The News
Most Recent Threads
The Blogs
Most Recent Threads
The Boards
Most Recent Threads

 
SmirkingChimpWire

  • Obama makes clearest hint that Clinton could be running mate May 9 2008 - 8:38am (1 comments)
  • Irrational Ambition is Hillary Clinton’s Flaw May 9 2008 - 1:11am (1 comments)
  • Raided counsel's office shut down investigation into Siegelman case May 8 2008 - 12:02pm (1 comments)
  • Florida Substitute Teacher Fired, Accused of Wizardry May 8 2008 - 9:19am (14 comments)
  • Clinton strategist to Clinton it is over! May 8 2008 - 12:37am (3 comments)
  • We now know who the nominee will be May 7 2008 - 1:24am (12 comments)

  • Smirking Chimp
    All Recent Posting Activity | Topics & Issues | Events | Polls | Chimp 1.0

    About | Contact | Advertise | Shop | Donate

    We'll Never Know: The Unprecedented Secrecy of the Bush Administration
    by Brian Morton | March 26, 2008 - 9:31pm

    article tools: email | print | read more Brian Morton

    If you think about it, it's amazing how completely and thoroughly information has been "managed" over the last seven years of the Bush administration. E-mails have been mishandled and then lost, information that regularly was disseminated to Americans about the workings of their government has been cut off, questions that normally were answered have simply been ignored, and no effort is made to ever find out those answers.

    By itself, this is a mildly impressive feat, until you realize that to accomplish this it required an almost top-to-bottom infestation of political will in the entire system--to manage every bit of federal apparatus to make sure that the president and his accomplices would never look bad, no matter how small the news or how astonishing the effort made to conceal it.

    It is also becoming clear that the Bushies made an effort right at the start to make sure that information would never see the light of day. As soon as they took office, they scrapped the Clinton administration's custom-made computer archiving system that, according to news reports, was installed after a court order. It would be one thing if the system was replaced by something newer or better, yet the one the Bush people put in could hardly be called an archive, as it simply recorded over previously recorded information that was supposed to be preserved as part of the Presidential Records Act.

    At every juncture, when administration officials are questioned about the apparent losses, they respond first with delays, then denials, and then excuses.

    In 2001, then-Attorney General John Ashcroft created a new standard for dealing with requests under the Freedom of Information Act that told government agencies that if there was any way possible to deny FOIA requests, the agency should do so, and the Justice Department would back the agency if it was called on it in court. Of course, the administration publicly would say the exact opposite. At the time, presidential spokesman Ari Fleischer said, "The bottom line remains the president is dedicated to an open government, a responsive government, while he fully exercises the authority of the executive branch."

    In 2003, the administration tried to create a gigantic computer system called "Total Information Awareness," under the aegis of the Pentagon, that would track people's movements, purchases, medical records, and nearly any other aspect where a person might come into contact with a computer system. In the end, Congress banned any funds from going to the project, and it presumably died on the vine, although even now the fight over the administration's warrantless wiretapping program still is choking its way through the court system.

    Terrorist "watch" lists have been created, and nobody knows who is on them, and once you're on them, it's impossible to find out whom to talk to to get off. Even Sen. Ted Kennedy, one of the most instantly recognizable faces in American politics over the last half-century, complained in a Senate hearing that he was stopped in an airport and told he couldn't get on his flight because his name was on a no-fly list. Nobody could tell him how he landed on it, and we never found out how he got off, aside from the general bad publicity that it caused.

    Despite the banality of the no-fly shenanigans, a case for the Bush stranglehold on information continued. Lawsuits by the nonprofit Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington forced the disclosure of a letter from a lawyer for Vice President Dick Cheney that instructed the Secret Service to destroy any evidence of lists of people who visited Cheney at his residence next to the Naval Observatory. At the same time, reporters who attempted to find out when and how many times now-convicted felon Jack Abramoff visited the White House were stonewalled with vague and general answers, first denying the lobbyist visited, then claiming he was just one of many people the president saw, and then maintaining a concerted effort to hide any photographic evidence that the president ever met with the influence peddler. By the time photographs leaked out, the news media's attention had since moved on to other things, and the outrage that might have come out of it was muted.

    The Bushies again unveiled this tactic, to gum a story to death, last week, after a federal judge gave the administration three days to produce evidence about what happened to millions of e-mails that were supposed to have been archived 2003 to 2005, during the start of the war in Iraq all the way through the response to Hurricane Katrina. Last Friday, the administration, in a sworn declaration, said that old hard drives are thrown away, and that some but not all of the information on them is moved over to new computer storage.

    When the final book is written on the Bush administration, its policy on information could be summed up like this: They hid it, they denied it, and then they threw it away.
    _______

    About author

    Brian Morton is a columnist for the Baltimore City Paper.

    Vote Result
    ++++++++++
    Score: 10.0, Votes: 12

    Comment viewing options

    Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

    Is It Time to Turn to the Private (Eye) Sector?

    So, at very least, we should be prosecuting the Bush Administration for violation of the Presidential Records Act. Since we obviously can't expect anything from the Democratic Congress we voted in to make a change, perhaps it's time we turn to the private sector.

    Are there no private citizens or advocacy groups with enough resources to hire a private investigation of the Bush Administration? It seems like it would take only the most elementary level of investigation to come up with the needed evidence. From all appearances, all it takes is the will to do it. If Congress lacks it, someone who's paid to investigate won't. A private eye might have better luck, if I may use such a term for what would be the same as shooting fish in a barrel--the targets of opportunity are overwhelming. If we can't impeach, we can at least prosecute.

