Like when the Clinton assholes destroyed typewriters and office stuff before Bush came into office. He wouldn't let it become a big fight, he said drop it, we are better people then they are.
That's because it never happened:
White House Vandalism Caper Was Overblown, a Report Finds
By CHRISTOPHER MARQUIS
Published: May 19, 2001
Accounts that departing Clinton administration officials destroyed office equipment and committed other acts of vandalism in the White House during the presidential transition were significantly overblown, a manager at the General Accounting Office, the investigative arm of Congress, said today.
The General Services Administration, which is sometimes referred to as the government's landlord, found nothing unusual about the condition of White House offices after Clinton officials left, and Bush staff members said they had no records that indicated damage or subsequent repair work, the G.A.O. official said.
The official, Bernie Ungar, director of physical infrastructure issues at the agency, said that inquiries he made at the request of Representative Bob Barr, Republican of Georgia, led him to conclude that Clinton officials might have engaged in pranks during the transition but did not cause major damage.
''My sense is there probably was some phones pulled, or whatever; I don't have a way to determine that,'' Mr. Ungar said, referring to accounts that office lines had been cut. ''But there wasn't indication of real, significant, widespread damage.''
In the first days of the Bush administration, Republican officials, often quoted anonymously in news accounts, accused Mr. Clinton's staff of numerous acts of vandalism, from littering the floor to overturning desks, stealing glassware and scrawling lewd graffiti on walls.
The reports emerged as President Bill Clinton was under fire for his last-minute pardons and for the Clintons' removal of donated furniture. At the time, Clinton officials admitted to pranks -- like removing the ''W'' from computer keyboards -- but denied causing major damage.
''I feel vindicated,'' said Rob Houseman, a lawyer who worked for Mr. Clinton's office of drug policy. He said he had been rebuked by friends who had read accounts of the so-called vandalism. ''I think a bunch of people should apologize,'' he said.
Ari Fleischer, the White House spokesman, declined to comment.
On Jan. 25, Mr. Fleischer had refused to detail the nature of any vandalism but criticized such behavior indirectly by asserting that the new administration would lead Americans toward greater civility.
The next day, Mr. Bush appeared to play down the accusations. ''There might have been a prank or two,'' he said. ''Maybe somebody put a cartoon on the wall, but that's O.K.''
At the time, President Clinton offered to pay the cost of any vandalism but requested a detailed account of what, if anything, was amiss.
No such records exist, said Mr. Ungar, who questioned members of Mr. Bush's staff as well as workers who refurbished about 400 offices in the West Wing, the East Wing and the Old Executive Office Building.
The General Services Administration responded to Mr. Ungar in February and issued a statement today, saying, ''The condition of the real property was consistent with what we would expect to encounter when tenants vacate office space after an extended occupancy.''
Speaking for the Bush administration in an April 18 letter, Phillip Larsen, the director of the White House Office of Administration, told the G.A.O. that it could not document any damage, saying, ''After investigating, we have located no such records and our repair records do not contain information that would allow someone to determine the cause of damage being repaired.''
The G.A.O. notified Mr. Barr last month that it had ended its inquiry, finding no grounds to continue.
Mr. Barr, an ardent critic of Mr. Clinton's, replied today that the failure to keep damage records in the Bush White House did not exonerate the former president's staff. Nor did the General Services Administration's conclusion, he said, since its responsibilities apply to office space, and not to the equipment within.
''This is very disappointing,'' Mr. Barr said in a letter to the G.A.O. ''And it is a disservice to the American taxpayers who deserve a full accounting of taxpayer property.''
query.nytimes.com |
