enlarge

Ahhh...so much for that transparency on which Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker campaigned. When Walker claimed to have received thousands of emails supporting him on his union-busting collective bargaining hardline, the Associated Press and the local publication the Isthmus asked to see proof. When Walker refused, they filed FOIA requests for them. Think that a legally binding document compelled Walker? Guess again:

Over the past month or so, Governor Deadeyes has been spinning a narrative in which he’s been receiving “overwhelming” support for his budget-slashing measures. He has frequently cited receiving emails from “a single mother” or “a small-business owner” or “a laid off autoworker from Janesville.” As he continues to find ways to get on to TV to make his case, he keeps relying on this “overwhelming” support.

In an attempt to find out what level of support he really has received, two local media outlets filed Freedom of Information Act requests, seeking the emails that Walker has received over this period of time. They want to see exactly who is supporting him and what they are saying.

Apparently, the law not being on his side, Walker decided to ignore the requests. Bill Lueders of the Isthmus noted that he had not received a formal response to his request. AP reporter Todd Richmond received an email from the governor’s lawyer, noting his request would cost more than $31,250 and that amount of money had to be paid in advance. Or, he could just come on down and camp out at the Capitol and read until his heart was content.

The men filed a suit in Dane County on Friday, as their requests weren’t being taken seriously.

The Freedom of Information Act for the state of Wisconsin is listed here. Note that it says that we’re supposed to have as much openness as possible. Also note that fees can be waived “if the material requested is of public interest.” Governor might be making sh*t up? Yeah, seems like this request fits the bill

Thirty-one thousand dollars for copying? C'mon. I can get a flash drive for $50 and you can put all of the files on that. I guess that's too easy an answer.

I'm curious how much of the precious Wisconsin tax dollars are being used to defend Walker's desire not to share with the public how much support he is actually getting.

George Galloway interviews Andy Worthington on UK knowledge of torture on Guantanamo detainees for Digital Radio.

I don't know that there is anyone on this planet who knows more about what went on at Guantanamo than independent journalist Andy Worthington, and that includes those inside the administration. Through incredibly hard work, diligence and a mountain of FOIA information, Andy has been chronicling this deepest, darkest chapter of American history.

Andy has written a book, The Guantanamo Files, that I am reading now and on which I will be hosting a book chat in the very near future. I can't lie, it's taking me longer to read it than it should, because I have to keep putting it down. There's not a chapter I've read that I haven't wanted to scream, "This should never have happened! This is not what a democratic country does! NOT IN MY NAME!" It is a detailed and unblinking look at not only a strange mixture of fear and incompetence, but of real evil as well. Indeed, Andy Worthington has been instrumental in documenting just what a legal black hole Guantanamo is:

My life as a full-time chronicler and analyst of Guantánamo and the “War on Terror” began with the 14 months I spent researching and writing my book The Guantánamo Files, which (with additional chapters published online) tells the stories of the 779 prisoners who have been held at Guantánamo throughout its eight-year history. I then began writing articles following developments at Guantánamo, helping to spread the word through various websites, and am delighted to report that my website now receives an average of 150,000 page views a month.

My thanks to all who have discovered my work, and especially to those who follow it on a regular basis. Three months ago, despite stalling and compromises on the part of the Obama administration, I thought that we were at least still proceeding in the right direction, but the last few months have proved me wrong, and have demonstrated that a huge amount of work still needs to be done. This is where your help — reading my work, helping to get it out to other people and providing financial support to enable me to keep spreading the word — is so important.

The one-year deadline that President Obama set for the closure of Guantánamo has passed, those who oppose the prison’s closure appear to have gained the upper hand in an ongoing propaganda war, and the administration has made numerous fundamental mistakes: failing to provide new homes on the US mainland for cleared prisoners who cannot be repatriated because they face the risk of torture, reviving the Bush administration’s reviled Military Commission trial system, and insisting that it has the right to hold some prisoners indefinitely without charge or trial.

With widespread indifference in the mainstream media, my mission — to educate people about the terrible mistakes that have been made, and the human cost of those mistakes — continues, not just with regard to Guantánamo, but also in researching the “ghost prisoners” of the CIA’s secret detention program (whose whereabouts are largely unaccounted for), exposing the baleful history of the prison at Bagram airbase in Afghanistan, calling for accountability for those who made America a “Torture Nation,” and exposing British complicity in torture and the injustice of my home country’s own anti-terror laws.

