Time to Fire the White House Webmaster

by emptywheel

I thought it worth mentioning that the Administration has twice made claims in the last week that their website refuted. First came Senator Leahy, who noted that Cheney's claims not to be part of the Executive Office of the President were disproved by the White House website.

The Administration’s response today also claims that the Office of the Vice President is not part of the Executive Office of the President.  That is wrong.  Both the United States Code and even the White House’s own web site say so – at least it did as recently as this morning.

Then yesterday, CREW pointed out that the White House website disproved White House claims that the Office of Administration was not subject to FOIA.

After learning that the Bush administration claimed that the Office of Administration wasn't subject to Freedom of Information Act requests, CREW did some research. Seems the White House website, which is an official voice of the Bush administration, states otherwise:

In fact, evidence that the Office of Administration is subject to FOIA requests is made here and here and here and here on the White House website and even once on the Department of Justice site here.

Rather than wait for the next ridiculous White House claim to be disproved by its own website, I say we try to anticipate it. What assertion, made on the White House website, do you think we should just ignore as a mirage invented by some over-imaginative White House webmaster? Some of my nominations include this whole section of the website, particularly this one. We ought to assume this, this, this, and this simply aren't true. And while we're at it, I'm just going to presume that this never happened--since it's on the White House website, it must not be true.

See how much fun you can have simply ignoring things you don't like that appear on the White House website?

Update: Rut Roh. It looks like someone did fire the White House webmaster.

CREW has just learned from a source that the White House has begun peeling off all of the Office of Administration FOIA-related content.

Anybody want to make a quick mirror of the White House website, so we can pull of the parts we don't like?

Comments

[William Ockham]

I'll be ignoring this one:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/08/20070816-1.html

[William Ockham]

Oh wait, I was already ignoring that...

[nolo]

i nominate this page -- as more
completely detailed here -- i can't
believe cheney really believes this.

great concept for a post!

p e a c e

[Jodi]

"Sacré bleu!"

A mistake on a Web Site!!!!

Oh my goodness gracious. What will happen next????

[joanneleon]

The WH web site must have been hacked by bloggers. (channeling Joe Lieberman)

[bmaz]

Freepatriot - I hope you, mother are doing well. Thoughts are with you. As you can see, the mental midget has reared its ugly head. Made me think of you. It is the ONLY thing of any value that the shitstain provides here. Hurry home.

[emptywheel]

nolo

Oh, I can't believe I forgot that one.

[croatoan]

President Discusses Roadmap for Peace in the Middle East. (March 14, 2003) "America is committed, and I am personally committed, to implementing our road map toward peace."

President Bush Announces Major Combat Operations in Iraq Have Ended, (May 1, 2003) "Major combat operations in Iraq have ended. In the battle of Iraq, the United States and our allies have prevailed."

President Discusses Hurricane Relief in Address to the Nation. (September 15, 2005) "When the federal government fails to meet such an obligation, I, as President, am responsible for the problem, and for the solution."

A goldmine from Day One:

(1) Public service is a public trust, requiring employees to place loyalty to the Constitution, the laws, and ethical principles above private gain.
(5) Employees shall put forth honest effort in the performance of their duties.
(8) Employees shall act impartially and not give preferential treatment to any private organization or individual.
(14) Employees shall endeavor to avoid any actions creating the appearance that they are violating applicable law or the ethical standards in applicable regulations

First inaugural address:

And every immigrant...makes our country more, not less, American.

Today, we affirm a new commitment to live out our nation's promise through civility, courage, compassion and character.
...
We must live up to the calling we share. Civility is not a tactic or a sentiment. It is the determined choice of trust over cynicism, of community over chaos. And this commitment, if we keep it, is a way to shared accomplishment.
...
We will show purpose without arrogance.
...
America, at its best, is a place where personal responsibility is valued and expected.
...
Encouraging responsibility is not a search for scapegoats, it is a call to conscience .
...
I will live and lead by these principles: to advance my convictions with civility, to pursue the public interest with courage, to speak for greater justice and compassion, to call for responsibility and try to live it as well.

