Eric Holder and DOJ Out to Gut the Freedom of Information Act

[montanadave]

So much for Obama's pledge to promote greater transparency within the federal government. When President Obama took office, he promised the American people "an unprecedented level of openness in government" and stated, "transparency promotes accountability and provides information for citizens about what their Government is doing." (http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/TransparencyandOpenGovernment/)

Well, that was then. This is now. The Department of Justice has proposed revisions to the Freedom of Information Act (http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2011-03-21/html/2011-6473.htm) which, in part, contain the following language:

"When a component applies an exclusion to exclude records from the requirements of the FOIA pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552(c), the component utilizing the exclusion will respond to the request as if the excluded records did not exist. This response should not differ in wording from any other response given by the component."

I caught a brief mention of this on Fox last evening, but the issue appears to be gaining some steam. These revisions were proposed back in March of this year, but I guess I've been living under a rock because I hadn't read about it. Well, these changes are attracting some scrutiny now and drawing fire from both the left and the right.

Here are a few assorted links to articles discussing the proposed changes in the FOIA:

The Daily Caller (http://dailycaller.com/2011/10/24/justice-dept-proposes-lying-hiding-existence-of-records-under-new-foia-rule/#ixzz1bpHtbf9Y)

Wired (http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2011/10/feds-embrace-foia-lying/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+wired%2Findex+%28Wired%3A+Index+3+%28Top+Stories+2%29%29)

And here is a copy of a letter submitted by the ACLU, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), and OpenThe Government.org to the Department of Justice during the period in which the DOJ solicited public comment on the proposed changes: http://www.openthegovernment.org/sites/default/files/FOIA%20552c%20Comment%20-%2010-19-11%20-%20FINAL.pdf

I realize many forum members may have negative feelings towards some of these organizations based upon their politics, but this seems to be an issue which is worthy of intense scrutiny by every American citizen. The government has always reserved the right to withhold information for a variety of reasons ranging from national security to individual privacy to proprietary business/trade secrets. And the government has also maintained that there were documents that could be exempted from the access granted under the Freedom of Information Act. These exemptions were enacted during Reagan's presidential tenure by his Attorney General, Edwin Meese (http://www.justice.gov/oip/86agmemo.htm).

So the government can deny access to information or, under certain circumstances, fall back on the "neither confirm nor deny the existence of" strategy with respect to certain documents and information they don't want made public. The government has plenty of ways to avoid disclosing information they do not want made public.

But these new changes are designed to allow the government to just flat out lie to the public and tell someone seeking access to certain documents that those documents simply don't exist.

I understand the need for the government to limit access to some information under very specific and closely defined situations, with the provision that there be some review process in place to confirm that the government's basis for withholding that information is, indeed, valid.

I'm not so keen on the notion of having regulations enacted which allow the government to affirmatively lie to the American public, the courts, basically all comers.

Sure, I know-- "Newsflash... Government Lies to Public!" BFD. I'm not that naive. But to enact laws which make it legal for the government to lie seems a bridge too far.

[Belmont31R]

But to enact laws which make it legal for the government to lie seems a bridge too far.




Its been illegal to lie to police and federal agents for a long time. Ask Martha Stewart about that. Yet they can lie willy nilly and engage in illegal activity to get others to commit crimes.



We get the government we deserve.

[montanadave]

Its been illegal to lie to police and federal agents for a long time. Ask Martha Stewart about that. Yet they can lie willy nilly and engage in illegal activity to get others to commit crimes.



We get the government we deserve.

Granted. But the actions of law enforcement are subject to judicial review. If an individual feels they were entrapped, they have legal recourse to challenge the charges.

What recourse do you have when the government simply denies that a document in their possession exists? How does a judge instruct the government to produce a document they deny exists?

It's a legal black hole for the government to shield themselves from any form of review or oversight.

[jmp45]

Its been illegal to lie to police and federal agents for a long time. Ask Martha Stewart about that. Yet they can lie willy nilly and engage in illegal activity to get others to commit crimes.



We get the government we deserve.

