A New Era Of Transparency? Like J. Edgar Hoover?

Always get tape: (I know it is difficult to listen to the lies, but please watch.)

Except the White House.

From Judicial Watch

Obama Administration Tells Federal Court Privacy Act Does Not Apply to White House

Judicial Watch, the public interest group that investigates and prosecutes government corruption, announced today that the Obama administration argued in a recent court filing that the Privacy Act does not apply to the Executive Office of the President (EOP). This court filing came in a Judicial Watch lawsuit filed in 1996 against the Clinton White House related to a scandal known as “Filegate,” where the Clinton White House obtained and maintained the private FBI files of hundreds of former Reagan and Bush officials [Alexander v. Federal Bureau of Investigation, Civil Action No. 96-2123/97-1288 (RCL)].

In the Obama administration’s “Renewed Motion for Summary Judgment,” filed with the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia on September 17, the Obama Justice Department stated the following: “The White House is not an agency under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), and it necessarily follows that it is not an agency subject to the Privacy Act.” However, the Privacy Act specifically lists the “Executive Office of the President” as an agency subject to the Act’s provisions. (emphasis mine)

“The White House is not an agency…”  It is OUR house where the salaries and bills are paid with OUR money.  It is a branch of our government.  If it is not a federal agency, what is it?

U.S. District Court Judge Royce Lamberth had repeatedly rejected this same legal argument, most recently in 2008 when the court ruled against a government motion that would have dismissed the lawsuit: “…this court holds that under the Privacy Act, the word ‘agency’ includes the Executive Office of the President, just as the Privacy Act says.”

While the Obama administration continues to advance the legal and political argument that the White House and the FBI should not be held accountable for the Filegate scandal, former President Bill Clinton apparently disagrees. Clinton told historian Taylor Branch in preparation for a recently published book, “those files did not belong at The White House,” and that they “should have been isolated and returned immediately.” According to Branch, Clinton also said “[h]is administration should and would be held accountable.”

“What the Obama administration is effectively saying here is that if the White House decides to illegally compile FBI files and violate your privacy rights, tough luck,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “It is disturbing that the Obama administration has taken the legal position that the Privacy Act does not apply to the White House and the Clinton FBI files scandal was not a scandal. It is worrying to those of us concerned about the Obama White House’s collecting “fishy” emails and compiling an enemies list of new organizations, radio hosts, businesses, and industry associations to attack and smear. Is the Obama defense of the FBI files scandal less about that Clinton scandal and more about what his White House is up to now?(emphasis mine)

An era of transparency when the White House is compiling emails lists, is asking for the names of people spreading “misinformation”, and waging a war on FoxNews and free speech?  An era of transparency when the party in power is doing all their work behind closed and LOCKED doors, not posting the bills online, not allowing the American people a chance to voice their opinions on fiscal life and death bills without ridicule, or even giving the members of both the House and Senate enough time to read and digest bills before being brought to a vote?

Just one more lie to add to the ever lengthening list coming from this administration, and another “Let Them Eat Cake” moment.

10 thoughts on “A New Era Of Transparency? Like J. Edgar Hoover?”

  1. Obviously they feel they are above the law. They are trashing the Constitution before our very eyes. What they are doing is obvious to those who have access to the internet and are seeking truth. I like to think that they are exposing themselves to millions of us. That makes them vulnerable. We will not allow our selves and our country to be ruled by tyranny. I think they know that, and because of that they fear us to some degree.

    If they are trying to take away our freedom and make us serfs, do we not have the right to defend ourselves? In doing so, what will that entail? For myself, I will live free or die. I’m willing to take a stand.

  2. Pingback: Bill Giltner
  3. Pingback: Diamond Tiger
  4. Pingback: urwerthit
  5. We must take a stand. The previous comment by “California Patriot” puts it exactly. Every day something new comes up to doubt our sanity. Why are we allowing this bunch of fools take over our government and change all the rules. I think we have adequate proof of the number of Americans who are fed up with this BS and want to put a stop to it.

    Each day that goes by there is another assault upon our liberties and when one group gets by with it another group
    tries their hand. Just keep marching, typing, calling and all around raising hell to show these bums that we aren’t going to take it anymore.

    I started today with the county government. Who knows where I’ll go tomorrow. Take Obama’s advice and get in their faces. Next time I think I’ll take my friendly newspaper guy who has assured me that he would trot along for the fun.

  6. Lee, you and CA Patriot are both correct. There is a commentary rolling around in my head that hopefully I will post soon. Millions are taking a stand, and everytime one person stands up and joins the “resistance”, another one thinks about it, and then does it. This is a race against time.

    Make sure to send me any articles from that reporter!

  7. Pingback: Scott Groves
  8. Pingback: NO_NWO_ACTUAL

Comments are closed.

Bad Behavior has blocked 1117 access attempts in the last 7 days.

%d bloggers like this: