IG report shows Obama WH rewrote Gulf spill report to support moratorium

posted at 9:30 am on November 10, 2010 by Ed Morrissey

When the Obama White House announced its moratorium on drilling in the Gulf of Mexico after the BP-Deepwater Horizon catastrophe in April, the administration insisted that they followed the recommendations of its panel of experts.  This story blew up when the panel of experts insisted that they had not recommended any kind of blanket moratorium, and that one simply wasn’t necessary to address the deficiencies at MMS that contributed to the catastrophic fire and spill.  A new report from the Inspector General probing the White House response accuses the administration of rewriting key sections of the report in order to falsely give the impression that the panel had made that recommendation:

The White House rewrote crucial sections of an Interior Department report to suggest an independent group of scientists and engineers supported a six-month ban on offshore oil drilling, the Interior inspector general says in a new report.

In the wee hours of the morning of May 27, a staff member to White House energy adviser Carol Browner sent two edited versions of the department report’s executive summary back to Interior. The language had been changed to insinuate the seven-member panel of outside experts – who reviewed a draft of various safety recommendations – endorsed the moratorium, according to the IG report obtained by POLITICO.

“The White House edit of the original DOI draft executive summary led to the implication that the moratorium recommendation had been peer-reviewed by the experts,” the IG report states, without judgment on whether the change was an intentional attempt to mislead the public.

The White House claimed some vindication, saying that the IG had stopped short of accusing the administration of a deliberate deception, and called it “a misunderstanding.”  That seems like a bit of a stretch, especially since the supposed mistake didn’t exactly occur in a vacuum.  Opponents of oil drilling, usually among Obama’s allies on the Left, had demanded an end to drilling in the region at least until the investigation into the disaster was completed.  The White House version of the report gave Obama political cover to order the six-month moratorium — at least until those involved in its peer review cried foul after the White House publicly used them to defend the action.

But even if it was just a “misunderstanding,” an artifact of some guileless editorial tweaking that inadvertently put a paragraph ahead of or behind an important qualifier, it was at the very least incompetence.  Why was the staff of energy “adviser” Carol Browner allowed to edit a report issued by the Department of Interior’s blue-ribbon panel in the first place?  Why did no one review those changes at Interior to determine whether the edits were justified, especially since the IG report indicates that the edits took place because the staffer or Browner didn’t think it summarized the findings properly?  Why not just ask the report’s authors to rewrite it themselves?

This is no mere academic exercise.  Thousands of people lost their jobs because of this supposed instance of sloppy editing, and the delay it created in safe exploration and drilling may impact the region for years, as well as America’s energy independence.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

I’m thinking Obama might not win Louisiana in 2012.

Doughboy on November 10, 2010 at 9:33 AM

They told me if I voted for Sarah Palin, the White House would manipulate science for political ends. And they were right.

This is no mere incompetence, this is outright deception. Carol Browner must go.

rbj on November 10, 2010 at 9:34 AM

This is no mere academic exercise

I see what you did there. ++

ted c on November 10, 2010 at 9:35 AM

Thousands of people lost their jobs because of this supposed instance of sloppy editing, and the delay it created in safe exploration and drilling may impact the region for years, as well as America’s energy independence.

In other words, Obama won.

The left got a chance to kill a portion of our dwindling oil industry … without Cap & Death.

darwin on November 10, 2010 at 9:35 AM

Every week we will be getting this kind of info, as Obama tries to “disclose” his sins before the takeover of the house.
Just trying to thwart the charges and the uncovering of his wrongdoings before they are officially revealed.
Good strategy, but he may not have enough weeks to disclose everything he has done that is either illegal, immoral, unethical, or just plain stupid…

right2bright on November 10, 2010 at 9:35 AM

“Conservatives are anti-science.”

CDeb on November 10, 2010 at 9:36 AM

No worries – MSM will let Obama skate.

jake-the-goose on November 10, 2010 at 9:38 AM

IG firing in 5…..4…..3

cmsinaz on November 10, 2010 at 9:38 AM

Sounds to me like this IG has a touch of the delerium. Maybe early onset dementia?

myrenovations on November 10, 2010 at 9:38 AM

Slick Obami.

