Most Transparent Administration Ever: No, you can’t see Obama’s emails to Hillary at her private address he didn’t know about

November 2, 2015

satire transparency

And no way was he looking at the address when he entered it or sent it, so he didn’t know, okay? Racist!

From Doug Powers writing at Michelle Malkin’s blog:

President Obama said previously he was unaware at the time Hillary Clinton was secretary of state that she used only a private email address. Now the White House is refusing to release emails between Obama and Hillary… the ones he sent to the email address he was unaware she used. It’s the kind of honesty and historic transparency we’ve come to expect.

Here’s one good, likely reason Obama doesn’t want those emails to come into the public eye:

Here’s what the Benghazi committee found in Thursday’s hearing. Two hours into Mrs. Clinton’s testimony, Ohio Rep. Jim Jordan referred to an email Mrs. Clinton sent to her daughter, Chelsea, at 11:12 the night of the attack, or 45 minutes after the secretary of state had issued a statement blaming YouTube-inflamed mobs. Her email reads: “Two of our officers were killed in Benghazi by an Al Queda-like group.” Mrs. Clinton doesn’t hedge in the email; no “it seems” or “it appears.” She tells her daughter that on the anniversary of 9/11 an al Qaeda group assassinated four Americans.

We know Obama and Clinton talked by phone that night at around 10 PM, at about the same time she issued her infamous “It was that darned video’s fault!” statement, and 45 minutes before she told her daughter it was an Al Qaeda attack. Election Day was just a couple of months away, and Obama had staked a large portion of his claim to reelection on the assertion that “Al Qaeda was on the run.” In fact, for two full weeks after the night of the attack, he kept claiming falsely that the video was to blame — even in a speech to the UN General Assembly.

Now, do you think it possible any emails in that time period dealt with the events of that night and what public spin they should give? Coordinating stories, perhaps? Guess we’ll never know, since Hillary probably deleted them and Obama won’t give them up, and will likely delete them when he leaves office. (1)

Got to love that commitment to transparency.

Footnote:
(1) Oh, come on. We’re talking about a leftist who learned his political trade in Chicago! Of course he’ll delete them.

Advertisements

Does our President need a spanking?

March 31, 2011

There are several way to explain President Obama’s often-odd, against self-interests behavior in office: he’s passive; he doesn’t like detail; or he lacks executive experience. I’ve often resorted to “He’s a Socialist ideologue and what he does makes perfect sense if one interprets it in light of Alinskyite incremental stealth Socialism and Black Liberation Theology,” though admittedly that’s a mouthful to say over the dinner table.

But, in all honesty, when I read something like this, I have to admit I can’t explain the sheer bloody-minded stupidity of it all:

President Obama finally and quietly accepted his “transparency” award from the open government community this week — in a closed, undisclosed meeting at the White House on Monday.

The secret presentation happened almost two weeks after the White House inexplicably postponed the ceremony, which was expected to be open to the press pool.

This time, Obama met quietly in the Oval Office with Gary Bass of OMB Watch, Tom Blanton of the National Security Archive, Danielle Brian of the Project on Government Oversight, Lucy Dalglish of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, and Patrice McDermott of OpenTheGovernment.org, without disclosing the meeting on his public schedule or letting photographers or print reporters into the room.

(Emphases added.)

I mean, didn’t someone on the staff point out the self-defeating and embarrassing irony of this? Accepting an award for transparency in conditions of secrecy that would make Nixon proud?

Seriously, what is going through his head?

Okay, call me nuts, but I have a theory: We all know of the President’s ego. He thinks the world of himself, he was raised in relative ease, and was never really, truly challenged in a knock-down, drag out, gut check kind of way. He’s pretty much glided from promotion to promotion, a living example of the Peter Principle. When he became president, he expected things would go as smoothly as they had in the past, and that glib words from him would be enough to get by.

But it didn’t work out that way. The presidency is unlike any other job, and you don’t succeed at it with just some nice speeches and TV interviews.

And Obama, for the first time in his life, found himself being held responsible — and he didn’t like it!

