Skip to comments.
GOP Staffer Suspended for Computer Improprieties
Special Report
| 11/25/03
| FNC
Posted on 11/25/2003 4:00:07 PM PST by dep
A Republican Senate Judiciary Committee staff member has been suspended with pay after he admitted that he improperly gained access to "secure committee computers," Fox News Channel reports.
Whether the staffer is the person who leaked numerous memos in which Democrats on the committee plotted to turn toe current filibuster of judicial nominees for political advantage was not stated.
An angry Judiciary Committee Chairman Orrin Hatch denounced the staffer's action, saying that senators expect their computers to be secure and calling the staffer's action "entirely unacceptable."
TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 2004memo; democrats; doublestandard; estradamemo; govtemployees; hypocrisy; iraqicivilians; judiciarycommittee; mediabias; memogate; memogate2; obstruction; orrinhatch; partisanpolitics; whichmemogateisthis
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 121-140 next last
To: dep
An angry Judiciary Committee Chairman Orrin Hatch denounced the staffer's action,Good Golly Miss Molly, give that staffer the Medal O Honor...
21
posted on
11/25/2003 4:10:29 PM PST
by
tubebender
(FReeRepublic...How bad have you got it...)
To: Moose4
"Um...why didn't the HTML tags work? " Strange. Looks like they were done correctly.
22
posted on
11/25/2003 4:10:32 PM PST
by
blam
To: Pukin Dog
Hatch should have fired the man, not just suspended him.
I suspect there are some civil servant rules/guidelines that have to be taken into account... But firing or allowing the staffer to resign should be done pronto.....
23
posted on
11/25/2003 4:10:38 PM PST
by
deport
To: mathluv
Let's keep in mind that Hannity was practically begging to be subpoenaed, while dropping the most thinly veiled hints possible that it wasn't a Republican that leaked that memo to him. My guess is this guy has been suspended for a completely different incident.
24
posted on
11/25/2003 4:10:39 PM PST
by
Timesink
(I'm not a big fan of electronic stuff, you know? Beeps ... beeps freak me out. They're bad.)
To: glock rocks
I think it has to do with the new and improved spell checker...
25
posted on
11/25/2003 4:12:29 PM PST
by
tubebender
(FReeRepublic...How bad have you got it...)
To: Moose4
wow! how strange :o)
did it look alright in the preview?
(or are you like me, and click the box and pull the trigger?)
26
posted on
11/25/2003 4:12:31 PM PST
by
glock rocks
(molon labe)
To: tubebender
I think it has to do with the new and improved spell checker...
Yep, it happened to me earlier.
To: Timesink
Wouldn't Hatch's employee's leak only be of the Judiciary Committee memos, though?
I don't think this person's got anything to do with the Intelligence Committee leak to Hannity.
28
posted on
11/25/2003 4:14:02 PM PST
by
EllaMinnow
(I miss Chancellor Palpatine. Heck, I even miss Illbay.)
To: deport
Then there should have been no announcement until the man was let go. Hatch handled this poorly. Good thing Bush got what he needed from these saps before they let him down again.
29
posted on
11/25/2003 4:14:08 PM PST
by
Pukin Dog
(Sans Reproache)
To: Timesink
This is a different committee, but I agree. I really think Sean was trying to say it was NOT a staffer, too.
I still want to see the emphasis on content, not on how they leaked. Of course, this may help get the attention of what is in the memos. That kind of attention can not be had if the memos are not in the news. The lamestream media will talk about a pubbie leaker.
30
posted on
11/25/2003 4:14:49 PM PST
by
mathluv
To: glock rocks
31
posted on
11/25/2003 4:15:59 PM PST
by
CedarDave
(Insted of using the new spel checkr, I'll just tpye as usal.)
To: glock rocks
It looked wrong in the preview, but I figured maybe it was just a new feature--the board might not interpret the tags until the message actually posted.
Dang gremlins. :)
}:-)4
32
posted on
11/25/2003 4:16:44 PM PST
by
Moose4
("The road goes on forever, and the party never ends." --Robert Earl Keen)
To: Enterprise
Yeah. Why doesn't Hatch attack the RATS with the same gusto?By now, you should know never to count your Hatches before they've chickened. (That's a classic Ann Coulter line.)
33
posted on
11/25/2003 4:16:46 PM PST
by
NYC GOP Chick
(So don't hand me Jack and try to call it Cola. I know the difference 'tween $h!t and shinola)
To: Moose4
Mine Work
34
posted on
11/25/2003 4:17:14 PM PST
by
SeeRushToldU_So
(Libs want to take my money, my guns, and my land....then sodimize me.)
To: mathluv; redlipstick
Ah, two different committees! In that case, I'm not going to get worked up about this at all.
I still want to see the emphasis on content, not on how they leaked. Of course, this may help get the attention of what is in the memos. That kind of attention can not be had if the memos are not in the news. The lamestream media will talk about a pubbie leaker.
Good point. They can't whine about the leak without discussing the CONTENT of the leak.
35
posted on
11/25/2003 4:17:22 PM PST
by
Timesink
(I'm not a big fan of electronic stuff, you know? Beeps ... beeps freak me out. They're bad.)
To: NYC GOP Chick
LOL - I know. And I still love it (and her).
To: dep
This GOP staffer should get a medal.
37
posted on
11/25/2003 4:18:14 PM PST
by
Saundra Duffy
(For victory & freedom!!!)
To: Timesink
The problem is that this allows the Democrats to frame the Republicans as willing to do anything to win, and to compare this to the Plumbers with Watergate. It will only resonate with the media and Bush haters, but it will get major airplay, unless we get another favor from Michael Jackson, Kobe Bryant or Scott Peterson over the weekend.
38
posted on
11/25/2003 4:20:29 PM PST
by
Pukin Dog
(Sans Reproache)
To: Timesink
They can't whine about the leak without discussing the CONTENT of the leak.Well, maybe SOME of the content may be mentioned!
39
posted on
11/25/2003 4:20:33 PM PST
by
mathluv
To: Mo1
It has nothing to do with what the Dems are doing witht he Special Interest groups to block Judges. You break the law, you get punished.
40
posted on
11/25/2003 4:20:36 PM PST
by
dr_who_2
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 121-140 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson