NYT: Newspaper Withholding Two Articles After Jailing (Ohio scandal)

[Pirate Smile]

The editor of The Cleveland Plain Dealer said last night that the newspaper, acting on the advice of its lawyers, was withholding publication of two major investigative articles because they were based on illegally leaked documents and could lead to penalties against the paper and the jailing of reporters.

The editor, Doug Clifton, said lawyers for The Plain Dealer had concluded that the newspaper, Ohio's largest daily, would probably be found culpable if the authorities were to investigate the leaks and that reporters might be forced to identify confidential sources to a grand jury or go to jail.

"Basically, we have come by material leaked to us that would be problematical for the person who leaked it," Mr. Clifton said in a telephone interview. "The material was under seal or something along those lines."

-snip-
"They've said, This is a super, super high-risk endeavor and you would, you know, you'd lose," Mr. Clifton told Editor & Publisher. "The reporters say, 'Well, we're willing to go to jail,' and I'm willing to go to jail if it gets laid on me, but the newspaper isn't willing to go to jail."

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/09/national/09cleveland.html

Arrgghh. Judy Miller and Plamegate deals with National Security. I doubt this does.

[Atman]

1. Anyone ever heard of the word "hero?"

America needs one now, real bad.

What a crock of shit this explanation is. A corporation, despite its relatively newfound "personhood," cannot go to jail. Stop being pussies and do what is right for your country, not your goddamn boardroom!

[sasquatch]

4. Right on!!

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

7. If I understand them correctly...

The source who provided the information could wind up in jail. If the printed the articles, they might be "heroic" at somebody else's expense. The PD needs to find a way to print the article without using the confidential information (i.e., find another source).

Of course, now that they've admitted that the essentially received "stolen property," their source could be in trouble anyway. Makes me wonder why they leaked the information in the first place -- maybe to get their source to come clean on his own? Who knows.

[goclark]

12. Trying to Make A Pt. and Save their Ass

When the story finally comes to light they can say, "Oh, we wanted to tell you but we would get in trouble,"

WIMPS, they should have their jobs taken from them.

Example: The Doctor was AFRAID to operate on a patient bleeding to death because they would "get sued."

Rethugs in hiding

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

14. I don't think so...

If a source gave them information in confidence, and that source was breaking the law in order to give the information, it really would be wrong for the newspaper to print the story given the current climate. They can't just say "screw you" and then leave the source twisting in the wind. Nobody would ever come forward with inside information after that; this may just be a case where, for now, the truth has to wait.

[drm604]

24. I don't necessarily disagree with what you're saying but...

They can't just say "screw you" and then leave the source twisting in the wind. Nobody would ever come forward with inside information after that...

I don't necessarily disagree with what you're saying but what good does it do to come forward if no one will publish it? Seems like a catch 22 - publish and cut off all future leaks, or don't publish thus making leaking worthless.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

47. I wonder the same thing, too...

Announcing that you have this information is tantamount to confessing your complicity in a crime. I wonder if the PD is dangling this as "bait" in front of an over-aggressive federal prosecutor.

[Viva_La_Revolution]

48. what good does it do ....

you asked...

"what good does it do to come forward if no one will publish it?"


The reporter can use that info in his investigation, use it to track down other sources, which can then be used in the article without compromising the original source.

A little like sneaking a peak at the answers in the back of the book. imho :P


on edit: in this case though, I think they are just not willing to print the story and take down their cronies.

[drm604]

57. That makes sense.

"The reporter can use that info in his investigation, use it to track down other sources, which can then be used in the article without compromising the original source."

Good point. I hadn't thought of that.

[Pirate Smile]

13. I know BushCo has been expanding the amount of government documents

which are now classified by an exponential number - things that have NO REASON to be classified EXCEPT that they may embarrass BushCo. That is why this is bad news.

Haven't they reclassified things that were NOT classified previously i.e. Sibel Edmonds?

edit to add - I did a search and found a report from Rep. Henry Waxman.