[steve]

Good point Jodi.

It is just a mistake on a website.

Of course, if they can't run a website, why should I believe that they can run a country?

[pseudonymous in nc]

Isn't White House website content subject to the archiving requirements of the Presidential Records Act? Now, that may mean they can pull pages offline into cold storage, but it would be hilarious if they now rejected FOIA requests for the pages relating to FOIA. Perhaps they can declare the material a state secret, even though it was published on the fucking website.

[JohnLopresti]

Since various branches of the government are visiting the wiki site to perfect revisionist historymaking, maybe the WH could forget its formal website design altogether and instead do a WHwiki. They could entitle one section antiEnvironment, and post court notices like that, about how it is easy to fracture congressional mandated review into segments to avoid obeying congress's laws, in this case, one on the books for seventeen years, last compliance having occurred in the BClinton administration.

[readerOfTeaLeaves]

ps in nc -- the opening scene of "The Book of Laughter and Forgetting" describes a photo in which a hat in a 'restored' photograph is the only visible remnant of the life of a politician who'd been 'disappeared.' The apparatchik who'd altered the photograph forgot to remove the ('disappeared') man's hat. Then again, it's possible that the apparatchik kept the hat in the photo as one small act of silent, anonymous rebellion.

Let's hope some rebels somewhere mirrored those WH web pages, then copied them to a nice, safe place. Perhaps hats of Abazaid, Shinseki, Plame, and sundry others will be seen on those 'restored' web pages at some point. (Next time I see a photo of Dick Cheney wearing a stack of 6 hats, I'll have a hunch about where 5 of the hats came from.)

When I went to Friar William's link, I encountered a 404 error and this text: The file you have attempted to access cannot be found. Please check the URL you entered to make sure there were no typing or copy-and-paste errors. You may also use our search facility to help you find the file you are looking for.

Please note: many files associated with the previous administration have been removed from this server. Some materials may be available through the National Archives and Records Administration website.

So what'd I miss...? Clearly, the site has been changed hastily. If they knew WTF they wanted on that page, they'd have loaded the updated the text, no? Mwahahahahaha...
----------------------------

Best to FreePatriot -- I see his services are in need yet again. Hope he's not caught in a flood somewhere.

[mattsmom]

I've been re-reading Orwell's 1984 - the similarity of Winston's job to the WH webmasters is just too scary for me (not to mention creating your own reality, forgetting that you used to fund the terrorists you now fight, etc.).

[nolo]

"Sacré bleu!"

A mistake on a Web Site!!!!

Oh my goodness gracious. What will happen next????

Posted by: Jodi | August 23, 2007 at 11:53

as mentioned above, by steve, if they
can't keep their act straight about what
is -- and is not -- f.o.i.a.-covered-
information (without regard to whether
the lawyers' determination of the answer
to that question is patently-ridiculous
on its face). . .

"what happens next", is the ad-
ministration will continue to lie about
what it has already done -- and will likely
seek to bomb iran, just for grins -- 'cuz
they can. . . and 'cuz we're not paying attention.

so jodi, it is not a "mistake" -- it is
a butress-foundation of bush's policies -- we are
talking about here. the policy: that the
people -- if left to their own devices -- aren't
capable of digesting the information the
government creates/manufactures/dissembles
to them. . . oh, wait -- no, the policy
is that bush/cheney know the people ARE. . .

so -- bush and cheney want to keep it secret.

we all now have a very good idea that this
information will prove repeated, and willful
[and therefore very-likely feloniously-criminal]
violations of contsitutional rights of americans,
under law that has been well-settled for at least
thirty five years. . . and, that is proof cheney
and bush cannot afford to have adduced against them.

here endeth your lesson, jodi.

p e a c e