O Admin tries to kill email case? Can someone explain why we side with Bush on this?

[saracat]

Obama administration tries to kill e-mail case
Sat Feb-21-09 08:25 PM

Source: Associated Press

By PETE YOST, Associated Press Writer Pete Yost, Associated Press Writer – 44 mins ago

WASHINGTON – The Obama administration, siding with former President George W. Bush, is trying to kill a lawsuit that seeks to recover what could be millions of missing White House e-mails.

"The new administration seems no more eager than the last" to deal with the issue, said Anne Weismann, chief counsel for Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, the other group that sued the EOP.

The Executive Office of the President includes the president's immediate staff and many White House offices and agencies.

Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090221/ap_on_go_pr_wh/white_house_e_mail

[jkshaw]

1. I'd look for another news source for this story

before making any judgment.

[Metta]

2. I agree. The AP has been known to be unreliable and, uh, biased.

Not to mention making stuff up.

[Emit]

3. What other source is there for this story and what exactly has the Obama admin

done that proves they are siding with Bush on this matter?

I can't find any other info on this subject other than this article, repeated in numerous places.

We need more details.

[vanboggie]

6. Here's a link to CREW

This came up yesterday, and here's a reliable source.
http://www.citizensforethics.org/

I'm disappointed in the WH stance and hope there is a good reason, though I don't know what that would be. I hope this doesn't portend a free ride for all investigations of the criminal BushCo enterprise :(

[saracat]

10. Here is another source but they all say the same thing

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2009/02/21/washington/AP-White-House-E-mail.html

[Exilednight]

26. It's not another source, It's the AP story printed on the NYT website. n/t

[Cha]

4. Can you tell me why you always

fucking find the shit about Obama all through the primaries, the general, and now? And never have anything to say?

[saracat]

11. What am I supposed to say? I am asking for an answer!

The only response seems to be I don't like the source! If people have an opinion, I would like to hear it. I guess it is easier to just dimiss entire news agencies like the AP and the NYTimes and insist they are "wrong" . And they sometimes are. But what does anyone "think" about this?

[Name removed]

16. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Joe the Revelator]

20. The question is, why don't you add YOUR opinion?

Instead of being a passive aggressive twit?

[saracat]

21. Because I haven't developed one? I do consider one downthread.

[Exilednight]

27. There is only one source, the AP. The NYT story is just a reprint of the AP story. The AP ........

has been losing credibility faster than Fox as of late.

[The Wielding Truth]

5. I just sent this to the Presidential web site. If I get an answer soon,

I will post it.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/
According to this article the President is not following his policy of securing a transparent government. What is his explanation?

[Occam Bandage]

7. The article neither explains what the case is specifically about, or what the O admin's position is.

I'm curious, but "he sides with Bush" isn't enough to know anything either way. Without giving both sides of the case, or even one side, this is simply irresponsible journalism.

[incapsulated]

8. I don't know the details of the lawsuit and what it would force the current admin...

To do?

I mean aside from looking for millions of emails, they want a new archival system, in the lawsuit?

That may be part of the administration's plan anyway but they don't want to do it via a lawsuit?

I don't know.

I do know Obama is resistant to investigating Bush and will have to be pushed there, probably by congress.

[saracat]

12. Thank you for an intelligent response.I don't know the details either.

My "guess" is every Prez is potentially looking out for himself in the future.

[liberalmuse]

9. I see these stories all the time lately on DU...

"President Obama sides with Torturers" or "President Obama sides with Bush on Email Case". I need MUCH more info than the same news story posted on DU again and again, along with being picked up by all the activist sites, and what especially gives me pause is that it is splashed on "Politico". The. Same. News. Story. I like various sources, most especially sources directly from within the Obama Administration, and therefore I am going to wait before making a judgment. President Obama has been focused on the economy right now in his first month in office. He's been doing other good stuff, but let's face it, he hasn't had the time to get in-depth on a lot of policy decisions other than on the economy. I need more than a month and reading this stuff from scant, dubious news sources before I buy it. It doesn't mesh.

[sniffa]

13. .

[Alexander]

15. .

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[firedupdem]

22. Love it!!

:rofl:

[Name removed]

14. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[HardWorkingDem]

18. Hey, this story has me troubled too, just not Saracat....

Obama is not god, Jesus or the next coming of the Beatles.

I thought one difference between us and the rabid wingnuts is it's okay to question Obama and his administration and this question should be answered.