News Intelligence Analysis

Special Investigations

September 14, 2004

Secrecy in the Bush Administration

Rep. Henry A. Waxman has released a comprehensive examination of secrecy in the Bush Administration. The report analyzes how the Administration has implemented each of our nation’s major open government laws. It finds that there has been a consistent pattern in the Administration’s actions: laws that are designed to promote public access to information have been undermined, while laws that authorize the government to withhold information or to operate in secret have repeatedly been expanded. The cumulative result is an unprecedented assault on the principle of open government.

The Administration has supported amendments to open government laws to create new categories of protected information that can be withheld from the public. President Bush has issued an executive order sharply restricting the public release of the papers of past presidents. The Administration has expanded the authority to classify documents and dramatically increased the number of documents classified. It has used the USA Patriot Act and novel legal theories to justify secret investigations, detentions, and trials. And the Administration has engaged in litigation to contest Congress’ right to information.

The records at issue have covered a vast array of topics, ranging from simple census data and routine agency correspondence to presidential and vice presidential records. Among the documents that the Administration has refused to release to the public and members of Congress are (1) the contacts between energy companies and the Vice President’s energy task force, (2) the communications between the Defense Department and the Vice President’s office regarding contracts awarded to Halliburton, (3) documents describing the prison abuses at Abu Ghraib, (4) memoranda revealing what the White House knew about Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction, and (5) the cost estimates of the Medicare prescription drug legislation withheld from Congress.

There are three main categories of federal open government laws: (1) laws that provide public access to federal records; (2) laws that allow the government to restrict public access to federal information; and (3) laws that provide for congressional access to federal records. In each area, the Bush Administration has acted to restrict the amount of government information that is available.

http://www.yuricareport.com/OverSight/SecrecyInTheBushAdministration_Waxman.html

[alfredo]

2. I feared that. This will give spineless editors an easy way out

of publishing investigative reports.

[dooner]

3. Yikes

I sure don't like that news. Could it really be the case?

Surely the reporter could publish it elsewhere (blog it if nothing else) if it's so darned important. The information isn't owned by the newspaper.

Geeze, whatever happened to taking responsibility for the truth?

[jrthin]

5. Obviously they have failed

to grasp that UNCOVERING criminal matters is not the same as COVERING up a crime.

[ewagner]

6. Ok Kiddies, here's you OBJECT LESSON

The NYT is printing this because they want anybody thinks Judith Miller actually BELONGS in the slammer to learn that this is what happens when Newspapers are afraid of the courts....

The Lesson?

Reporters MUST have carte-blanche discretion to keep their sources secret...even if the source commits a crime.

This is propaganda at it's most insidious....

I hate this crap....

[mzmolly]

11. Totally agree.

The reason a crime was involved in Plame is because of a Bush Sr. law that it's illegal to out an intel official. I doubt the case is similar.

[despairing optimist]

15. Given the NYT's less-than-stellar record, it is hardly in a position

to use the Plain Dealer case to lecture the public about freedom of the press. The Times Co. has lots of money; ergo, lots of freedom of the press. And look what it has done with that freedom, if you can stand it. Judy Miller is in the right place for the wrong reasons; she never wrote a story outing Valerie Plame but she and her editors managed to put Ahmed Chalabi's dictation on page one regularly, virtually unedited, to disastrous effect. I'm about as afraid of the Times as I am of the courts.

The Times may have a not-so-hidden agenda in running the story about the Plain Dealer's woes, but the story also serves to alert other news organizations that the Plain Dealer's reports are out there for someone else to pick up. IMHO, someone will, now that the NYT used its megaphone to put out an APB.

[NashVegas]

49. Slightly Off

The reporters are willing to go to jail.

The editor is willing to go to jail.

The corporation board is not willing to take the heat.

Lesson object: if you want real news, crush corporate media.

[Mairead]

53. Right. The PD is a conservative rag, for openers

So I'm sure the 'go to jail' has a subtext of 'be sacked'. And since the staff are either non-leftist or non-brave, there won't be much jail-going.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

50. Agree 100%. The NYT is playing games with this one.

[Eloriel]

61. Here are some good arguments on the whole matter

First, Fitzgerald's own:

In court documents filed Tuesday, Fitzgerald wrote that even though Time magazine surrendered Cooper's notes in the case, the journalist's testimony is still needed in the investigation.