Shy Guy on November 10, 2010 at 9:39 AM

I thought Bambi was going to put science over politics. Another day, another lie.

Lance Murdock on November 10, 2010 at 9:39 AM

“Hide the decline.”

chemman on November 10, 2010 at 9:40 AM

They told me if I voted for Sarah Palin, the White House would manipulate science for political ends. And they were right.

This is no mere incompetence, this is outright deception. Carol Browner Barack Obama must go.

rbj on November 10, 2010 at 9:34 AM

I agree strongly except for your conclusion as to whom is responsible and who should be held to account.

One wonders if the Good Witch of the North is warming up her blackberry to fire a facebook salvo.

turfmann on November 10, 2010 at 9:41 AM

As daydreambeliever posted in the headlines, wait till we see the debt commission report in Dec….

Where are you daydream believer?

cmsinaz on November 10, 2010 at 9:42 AM

The end justifies the means.

To Obama this refers to the end of America as we know it.

Maybe the entire republican caucus in the house can stand up and yell “You Lie” in unison at next year’s SOTU speech.

Congressman Issa, paint your target.

fogw on November 10, 2010 at 9:42 AM

This is no mere academic exercise. Thousands of people lost their jobs because of this supposed instance of sloppy editing, and the delay it created in safe exploration and drilling may impact the region for years, as well as America’s energy independence.

Let’s not hyperventilate, Ed. The Secretary issued the moratorium on drilling. That’s what caused the delay. The sloppy editing had nothing to do with it.

Jimbo3 on November 10, 2010 at 9:43 AM

Yeah, but they’re saving the Earth! And their friends are scientists and stuff!

ZenDraken on November 10, 2010 at 9:43 AM

And it was sloppy editing, but if you read the report, it’s very clear what recommendations were in the body of the report (which was peer reviewed) and which additional recommendations were in the executive summary. There were no recommendations for a moratorium in the body of the report.

Jimbo3 on November 10, 2010 at 9:44 AM

What would prevent the scientists who had their recommedations mischaracterized from suing the administration? Could they rip some mask off via discovery process? Any lawyers?

Western_Civ on November 10, 2010 at 9:47 AM

In other words, Obama won.

The left got a chance to kill a portion of our dwindling oil industry … without Cap & Death.

darwin on November 10, 2010 at 9:35 AM

Worse. If they get their wish, it won’t just be on Federal Lands. State will have to ask the Feds if Oil Comps and Gas Comps and Mining are allowed to do anything on STATE land.

This is one thing I have been talking about for a while, as they are already doing it via EPA and anyone who has a Environmental Conservation agency for their state or even county. Permitting is bad and after all is said and done, it will take year before anything happens and before you can drill or mine due to permitting.

upinak on November 10, 2010 at 9:47 AM

That’s my Congressman.

ZEro did not win in Louisiana in 2008. His lapdog (Blue Dog) Charlie Melancon failed miserably in his bid to unseat Vitter in the senate race this year.

Kermit on November 10, 2010 at 9:47 AM

So, the defense is that they didn’t lie, they just edited the report to deliberately mislead. I feel better now.

Vashta.Nerada on November 10, 2010 at 9:48 AM

The Chicago Way.

WisCon on November 10, 2010 at 9:49 AM

Let’s not hyperventilate, Ed. The Secretary issued the moratorium on drilling. That’s what caused the delay. The sloppy editing had nothing to do with it.

Jimbo3 on November 10, 2010 at 9:43 AM

So you’re saying that this report was NOT used to justify the moratorium?

CDeb on November 10, 2010 at 9:50 AM

http://spectator.org/archives/2010/10/11/the-presidents-nun-obamacare-s

Lying, bullying, personal assassination of anybody who stands in the path, widespread corruption the likes of which would make Al Capone look like a good guy… Is there any doubt that we are witnessing the largest and most powerful organized crime ring ever established disguised as the Democrat Party.

Keemo on November 10, 2010 at 9:50 AM

This IG had better watch his back. Liberals throughout govt and the media will start the smear campaign on hm now.

GardenGnome on November 10, 2010 at 9:50 AM

So, the defense is that they didn’t lie, they just edited the report to deliberately mislead. I feel better now.

