The Freedom of Information Act specifically states:
…any person has the right to request access to federal agency records or information except to the extent the records are protected from disclosure by any of nine exemptions contained in the law or by one of three special law enforcement record exclusions.
The nine exemption categories that authorize government agencies to withhold information are:
1 – classified information for national defense or foreign policy;
2 – internal personnel rules and practices;
3 – information that is exempt under other laws;
4 – trade secrets and confidential business information;
5 – inter-agency or intra-agency memoranda or letters that are protected by legal privileges;
6 – personnel and medical files;
7 – law enforcement records or information;
8 – information concerning bank supervision; and
9 – geological and geophysical information.
But the AP has investigated and found that the Homeland Security Department detoured requests for records to political appointee’s to get approval first.
Where’s the outrage from the left?
For at least a year, the Homeland Security Department detoured requests for federal records to senior political advisers for highly unusual scrutiny, probing for information about the requesters and delaying disclosures deemed too politically sensitive, according to nearly 1,000 pages of internal e-mails obtained by The Associated Press.
~~~The Freedom of Information Act, the main tool forcing the government to be more open, is designed to be insulated from political considerations. Anyone who seeks information through the law is supposed to get it unless disclosure would hurt national security, violate personal privacy or expose confidential decision-making in certain areas.
But in July 2009, Homeland Security introduced a directive requiring a wide range of information to be vetted by political appointees for “awareness purposes,” no matter who requested it.
Career employees were ordered to provide Secretary Janet Napolitano’s political staff with information about the people who asked for records — such as where they lived, whether they were private citizens or reporters — and about the organizations where they worked.
If a member of Congress sought such documents, employees were told to specify Democrat or Republican.
Of course as soon as the AP started investigating the DHS ceased this blatant .
This policy required that anything “controversial or sensitive,” anything related to White House policy, or anything requested by journalists, activists, watchdog groups and even lawmakers could only be provided after a political appointee looked it over. That appointee often opted to just never respond to a request…in effect vetoing the request.
How in the world can Napolitano keep her job after this? I mean they used the FIOA as an excuse to dig into the lives of private citizens who requested information that should be freely available to every citizen.
Open and transparent indeed. We have Napolitano providing information based on what party they belong to and we have a Attorney General who bases his decisions on whether to prosecute or not based on race.
Ch-ch-change
See author page
The outrage is not there because the “Ministry of Truth” (MSM) will not broadcast it. A real investigation will not occur until Republicans take back one or both houses of Congress.
Just one more reason to vote these Marxist bastards out in November. DHS needs to be reorganized and/or disbanded. Haven’t seen any relevance from that organization since it was formed. Myself, I don’t feel any safer because its there. I do, however, have reservations about how Obama might use it against “We The People”.
Disband the creepily-named Department of Homeland Security. It is a mistake. The original problem was the communication barriers between different government agencies that prevented action on pending terrorist threats such as the 9/11 attacks. Besides the natural turf-protection that goes on, the execrable Jamie Gorelick put a particular barrier in between foreign and domestic intelligence sharing during the Clinton administration, remember? You don’t need to create a giant new turf-protecting bureaucracy to take down the barriers. And just look at this crap – DHS is convenient one-stop shopping for an administration that wants to abuse power.
Regarding this FOIA corruption: Look how scared these paranoid little rodents are. They clearly feel there is much for them to be afraid of.
Oh, the stories they could tell.
And in fact, will tell.
Some of them in vengeful ‘insider’ books after O throws them under the bus.
And hopefully starting next year, some of them testifying under oath after Democrats lose control of Congress.
journOlisters rabbit hole.
I am sure the journOlists would have no problem if the Bush administration had done the same, vet through the political team. Don’t you?
This is a huge issue but what is the media discussing? The Sherrod debacle…. just another diversion from real substantive issues.
@Mr. Bly
That is the modus operandi of the left. Shift the direction of the conversation away from what is most damaging to one that is superficial. You see it everyday on this board when we get posts from CRAP and tadcf, and to a minor extent Greg(although he does seem to stay on topic far more than the other two or any of the other moonbat visitors here).