    Submitted by Hunker Down on March 26, 2008 - 11:16pm.

    Here I am this morning, on

    Here I am this morning, on smirkingchimp after an absence of a day. I don't take drugs, I don't even 'do' aspirin. But I liken smirkingchimp to a 'good' drug--the hits just keep on coming. So it is with this piece. If there is one cause for optimism in this country, it is the people who continually come up with material to share with others on smirkingchimp (other websites too, though this is the one I participate in). What we have is testimony and evidence in the crime. AND IT IS GROWING. Brian Morton is the lastest to whom I offer my gratitude.

    Submitted by nedlud on March 26, 2008 - 11:40pm.

    It's an old Bush Crime Family tradition

    Expunging the record is an old Bush Crime Family tactic.

    For example, most people know that old Prescott tried to overthrow the government in 1934, but only the bare bones of the plot remain. Most of the details and all of the names have simply disappeared from the records. Entire pages missing from the archives.

    This gives them plausible deniability, because those who truly want to believe can have their straws to grasp on to.

    Kitty Kelley reports in her book (well worth reading despite the multi-million dollar corporatist smear campaign against it) that when she went looking for public records to document some things -- such as the wacky Bush cousin squirreled away in some foreign country -- the records were simply missing. Entire pages just ripped from the books that contained them. These were birth and death records. They couldn't erase them, so they just tore the whole page out of the book.

    We know that Dick Cheney has a shredder company bring a truck to his residence on a regular basis. There will be nothing in Cheney's records that would give us any clue to anything.

    The only way that we'll know some of this is if people start talking, but without a paper trail, it will be easy to smear them as "crazy," "disgruntled," etc.

    _______

    "Give a man a fish, and he'll eat for a day. Give a fish a man, and he'll eat for weeks!"

    Submitted by Nichomachus on March 27, 2008 - 12:43am.

    Jaysus H, what does that

    Jaysus H, what does that tell you?

    Only criminals shred the evidence and cover their tracks.

    Only DESPERATE criminals.

    What will it take to get these guys behind bars???

    Submitted by thismachinekill... on March 27, 2008 - 1:49am.

    The 'memory hole'.

    The 'memory hole'.

    Submitted by nedlud on March 27, 2008 - 3:25am.

    No offense

    No offense, Nichomachus. But. Few people I work with have heard of Prescott Bush, let alone what he did in the 1930's. Or the 1940's. One colleague knew of him but not of his bank dealings. And this person is a teacher of history/social studies/whatever. He prides himself on knowing Adam Smith, markets, and business. And he thinks he teaches high school kids.

    I despair because I live in the trenches. They support the bombing of the "towel-wearing A-rabs who made 9-11."

    Oy.

    _______

    Cthulhu 2008. Why vote for a lesser evil?

    Submitted by ovid on March 27, 2008 - 7:57am.

    Total Information Awareness

    In 2003, the administration tried to create a gigantic computer system called "Total Information Awareness," under the aegis of the Pentagon, that would track people's movements, purchases, medical records, and nearly any other aspect where a person might come into contact with a computer system. In the end, Congress banned any funds from going to the project, and it presumably died on the vine...

    Nope!

    Submitted by Devoidoid on March 27, 2008 - 7:02am.

    Little Black Boxes

    Now what do you suppose is the purpose of all those little black boxes in all those secret rooms at all those telecommunications switching centers that are supposedly listening for terrorists? After all, everything they pick up which is not terror-related is just a bonus waiting to be used to fill out those pentagon files we couldn't afford to fill before. It would seem that the TIA program has found some funding.

    Submitted by JohnnyD on March 27, 2008 - 12:35pm.

    Secret Government

    Yes, this secrecy thing with the Bush administration is a very serious problem. If we cannot see into the workings of it, it can do as it pleases. This is a characteristic of totalitarian states. In my own personal experience, I have had an FOIA request outstanding at the Center for Disease Control. It was sent in in March of 2007 and the CDC has said on a couple of occasions they are working on getting the "After Action Report on Hurricane Katrina" out to the public. Anything over a year in my opinion makes the law a joke. If it is a "report" you would think it is done and ready but nope, time rolls on. I've heard of 15 year old requests under the FOIA. The government is laughable in this situation because it appears under Bush, they don't care what we think. So, when a citizen writes or calls or questions a bureaucracy like the CDC, they just lie and blow us off. Democracy doesn't act like this.

    Submitted by wcfar on March 28, 2008 - 3:36am.

    Would You Really Want to Know?

    Do you really want to know all of W's secrets, his lies, his crimes? If he stole the elections? If he engineered the deaths of 3000 Americans to justify war, would you want to know the details of that? If he arrested hundreds of Americans and immigrants for the sole crime of being Muslim would you want to know? Do you really want to know about torture and murder in the name of democracy? Can you stare into the heart of darkness? Can face evil incarnate?

    Submitted by CarlosBulosan on March 28, 2008 - 1:24pm.

    Yes, I would!

    And not only that, but I would like the full details of his crimes to be plastered all over headlines around the world.

    I would like every human finger to be pointing in Bush's face, and to hear the whole world agree that he is guilty.

    Submitted by Buddy McCue on March 29, 2008 - 5:16am.
     
    100 Most Recent Threads | Topics & Issues | Events | Polls | Chimp 1.0

    Home | Top

    About | Contact | Advertise | Shop | Donate

    Privacy Policy | Terms of Use

    © 2008 Smirking Chimp Media

    bot trap