iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Andrew Breitbart

GET UPDATES FROM Andrew Breitbart
 

The White House Guess List: How Obama Pulled a Fast One on the American People -- in the Name of "Transparency"

Posted: 03/22/11 05:56 PM ET

President Barack Obama has won praise from the media -- and from himself -- for putting the White House visitor logs online. Yet the visitor logs may hide more than they reveal.

The White House is still holding back "tens of thousands" of visitor logs, according to congressional testimony last week by Tom Fitton, President of Judicial Watch, who also added that "the Obama administration is less transparent than the Bush administration."

We also know that some of the most important presidential visitors don't even walk into the White House. The administration meets K Street lobbyists at Caribou Coffee, and holds secret meetings in Jackson Place townhouses where there are no visitor logs.

The visitor logs that have been released are problematic, because they are simply lists of names, with no way to verify whether a specific name belongs to a particular person.

When the first names were released on Oct. 30, 2009, late on a Friday afternoon, then-White House "ethics czar" Norm Eisen noted the lists included "false positives" -- "names that make you think of a well-known person, but are actually someone else." According to Eisen, these included ordinary visitors named "Michael Jordan, William Ayers, Michael Moore, Jeremiah Wright, Robert Kelly ("R. Kelly"), and Malik Shabazz."

A number of conservative bloggers noticed the names, but not Eisen's blog post. With speed and precision suggesting direct coordination from the top, ThinkProgress, the core of the heavily funded John Podesta/George Soros "progressive" world, gleefully attacked its ideological foes for reporting "false positives." The next release included "Louis Farrakhan" and "James Taylor," but this time conservatives were more careful.

Yet there is no way to prove that the "false positives" really are false, because the White House refuses to reveal identifying information about visitors. In December 2009, citing visitor logs, Big Government reported that ACORN CEO Bertha Lewis had likely visited the White House on a special "staff tour" on September 5. The timing of Lewis's visit -- as the far-left regrouped in the aftermath of the health care town halls -- seemed suspicious.

Ben Smith of Politico then reported that an anonymous White House source said we had the wrong Bertha Lewis. I asked Smith why, if that were the case, the White House would use an anonymous flack to put down our report, rather than busting us cleanly. Smith agreed it was weird. The next day, the official emerged, but the newly revealed Jen Psaki refused to say who the real Bertha Lewis was, citing "privacy concerns."

With no way to verify, there is no real transparency. Of course, with Andrew Stern, the former president of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), who visited the White House over twenty times through October 2009, there is little doubt that he is the Andy Stern. That information helped establish the credibility of the visitor logs. Yet there are three "Andrew Sterns" who visited with group tours--are they just "false positives"?

What is the point of listing hundreds of thousands of tourists, if not to help create "false positives"? Eisen and the White House have created a haystack that can hide a needle. Considering that Eisen, a major Obama bundler in 2008, was responsible for smearing former Inspector General Gerald Walpin, and was elevated to an ambassadorship through a shady recess appointment, that hardly seems impossible.

Evidence has emerged to suggest the White House tried to manipulate media coverage of the visitor logs to create an impression of transparency. Indeed, Fitton reported to Congress that in the fall of 2009, Eisen "encouraged [Judicial Watch] to publicly praise the Obama administration's commitment to transparency, saying it would be good for them and good for us." Yet the White House still refused to provide all of the visitor logs.

In the name of "transparency," the White House has turned the guest list into the "guess list." Tragically, the media seem fine with that. Last week, representatives from Sunshine Week -- funded by the hapless American Society of News Editors, among others -- tried to give the president a "transparency" award. (UPDATE: ASNE has indicated that it declined to participate in the transparency award, and that the open-government activists at the White House last week did not represent Sunshine Week as an organization.) It was postponed -- but when they hold the event, bloggers reporting the news the "real" journalists won't report ought to beware: the Newsweek reporter in the visitor logs may not be that "Tunku Varadarajan."

