From: Gary Britt 

The Democrats In Congress are just trying burglarize the RNC.  Just like
the watergate burglars were trying to do.

Gary

Rich Gauszka wrote:
> Forgot to add this one comment from the muckraker site
>
> http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/003033.php
> OK - lemme see if I can get this straight:
>
> Congress: we want to see your emails
>
> White House: no, executive privelege
>
> C: we see that some emails were RNC
>
> WH: that was to avoid the Hatch Act, so people could do political, non-govt
> work
>
> C: OK, then let's see the RNC emails
>
> WH: no, there "exists a clear and indisputable Executive Branch
interest"
>
> Do I have that straight?
>
>
>
> "Rich Gauszka"  wrote in message
> news:4626732e$1{at}w3.nls.net...
>> The White House is claming 'executive privilege'  for RNC emails.  They
>> tried to have it both ways with the emails and they got caught - now they
>> have to go with the 'executive privilege' ploy.
>>
>> http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/003033.php
>>
>> And today, in a letter to the RNC, the White House made their position
>> clear: you have to give them to us first. There "exists a clear and
>> indisputable Executive Branch interest" in the emails on the RNC-issued
>> accounts, wrote Emmet Flood, Special Counsel to the President.
>>
>> "John Cuccia"  wrote in message
>> news:odrc23tadnebrfgbpmut2t33tam6lrg8at{at}4ax.com...
>>> They weren't losing White House emails.  They were losing RNC emails,
>>> which they were using  for official business to cirmcumvent the law.
>>>
>>> Now they have the nerve to claim that said RNC email protected by
>>> executive privilege.  The Bushies continue to exhibit themselves to be
>>> liars, thieves, and blackguards, to a man.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, 18 Apr 2007 10:31:26 -0400, "Rich Gauszka"
>>>  wrote:
>>>
>>>> They probably were too busy 'losing' White House emails
>>>>
>>>> "Mike N."  wrote in message
>>>> news:0n0c2357m46tva0ceomnrt1fp02kidvu55{at}4ax.com...
>>>>> http://abcnews.go.com/International/story?id=3012688
>>>>>
>>>>> "It was a simple letter, just more than 100 words
on two pieces of
>>>>> paper.
>>>>>
>>>>> But this singular document became one of the key
pieces of evidence,
>>>>> the
>>>>> smoking gun, touted by the Bush administration to
justify the invasion
>>>>> of
>>>>> Iraq. It's also the same piece of "evidence"
that led to a perjury
>>>>> conviction for Vice President Dick Cheney's former top
aide, I. Lewis
>>>>> Libby.
>>>>>
>>>>> The July 2000 letter, which was obtained from Italian
intelligence
>>>>> services, appeared to be an official correspondence
from the Niger
>>>>> government to the president of Iraq, confirming a deal
to sell 500 tons
>>>>> of
>>>>> pure uranium to Iraq annually.
>>>>>
>>>>> But if the CIA had done a simple Internet search on
some of the terms
>>>>> used
>>>>> in the letter, the agency would have quickly learned
that it was a
>>>>> forgery.
>>>>>
>>>>> Instead, the letter was later cited by President Bush
in his 2003 State
>>>>> of
>>>>> the Union address as proof that Saddam Hussein was
determined to build
>>>>> nuclear weapons, justifying a preemptive invasion of
the country. "
>>
>
>

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5