Bustednuckles @ 128

Sounds to me like the theme from Dragnet should be playing loudly in the chambers……

My understanding is that one can lose a job by violating the HAtch Act, but there is no criminal liability.

Anyone know for sure?

Criminal liability, I don’t know, but if you violate the Hatch Act you do lose your job, and there are fines, in some cases they can reach $250,000.

Re: GSA situation — every Federal (Executive Branch) employee is required to take a Government managed course on Ethics and one on Computer Safety every year. Guess no one in the Bush Mis-Administration bothered to listen during class.

Hey, they’d probably forget their own names if they hadn’t been hunted down, chained and frogmarched into the committee room.

Nail ‘em Henry.

Now that has got to be the understatement of the week.

Tonster @ 69
Is “gazillion” a GSA term?
—
…it’s one thousand brazillions

Or a person who lives in Gazil.

Really, should people with such poor memories be running our government?

Heh. We have a nickname for her now, don’t we?

Lurita “Cookies” Doan.

LMFAO!

This isn’t even one of the hearings that we’ve all been waiting for with bated breath, like the Samson hearing coming up.

And yet even this hearing is revealing all kinds of scandalous and damning information.

This administration is corrupt, through and through.

TRex’s “core sample” metaphor helps illustrate the point.

If we take a core sample of any aspect of the administration, we reveal multiple instances of corruption and criminality. This was true in the Libby trial, and it is true in every one of the hearings thus far.

In fact, describing “instances” of corruption and criminality is probably the wrong way to say it. In the Bush administration, one instead finds isolated “instances” of professionalism and law-abiding behavior.

It is growing increasingly clear that the norm, the backdrop, the default for this administration is criminality and corruption.