reform, but NO. They set up committee after committee to investigate Bush. This stupid committee is a joke, no better then the 9/11 commission with Jamie Gorelick, who set up the DAM wall between our units. Nice post, GNOME. You and all the other far leftist are getting alittle desperate, and Hillary is coming UNDONE.

God forbid Congress should fulfill its Constitutional oversight duty by examining wrong-doing and malfeasance in the Executive Branch. Because Congress is really just a puppet and mouthpiece for the Presidency, as your GOP boys proved over the last 8 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

snake (12/11/2007)
Ramen (12/11/2007)

Ramen, congress has become a laughing stock and its because they care not a whit abt the people they represent, they're entirely enamored with power. Now, power means investigating and hearings. The dems are not concerned with real work, they're consumed with hate. Maybe not all of them but their leadership, Pelosi and Reid cannot tackle the enemies of our country. They are too concerned with tarnishing Bush. Just think, how effective we could be if our leaders, put aside the party line and tackled the problems I mentioned.

Bipartisanship does not mean that Congress does whatever your boy in the White House says. There is plenty of evidence that the administration has engaged in illegal and unconstitutional acts, and it is the job of Congress to investigate those abuses. How many WH officials have resigned over the past year because of these investigations? You even lost the Attorney General, the highest law-enforcement official in the country, because of a legitimate investigation into whether he lied before Congress (possibly under oath).

And btw, the Democratic Congress passed more legislation this year than the GOP did over the past 3 years combined. Your GOP boys didn't even get the budget passed last year, so Pelosi and Reid had to do their work as well as their own work this year.

You're the last person on these boards to be complain about partisan investigations (::cough:: Clinton impeachment ::cough:: ) and a do-nothing Congress.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Real bi partisan investigation. Thats all congress has done since changing hands, investigated the Bush White house. Its a huge reason why their polling #s are so low. The dems are obsessed on Bush. I would love to see just a smidgeon of democrat efforts go into economic solutions for the future, stopping the enemy that wants us DEAD, tax reform, immigration reform, but NO. They set up committee after committee to investigate Bush. This stupid committee is a joke, no better then the 9/11 commission with Jamie Gorelick, who set up the DAM wall between our units. Nice post, GNOME. You and all the other far leftist are getting alittle desperate, and Hillary is coming UNDONE.

That's what you said about Whitewater, Travelgate, Lewinski, etc., right?

But that was more important, of course!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You hit a nail on the head. Republicans are forced out for conduct Hyped by the media and the left. Gonzales fired the judges, as did Janet El Rino did. Janet went on to send a child back to Cuba and many more horrible acts from the highest office. Clinton lied before the people and was impeached. He did it, and he did far worse in his days. Do you really want to start a comparison between the Bush WH and Clintons? If so, Lets Roll.

Gonzales fired judges? Rino too?

link?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

snake (12/11/2007)

You hit a nail on the head. Republicans are forced out for conduct Hyped by the media and the left. Gonzales fired the judges, as did Janet El Rino did. Janet went on to send a child back to Cuba and many more horrible acts from the highest office. Clinton lied before the people and was impeached. He did it, and he did far worse in his days. Do you really want to start a comparison between the Bush WH and Clintons? If so, Lets Roll.

You missed the point, again.

It's not that Gonzales fired the judges, it's that he lied in congressional testimony about his knowledge of these firings. He lied in congressional testimony about several other policy-related matters, as well, to the point that even Republicans were suggesting that he might have committed perjury.

You supported impeaching Clinton for perjury, but defend Gonzales for the same.

That is precisely why you have no credibility when it comes to demanding bipartisanship.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ramen (12/11/2007)
snake (12/11/2007)

You hit a nail on the head. Republicans are forced out for conduct Hyped by the media and the left. Gonzales fired the judges, as did Janet El Rino did. Janet went on to send a child back to Cuba and many more horrible acts from the highest office. Clinton lied before the people and was impeached. He did it, and he did far worse in his days. Do you really want to start a comparison between the Bush WH and Clintons? If so, Lets Roll.

You missed the point, again.

It's not that Gonzales fired the judges, it's that he lied in congressional testimony about his knowledge of these firings. He lied in congressional testimony about several other policy-related matters, as well, to the point that even Republicans were suggesting that he might have committed perjury.

You supported impeaching Clinton for perjury, but defend Gonzales for the same.

That is precisely why you have no credibility when it comes to demanding bipartisanship.

You and Snake are frighteningly missing the point. This is a perfect illustration about how Propoganda frames and shifts issues.

First, Gonzales fired federal prosecuters, not judges.

Secondly, and much more importantly, you need to have an understanding about the role of prosecutors, and the delicate balance between partisanship and independence.

Generally, when a new administration is elected, many (not sure of the actual percentages, but I think it's high) of the federal prosecutors are replaced. The DO tend to be partisan appointees. Reno did this and Gonzales also.

BUT . . . once the prosecutors are in place, it is imperative that they have the independence to proscute what THEY see fit. And they have historically been granted just that discression, unchecked.

What Gonzales did which is, in my opinion, at least as bad as lying under oath, was fire prosecutors because they were being TOO independeant and SPECFICALLY NOT being PARTISAN enough in deciding who they went after.

And, evidently, he did this at the behest of Carl Rove.

snake, do you see that distinction?

Do you see the problem?

Is it relevent?

Snake, you're a smart guy. If you had all of the fact, you would have understood this. But you only get your news from biased sources. These sources manipuate the facts which they present in a way that misleads you. It's really pretty insulting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...