"First, Cooper's own article noted that the conduct of the officials involved an attack on an administration critic, not whistle-blowing," Fitzgerald wrote.

"Second, at a time when journalists seek a reporter's privilege akin to the attorney-client privilege, they ought to recognize that an attorney can be compelled to testify if his client communicates to the attorney for the purpose of committing a crime or fraud. ... Third, journalists are not entitled to promise complete confidentiality -- no one in America is."

Fitzgerald also opposed Cooper's and Miller's request for home detention -- rather than a jail sentence -- for refusing to reveal their sources.

"Special treatment for journalistic contemnors may negate the coercive effect contemplated ... and enable, rather than deter, defiance of the court's authority," Fitzgerald wrote. (Full story)
http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/07/06/reporters.contempt/index.html


And then there's the superb Editor and Publisher piece:
E&P: Karl Rove: Using Reporters--and Abusing the First Amendment
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x4021846
and: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=1908252
Link: http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/columns/shoptalk_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1000973352


and another re Fitzgerald's position on the matter:
"An attack on an administration critic, not whistle-blowing" - Fitzgerald
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=1909658
Link: http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/07/06/reporters.contempt/index.html


I find it so discouraging that people in the biz can't sort this out for themselves. Lazy incompetent sycophants.

[oldtime dfl_er]

8. put the damn thing in a plain envelope

and mail it to the London Guardian or even a Canadian paper. They have guts in those countries.

I wonder if these stories have to do with the stolen election?

http://www.cafepress.com/scarebaby/654252

[Radio_Lady]

26. My thoughts exactly -- It's from OHIO, folks... remember OHIO???

[jazzjunkysue]

77. DingDingDingDingDingDing We have a winner! Johnny, tell him what he's won!

My money's on secretary Blackwell, and this is all about playing chicken with the B*** admin, letting them hang it on Blackwell so it doesn't make it to DC. Everyone knows he rigged the election, and the tabulators and voting machine company was complicit. Probably a couple dozen members of those companies and the Ohio GOP will eventually be wearing cuffs, and so, they're only holding this to keep the paper from being burned down.

[despairing optimist]

9. Stories like these have a way of bubbling up in other places

They may still see the light of day. The fact that the NYT is reporting about them indicates that NYT's editors, at least, don't want to let go of them. (And we know about the stories that the NYT editors pass up or bury on page A26.) It's rather like shopping around a stray dog or cat and looking for someone to adopt it.

It's the stories that editors bury and reporters only talk about among themselves that bother me the most, and they're usually about things that might offend some government or business sources and dry them up forever after--or they may go after major advertisers that would dry up the ad revenue stream and go to a competitor. As for the Plain Dealer, it probably struggles in a shrinking market like most other city papers and has to choose between a potentially ruinous lawsuit or living to fight another day by passing on these stories.

[Racenut20]

10. So give it to someone who will print it. Grow some balls

[Roland99]

16. What a fvcking COPOUT! Isn't the Plain Dealer owned by Repukes?

This is such bullshit. The situations aren't the same.

[TahitiNut]

21. Yes. It's owned by the right-wing Newhouse Newspapers.

Newhouse has a stable-full of propaganda outlets for the Reich.

[Roland99]

23. Smelling of collusion, to me.

[TahitiNut]

30. That's why I looked it up ... it smells.

I wanted to see if the ownership of the NYT and the CPD were linked in some obvious way. Without checking Boards and equity ownership, I can't tell.

[TacticalPeek]

17. Posturing.

When the cost is too high, just pose.

[lovuian]

18. But heres the question??? Was a crime commited???

are they not reporting a crime???

[Pirate Smile]

19. There is a criminal investigation going on and all the documents are

now under seal but someone leaked them to the newspaper anyway.

So the leaker defied the court order and committed a crime.

[DoYouEverWonder]

46. So are these documents part of an ongoing investigation?

Then it would be wrong to print this info until the investigation is over and charges have been filed. I would hate to see an important investigation compromised because we can't wait to know everything?

In this case it seems the Plains Dealer may have made the right decision and the NYT's is just trying to spin it in their quest to make Judith Miller a martyr for the 1st Amendment.