Yes, a criminal admin.. What is it going to take to start impeachment processes? If it was a conservative admin that even hinted at anyone of the hundreds (maybe thousands, who can keep track) of offenses, impeachments would have started long ago. What qualifies as legal to a minor offense on the left would be absolute imprisonment on the right. It's just flat out evil imho.

Shouldn't be 'we' though, I didn't vote for this admin, I saw this coming from day one. I also feel if that if anyone is remorseful for their vote of this guy, they should not be allowed to vote again because of their lack of discernment and understanding. Just my opinion..;)

[Doc Safari]

The government lies to us already. They just want to make it official.:big_boss:

[crusader377]

This looks like another action legalizing criminality by the federal government. No wonder why trust in government to do the right thing is at an all time low.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/09/28/cnn-poll-trust-in-government-at-all-time-low/

[Honu]

its all Bushes fault !!!

where is the lefties complaining ?

anything and everything anymore really makes me wonder

GB was saying he was reading a book about Mussolini and how it was scary the steps he did were very close ?
would be curious to read as history does tend to repeat itself :)

[Belmont31R]

Granted. But the actions of law enforcement are subject to judicial review. If an individual feels they were entrapped, they have legal recourse to challenge the charges.

What recourse do you have when the government simply denies that a document in their possession exists? How does a judge instruct the government to produce a document they deny exists?

It's a legal black hole for the government to shield themselves from any form of review or oversight.




We should be asking ourselves why the executive branch is allowed to make up laws as they go and decide whats legal and illegal. I thought that was Congress' job. The executive enforces those laws, and the judiciary decides guilt or innocence. Congress has given the executive such broad swaths of power its really no surprise we have an out of control executive.

[glocktogo]

This is another reason I'm unhappy that Issa isn't calling for a special prosecutor. This goes way beyond a Congressional investigation. Our nation's top law enforcement official is a corrupt liar that wants to hide what he's doing, and he's getting away with it. :(

[SteyrAUG]

We get the government we deserve.


Not everyone does.

The hard working honest guy gets the same shitty government as everyone else. And he is powerless to make anyone else more honest and accountable.

In reality my ability to control things mostly ends at my property line unless I'm willing to engage in illegal activity.

[BrianS]

So these are proposed changes to the law or to regulations regarding the law?

If the former we can write our representatives. Why would a Republican controlled House approve of this with a Democrat President in the WH? Generally they only stupidly rubber stamp bad law when the R's and D's in Congress and the WH line up.

If it is just a "rule change" in the regs that actually flesh out the USC, well, that pretty much serves to illustrate why so much of our law being defined outside the legal process by the bureaucracy is dangerous doesn't it?

Hey, at least the rule change proposals are still open and public. In a real tyranny they wouldn't even confirm or deny that! Sometimes not even what the actual rules are!

[glocktogo]

So these are proposed changes to the law or to regulations regarding the law?

If the former we can write our representatives. Why would a Republican controlled House approve of this with a Democrat President in the WH? Generally they only stupidly rubber stamp bad law when it suits their need for more power.

Fixed it for ya. The only difference between voting "R" or "D", is which rights you'd prefer to loose first. :(

[BrianS]

Fixed it for ya.

No, if you look carefully they generally manage to object on "principle" when the opposing party is proposing the power grab AND they have the votes to stop it. When they have the votes in Congress and the Presidency they rubber stamp it.

Look at the first two years of the Obama presidency and all the stupid shit that got rammed down our throats and the first six years of Bush the Younger for evidence.

[Belmont31R]

So these are proposed changes to the law or to regulations regarding the law?

If the former we can write our representatives. Why would a Republican controlled House approve of this with a Democrat President in the WH? Generally they only stupidly rubber stamp bad law when the R's and D's in Congress and the WH line up.

If it is just a "rule change" in the regs that actually flesh out the USC, well, that pretty much serves to illustrate why so much of our law being defined outside the legal process by the bureaucracy is dangerous doesn't it?

Hey, at least the rule change proposals are still open and public. In a real tyranny they wouldn't even confirm or deny that! Sometimes not even what the actual rules are!




Congress is lazy and so far outside of its scope they generally put provisions in the laws they pass for the department to come up with regulations to enforce the law or allow them to define certain legal aspects. Like how the ATF gets to decide a shoe string is a machine gun.


