White House Blocks Access To Visitor Logs
Secret Service Records Made Off-Limits After Watchdog Review Of Lobbyist Meetings
-
-
Photo
Lobbyist Jack Abramoff, seen here leaving Federal Court in Washington, Jan. 3, 2006, and his associates visited the White House more than 200 times. But the White House initially revealed only 2 such visits in response to a probe of the lobbyist's influence. (AP)
-
Photo
In response to legal efforts to uncover visits by lobbyists and other influential parties to the White House, watchdog groups have sought Secret Service visitor logs. It has now been revealed that the White House signed an agreement with the Secret Service last year blocking the release of such information. (CBS/AP)
-
-
Interactive
Bush Presidency
The president's agenda, plus facts, figures, major events and key personalities.
-
Interactive
Wheeling & Dealing
Learn more about the scandals involving former lobbyist Jack Abramoff
-
Interactive
The White House
Explore America's White House, which has survived a fire set by British troops and has undergone several major renovations in the past 200 years.
The Bush administration did not reveal the existence of the memorandum of understanding until last fall. The White House is using it to deal with a legal problem on a separate front — a ruling by a federal judge ordering the production of Secret Service logs identifying visitors to the office of Vice President Dick Cheney.
In a federal appeals court filing three weeks ago, the administration's lawyers used the memo in a legal argument aimed at overturning the judge's ruling. The Washington Post is suing for access to the Secret Service logs.
The five-page document dated May 17 declares that all entry and exit data on White House visitors belongs to the White House as presidential records rather than to the Secret Service as agency records. Therefore, the agreement states, the material is not subject to public disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act.
In the past, Secret Service logs have revealed the comings and goings of various White House visitors, including Monica Lewinsky and Clinton campaign donor Denise Rich, the wife of fugitive financier Marc Rich, who received a pardon in the closing hours of the Clinton administration.
The memo last spring was signed by the White House and Secret Service the day after a Washington-based group asked a federal judge to impose sanctions on the Secret Service in a dispute over White House visitor logs for Jack Abramoff, a once-powerful but now disgraced lobbyist.
The chief counsel to another Washington-based group suing to get Secret Service logs calls the creation of the memo "a political maneuver couched as a legal one."
"It appears the White House is actually manufacturing evidence to further its own agenda," Anne Weismann, a Justice Department lawyer for 19 years and now chief counsel to Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, said Friday.
The White House and the Secret Service declined to comment.
Last year in the Abramoff scandal, the Bush administration, in response to three lawsuits, provided an incomplete picture of how many visits Abramoff and his lobbying team made to the White House.
The task of digging out Abramoff-White House links fell to a House of Representatives committee that collected the lobbyist's billing records and e-mails. The House report found 485 lobbying contacts with presidential aides over three years, including 10 with top Bush administration aide Karl Rove.
As part of its security function of protecting the White House complex, the Secret Service uses the log information to conduct background checks on people prior to daily appointments and visits.
The memorandum of understanding is an unusual step because it deals with an unsettled area of law.
Federal courts will ultimately decide whether records identifying White House visitors and who they are going to see are under the legal control of the Secret Service or are presidential records publicly releasable solely at the discretion of the White House.
© MMVII The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.



- 1
- 2
- 3
- next
See all 132 CommentsI do know one thing. I joined the ACLU yesterday, and this is exactly why.
One silver lining: stuff just like this caused me to join and contribute to the ACLU yesterday. No kidding.
These lying sneak thieves have to be removed.
"You are the dead," repeated the iron voice.
"It was behind the picture," breathed Julia.
"It was behind the picture," said the voice. "Remain exactly where you are. Make no movement until you are ordered."
;)
Impeach the Prez and the Veep.
ed u cates
Posted by bildooreilly
Huh? USSA?
Must be because Dubya and company used the "if you aren't a criminal you have nothing to worry about" argument in defending his warrantless snooping... Kinda puts a clamp on their mouths when their idol makes it very apparent HE has something to hide.
IMPEACH
nccolsens, BACK IN THE USSA... if these people want to act like communists and run our government like communists then I'll call it like I see it.
Is it not enough that we had one watergate scandal ? Hail the Emperor and his coterie. This is democracy that we practice here.
It is strange that there are no comments defending the actions of this administration about this issue. Was it posted long? I had seen it on other news agencies web site and had to search for it here.
I feel comfortable posting here. I have a very hard time digesting FoxNews. I had tried to send some emails from their web site several times that were not in line with their "rose-tinted glasses" point of view and they "never" made to their destination. Needless to say, my computer encountered strange experiences afterwards. My comments were not threatening, but they pointed out how unbalanced the actions were coming from this administration. I questioned whose looking out for the American peoples interest here?
I questioned why are we always looking in someone else's back yard (Iraq) instead of dealing with our own issues (Hurricane Katrina's recovery along the Gulf Coast)?
