Most Transparent White House? No, NYT Exec Editor Says It's The Most Secretive
from the well,-duh dept
We've been among those who have pointed out how laughable the Obama administration's claims to be "the most transparent administration in history" are, when, from nearly every angle, it appears that the Obama administration is ridiculously secretive -- beyond any previous administration. So, it's interesting to see that it's not just us who thinks that. The NYT's executive editor, Jill Abramson, who worked in Washington DC for decades, has noted that the Obama administration is, by far, the most secretive she's ever dealt with."I would say it is the most secretive White House that I have ever been involved in covering, and that includes — I spent 22 years of my career in Washington and covered presidents from President Reagan on up through now, and I was Washington bureau chief of the Times during George W. Bush's first term," Abramson told Al Jazeera America in an interview that will air on Sunday.I guess that's what happens when you declare that whistleblowers are "aiding the enemy" even as you pretend to support them. Your administration clams up.
"I dealt directly with the Bush White House when they had concerns that stories we were about to run put the national security under threat. But, you know, they were not pursuing criminal leak investigations," she continued. "The Obama administration has had seven criminal leak investigations. That is more than twice the number of any previous administration in our history. It's on a scale never seen before. This is the most secretive White House that, at least as a journalist, I have ever dealt with."
Whenever this issue comes up, I keep going back to the speculation from Daniel Ellsberg a few years ago, in which he noted that while President Bush (the younger) abused his power and bulked up the surveillance state in secretive ways, when push came to shove, he believed that Bush was proud of doing that. President Obama, on the other hand, seems to be embarrassed about the way he's abused the power of the Presidency, and goes to tremendous lengths to try to hide those abuses and excesses. It's pure speculation on the part of Ellsberg, but it certainly rings true on multiple levels.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: jill abramson, journalism, obama, reporting, transparency
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Then again, the O has his remote killbots. But even he wouldn't dare to use them in russia. I hope.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
If anyone wants to put a stop to it and end this party, they're labeled CRAZY!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Congress did that, Obama just approved it.
The Drone Strikes under Buch, bad, bad, bad, Code Pink all over it. Obama, 20 times or more then Bush ever did, and it's crickets.
Except for all the widespread criticism of them.
Trust me, I wasn't a fan of BUSH. A Huge RINO!!!
So Bush was too liberal for you?
We need term Limits. Being in Congress and Washington D.C. for 5 to 10, 30, 40 years corrupts your mind.
Term limits would not help with either Bush or Obama.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
War in Afgh went up and part of result was capture of Bin Laden.
Despite its issues, drones get terrorist masterminds at a high rate per general cost in life.
One prob is money allegiance, yes. Corps have 1st amend rights is major prob.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
b) in my opinion, someone else is pulling the strings
c) if that is the case, Obama should be embarrassed! he should also do one or both of resigning the presidency and having those who he knows are pulling the strings arrested! they cant be doing so for any reason other than to better themselves and whatever grip they have/want on the world, because it's much more than just the USA at stake here! if he does neither, there can be no credibility in his leadership
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Again, I'm not ready to accept this theory. But it is possible. He may have been unfortunate to be the one at the seat when the powers behind all this rotten shit decided to clamp down on democracy harder in the name of money.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
And the more reasonable response would be "because that's politicians do when they are eligible for re-election."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
b) in my opinion, someone else is pulling the strings
Obama is black... Based on the recent and historical mutterings of the NAACP black folk are not allowed to have an opinion that differs from the NAACP, so of course someone is pulling the strings. The Black Americans just need to ask themselves are their black masters better or worse than the white ones. O wait...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Need any crosses?
How about some white bed sheets
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Bigots of the world, unite!
Need any crosses?
How about some white bed sheets
Be a pal and tell us which bigots? there are a lot of bigots out there that hate each other and will most likely fight, and not unite. Or are you one of those types that believes bigots only exist in the camp opposite yours?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
If he were white, he would be executed for treason.
No other presidents got away with this much bullshit.
You idiots are the problem, not those "bigots". Because you let black people do whatever they want
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Absolutely untrue. It's people who raise race (whatever the race is) when it's not relevant, or as if "race" meant "conspiracy", or as if race is somehow indicative of skill, value, or trustworthiness (or lack thereof) who are bigots.
"If he were white, he would be executed for treason."
If you really believe this, then you really should take a few remedial courses on governmental and constitutional law.
"No other presidents got away with this much bullshit."
Oh, and a few courses on US history.
"Because you let black people do whatever they want"
Spoken like a true bigot.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Sen. Tim Scott: NAACP Now Practices 'Philosophical Bigotry'
"While the NAACP once stood for equal rights for minorities, it now has turned to "philosophical bigotry," says Sen. Tim Scott, R-S.C.
The Rev. William Barber, president of the North Carolina NAACP, called Scott a ventriloquist dummy for the tea party in a Martin Luther King Day speech on Monday. Scott is the only black Republican serving in the U.S. Senate."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
“They frantically seek out people of color to become mouthpieces for their particular agenda,” Barber said on a conference call.
He also addressed the Scott comments, which he had previously defended. He said his remarks had “nothing to do with color,” because they were intended to apply to anyone who supported Republican platforms, such as South Carolina governor Nikki Haley and North Carolina governor Pat McCrory: “The issue is: Who are you a mouthpiece for when you fight the implementation of the Affordable Care Act?” he said.
Sen. Scott has dismissed Barber’s comments as “baseless and meaningless rhetoric.” “Reverend Barber will remind me and others of what not to do,” he added.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Although I must say, being called a mouthpiece is small potatoes compared to some of the other ridiculousness.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
By all means have issues with what the man does. Color has nothing to do with that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Or the former.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Or you only notice it when foxnews tells you about it?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Advice to future politicians: Just because I support *some* of your policies doesn't mean I'm going to support you when you go off script and break the Constitution and the social contract in an effort to scoop up as much power as you can.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I find this difficult to believe.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
___________________
And yet life goes on despite your incredulity. What a moment we get to share with you, learning you're not the center of the universe.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Stating that one doubts such a proclamation, is the same thing as declaring you are the "center of the universe", how profound.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Wrong word...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Wrong word...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Wrong word...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Wrong word...
Oh really?
https://www.google.com/search?q=obama+should+resign
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Wrong word...
Bravado Accomplished
Is our children learning bravado?
Bravado me once, shame on you. Bravado me .. you can't get bravado'd again.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Why not?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Why not?
This an interesting accusation. I'd like to see the research, that is .. assuming there was any.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Likely? Probable?
You simply can not say that all of this is for my safety. That's simply can not be true, not true at all.
The greatest security is almost always knowing what to expect and I sure as shit never expect bogeymen and ghosts.
What I fully expect, at this juncture, is a government hell-bent on fucking us all.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
i agree...
(just like our constitutional rights)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Well, folks did want change.......
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I'm sure it is easy to then imply it is the most secretive ever ... although this conclusion might be a little lacking in the evidence and corroboration dept.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]