[TahitiNut]

20. Monstrous Hypocrisy by the Corporate Media

She's in jail for not violating confidentiality concerning an investigation of a violation of confidentiality.

She's claiming a privilege for herself rationalized as a protection for whistleblowers, defending people who've retaliated against a whistleblower.

This is whoring and exploitation of the worst kind. Rather than advocate real, substantive protections for those who expose wrong-doing in business and government, the fascist media wants to exploit their heroism to gain power and privilege for themselves.

[existentialist]

22. "chilling effect"

This is indeed scary stuff, but how many of us can say that we are really surprised?

[BrightKnight]

25. Leak to foreign journalists.

Why not leak the information to foreign journalists. I'm sure the CBC, BBC, ABC, or the Guardian, could be persuaded to publish the story. This would be very embarrassing and it might prompt a Federal free press protection act. I would like to see a list of people voting against that.

Foreign journalists might be willing to do it simply to advance the cause of journalistic freedom.

[Radio_Lady]

27. Does anyone know if the U.K., Canada, or other free presses have

this sort of law in effect?

Or is it just a U. S. state of mind???

[kitty1]

75. Send the anonymous info to a Canadian journalist...

or the CBC News. Who's to say that we have the same laws on exposing the source of a leak. Especially if it's a relevant story with huge implications involved. This way noone gets arrested, and the story gets out. ( I'm a close relative of the editor of a large daily Newspaper here) If I can help...;)

[caligirl]

28. The editor was the hold out in endorsing Kerry. He wanted to endorse

Bush. The rest of the editorial staff wanted to endorse Kerry. So they endorsed no one because of him. As far as i know it was a first for the paper to NOT endorse a Pres. cand.

[brentspeak]

32. It was the publisher who overruled the editorial staff

Classic example of how the nation's media is being manipulated by a very few plutocrats.


Now comes evidence that there's two Plain Dealers: the editorial staff, and Publisher Alex Machaskee.

Last week, the daily's editorial board overwhelmingly voted to endorse John Kerry. But Machaskee overruled them, ordering lackeys to prop up George W. Bush instead.

This isn't the first time Machaskee has pulled a power play; he also forced the editorial board to endorse Governor Bob Taft. That turned out well.

Machaskee's Bush decree apparently set off a minor mutiny in the newsroom, where ink-stained wretches scrambled to rat out their boss to other media.

http://www.clevescene.com/issues/2004-10-27/news/firstpunch.html

[caligirl]

33. Thanks for the correction, been awhile since the s-election

[OzarkDem]

80. Self-delete

[brentspeak]

29. We don't know enough about this to pass judgement

on the editors. And it's easy for someone who's own rear-end is not on the line to ask that someone else suffer the consequences. It sounds like the source who leaked the information is in an extremely precarious position. That's who I'm concerned about.

I'm hoping that The Plain Dealer can find a way to get these articles published, and soon.

[reality based]

31. Does the Plain Dealer have material leaked from a federal grand jury?

Sounds like that may be the case. I read elsewhere that Ohio has a state shield law for reporters. That would make it likely that this is a federal matter if the PD is being honest. By publicizing this at all aren't they inviting a leak investigation, thereby accomplishing what they claim they wish to avoid?

[autorank]

34. Bulletin: Spineless editors will continue to be spineless editors.

Fuck them, where were they on the election scandal before, during and after election day 2004.

The Toledo Blade Rocks. They are a real newspaper, maybe one of the few major's left in the USA. Bite me Plain Dealer, you cowards!

[enough]

35. kick

[quaoar]

36. The stories likely involve grand jury information

In which case, the information is likely to come out eventually anyway. If the stories are merely scoops on who is going to be indicted, then prudence might be the wise course. If, however, the stories involve allegations of a cover up, then the paper needs to consider publishing it anyway.

Sometimes you get a source whose name is withheld but others can figure out who leaked it anyway because so few people had access to the information. That may be the case here.

I'm gonna take a wild guess and say the stories involve a federal grand jury and that the source is an FBI agent unhappy with something that U.S. Attorney's office is doing to the case.

[Miss Chybil]

37. Well, it sounds like they've admitted a crime has been committed and

they received the "stolen property." Might as well run the story now. If they're afraid of prosecution, they should know the stories need never be written for that to happen. The cat's already out of the bag.