So DOJ is proprosing an internal regulatory change in how they handle FOIA requests. They may be outside the scope of the law or their regulatory authority but that would have to be hashed out in the courts. Checks and balances...:)


This is why big government is so inefficient. Congress does not have the time to go over everything with a fine tooth comb like we deserve and should expect them to. Laws are often poorly written and they hand over their job to other branches. The judiciary is slow and the average citizen cannot afford justice before the courts. The feds can throw millions of dollars into a case against a guy who makes 20k a year defending their schemes. If this rule took effect and you filed a FOIA request which was denied what are you going to do about it?

[khc3]

Holder must feel like he can get away with anything, and I don't see anything to dispute that view.

This is a man who was lectured in a Senate hearing by Robert Byrd that his conduct during the Marc Rich pardon would forever make him unfit to serve in a position of public trust, and now he's our AG.

[BrianS]

This is a man who was lectured in a Senate hearing by Robert Byrd that his conduct during the Marc Rich pardon would forever make him unfit to serve in a position of public trust, and now he's our AG.

A black man being lectured by a former Klansman on his fitness to serve in a position of public trust must have been a real hoot.

Is this on video anywhere?

[VooDoo6Actual]

The secret Iran Israel oil pipeline and Marc Rich the king of oil
"Pioneer of Globalization" imo, not by a longshot but interesting moniker...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FaxwuW4qww8

Glencore Firm

http://www.glencore.com/history.php

[Redmanfms]

Not everyone does.

The hard working honest guy gets the same shitty government as everyone else. And he is powerless to make anyone else more honest and accountable.

In reality my ability to control things mostly ends at my property line unless I'm willing to engage in illegal activity.

Isn't democracy wonderful......




Of course, the Founders saw this coming and conspicuously made us NOT a democracy, but don't tell the left that.

[HK51Fan]

this world, not just this country, has had it and is coming to a boiling point. I truly believe with the advent of the internet you can no longer hide shit from the public. I shudder to think of all of the bullshit the populace has been fed over the years!
look at the sorry scumbags who are in charge of this country! Do you think these are isolated incidents, the lying, cheating, drugs, homosexuality, thievery? Fuk no......this shit has been going on forever! But with the internet we now see this shit. I don't even look to news for most.......ummm news anymore!

people all over the world see what the hell is going on. and we see what the hell we're doing to other countries. We aren't being fed the sound bites and "cleaned" video feeds that were the norm when I was a kid. This shit doesn't fly anymore.

There is change coming........and the status quo is no longer acceptable.

[Trajan]

this world, not just this country, has had it and is coming to a boiling point. I truly believe with the advent of the internet you can no longer hide shit from the public. I shudder to think of all of the bullshit the populace has been fed over the years!
look at the sorry scumbags who are in charge of this country! Do you think these are isolated incidents, the lying, cheating, drugs, homosexuality, thievery? Fuk no......this shit has been going on forever! But with the internet we now see this shit. I don't even look to news for most.......ummm news anymore!

people all over the world see what the hell is going on. and we see what the hell we're doing to other countries. We aren't being fed the sound bites and "cleaned" video feeds that were the norm when I was a kid. This shit doesn't fly anymore.

There is change coming........and the status quo is no longer acceptable.

Actually, the government (both parties) are trying to stop that too.

'Rogue websites' bill introduced in US House
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.64f335a63a0a239e61cf0891c65a0c44.a81&show_article=1


Internet NKVD/Gestapo.

Sure, its just music/movies/games, but the organization will be in place to take down whatever sites No. 1 doesn't like.

[khc3]

A black man being lectured by a former Klansman on his fitness to serve in a position of public trust must have been a real hoot.

Is this on video anywhere?

Actually, my bad. Byrd directed his remarks at Bill Richardson, who then was elected Gov of NM, regarding the security lapses at Los Alamos that occurred during his time as Sec of energy.

Holder was excoriated over the Rich pardon during a House hearing.

[Caeser25]

What a crock of shit.

[Don Robison]

Raise your hand if you think what they are asking to do hasn't already been done in the past. Sounds to me like they just want to give it the official okey dokey to do now.