Any Republicans care to explain why Bush and co. are hiding this information?
What authority makes the Secret Service a sovereign entity that can negotiate contracts at all?
If the Secret Service is NOT authorized to negotiate contracts, then the contract is worthless and void.
If the Secret Service IS authorized to enter into such contracts without the participation of Congress, then all other agencies must also be so entitled. The various subdepartments in the DoD can negotiate with other agencies to continue its operations, the DOJ can go on strike and forget trying cases, and so on.
Sounds to me codified corruption. I expect little else from the Bush Administration anymore.
language, as they fear thy self in human soul."
God Bless
More evidence of war profiteering? Secret deals with the oil industry? Or perhaps with the pharmaceuticals?
The level of deceit in this White House is sickening!
What a bunch of hogwash! The last time I checked GWB, or any president for that matter, doesn't own The White House. The American people/tax payers "own" The White house. I, for one being a tax payer and an American citizen all my life, want to know who, how and when whoever entered my house.
Wouldn't everyone want to know when someone comes in and leaves their private house? Why not your public house?
hbevis
I guess he's still covering up the tracks of the financial dealings of Cheney and those who have bought the Bush Administration.
Ahhh, the American Government - the "best" money can buy.
What needs to happen before the majority of Americans wake up to this corrupt President and his corrupt henchmen and demand his impeachment?
While the President demands to be able to listen in on our telephone calls and read our letters, he is busy trying to hide his own records from the American people - the same folks who put him into power.
For g*ds sake people - wake up and demand that he be held accountable for his treasonous actions before it's too late.
The President should understand that he is a GUEST in the White House, not the OWNER. We the People are the owners!
Reading mail
eaves dropping
log at our white house
invasion of a sovereign country
lying to start invasion
killing thousands of people
bankruptcy of america
no bid contracts
When halburton over charged for fuel bush said they had to pay it back.
In corporate america a company that did that to a company would have been thrown out on its ear.
It is all about oil and profit.
We have been giving them all those profits at the pump.
Without Iraq oil would never have gone above fifty five dollars a barrel.
Time to run them out of town.
This is a President who has gone to far.
This is a President who is betraying the United States for his own profit.
This is a President who is not fit for his duties.
This is a President who should be impeached for his crimes against the American people.
"homosexual triangle". I'm no fan of Bush, but homosexual triangle??? Maybe you should check your Fruit Loops tomorrow morning for planted bugs to see if the government is listening in too?
I'd love to see Bush pay for his lies and hubris, but I don't know if the democrats have the finesse to pull that off without bumbling it.
I think Bush will end his presidency with the lowest of poll numbers (except for those loving christian warmongers with their heads up their ***) and in complete shame. History will even be less kind to this war dodging, pious, silver spoon fed elitist. We will suffer for years due to this Administration's policies. Maybe, just maybe, we might be spared a Jeb Bush presidency now. Let's just hope that George W. and Pat Robertson resist most of the voices in their head.
I had my emails to Fox News returned also. Unless you probably kiss *** for O'Reilly or their point of view, they don't want to hear it. I think they will find themselves with the same ratings as this shameful president in due time. Look how long it took for people to start criticizing this president for fear of being labeled anti-American and being on the side of the terrorists -- and let's not forget throwing in something about 9/11 in there too. If my memory serves me, the only person ever to criticize anything remotely connected to 9/11 was the blonde bimbo Anne Coulter who called the widows greedy ***. Anne in a nutshell (or being a nutshell) represents the core mindset of fear and hatred exhibited by the 30% of misgided Americans still backing this president.
Give me a _ _ _ _ ING BREAK! Here we go again with "Christianity under attack mentality.
But, in specific answer to your question. I don't think that simply because someone calls themselves a Christian that they actually "get" the principles of Christianity. Jesus wouldn't have been on TV hawking fake healing waters and he sure as hell wouldn't need Pat Robertson saying there's someone out in Des Moines who is feeling pain on the right side of their head and God is healing them -- now just send in your last pennies and let God know how appreciative you are. Jesus was for the poor, my friend. Not, the Christian leaders loading up their bank accounts and egos in his name. Isn't that called blasphemist anyway? I'm tired of politicians and Christian leaders hiding behind BS. It's easy to kiss babies, evoke the name of "Christ" and basically living a life of hypocrisy while calling up hookers to spank you while you're wife is at home with your kids. So, if you feel that is your brand of Christianity and it isn't subject to criticism because you're so ignorant to think that anything attaching itself to God is true, then yeah, you're right, I'm always that unkind to that kind of hypocrisy-based Christianity. Now, get a life or offer a real argument.
"Are you always this kind to Christians?"
There are too many "fake" christians masquerading as christians.
It's time they stop "selecting" which aspects of christianity they wish to follow.
- 1
- 2
- 3
- next
See all 132 Comments