[Virginian]

38. Maybe there isn't a story at all, they just want to make a point. n/t

[WCGreen]

39. This has to do with the Coin Scandal

here in Ohio.....

All these thugs who have been running around taking the state back to the 1700's have been helping themselves to whatever isn;t tied down....

There is criminal stuff brewing...

My source, an elected Republican office holder who is also a friend of mine, told me that the major palyers are all hiring criminal attorneys now....

Remember, the PD Backed off from endorsing either Kerru or Bush because they couldn't get Clifton or Makeskie on board...

I think there is danger that they may ruin the evidence in this case. That is my thoughts on this although I would put it past Alex Makeskie, or how ever you spell his name, to be clamping down just a bit since he is a big time GOP supporter.....

[jazzjunkysue]

78. the major palyers are all hiring criminal attorneys now....

That's the best news I've heard in years. :toast:

[OzarkDem]

81. Mason has been really quiet

on these investigations, nearly invisible. What's with that?

[WCGreen]

84. It's out of his jurisdiction....

All state stuff get ajudicated (I think thats the word) in Franklin County.....

[Paradise]

40. Well, isn't that just ducky! n/t

[rucky]

41. Propagandists vs. Whistleblowers

the leaks themselves are not partisan. this is clear-cut ethics being muddled by Right Wing partisanship.

it frustrates me to no end that there are well-meaning people in power who don't see it for what it is, and don't have the courage to do the right thing.

[blogslut]

42. Toledo Blade

Much better paper.

[Logansquare]

52. Much better paper than most in the U.S., IMO n/t

[The Backlash Cometh]

43. Our pampered press.

Remember the days when people really believed in their craft and were willing to face jail time in order to get the news to the public because it actually meant something?

[GoBlue]

44. "The material was under seal or something along those lines."

Lawyer doesn't know which?
Deliberate obfuscation, I suspect.

[cmd]

45. I'm willing to wait patiently

This is a scandal that will rid my state of republican rule. It's ok with me if I have to wait a while. The big election is more than a year away. It will be fun to watch the squirming.

[mopinko]

51. another coat of lipstick for pig judith miller

nyt runs this story in case anyone starts to wonder if judith miller is something besides a martyr to the first amendment. like maybe she is a part of operation mockingbird, or..... i call bullshit.

[justsomegirl]

54. Puh-lease

Where's Katherine Graham when you need her?

[progressivebydesign]

55. SHIT! There goes ANY HOPE of investigative journalism in the US

This bodes so badly for the future of our democracy. There is a reason the Founding Fathers held a free press with such regard. It is ESSENTIAL to our future as a democracy. I say the editors need to get the frightened heads out of their lawyer's asses and DO SOME FUCKING GOOD!!!!

[bunny planet]

56. I think the source should take the leaked info. to the Toledo Blade.

Haven't they been bold and relentless in reporting about the Coingate scandal? Perhaps one of their reporters isn't afraid of writing an investigated piece not whitewashed or suppressed by the blivet administration's pressure. One can only hope this source, if it is a real whistleblower trying to expose some corruption that deserves to be exposed, shops the story around a bit until he or she finds someone with integrity who'll take it.

[berni_mccoy]

58. If a report illegally obtained information

And that information uncovered a MURDER, would the reporter be an ACCOMPLICE if he SAT ON THE STORY?

I think he would be.

This makes the Plain Dealer an Accomplice to WHATEVER ILLEGAL ACTIVITY they KNOW ABOUT.

[WhiteTara]

63. I agree.

Shouldn't they just be turning this info over to the FBI, or Fitzgerald's office?
:shrug:

[Eloriel]

59. Not only an issue of National Security, but

THIS isn't rataliation against whistleblowers, as the Plame case clearly was.

I think they're just being purposly dense and stupid, or using the Cooper/Miller affair as a real damn convenient excuse.

[thinkingwoman]

60. my ex-publisher bs meter

is pinging pretty loudly.

I'm not buying this as presented. There must be more to the story.

Nobody should jump to the conlusion that the "stories" they are "withholding" have anything to do with government corruption or critical public right to know RIGHT NOW information.