Vashta.Nerada on November 10, 2010 at 9:48 AM

No, they did. Don’t forget that Salazar redirected how processings and how the MMS manages their “paperwork” and even had a PDF made up of how to do it, so everyone in the MMS had it straight.

upinak on November 10, 2010 at 9:50 AM

Let’s not hyperventilate, Ed. The Secretary issued the moratorium on drilling. That’s what caused the delay. The sloppy editing had nothing to do with it.

Jimbo3 on November 10, 2010 at 9:43 AM

And you wonder why none of here take you seriously.. Jeez

Keemo on November 10, 2010 at 9:51 AM

Obama’s war on science?

DGOOCH on November 10, 2010 at 9:52 AM

Let’s not hyperventilate, Ed. The Secretary issued the moratorium on drilling. That’s what caused the delay. The sloppy editing had nothing to do with it.

Jimbo3 on November 10, 2010 at 9:43 AM
So you’re saying that this report was NOT used to justify the moratorium?

CDeb on November 10, 2010 at 9:50 AM

The moratorium was issued when the report was issued. The report was used to justify it, but the government already had issued the moratorium.

Jimbo3 on November 10, 2010 at 9:52 AM

I like how the WH spins this. Also interesting how MSNBC buried this a while back.

A lie is a lie. And they’re saying, no, we didn’t mean to do this.
My BUTT.
If you are such a fool that you cannot understand you’re being blatantly lied to, there is no hope for you.

Badger40 on November 10, 2010 at 9:52 AM

none of us; need more coffee!

Keemo on November 10, 2010 at 9:53 AM

And you wonder why none of here take you seriously.. Jeez

Keemo on November 10, 2010 at 9:51 AM

So, explain, because what I wrote is correct. The Interior Secretary had the authority to issue the moratorium and did issue it. Right?

Jimbo3 on November 10, 2010 at 9:53 AM

I’m thinking Obama might not win Louisiana in 2012.

Doughboy on November 10, 2010 at 9:33 AM

He didn’t win it in 2008. Louisiana, Texas, Mississippi, and Alabama all went to McRage to the tune of 60 percet or more. Which kind of shoots holes in the RINO meme that Conservatives cost McRage the election.

Of course – seeing as how this establishment thing with the GOP has played out recently – I suspect Southerners will be “re-evaluating” their support for RINO candidates in 2012.

HondaV65 on November 10, 2010 at 9:54 AM

Here’s a translation of the IG report …

There were NO WMD’s … the Obama White House made them up.

HondaV65 on November 10, 2010 at 9:55 AM

The White House version of the report gave Obama political cover to order the six-month moratorium

Never mistake for incompetence what can easily be attributed to maliciousness.

The Mega Independent on November 10, 2010 at 9:55 AM

A new report from the Inspector General probing the White House response accuses the administration of rewriting key sections of the report in order to falsely give the impression that the panel had made that recommendation

Why did this not come out before the elections?

Schadenfreude on November 10, 2010 at 9:55 AM

Sounds like a nice class action against the federal government if you lost your job due to the moratorium.

Koa on November 10, 2010 at 9:57 AM

Why was the staff of energy “adviser” Carol Browner allowed to edit a report issued by the Department of Interior’s blue-ribbon panel in the first place?

So they could alter it – make it say what they wanted it to say.

Just ask Mary Nichols of the California Air Resources Board.

GarandFan on November 10, 2010 at 9:57 AM

Hey, it’s kind of like when Kagen rewrote the ACOG’s abortion position. I love liberals.

Vera on November 10, 2010 at 9:59 AM

If that report had been a class assignment, this would result in an F and a report filed for academic misconduct.

skydaddy on November 10, 2010 at 10:00 AM

In the wee hours of the morning of May 27, a staff member to White House energy adviser Carol Browner sent two edited versions of the department report’s executive summary back to Interior. The language had been changed to insinuate the seven-member panel of outside experts – who reviewed a draft of various safety recommendations – endorsed the moratorium, according to the IG report obtained by POLITICO.

The “misunderstandings” seem to be piling up lately.

The “wee hours” offer the best opportunity for potentially reclassified “misunderstandings”.

