rumitoid

The Trump administration has removed language about freedom of the press from its guidebook for US attorneys.

The US Attorneys' Manual is a guide to Justice Department policies written for US attorneys and other department employees. It was edited late last year, for the first time in two decades, with significant changes to the “Media Relations” section – changes experts say reflect a larger Trump administration hostility towards members of the press.

Gone from the handbook is a section specifically reminding attorneys of the public's right to know. Gone is a section on the need for free press and public trial. Added to the manual is a section reminding employees to report any concerns to their superiors, and requiring them to disclose any contacts they have with the media.

Summer Lopez, the Senior Director of Free Expression Programmes at PEN America, said the changes showed a "deliberate effort to shift the tone of internal debates away from press freedom concerns".

"It confirms what we already know: That this administration is dismissive of the important work done by the press to promote government accountability," she said in a statement to The Independent.

Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein ordered a review of the handbook last year, department spokesperson Ian Prior told BuzzFeed News, who first reported the changes.
The purpose of the overhaul – the largest since 1997 – was to “identify redundant sections and language, areas that required greater clarity, and any content that needed to be added to help Department attorneys perform core prosecutorial functions,” Mr Prior said.

The new manual removes a section titled “Interests Must Be Balanced,” which reminded attorneys to balance the public's right to information with an individual's right to a fair trial and the government’s ability to enforce justice.

Instead, it adds language on "the right of the public to have access to information about the Department of Justice" to a sentence in the opening section.
Also gone is a section on the need for free press and public trial, which previously stated that employees should consider “the right of the people in a constitutional democracy to have access to information about the conduct of law enforcement officers, prosecutors and courts, consistent with the individual rights of the accused”.

Added to the manual is a section on “whistleblower protections,” which reminds DOJ employees that they can report concerns to their management or the inspector general without threat of retaliation.

Another new section, “reporting media contacts” tells employees they must report any contact with members of the media about DOJ matters to their designated media representative.

Previous language in the handbook did not make such a stipulation. Instead, it said the department’s Office of Public Affairs should be informed of requests from national media organisations to discuss “in-depth stories and matters affecting the Department of Justice, or matters of national significance”.

Alexandra Ellerbeck, the North America Program Coordinator for the Committee to Protect Journalists, said the handbook changes were largely symbolic, and more of an indication of the department's priorities than a guide to how attorneys will behave on the ground.

But taken in the context of current Justice Department leadership and the administration as a whole, she said, the changes are concerning.

President Donald Trump has made his disdain for the mainstream press clear, at one point referring to them “the enemy of the American people”. He has suggested challenging the licenses of television networks that run negative coverage of him, and threatened to make people who leak information to the media “pay a big price”.

The head of the Department of Justice, Attorney General Jeff Sessions, has made similar statements. Last year, he told reporters his department had tripled the number of leak investigations over the previous administration, and even created a new counterintelligence unit in the FBI to work on the issue.

Mr Sessions also said he would review current rules that make it difficult to subpoena reporters for the names of their sources.

Ms Ellerbeck said these comments made her nervous about the edits to the handbook.

“This administration has shown an unprecedented level of overt hostility to the press, and in that context I think these changes are concerning,” she told The Independent. “...They’re another example and another indication of where the administration's priorities are when it comes to a free press.”

https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-administration-removes-language-freedom-203903022.html

BigMike Loc: yerington nv

Faugh!

rumitoid

Take that to be a statement from the blind.

BigMike Loc: yerington nv

Take it however you want. If you can't see that criminal element is trying to undo the last e******n under color of authority then you need to get out of the way. All this cry babying about how awful a person Trump is falls flat when any reasonable person looks at the alternative.

Boo_Boo Loc: Jellystone

Let me see if I understand you.... it is the fault of President Trump that president obama ordered the manual be revised.

PeterS

Strange, Trumps peeps could give a flip what he does so what is Trump so afraid the media will disclose? I mean, Trump could literally perform a******ns in the Lincoln bedroom and they would write it off to f**e media. So why the fear of the press. It makes no sense...

rumitoid

Too funny.

rumitoid

No, the revisions to the manual was under his administration.

PeterS

Well, clearly you are better at doing a search than I am. Lets see the link that says Obama ordered the review--cuz I couldn't find it...

Boo_Boo Loc: Jellystone

Government manual revisions are not done overnight.... it takes a very long time to get them approved.
I know this as a fact.... my husband wrote the NEO Plan for Europe..... two years to get the first draft approved and another year to get it in front of the approval board. So, the order to have this manual approved started before 2016, making it an obama plan and order.

Boo_Boo Loc: Jellystone

Provisions for changes to the manual is located at: https://www.justice.gov/usam/usam-1-1000-introduction
Quoted for those who do not like to follow or provide their own links: "Proposed substantive changes to the Justice Manual may be submitted by the leadership of any component. Substantive changes by the Attorney General, Deputy Attorney General, or the Associate Attorney General are effective upon issuance. All other proposed substantive changes must be reviewed by the Attorney General’s Advisory Committee (AGAC) and the heads of any affected DOJ components before being incorporated. When one component objects to a proposed change, that component will communicate with the proposing component to try and reconcile their differences. Unresolved issues will be decided by the Attorney General or the Deputy Attorney General.

Clerical changes to the Justice Manual do not require cross-component review before incorporation. Clerical changes should be sent to the Justice Manual staff through the Director of EOUSA."

Here is a link to the page involving changes to media contacts: https://www.justice.gov/usam/usam-1-7000-media-relations#1-7.111

As you can see from https://www.justice.gov/usam/usam-1-9000-special-masters, these changes were directly linked to the Clinton mishandling of classified material on her basement server.

The revisions noted at https://www.justice.gov/usam/1-15000-respect-religious-liberty-0 is in direct response to muslims and their freedom of religion.

Considering the mosaic of changes.... from leaking classified information to religious freedoms..... and the fact the last major revision of this manual happened in 1997, it is reasonable to conclude that the need to update this document was both necessary and timely.

PeterS

What amazes me Pennylynn is the lengths you will go to to prove your are right and shouldn't be trifled with. And I like the touch about how your own personal experience places you in a position of authority--I assume to discourage people from challenging you. That by the way is called an 'appeal to authority' and when used to dissuade argument is a logical fallacy.

Well sorry, and while it sorta makes the topic fizzle if you had taken two seconds simply to read the article it tells you who ordered the changes and when they were done. And while I don't want to spoil it for you the one area you are correct is you cons h**e him just about as much as you h**e Obama. PennyLynn you do have a giant brain, that I will give you that, unfortunately your hubris is even larger...

Boo_Boo Loc: Jellystone

First, it was not my experience, but that of my husband who wrote the NEO plan for Europe. However, I have been involved in getting "guidance" and that is what this manual is, on government computers written and approved. It takes time, patience, meetings, and rewrites to gain approval. However, you are correct. Although in my experience it takes months or years to get government guidances or regulation passed, it can be argued that the process can be faster. Perhaps in your career working within the government, your experiences have been different. Can you share your achievements in this arena? By the way, here is a link to how regulations and manuals are accomplished in the government: https://www.reginfo.gov/public/reginfo/Regmap/index.jsp and here is another link you may find interesting: https://www.federalregister.gov/uploads/2011/01/the_rulemaking_process.pdf

archie bunker Loc: Texas

Funny how you didn't say she was wrong, isn't it, st. Pete?

BigMike Loc: yerington nv

It isn't funny.