Servergate: Senate Republicans access secret Dem memos

Jason - I don’t CARE if he’s wired in. I’m not looking to label or demonize people, I’m just looking for news stories. I gave you two stories that I found on his site before I saw them anywhere else - why do I give a damn if he’s tight with the GOP? Does that make those two stories any less valid? I can see the source of the stories. Are you going to stop reading or listening to all of the news people who are contributing to the Democratic party? I don’t believe what he says - 99% of his stories are links to other sources. Read the page for a couple of weeks - it’s just a damned page of links.

Peter Jennings has coyly berated Bush numerous times. CNN ran a running banner under a live speech by Bush giving Democratic rebuttals to each point the President made (since they get advance copies of the speech, I’d be surprised if someone in the Democratic party didn’t help them with that.) I can see emphasis on every source if I look for it. The difference is that I don’t discount everything on a source that says things I disagree with.

I don’t either, unless they’re proven liars. Which Drudge is - Clinton’s black baby.

OK, Jason, he’s horrible. Like I said, almost everything on that page is a link to other sources, and I often get hits to stories before I see them anywhere else. I don’t pay much attention to any original content on the site (and there rarely is original content.)

I guess you hate Clinton’s guts too: proven liar.

Different context.

Ah. Lying is cool if it’s on “my” side - some lying is OK, other lying isn’t. I can lie to the American people, my wife, have my staff work to cover it up and lie to them about it, I can lie to a federal judge - that’s cool. By the way - I wasn’t a backer of the whole impeachment drive, but I also think that the lying and covering up was wrong. But I think it’s hypocrytical to call one person scum because they lie, and then say but it’s A-OK if someone on “My Side” lies.

By the way - the black Clinton baby story wasn’t broken by Drudge - it was originally published in that rag, The Star. It was then carried in the New York Post.

I don’t think we’re going to do anything but beat this horse to pulp. I think Drudge is a hack who has a web page with links to a lot of sources, and often has links to breaking stories before others do. I use it for that. You’re convinced that Drudge is an arm of the evil empire. Fine. The world is filled with information - use that which you wish.

Perhaps we should consider returning to the original topic of discussion: republicans hacking into the democratic judiciary computer system in order to steal memos and hand them down to columnists. Possibly the sleaziest fucking thing I’ve heard in the past month or two, particularly the republican reaction of “It’s all the Democrat’s fault for not securing their computers well enough. What, you expected us to have something approximating morals or ethics?”

I want to see someone in one of these controversies actually spend time in the jail. I don’t care what party they belong too, but there’s far too much sleazy behavior going on.

Agreed. While I haven’t seen anything that convinces me the Democrats wouldn’t do the same thing (I think both sides are corrupt) someone should be punished in a significant fashion for this. Even though they didn’t hack into anything, they pulled the memos off a shared folder that wasn’t secured (but would have been if they had realized their error,) they should have immediately told the Democrats “hey - you’ve got sensitive stuff out there for anyone to see.”

I just read where the Feds have grabbed Frist’s computers (don’t read that last note, Jason, I saw the link on Drudge to the Knoxville paper reporting it. ;) )

It’s so damned discouraging. You’d really like to think that the folks in Washington, the people who make our laws and govern the nation, would be high integrity people. But I haven’t seen anything to that effect on either side of the aisle in many, many years. Sigh.

Ah. Lying is cool if it’s on “my” side - some lying is OK, other lying isn’t. I can lie to the American people, my wife, have my staff work to cover it up and lie to them about it, I can lie to a federal judge - that’s cool. By the way - I wasn’t a backer of the whole impeachment drive, but I also think that the lying and covering up was wrong. But I think it’s hypocrytical to call one person scum because they lie, and then say but it’s A-OK if someone on “My Side” lies.

By the way - the black Clinton baby story wasn’t broken by Drudge - it was originally published in that rag, The Star. It was then carried in the New York Post.

I don’t think we’re going to do anything but beat this horse to pulp. I think Drudge is a hack who has a web page with links to a lot of sources, and often has links to breaking stories before others do. I use it for that. You’re convinced that Drudge is an arm of the evil empire. Fine. The world is filled with information - use that which you wish.[/quote]

Oh lord - Clinton was lying about cheating on his wife to fend off a sleazy, totally political legal attack. Drudge was just repeating unsourced rumors he didn’t even try to verify. Clinton’s lie had nothing to do with his job performance or anything I give a shit about. Drudge’s lie was exactly the sort of thing you’re not supposed to do when you’re journalist, what with people wanting to trust the veracity of what you tell them and all.

I forgot about the Sid Blumenthal beating his wife story, too.

Here’s a timeline of the black baby thing:

http://www.ojr.org/ojr/ethics/1017969295.php

Edit: Oh, I see what we’re arguing about now. You’re think of him as a “news aggregator,” with no responsibility for verifying the truth of the links he puts up. I think of him as a reporter.

I agree he doesn’t have too much responsibility for verifying the links he puts up - the onus is on whoever wrote the page he links to. I do think he has a responbility, however, to verify the unsourced allegations he splashes across the top of the page - “Sidney Blumenthal beats his wife!” He doesn’t; Drudge considers it “reporting” to just whatever slander his GOP friends tell him across the top of the page. He’s wrong, and it’s sleazy.