Politico seems to be repositioning it’s stance with a wet finger in the air.

ontherocks on November 10, 2010 at 10:01 AM

The moratorium was issued when the report was issued. The report was used to justify it, but the government already had issued the moratorium.

Jimbo3 on November 10, 2010 at 9:52 AM

So you’re saying the government would have still issued the moratorium if they hadn’t had a report recommending one?

CDeb on November 10, 2010 at 10:01 AM

So, explain, because what I wrote is correct. The Interior Secretary had the authority to issue the moratorium and did issue it. Right?

Jimbo3 on November 10, 2010 at 9:53 AM

Jimbo, who is the head of the DOI? DO you know?

upinak on November 10, 2010 at 10:03 AM

Jimbo3 on November 10, 2010 at 9:53 AM

You’ve already trapped yourself Jimbo. I’m afraid you’re an average nutter and are way in over your head here. Other sites offer much less challenge; just a thought.

Keemo on November 10, 2010 at 10:04 AM

No worries – MSM will let Obama skate.

jake-the-goose on November 10, 2010 at 9:38 AM

And because of this the tards who still support this excretory lump today will be there in 2012. Who will the independents side with?

Extrafishy on November 10, 2010 at 10:07 AM

So, explain, because what I wrote is correct. The Interior Secretary had the authority to issue the moratorium and did issue it. Right?

Jimbo3 on November 10, 2010 at 9:53 AM
Jimbo, who is the head of the DOI? DO you know?

upinak on November 10, 2010 at 10:03 AM

Salazaar. Read the link for more information.

Jimbo3 on November 10, 2010 at 10:08 AM

The moratorium was issued when the report was issued. The report was used to justify it, but the government already had issued the moratorium.

Jimbo3 on November 10, 2010 at 9:52 AM

No, an edited and falsified version of the report was used to justify it.

fogw on November 10, 2010 at 10:08 AM

OT: ANWR reminder

barnone on November 10, 2010 at 10:08 AM

The moratorium was issued when the report was issued. The report was used to justify it, but the government already had issued the moratorium.

Jimbo3 on November 10, 2010 at 9:52 AM
So you’re saying the government would have still issued the moratorium if they hadn’t had a report recommending one?

CDeb on November 10, 2010 at 10:01 AM

Yes. The report said that the Interior Secretary had decided to issue the moratorium.

Jimbo3 on November 10, 2010 at 10:09 AM

So bcs evidently the moratorium was issued a bit before the report, the WH had no idea what was in there before it was cleverly edited to mislead?
Give me a break. If a govt investigation is going on, you can bet someone in the WH knew what was up & though the details may not have been known, they knew something was up, which is why in the mid-night hour they LIED by clever editing.
And now they just say it was a misunderstanding.
That’s usually how many people describe their purposeful lies.
I don’t buy it & I bet most Americans do not, either.
They didn’t like what was in the report & they knew it was coming & BO issued a moratorium without any meaningful information.
It was all based on politics & emotion & trying to satisy the enviro wacko base.
Heads need to roll on this. Big time.
If it were Bush, the press would be screaming that from the rooftops.

Badger40 on November 10, 2010 at 10:09 AM

No, an edited and falsified version of the report was used to justify it.

fogw on November 10, 2010 at 10:08 AM

It was edited, not falsified.

Jimbo3 on November 10, 2010 at 10:10 AM

Congressman Issa, paint your target.

fogw on November 10, 2010 at 9:42 AM

One more item on Rep. Issa’s list of “hundreds” of investigations.

In such a target-rich environment, I hope he can prioritize the list and start by going after the scandals that cost the American people the most jobs and/or money, and not get bogged down in minor issues.

Steve Z on November 10, 2010 at 10:10 AM

“The White House claimed some vindication, saying that the IG had stopped short of accusing the administration of a deliberate deception, and called it “a misunderstanding.” That seems like a bit of a stretch, especially since the supposed mistake didn’t exactly occur in a vacuum.

This is ridiculously equivocal and even generous. A “bit of a stretch”? The opening synopsis of the IG report is unambiguous. The report makes clear that the experts were exploited and that the report was designed to buttress the political decision of the moratorium.

