Comments on: Ha, Ha, Ha, Oops! http://www.1115.org/2007/04/12/ha-ha-ha-oops/ Thu, 09 Feb 2012 20:45:34 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3 By: sarabeth http://www.1115.org/2007/04/12/ha-ha-ha-oops/comment-page-1/#comment-48160 sarabeth Thu, 12 Apr 2007 21:53:51 +0000 http://www.1115.org/2007/04/12/ha-ha-ha-oops/#comment-48160 We are now finding out why the WH went so quickly from from “an undetermined number of e-mails” to “thousands of messages”. Because apparently, the number of messages in question may actually be five million. That, at least, is the <a href="http://www.citizensforethics.org/node/27603" rel="nofollow">enlightened estimate</a> of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington’s (CREW). As the lady in the turban already said early this morning: "Ha, Ha, Ha, Oops!" We are now finding out why the WH went so quickly from from “an undetermined number of e-mails” to “thousands of messages”.

Because apparently, the number of messages in question may actually be five million. That, at least, is the enlightened estimate of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington’s (CREW).

As the lady in the turban already said early this morning: “Ha, Ha, Ha, Oops!”

]]> By: sarabeth http://www.1115.org/2007/04/12/ha-ha-ha-oops/comment-page-1/#comment-48159 sarabeth Thu, 12 Apr 2007 21:24:51 +0000 http://www.1115.org/2007/04/12/ha-ha-ha-oops/#comment-48159 Correction: I said above <blockquote>Funny that just a few short days ago White House officials did not know how many officials used the system, but were pretty sure that it was only a handful.</blockquote> I assumed it was only a few short days ago since the <em>L.A. Times</em> on April 9 said: "Stanzel said he did not know how many officials used the separate system. Another White House official called it “a handful.”" That made it sound like both statements were made the same day. As any self-respecting news junkie now knows, the handful statement was <strike>made</strike> made up by Dana Perino on March 27. Correction:
I said above

Funny that just a few short days ago White House officials did not know how many officials used the system, but were pretty sure that it was only a handful.

I assumed it was only a few short days ago since the L.A. Times on April 9 said: “Stanzel said he did not know how many officials used the separate system. Another White House official called it “a handful.””
That made it sound like both statements were made the same day.

As any self-respecting news junkie now knows, the handful statement was made made up by Dana Perino on March 27.

]]> By: matt http://www.1115.org/2007/04/12/ha-ha-ha-oops/comment-page-1/#comment-48154 matt Thu, 12 Apr 2007 19:23:11 +0000 http://www.1115.org/2007/04/12/ha-ha-ha-oops/#comment-48154 prosecutor = criminal players = victims stripper = liar/accessory it's not what they're saying, it's that they're all saying it when clearly there are much more important things going on. prosecutor = criminal
players = victims
stripper = liar/accessory

it’s not what they’re saying, it’s that they’re all saying it when clearly there are much more important things going on.

]]> By: jamie beth http://www.1115.org/2007/04/12/ha-ha-ha-oops/comment-page-1/#comment-48153 jamie beth Thu, 12 Apr 2007 19:15:07 +0000 http://www.1115.org/2007/04/12/ha-ha-ha-oops/#comment-48153 what about the duke lacrosse case? i mean, really, i want to know, but i don't think my blood pressure can handle what the "right" has to say about all of it. can you break it down for me? what about the duke lacrosse case? i mean, really, i want to know, but i don’t think my blood pressure can handle what the “right” has to say about all of it. can you break it down for me?

]]> By: matt http://www.1115.org/2007/04/12/ha-ha-ha-oops/comment-page-1/#comment-48151 matt Thu, 12 Apr 2007 17:36:53 +0000 http://www.1115.org/2007/04/12/ha-ha-ha-oops/#comment-48151 i just held my nose and swung through the other half of the blogosphere, and there's not a peep about this. doesn't intellectual honesty demand some kind of response to such an obvious case of obstruction of justice/evidence destruction/presidential records act violation? they're all (and i do mean all) going on about...the duke lacrosse case. i just held my nose and swung through the other half of the blogosphere, and there’s not a peep about this. doesn’t intellectual honesty demand some kind of response to such an obvious case of obstruction of justice/evidence destruction/presidential records act violation?

they’re all (and i do mean all) going on about…the duke lacrosse case.

]]>