It’s analogous to me telling you “this guy I know is Bush’s hookup for cocaine,” vs. “here’s a webpage I found where a guy says he knows Bush’s hookup for cocaine.” You’re going to be seriously pissed at me if the information is wrong in the former - either I’m lying to you or I’m too lazy to bother verifying and assessing what’s told to me - while if it’s the latter, you wouldn’t even think to get upset with me.

Oh, and the bagel isn’t just a bagel - it’s more of the “John Kerry looks French” crap they tried last summer.

If this is true, a whole lot of those liberal media bias theories just got a lot more credible.

Did anyone go to jail for the GOP cell phone taping(AllPolitics - The Tale Of The Tape - Jan. 13, 1997)?

Did anyone go to jail for the GOP cell phone taping(AllPolitics - The Tale Of The Tape - Jan. 13, 1997)?[/quote]

I certainly hope McDermott was punished in some way by the ethics commitee. That’s sleazy stuff. Not really on the same level, though, since it wasn’t senate personnel acting under orders to spy/intrude/hack, it was a couple of yahoos who happened across the conversation while on their police scanner.

Was it really a Mitnick-esque crack? The Yahoo account makes it sound like someone forgot to set a password on a Windows share.

GOP staffers were able to access Democratic files because of a glitch dating back to 2001, when a computer technician’s mistake left files on a shared committee server accessible without a password, The Globe reported.

Not that that makes it any better, but this is less a high-tech crack and more a walking into an open-door room.

Yahoos who were “Democratic activists in their home state”. Yahoos who “overheard the conversation on a police scanner in their car during a Christmas shopping trip and after three or four minutes, decided to tape it.” Ok, police scanner picking up cell phone conversations I can buy. Thinking “it would ‘neat’ to have a tape of important people speaking for a soon-to-be-born grandson” I can buy. Scanner and tape recorder in car while Christmas shopping…that’s a strech…although I guess I’ve heard of weirder. Keep in mind that I don’t think a single OEM or aftermarket car tape deck has recording functionality. Do scanners have tape recorders? Maybe that’s it, I don’t know. Of course the Republicans response of “We can’t tell who leaked it, but the Ds have to prove it wasn’t McDermott” was idiotic.

They were probably carrying around one of those hand held tape recorders, which lots of political operatives do frequently.

I must work in a very trusting state since the closest thing to political operatives that frequently carry around a hand held tape recorder are the political journalists. And I come in contact with a fair number of political operatives in my line of work.

The claim that the files were ‘wide open’ and ‘not protected’ is being made only by the republican side - the democrats whose files were violated have repeatedly stated that the computers had full password protection.

Yep. That’s how I use him. I can’t imagine, having looked at his page every day, how anyone could take him as a reporter. Do you read his page? He RARELY has unsourced information - like I said, even the Clinton Black Baby item was first posted in The Star, and carried by the New York Post. And frankly, on those very rare occasions he has anything unsourced, I take it as unsourced and give it that much credit/validity.

You and I just look at it differently, as you noted. It’s a page worth about 30 seconds of my time in a day, just to see the collection of links, and also because he has one of the best collection of links to columnists of every political flavor, and foreign news sources, that I know of. I don’t read any more into his HTML page than what’s there. You have reasons that you don’t like the page - cool. It’s just a single, relatively small web page.

Oh, and the bagel isn’t just a bagel - it’s more of the “John Kerry looks French” crap they tried last summer.

Then Reuters and Yahoo news are in cahoots with the GOP also, because it’s a pure link to their photo and caption. (Eating a bagel while on the road is a major putdown?)

Edit: Oh - and since you and I both are pretty good at going back and forth, I’ll let this be my last comment on this topic, and you can have the last word. ;)

When did Yahoo and the Boston Globe join the Republican side? Yahoo says “a computer technician’s mistake left files on a shared committee server accessible without a password”, and the Globe says “members of the GOP committee staff exploited a computer glitch that allowed them to access restricted Democratic communications without a password.”

The Globe further details the glitch: “The computer glitch dates to 2001, when Democrats took control of the Senate after the defection from the GOP of Senator Jim Jeffords, Independent of Vermont. A technician hired by the new judiciary chairman, Patrick Leahy, Democrat of Vermont, apparently made a mistake that allowed anyone to access newly created accounts on a Judiciary Committee server shared by both parties – even though the accounts were supposed to restrict access only to those with the right password.”

That said Manuel Miranda, a GOP staffer, is trying to have his cake and eat it too eight ways to Sunday:

So which is it Manuel? The docs are government business, thus no stealing, but subject to nondisclosure, or the docs aren’t official business, thus no disclosure violation, but open to being stolen?

I don’t think it’s an issue of anyone joining a side, I think it’s an issue of two seperate stories being promulgated by two different sides. I’ve read both stories that claim there was no password at all, and stories that claim the system was locked up in normal fashion. I claim that the ‘no password’ stories come from the republicans, because the wording in the ‘no password’ part of the no password stories seems almost identical to the wording quoted in the early article I read, which quoted a republican stating that there was no password protection, thus it was all the democrat’s fault, thus, there was no way the republicans could have been expected to act ethically.

In any case, regardless of whether there was a password or not, the Republicans who took the memos, read them, knowing they were private, and then divulged them to friendly media sources acted like utter unethical scumbags, and are deserving of the harshest censure.