I often get the feeling that writers at Hot Air are trying to prove something. If a story with these damning ingredients occurred under George Bush’s White House, it would be the biggest story of the year in the MSM — and for good reason. The “scientific method” and the idea of good-faith government as it pertains to public policy was corrupted here — or strong evidence has been provided that it was. This would be an above-the-fold, front-page NY Times story and would prompt immediate calls for a congressional inquiry.

rrpjr on November 10, 2010 at 10:11 AM

Jimbo3 on November 10, 2010 at 9:53 AM

You’ve already trapped yourself Jimbo. I’m afraid you’re an average nutter and are way in over your head here. Other sites offer much less challenge; just a thought.

Keemo on November 10, 2010 at 10:04 AM

In other words, you’re not up to the challenge.

Jimbo3 on November 10, 2010 at 10:11 AM

According to the standards of the MSM, this should be the biggest story and government scandal of the year. No question. Let’s see how they cover it.

rrpjr on November 10, 2010 at 10:12 AM

I would like to know what Const authority allows the federal govt to stop all drilling in the Gulf as a moratorium based on an accident where the info on the risk had not yet been accounted for in a ‘report’.
And then you have deliberate criminal activity happen by WH staff & since they apologized, nothing’s going to come of it?
This is INSANE.

Badger40 on November 10, 2010 at 10:12 AM

Salazaar. Read the link for more information.

Jimbo3 on November 10, 2010 at 10:08 AM

Umm no, I was asking you because MOST people in here (other then you) were saying Slazar.

I really do not think you have a clue as to what Salazar does and who he reports to exclusively.

upinak on November 10, 2010 at 10:14 AM

They told Glenn Reynolds that if he voted for John McCain, politicians would conduct a war on science, and they were right!

ExUrbanKevin on November 10, 2010 at 10:14 AM

The moratorium was issued when the report was issued. The report was used to justify it, but the government already had issued the moratorium.

Jimbo3 on November 10, 2010 at 9:52 AM

You’re starting to sound like Obama, your words make no sense at all.

darwin-t on November 10, 2010 at 10:14 AM

This is INSANE.

Badger40 on November 10, 2010 at 10:12 AM

This surprises you? Have I not been saying this is going to happen… for a few years now?

upinak on November 10, 2010 at 10:14 AM

If that report had been a class assignment, this would result in an F and a report filed for academic misconduct.

skydaddy on November 10, 2010 at 10:00 AM

And if it had happened anywhere in a private sector workplace, the guilty parties would have been immediately terminated for falsifying records.

UltimateBob on November 10, 2010 at 10:15 AM

And if it had happened anywhere in a private sector workplace, the guilty parties would have been immediately terminated for falsifying records.

UltimateBob on November 10, 2010 at 10:15 AM

and yet, the private sec has to go by the rules set out via the Feds and State.

More or Less: Do as I say, not as I Do.

upinak on November 10, 2010 at 10:18 AM

The next Republican President should have the FEC confiscate all Union Funds before an election. Let the Unions fight to get the truth and after the election, the FEC should return the money (with interest) and apologize for the error. No harm no foul.

barnone on November 10, 2010 at 10:20 AM

The moratorium was issued when the report was issued. The report was used to justify it, but the government already had issued the moratorium.

Jimbo3 on November 10, 2010 at 9:52 AM
You’re starting to sound like Obama, your words make no sense at all.

darwin-t on November 10, 2010 at 10:14 AM

I caught that,too.
Which is why I just really can’t take a lot of his arguments very seriously.
From what I can gather, though, the reposrt was issued after the moratorium, but read my above post on that bcs it doesn’t matter.

Badger40 on November 10, 2010 at 10:21 AM

Why was the staff of energy “adviser” Carol Browner allowed to edit a report issued by the Department of Interior’s blue-ribbon panel in the first place? Why did no one review those changes at Interior to determine whether the edits were justified, especially since the IG report indicates that the edits took place because the staffer or Browner didn’t think it summarized the findings properly? Why not just ask the report’s authors to rewrite it themselves?

Why?

Because Browner is the de-facto head of Interior, and the EPA.