"Material under seal or something along those lines" is a mighty suspicious statement in my professional opinion. Under seal is a specific thing...with 25 years in the field I have no idea what "something along those lines" means.

I call bullshit. Frankly.

P.S. Good catch, btw.

edited because "mighty" needs a "y"

[0007]

62. The world gets crazier by the hour.......

I say to these two reporters that are willing to take a risk; take the story to a newspaper that's willing to print it...Yes, you'll get fired!

[WhiteTara]

64. Sounds like the leaker knew the penalties

and still decided to leak the materials

"Basically, we have come by material leaked to us that would be problematical for the person who leaked it," Mr. Clifton said in a telephone interview. "The material was under seal or something along those lines."

Remember Daniel Elsberg? Okay recently Siebel Edmonds?

[Kevin Spidel]

65. Newspaper Withholding Two Articles After Jailing

By ROBERT D. McFADDEN
The editor of The Cleveland Plain Dealer said last night that the newspaper, acting on the advice of its lawyers, was withholding publication of two major investigative articles because they were based on illegally leaked documents and could lead to penalties against the paper and the jailing of reporters.

The editor, Doug Clifton, said lawyers for The Plain Dealer had concluded that the newspaper, Ohio's largest daily, would probably be found culpable if the authorities were to investigate the leaks and that reporters might be forced to identify confidential sources to a grand jury or go to jail.

"Basically, we have come by material leaked to us that would be problematical for the person who leaked it," Mr. Clifton said in a telephone interview. "The material was under seal or something along those lines."

In an earlier interview with the trade journal Editor & Publisher, which published an article on its Web site late yesterday, Mr. Clifton said that lawyers for The Plain Dealer and its owner, Newhouse Newspapers, had strongly recommended against publication of the articles.

the rest here: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/09/national/09cleveland.html?ei=5070&en=f699728ac8ff8730&ex=1121572800&emc=eta1&pagewanted=print

[sadiesworld]

66. Nah nah nah boo boo...

We would have told you, but now we won't.

Pathetic.

There must be a boatload of incriminating crap for the NYT to be spinning this hard.

[jimshoes]

67. If this were about a Dem

and a blow job, would they have the same reservations?

[rzemanfl]

68. The effects of plamegate hit coingate and what went wrong in

Ohio? This really sucks:

"The Plain Dealer, Ohio's largest newspaper, is holding two investigative stories based on leaked documents because they could result in the type of court showdown that led to a New York Times reporter being jailed."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050709/ap_on_re_us/newspaper_legal_concerns

[merwin]

69. Grr... don't give in to Bushco!

[txindy]

70. I had to laugh when I read about the Plain Dealer yesterday

First of all, they are a wingnut paper. Second, the Toledo Blade did all of the work on Coingate and, suddenly, the other Ohio paper is claiming they have two important stories they're sitting on because of Miller? Yeah, okay. Of course, they decided on sitting on them BEFORE Miller went to jail, because....? Why, exactly?

This is just an excuse for them to apply pressure to the public to back Miller and also to give them a cover for not doing their job in their own state while the Toledo Blade revealed all. They want attention, too.

MHO, anyway.

[skip fox]

71. Another link

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/09/national/09cleveland.html?ex=1121572800&en=fe99728fc8bf8730&ei=5065&partner=MYWAY

[The Backlash Cometh]

72. c'mon Plain Dealer, grow some cojones.

If the information you have has overriding public interest, then you know the Supreme Court will rule in your favor.

[Moderator]

73. subject line

Your subject line does not match the article title.

It's also a duplicate of this:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=1613926

Thanks

[rzemanfl]

76. Thank you. n/t

[rumpel]

74. AP story also in LATimes

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-cleveland9jul09,1,4605149.story?coll=la-headlines-nation

[OzarkDem]

79. Self-delete

[zara]

82. Republican Newspaper Laying Out Argument...

for GOP Hacks to use to save Rove.

[mistertrickster]

83. What the reporters can do is go to top level gov't people, ask them

in public forums "yes" or "no" questions about the information.

If they lie to reporters, there will be hell to pay later. Or at least it used to work that way, when Democrats were in the White House.