So now he’s acting petulantly: the press doesn’t fawn (as much) over him anymore? Fine. He’ll bar them from his transparency award ceremony and to heck with how it looks! I mean, did you listen to his tone in parts of his speech on Libya? It was as if he was scolding or chiding the American people for daring to question him.

I still think he’s a Socialist, but now I’m convinced he’s an immature passive-aggressive Socialist and what we’re seeing is him “acting out.”

It’s come to this, my friends: Our president needs a time out.

via Moe Lane

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


Transparency Watch: Oh, that 40-grand!

June 29, 2010

Somewhere in my memory, way back around the time Obama was elected and a new era of Hope and Change had dawned for America, the then-candidate promised us a new era of transparency in government.

That was then, this is now:

White House aide failed to disclose $40K payout

President Barack Obama’s political director failed to disclose that he was slated to receive a nearly $40,000 payout from a large labor union while he was working in the White House.

Patrick Gaspard, who served as the political director for the Service Employees International Union local 1199, received $37,071.46 in “carried over leave and vacation” from the union in 2009, but he did not disclose the agreement to receive the payment on his financial disclosure forms filed with the White House.

In a section on his financial disclosure where agreements or arrangements for payment by a former employer must be disclosed, Gaspard checked a box indicating that he had nothing to report.

Bill Burton, a White House spokesman, told POLITICO Monday that Gaspard was in the process of correcting his disclosure form to reflect that he did in fact have an agreement for severance.

“We have made the small administrative change to this year’s and last year’s forms to indicate that part of the final payment to Patrick reflected their typical severance of one week of pay for each of his nine years of service at Local 1199 of SEIU,” Burton wrote POLITICO in an e-mailed statement.

Such financial disclosures are governed by federal law, but Stan Brand, a former House general counsel and ethics expert, said the Justice Department is unlikely to pursue an investigation unless they suspected a “knowing or willful” intent to deceive.

Call me a paranoid, racist, dangerous right-wing potential extremist (and don’t forget “Nazi!“, too), but I find it hard to believe that someone could just forget $40,000 paid out to him by his former employer, especially when he needed the money to pay down nearly $80,000 in debts.  Hey, it happens all the time, right?

Oh, and the former employer happens to be a powerful union allied with one’s new boss and his political program. And that union’s then-head was and is a frequent visitor to the White House.

What a coincidence.

They must be using the Tammany Hall definition of “transparency.”

(via Ed Morrissey)


And the prize for best fantasy fiction goes to…

January 4, 2010

Recovery.gov, the federal web site bills itself as:

…the U.S. government’s official website providing easy access to data
related to Recovery Act spending and allows for the reporting of potential fraud, waste, and abuse.

Trouble is, way too much of the information is wrong or outright nonsensical. It counts jobs never in danger of elimination as jobs saved and reports jobs saved or created in nonexistent congressional districts. Now, we learn, we are to be grateful for jobs created or saved (and our money spent) in zip codes that don’t exist:

“Closer examination of the latest recovery.gov report for New Mexico shows hundreds of thousands of dollars sent to and credited with creating jobs in zip codes that do not exist in New Mexico or anywhere else. Moreover, funds reported as being spent in New Mexico were given zip codes corresponding to areas in Washington and Oregon.”

Like the rest of the Obama “recovery program,” Recovery.gov is a joke. It might as well track The One Ring on its journey back to Mordor.

LINKS: Sister Toldjah, who reminds us  that Joe Biden is supposed to be closely overseeing the stimulus program. That explains a lot.


ClimateGate links

November 27, 2009

It may be a holiday here in the US, but the news and revelations about the scandal that may sink the Cult of Anthropogenic Global Warming didn’t take the weekend off. Here are some of the more interesting links to cross the Public Secrets case desk:

There’s never just one:

The biggest item, and the one that has to have cultists and alarmists worldwide burning candles to Al Gore, is news that the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit may not be the only site to have manipulated data to fit a preferred result. New Zealand’s National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research (NIWA) has been accused of manipulating data to show a warming trend where none existed. Lawrence Solomon of Canada’s Financial Post reveals a connection from NIWA back to the corruption-tainted CRU, while James Delingpole comments on the deepening shame.