Don’t forget Browner’s destruction of EPA records that were subject to a federal court’s preservation. The EPA was found in violation, and she should have gotten jail time for contempt, but lied her way out of it. (I still can’t believe the judge was naive enough to think she didn’t know what she was doing when she ordered a tech to wipe those hard drives.)

Obama knows Browner could NEVER survive the public scrutiny of a Senate confirmation hearing. But Obama, the Constitutional Law lecturer, is not bound by any puny constitutional law. He just created a new position and lied about what powers she actually wields. The paper trail here reveals that Browner is exerting authority that she must first be confirmed by the Senate to constitutionally wield.

Actually, this technique is a variation on the methods used to avoid the consequences of the Shakman cases which restricted political patronage. Firing enemies and hiring supporters was justified by alleged “reorganization”; titles and duties were switched around and somehow your enemies jobs were gone, and new jobs with new titles were given to your supporters. These techniques were developed by Chicago pols after Richard The First’s patronage kingdom was smashed by the Shakman decrees.

These people are a corrupt cabal. They will do anything they think they can do without regard to the their sworn duty or the boundaries of the law.

novaculus on November 10, 2010 at 10:22 AM

Jimbo3 on November 10, 2010 at 10:11 AM

I really don’t mean to be an a-hole here Jim.. Truth is there is no challenge, you already blew it. Truth is you come here on a regular basis and spew utter non sense, which makes you a waste of time. If you would engage in honest debate rather than spew talking points it wouldn’t matter that you’re an apparent ultra Liberal.. Your talking points are already widespread and fall in line with Progressives very well. It simply gets old quickly as we watch the obvious unfold before our eyes. There simply is no defense for what we see taking place in America at the hands of the federal government, and the Progressive movement in our country and around the world. We need oil now, not tomorrow or months from now. The dishonesty with this administration is beyond anything I’ve seen in my 57 years of life.

Keemo on November 10, 2010 at 10:23 AM

Well it looks like Issa has soemthing to investigate and the Oil industry needs to get some balls and sue the hell out of the White House, as to the Gulf States.

Daemonocracy on November 10, 2010 at 10:23 AM

Thousands of people lost their jobs because of this supposed instance of sloppy editing, and the delay it created in safe exploration and drilling may impact the region for years, as well as America’s energy independence.

All by design, baby, all by design.

thekingtut on November 10, 2010 at 10:24 AM

Jimbo, you’d be better served to just have Ed install some script that posts an “I’m not concerned by this” message from you to any Democratic malfeasance and an “I’m terribly concerned about this” message from you to equal or lesser Republican malfeasance.

They manipulated the language of the report. They did so in a way that produced a false impression regarding the views of their experts; and, notwithstanding any sequence of events referenced by the report, the Secretary no doubt took this “support” into account in making the decision about the moratorium. Perhaps because Ms. Browner told him she knew how the experts would come down?

Your critical faculties are listing hard to port, and taking on water.

DrSteve on November 10, 2010 at 10:29 AM

Jimbo3,

Whether or not the report was issued before or after the moratorium and/or had any affect on the moratorium, do you admit that the Obama WH is dishonest in issuing the report? That it subverted science to politics with this report? That the report was intended to support the reason for the moratorium?

In other words, waht exactly are you attempting to defend here? Are you claming “no harm, no foul”?

Monkeytoe on November 10, 2010 at 10:34 AM

All by design, baby, all by design.

thekingtut on November 10, 2010 at 10:24 AM

Absolutely! We must acknowledge this in order to understand what we see taking place before our eyes. This is an all out assault from within by Progressives to change America into something we don’t want without our consent. These folks are all in, and have no backing down in their plans from what I can tell. I see no reason to believe Obama and his thugs are going to move to the center or pull a Clinton in order to gain back power they just lost. I see generations of planning for this day; judges in place, power in every branch of government, control of the media and education systems… This is their day and they are in to win. You don’t shove legislation down the throats of a free people if you fear the people. Two thousand page bills passed when only twenty pages were needed for the supposed purpose of the bill… If not for the Tea Party, the rise of the people, we would have been buried by all of this before we knew it.

