For months, many Democrats and civil libertarians have complained about the disconnect between what President Obama says and what he does as President. One area of the greatest criticism has been the effort of the Obama Administration to block public review of embarrassing pictures, White House logs, controversial memoranda, or disclosure of governmental actions — despite his promise to guarantee transparency in government. One such person who appears to have lost patience with the Administration is Chief U.S. District Judge Loretta Preska. Judge Preska has rejected efforts by the Obama Administration to withhold information on who received $2 trillion dollars in bailout funds. The Obama administration argued that the public has no right to know such information. Given today’s news that the federal debt level will be reach $9 trillion, many people would like to look a bit closer at what Congress and the White House has been doing with the public fisc.
In the latest case, the Justice Department argued that the Federal Reserve records were exempt from the Freedom of Information Act. It is yet another Bushesque argument adopted by this Administration to prevent review of public information.
President Obama once promised to “make our government open and transparent so that anyone can ensure that our business is the people’s business.” That was just a day or so before he barred release of embarrassing pictures and documents.
President Obama’s view of “transparency” appears quite opaque.
One of the controversies that are lingering over the use of the funds is the transfer of billions to foreign banks — estimated at half a trillion dollars in credit swaps.
For the article, click here.