In the last three months, I have updated my definitive Guantánamo prisoner list, produced an annotated version of the first ever Bagram prisoner list, and published five articles listing all my work in chronological order, as well as reporting the stories of the prisoners released from Guantánamo, reporting on their habeas corpus petitions in the US courts, exposing right-wing lies and misinformation, and the spinelessness of many Democrats, and criticizing the administration for its inability to place principles above pragmatism.

Andy is currently seeking donations to help continue his important work. Please donate if you can. But if that's not possible, I urge you to considering purchasing Andy's book, The Guantanamo Files, in advance of our book chat. It's an excellent read, if a bit harrowing and should make for a very lively book chat.

Glenn Greenwald on Obama's support for the new Graham-Lieberman Secrecy Act:

It was one thing when President Obama reversed himself last month by announcing that he would appeal the Second Circuit's ruling that the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) compelled disclosure of various photographs of detainee abuse sought by the ACLU. Agree or disagree with Obama's decision, at least the basic legal framework of transparency was being respected, since Obama's actions amounted to nothing more than a request that the Supreme Court review whether the mandates of FOIA actually required disclosure in this case. But now -- obviously anticipating that the Government is likely to lose in court again (.pdf) -- Obama wants Congress to change FOIA by retroactively narrowing its disclosure requirements, prevent a legal ruling by the courts, and vest himself with brand new secrecy powers under the law which, just as a factual matter, not even George Bush sought for himself.

The White House is actively supporting a new bill jointly sponsored by Sens. Lindsey Graham and Joe Lieberman -- called The Detainee Photographic Records Protection Act of 2009 -- that literally has no purpose other than to allow the government to suppress any "photograph taken between September 11, 2001 and January 22, 2009 relating to the treatment of individuals engaged, captured, or detained after September 11, 2001, by the Armed Forces of the United States in operations outside of the United States." As long as the Defense Secretary certifies -- with no review possible -- that disclosure would "endanger" American citizens or our troops, then the photographs can be suppressed even if FOIA requires disclosure. The certification lasts 3 years and can be renewed indefinitely. The Senate passed the bill as an amendment last week.

Just imagine if any other country did this. Imagine if a foreign government were accused of systematically torturing and otherwise brutally abusing detainees in its custody for years, and there was ample photographic evidence proving the extent and brutality of the abuse. Further imagine that the country's judiciary -- applying decades-old transparency laws -- ruled that the government was legally required to make that evidence public. But in response, that country's President demanded that those transparency laws be retroactively changed for no reason other than to explicitly empower him to keep the photographic evidence suppressed, and a compliant Congress then immediately passed a new law empowering the President to suppress that evidence. What kind of a country passes a law that has no purpose other than to empower its leader to suppress evidence of the torture it inflicted on people? Read the language of the bill; it doesn't even hide the fact that its only objective is to empower the President to conceal evidence of war crimes.

That this exact scenario is now happening in the U.S. is all the more remarkable given that the President who is demanding these new suppression powers is the same one who repeatedly vowed "to make his administration the most open and transparent in history." After noting the tentative steps Obama has taken to increase transparency, the generally pro-Obama Washington Post Editorial Page today observed: "what makes the administration's support for the photographic records act so regrettable" is that "Mr. Obama runs the risk of taking two steps back in his quest for more open government."

Marcy at FDL brings us this interesting tidbit that indicates you might be serving jail time for downloading music:

Last September, the Bush administration defended the unusual secrecy over an anti-counterfeiting treaty being negotiated by the U.S. government, which some liberal groups worry could criminalize some peer-to-peer file sharing that infringes copyrights.

[...] Now President Obama's White House has tightened the cloak of government secrecy still further, saying in a letter this week that a discussion draft of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement and related materials are "classified in the interest of national security pursuant to Executive Order 12958."

[...] Jamie Love, director of the nonprofit group Knowledge Ecology International, filed the Freedom of Information Act request that resulted in this week's denial from the White House. The denial letter (PDF) was sent to Love on Tuesday by Carmen Suro-Bredie, chief FOIA officer in the White House's Office of the U.S. Trade Representative.

[...] Love had written in his original request on January 31--submitted soon after Obama's inauguration--that the documents "are being widely circulated to corporate lobbyists in Europe, Japan, and the U.S. There is no reason for them to be secret from the American public."

