misleading headline on msnbc.com: 'Obama administration defending bu$h* secrets'

[spanone]

at first this headline pissed me off...then i read the 2nd paragraph and realized the truth...if they are going to rewrite the act guidelines, what else could they do at this point?

WASHINGTON - Despite President Barack Obama's vow to open government more than ever, the Justice Department is defending Bush administration decisions to keep secret many documents about domestic wiretapping, data collection on travelers and U.S. citizens, and interrogation of suspected terrorists.

In half a dozen lawsuits, Justice lawyers have opposed formal motions or spurned out-of-court offers to delay court action until the new administration rewrites Freedom of Information Act guidelines and decides whether the new rules might allow the public to see more.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29225492/

[Spazito]

1. Very misleading...

It boggles the mind that, somehow, even being in office less than a month, there are expectations that either a) re-writes on major policies should occur simultaneously with the inauguration or b) the Obama Administration should respond on the fly without having the needed re-writes in hand.

I have no doubt the changes will be made as quickly and as judiciously possible and they will reflect a very different view on what should be held secret from the public.

[spanone]

3. the real headline should read 'Obama looking to rewrite FOIA guidelines'

that's the REAL story

[Spazito]

5. I bet if were were to search MSNBC's site we would find that heading...

or a close variation but they choose not to connect the dots between the two (really one) stories, it makes it more difficult to project faux controversy were they to actually report the facts.

[catnhatnh]

2. Ding, Ding, Ding!

We have a winner. I've been defending these charges since less than a week after Eric Holder's confirmation and those piling on were DUer's!

[spanone]

4. if you read the headline and the first paragraph it would piss you off....but

the truth is farther down in the story

[catnhatnh]

6. Completely Agree...

But I've seen posts excoriating the administration for their "support" of Bush policies. There was no implied criticism of your post-that bad boy illuminates two truths....MSM slant and the fact Obama has not weighed in yet.

[Ocracoker16]

7. thanks for pointing that out

This is the second MSNBC article I have seen this week that was misleading.

[chill_wind]

8. Then shouldn't they have been asking for delays in cases that have already come up?

But so far, it doesn't sound like they have. That's the first half of that last sentence. Let's read it again:

In half a dozen lawsuits, Justice lawyers have opposed formal motions or spurned out-of-court offers to delay court action until the new administration rewrites Freedom of Information Act guidelines and decides whether the new rules might allow the public to see more.

Those cases that they have apparently kept with the Bush admin on already are cited on page two.

For the record, I don't like the article's title either, but these seem to be the facts so far:

"So far, Justice has expressed willingness to review Bush decisions in two cases, only one because of FOIA changes."

And neither one of those two include the extraordinary renditions and torture case (Jessopsen Dataplan) The DOJ DID NOT ask for delay or review. So the Obama DOJ did weigh in this one and has on others already. We can't have it both ways, here.

And this one:

"The civil division has sought a delay to review one case — involving three 2005 Justice legal memos on the definition of "cruel and unusual" interrogation tactics. But its request didn't mention the new FOIA policy. Instead it said Obama's Jan. 22 executive order on detention and interrogation might alter the government position.

That's going to be key. Those are the OLC Torture Memos, that the ACLU is asking for, I suspect.

http://washingtonindependent.com/29575/aclu-lawsuit-tests-obama-openness-policies



The Bush admin succeeded in pushing that one off until after they left. It's already had several extensions. The Obama admin wants to delay that one for another 90 days worth of review yet. A federal judge will decide on Feb 18. how much more of an extension they can have. More info at the ACLU website.