[Two Americas]

24. that is a call out

Respond to the message. You are attacking the messenger, with insinuations and speculation and character assassination. Whatever it is that you think saracat is doing - even if your accusations are true (after all people have a right to disagree with politicians and elected officials) - what you are doing here is far, far worse.

I don't think anything could be more disloyal to the President - more demeaning and destructive - then this misguided "support" that is rally suppression of dissent disguised as "support" for the administration.

Dissent is the fuel that fires every great and successful political career. FDR said "if you want we to do something, force me to do it." That is the way politics works in a representative democracy. He welcomed pressure, as all good leaders always do. You do Obama a tremendous disservice with what you are doing, and it can only weaken and sabotage the new administration.

Let the president do his job. His job is to be a politician, an elected official in a representative democracy, and that means listening to and responding to critical and dissenting voices. The job is not to be a strong man, the unitary executive acting by decree and in loco parentis, a larger than life comic book hero for people, a love object and worship object used to satisfy their own emotional needs for an authoritarian figure, an idol or a celebrity. That demeans both the man and the office, and the man represents all of us and the office belongs to all of us, not merely to the few, the self-proclaimed "supporters" and "loyalists."

[Danger Mouse]

17. I think without more actual information it's unfair to say he's 'siding with Bush'

[biopowertoday]

19. Since Bush, the Executive Branch has new powers. WHY

would Obama give them away?

[Princess Turandot]

23. Looking at the documents on CREW's own website, as a point of information..

This lawsuit was filed originally in September 2007 and has been meandering along since then. The DOJ requested that this lawsuit be dismissed on January 21, 2009 when I believe that Mr. Obama had been President for all of one day. (That was the last 'argument' made by the DOJ; other filings appear to be informational, such as a change of the attorney of record.)

CREW is one of the Plaintiffs; it filed its response to the dismissal request on Friday. That apparently generated this article, a month after the request was made.

I have no idea of what influence a new President elect has on existing DOJ cases during the transition period or whether a change of administration affects previously set court response deadlines. (I suspect that the deadlines would not be extended, since the defendant is the Office not the occupant.) The timing here however makes the motivation of the sudden news burst about this questionable to me. Was it even reported a month ago when it actually happened?

For anyone with the stamina to read through the source documents, I assume that the CREW legal filings collection is complete.



http://www.citizensforethics.org/node/37373/related#content_attachment

[jenmito]

25. Have you started a thread yet asking about the claim that Obama's not a U.S. citizen?

:shrug:

[liberalsince1968]

28. CREW would have no reason to lie about this. And the Obama Admin has already shown that

it has no problem continuing to keep the Bush Admin's secrets.

[pretzel4gore]

29. our society is corrupt, or run by criminals, rather

maybe that indicates something. Listen to the news, any news, mainstream. Whattaya hear? Well, it isn't the truth, no matter how you stretch it. Lookit Obama. The pigmerdia openly, relentlessly, provably, preferred the old white goof over Mr Obama, and they twitch with resentment that Obama was given the job, elected, as prez...though they now insult everybody by calling themselves 'the Obama-mania media' as if Barack is a rock star and they, like the public, twittering teens. But they lie. The entire goddam society is spackled with rotten fat, dripping with hypocrisy and bald-faced lying bastards on every news channel, while the ground shifts under the entire lot. Obama can't do anything, unless he restarts the American Revolution, and takes up where we left off in 1780(?)...
item: The 'Reign of Terror' during French Revolution cost 2500 lives, while an estimated 40 thousand workers and sympathisers were slaughtered after failure of the Paris Commune in 1870, yet the 'Reign of terror' still terrifies ordinary people (who have never even heard about the Paris Commune)...
-out of 1500 victims of the sinking of Titanic, an estimated 600 were steerage passengers who were locked in and are still trapped in the wreckage; but no one will ever mention THAT, wouldn't be kosher!
- 'Jack the Ripper' was a made up name for the killer of 5 hapless streetwalkers in 1888 London. John Druitt, the rape murderer, was id'ed by cops even before he 'committed suicide' (probably aided by Scotland Yard, see Dr. David Kelly!) by jumping in Thames in November '88, shortly after last 'ripper' deed. He was an upper class gentleman who enjoyed 'stomping' poor people in the East End, and the upper class police men realized to ID him would annoy Queen Victoria, a notorious prude, and would also pissoff the poor, so why not let the so called mystery fester? After all, who suffered by implying the killer was a crazy russian or even Prince Eddy, who was gay....
>the liars have been unchallenged since...since the 8 hour day became the cause for economic downturns and recessions, about same era as the Ripper/Titanic cases and partially inspired by the French Revolution