Eric Holder's 'Off-The-Record' Meeting With Journalists Leads To 'On-The-Record' Quotes, But Not Much Else

from the blah-de-blah-blah dept

Remember how Eric Holder wanted to hold a meeting with a bunch of journalists as he seeks to revise the "guidelines" the DOJ sets up for itself (fox watching the hen house, anyone?) on how it spies on journalists? A meeting where many top news organizations refused to go because it was officially "off the record?" In the end, the media seemed to be split on whether or not to go, as summarized by the Huffington Post (who didn't go):
Not going: New York Times, AP, Huffington Post, McClatchy, CNN, CBS News, Fox News, Reuters, and NBC News.

Going: The Washington Post, Politico, Wall Street Journal, Los Angeles Times/ Chicago Tribune, ABC News, Bloomberg, USA Today.
And then, for all the fuss, at the end of the meeting, DOJ officials told the reporters they could discuss "in general some of the ideas that were discussed," though it appears that some points still remained off the record. As for what was publicly disclosed, it sounds like reporters were not impressed.
At the session, Holder and Deputy Attorney General James Cole expressed a willingness to revise the guidelines for such investigations, journalists present at the get-together told POLITICO.

But Holder stopped short of offering any concrete changes to the guidelines. Instead, the Attorney General sought to assure the journalists that he and the DOJ were trying to seek a balance between the demands of national security and the free flow of information, and sought suggestions from the journalists on how those changes might be achieved.
Ah, so the hens get to suggest to the fox how they'd like their rights to be violated, and then the fox gets to decide how best to "incorporate those suggestions"? I'm sure that will work out just great. As some who were in attendance noted, nothing in the meeting suggested that the DOJ was actually going to change or adjust its policies.


Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jun 4th, 2013 @ 12:17am

    An administration full of crooks and liars

    "This is the most transparent administration in history." -- Barack Obama to the most gullible electorate in decades.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      jupiterkansas (profile), Jun 4th, 2013 @ 8:06am

      Re: An administration full of crooks and liars

      Gullible implies that everyone believed him.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Anonymous Coward, Jun 4th, 2013 @ 11:18am

        Re: Re: An administration full of crooks and liars

        Those who elected him believed him. Hence "most gullible electorate".

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          icon
          jupiterkansas (profile), Jun 4th, 2013 @ 12:18pm

          Re: Re: Re: An administration full of crooks and liars

          I don't think he was elected based on his promise of transparency. It was pretty much known to be a joke by the time his second election rolled around.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Kiwini, Jun 4th, 2013 @ 11:59am

        Re: Re: An administration full of crooks and liars

        Not "everyone"...only enough voters to win both elections by thin margins.

        And they aren't all crooks and liars, but far too many of them are.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    saulgoode (profile), Jun 4th, 2013 @ 12:47am

    I think the main problem is that the Attorney General views the Constitution as a "policy guideline".

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jun 4th, 2013 @ 12:52am

    His name should be Eric Holdon, or Eric Hangon.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jun 4th, 2013 @ 4:49am

    1) Journalists need to be spied upon because they might publish tidbits of confidential information.

    2) Low level army personnel leaking evidence of war crimes is treason.

    3) Bankers aiding and abetting terrorists is ok.

    4) Bankers laundering drug money is ok.

    5) High level politicians outing under cover people is ok.

    There seems to be a pattern here.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jun 4th, 2013 @ 7:10am

    They impeached Nixon for less than the shit Obama has pulled.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Jun 4th, 2013 @ 9:15am

      Re:

      "They impeached Nixon for less than the shit Obama has pulled."

      Really?
      Republican Nixon resigned before the impeachment process was completed to avoid the shame.

      Oh, and please list the "shit" Republican Nixon, in fact, did and the "shit" Obama's been accused of, but not proven, unless you know of something that has, in fact, been proven in a court of law.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Jun 4th, 2013 @ 9:15am

      Re:

      They impeached Nixon for less than the shit Obama has pulled.

      In Nixon's time it was standard for powers-that-be to maintain a believable facade of lawful government. People expected a lot more from politicians then. While they are not necessarily any more honest than they are today, politicians had to work harder back then.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous, Jun 4th, 2013 @ 6:03pm

    Blah-de-blah-blah-my-race-had-nothing-to do-with-me-getting-this-job-I-swear-it-blah-de-blah-blah...

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
A word from our sponsors...
Essential Reading
Techdirt Reading List
Techdirt Insider Chat
A word from our sponsors...
Recent Stories
A word from our sponsors...

Close

Email This