It seems the arrogant priests of the AGW cult have at last met their Nemesis.

The Silence of the Lambs American Media:

You would think that a scandal of this potential magnitude would be on all the networks and in all the major papers of the United States.

You would be wrong. They are doing their level-best to ignore or downplay this crisis in AGW orthodoxy. In fact, the Russians are covering this more honestly than the American press:

Hang your heads in shame, MSM. The Russian press has more integrity than you.

Update: The New York Times refuses to publish the leaked emails, citing ethical concerns, yet it had no problem releasing national secrets in wartime. Ethics. Yeah. Sure.  Waiting

Other Links:

Senior members of the opposition Liberal Party in Australia have resigned in protest of the Party leader’s support for a cap-and-trade scheme. Though no direct link to ClimateGate was drawn, it’s a reasonable inference thanks to the timing.

Perhaps this is a good time to reread the late Michael Crighton’s speech about environmentalism as a religion.

Oh, my. The revered BBC had the CRU’s files a month ago and didn’t say a thing. Media bias at the Beeb? Say it ain’t so!

An excellent summary of the significance of the CRU email and program files. I disagree with the author’s conclusion after item four (I think this sets AGW theory back to square zero), but the summation itself is good.

I have to ask: without utter and complete transparency on the part of advocates of man-caused climate change, how can anyone trust their claims in the future? They have to release all raw data and make available the raw code of their programs. If they’re right, why hide anything? Nothing else will do.

Their credibility is in ruins.


But it’s OK when Obama does it

July 22, 2009

For eight years, the Bush administration was excoriated for holding confidential meetings between the White House – specifically Vice-President Dick Cheney- and oil-industry executives. But now when the Obama administration does the exact same thing with health-care execs, why, it’s no problem:

The still sort-of-new Barack Obama Democratic administration has again adopted another policy straight out of the administration of his much-criticized Republican predecessor, George W. Bush.

Obama administration officials have rejected a watchdog group’s request for a list of healthcare industry executives who’ve been meeting secretly in the White House with Obama staffers to discuss healthcare changes being drafted there and in Congress.

According to the Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, which is suspicious of the influence of health industry lobbyists and company officers, it received a letter from the Secret Service citing an Obama Justice Department directive and denying access to visitor logs under the “presidential communications privilege.”

Sound familiar?

Remember the holy hullabaloo in the early Bush years when Vice President Dick Cheney met in the White House compound with energy industry officials and refused to release a list of those executives and the frequency of their visits? That controversy was propelled by critical Democrats and was before Obama’s brief Senate tenure.

Read the whole thing. The LA Time “Top of the Ticket” politics blog* mentions other Obama-Biden promises for new transparency after the dark years of BushHitler and Darth Cheney, promises that turn out to have had, as is typical for Barack Obama, expiration dates.

Now, I’m not criticizing the claim of the Executive Branch to have confidential discussions and to receive advice that’s held in confidence. No presidency could function if every communication, remark, memo, and sneeze were made public. At the least, others would be afraid to give controversial opinions, lest they be pilloried in the press. And opposition members of Congress, hungry for press exposure and to take the administration down, would be irresistibly tempted to go on fishing expeditions, demanding document after document, witness after witness, again threatening to paralyze the Executive.

No, presidents have a need for secrets and confidential meetings, and the pubic does not have an absolute right to know. (Really. What right did the public have to the planning discussions for D-Day, for example?) However, it’ yet another example of Team Obama’s hypocrisy that they so harshly criticized George W. Bush for doing exactly what Barack Obama now claims as executive privilege. And that “say one thing, do another” is something Obama seems be doing at a pace sure to leave his predecessors in the dust, confident in their assumption that we’re either too stupid to notice or just don’t care.

*(Which, I have to admit, does a darned good job, contrary to what I’ve come to expect from the Times)

LINKS: Sister Toldjah, Just One Minute, QandO, In the Agora, The Agitator.

(via Memeorandum)