[...] Love's group believes that the U.S. and Japan want the treaty to say that willful trademark and copyright infringement on a commercial scale must be subject to criminal sanctions, including infringement that has "no direct or indirect motivation of financial gain."

ACLU:

The American Civil Liberties Union responded today to a stunning new report that the NSA has effectively revived the Orwellian "Total Information Awareness" domestic-spying program that was banned by Congress in 2003. In response, the ACLU said that it was filing a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for more information about the spying. And, the group announced that it was moving its "Surveillance Clock" one minute closer to midnight.

"Congress shut down TIA because it represented a massive and unjustified governmental intrusion into the personal lives of Americans," said Caroline Fredrickson, Director of the Washington Legislative Office of the ACLU. "Now we find out that the security agencies are pushing ahead with the program anyway, despite that clear congressional prohibition. The program described by current and former intelligence officials in Monday's Wall Street Journal could be modeled on Orwell’s Big Brother."

The ACLU said the new report confirmed its past warnings that the NSA was engaging in extremely broad-based data mining that was violating the privacy of vast numbers of Americans.

TPM has more...

Contra Costa Times: (reg. req'd)

A Lafayette attorney who specializes in election law is seeking a Congressional investigation into whether the White House was involved in pushing a California ballot initiative to change the way the state allocates its electoral votes.

Barry Fadem, who is working for the group opposed to the initiative, also made a Freedom of Information Act request with the White House on Friday to reveal all contacts between Bush Administration officials, the Republican National Committee and other political operatives discussing potential changes to the state's electoral college laws.

"We want to know if the White House improperly discussed this on taxpayer time," said Fadem, a Democrat. "But we also want to make people aware that this is not some new idea, not some good public policy that proponents keep claiming. This is truly only about one thing: stealing the presidency."

If it could be shown that the White House did discuss this on taxpayer time (good luck with that FOIA request, this administration is the most secretive in history), we have a clear cut case of violating the Hatch Act, which could lead to some very interesting hearings.

Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington:

Two weeks ago, CREW documented how the White House website conflicted with the Bush administration's claim that the Office of Administration was not subject to Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests.  On August 23, 2007, the Washington Post took note of the  conflict between the White House website and the White House position:

The claim, made in a motion filed Tuesday by the Justice Department, is at odds with a depiction of the office on the White House's own Web site. As of yesterday, the site listed the Office of Administration as one of six presidential entities subject to the open-records law, which is commonly known by its abbreviation, FOIA.

The White House website has been scrubbed -- and a new message indicates that the Office of Administration is now exempt from FOIA requests.   Read on...

  CREW:

CREW just released a new blockbuster report:  The Best Laid Plans: The Story of How the Government Ignored Its Own Gulf Coast Hurricane Plans.

Best Laid Plans details the Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) plan to respond to a hurricane of Katrina's magnitude and, very importantly, FEMA's subsequent failure to implement that plan.  The full report can be found here.

Shortly after Katrina struck, on September 7, 2005, CREW sent a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), of which FEMA is a component, seeking records related to the federal government's long-term planning for a hurricane on the Gulf Coast as well as its immediate preparations for and response to Hurricane Katrina.

The Best Laid Plans is based on the 7,500 records DHS provided in response.  What we found is disturbing -- and dangerous.

CREW:

The first paragraph of the latest AP article sums it up:

A newly disclosed effort to keep Vice President Dick Cheney's visitor records secret is the latest White House push to make sure the public does not learn who has been meeting with top officials in the Bush administration.

The Bush administration has changed the rules over record-keeping to prevent access to visitor records. They've usurped the role of the Secret Service, which is covered by the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). Instead, Bush and Cheney claim visitor records are under their jurisdiction, thus exempt from FOIA. CREW is not accepting that determination, hence our lawsuits.

liberal catnip: It's confirmed, the UK accepted US torture planes.

Bad Attitudes: Woodward & Bernstein on Larry King. Bernstein pretty much calls the Bush administration a pack of liars....which is what we do here every day!

Hotline On Call: Doolittle does a lot of talking

The Road To Surfdom: A Hamas victory in Palestine, an emboldened Iran and an increasingly radicalised government in Iraq. This is all helping keep us safe....how?

outraged moderates: DOD staffer's notes from 9/11 obtained under FOIA
outraged moderates: DOD staffer's notes from 9/11 obtained under FOIA