 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 108
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
marijam
Independent
10:14 AM on 03/24/2011
Conservatives, answer me this. Why are conservatives trying to repeal financial reforms? Do they want another melt down? I've just been reading Tom Pauken's book Bringing America Home and it certainly appears to me that progressives and conservatives agree about Wall Street. So why are conservatives once they get into office working against us and for Wall Street?
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
Maezeppa
Happy-Happy Joy-Joy
01:08 AM on 03/24/2011
I don't mind thoughtful opposition.   I do mind congenital l.ars.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
R Gary Fenske
oldrnwhyzer1 but still growing
09:55 PM on 03/23/2011
And... this surprises anyone, WHY?? There is no such thing as "true" transperency in any government agency whether local, state, or federal. Why should there be... then we would know the truth of what goes on behind closed doors, and that is where all of the corruption goes on... silly Americans. We have to change the people in charge, first, then the rules they follow, next. Power to the PEOPLE! (Yeah, right...).
06:50 PM on 03/23/2011
Oh gosh! The white house won't provide who every single name is attached to from their registration logs! It must be some huge conspiracy to hide. . . something with ACORN and voter registration fraud and planned parenthood! I won't rest until every person visiting the white house has to present their long form birth certificate!
03:15 PM on 03/23/2011
Good post Andrew.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Jahsmah
Freelance writer, MAT student, mom, and wife
02:46 PM on 03/23/2011
I guess we should have known ACORN would be in there somewhere.
This comment has been removed due to violations of our [Guidelines]
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Michael Ludin
Child advocate
11:42 AM on 03/23/2011
Come on, can't we all get along. It is transparent because our Prez says it is transparent. Like Bush said it is not a leak, because he declassified it as it was spoken and then reclassified it a second later, or when he said it was legal to torture because his lawyer says so. It is Presidentiallly acting to make proclamations, we don't have a queen after-all/
This comment has been removed due to violations of our [Guidelines]
10:54 AM on 03/23/2011
So you have a problem with a democratic president who behaves like a repub?
This comment has been removed due to violations of our [Guidelines]
08:35 AM on 03/23/2011
Obama's new slogan:
"Change you will pay dearly for"
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jharris344
Go Republican!! Go Broke!!
09:15 AM on 03/23/2011
LOL! I think you're mxing up Obama with Rick Scott, or Chis Christie, or any of the other newly elected repub governors! LOL!
11:49 AM on 03/23/2011
No... wrong. They are cutting spending out!
08:07 AM on 03/23/2011
I'll give Obama the benefit of the doubt and say he probably went into office believing his own hype about how he would run his presiency. Problem is once he got into office he and i would think alot of other presidents found that washington and the office of president doesn't work that way.
So now he has no idea what to do. he was elected with no political or governing experience at all and we are seeing the results.
It was a good run, you made alot of foks feel all warm and fuzzy, but its time for Obama to step a side and let someone better qualified do the job. Who that might be i have no idea thou. i'll be honest about that.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Guscat
08:36 AM on 03/23/2011
If you do not know who that person is why do you make the suggestion?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
too young but old enough
I already know how this is going to turn out...
11:46 AM on 03/23/2011
Just because he doesn't know who would be better, it doesn't mean that he can't hope for someone better. I would love to have someone that I actually WANT to vote for running as a major contender in a presidential election, but that hasn't happened in my lifetime.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jharris344
Go Republican!! Go Broke!!
09:19 AM on 03/23/2011
LOL! You're joking, right? This president has done more for the country than the last 5 republican presidents combined! LOL! Failure to lead, not governing experience!! LOL!! GW Bush and Reagan come to mind and their legacies? Decrease in taxes for wealthy and huge deficits. Get your fact straight.
11:43 AM on 03/23/2011
LOL LOL LOL...repeating "LOL's" with ridiculous claims of how much Obama has done to (oops - you said "for") this country is what I find really funny.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
michael26
12:23 AM on 03/23/2011
This is no surprise. I always knew that Obama was an invention of the media. There was no substance to his 2008 campaign.

I didn't vote for him in 2008. I certainly won't be voting for him in 2012
This comment has been removed due to violations of our [Guidelines]
This comment has been removed due to violations of our [Guidelines]
11:47 PM on 03/22/2011
I guess he over simplified. Maybe it takes multiple administrations, over time, to get to the bottom of the chicanery? Like health care, and the plans to pull out of Iraq, and Afghanistan, we needed to start somewhere?

The real problem is that the next administration (after Obama) is not likely to follow up. "We, the people" need our own way to track, monitor, and nail these puppies and sooner or later technology will get us there!
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
realitytrumpsbull
Two 'alves of coconut!
06:06 AM on 03/23/2011
I say that if you're serious about that, then you need to figure out how to make campaign promises legally binding. When that happens, then you can throw somebody out of office their first year, for not living up to them. But, talking about multiple administrations, Bush et. al. kind of set the next guy up to fail. Creepy crafty high-dollar politics. And, Congress failed on the impeachment there, too.