Keemo on November 10, 2010 at 10:35 AM

Whatever you do, don’t be suspicious of Democrats! /Jimbo3

DrSteve on November 10, 2010 at 10:40 AM

Keemo on November 10, 2010 at 10:23 AM
Monkeytoe on November 10, 2010 at 10:34 AM
DrSteve on November 10, 2010 at 10:29 AM

Have any of you actually taken the time to go to the link and read the entire report? Before you jump all over me, why don’t you go and do that. The issuance of the moratorium is in the executive summary, not in the body of the report. All the panel recommendations are in the body of the report and in the executive summary. Looking at the entire report in context, it’s somewhat clear what the experts recommended and didn’t. It was sloppy editing in the executive summary.

Jimbo3 on November 10, 2010 at 10:41 AM

LETS REVIEW:

Fake IPCC Report to prop up phony “Global Warming” claim….

Fake Gulf Oil Spill Report to prop up unnecessary and harmful “Moratorium”….

I THINK WE SEE A PATTERN…

landlines on November 10, 2010 at 10:45 AM

6 mo drilling moratorium.

May(5) + 6 = Nov(11).

Math is fun – especially when midterms are involved.

yo on November 10, 2010 at 10:45 AM

Have any of you actually taken the time to go to the link and read the entire report?
Jimbo3 on November 10, 2010 at 10:41 AM

Yes, but that was due to work. Have you taken the time to understand what they are speaking about in the report?

It wasn’t sloppy editing, especially when you can get the original copy via the internet. It was lack of common sense and trying to save butt where it was known that they didn’t do their jobs with the paper trail that was left and disregarded.

upinak on November 10, 2010 at 10:45 AM

***

It was sloppy editing in the executive summary.

Jimbo3 on November 10, 2010 at 10:41 AM

Oy.

BuckeyeSam on November 10, 2010 at 10:47 AM

Of course they did. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to learn that. The White House is under Democrat rule and lying is just the order of the day for Democrats, as they simply have to make sure we “do the right thing” in all things they think about.

Webrider on November 10, 2010 at 10:48 AM

The blanket moratorium was in no way justified by the report and re-writing the recommendations was then taken up by the experts at the National Academy of Engineering who did not like having their report changed and having words put in their mouths that they did not say nor stand behind. They pointed out that only a moratorium for this type of rig in that much water was necessary, and a blanket one was not justified by their report.

They also point out the long-term good safety record of drilling in US waters and that it is safer to work on those rigs than the average job on land in the US. The summary was not supported by the facts, and the DOI changed the summary to fit what they had already done and were called on it. This is not a minor editing error, but going after the skills of those individuals who did the review and rewriting their recommendations without their advice nor consent and making it look like they signed off on those recommendations, which they did not do.

Why bother bringing in experts if you won’t listen to their advice?

Andy why should any expert now trust the DOI as the department now feels free to use an experts name to get their own findings in place?

Why not just be honest and say what you want and why you want it, and let your expertise, or lack thereof, shine through? As it is we get mealy mouthed supporters in lock step with the policy who don’t care about the actual jobs of professionals in the field, their work experience or the engineering and economics necessary to make it run. Yet these are the very same supporters who hide behind ‘credentialed’ individuals in other venues… so when they agree with you all is fine and when they disagree with you, why, administrative power serves just fine now, doesn’t it? Nice bit of authoritarianism there: say what I want or we will say it for you.

ajacksonian on November 10, 2010 at 10:48 AM

Big deal…Chris Christie stayed in a suite at a DC hotel five years ago.

ctmom on November 10, 2010 at 10:59 AM

ajacksonian on November 10, 2010 at 10:48 AM

Nicely stated & written.. My sister-in-law is a long time employee (manager) @ Caterpillar Corp. and this reminds me of how badly Obama and the media pissed off this group of people by pulling the same stunt several months ago. These people have no regard for the truth.

Keemo on November 10, 2010 at 11:04 AM

Let’s be even more clear about this story. Salazar and Browner, under the direction of the Obama and with no outside recommendation from the Panel of Experts or any other credible body, shut down the domestic offshore drilling industry for purely political purposes. This action has caused tens of thousands of people directly or indirectly connected with offshore drilling and development in the Gulf or Mexico to be out of work. Related service industries are trying to hang on by their fingertips. Drilling rigs are continuing to leave the Gulf. Domestic oil & gas production will definitely fall over the next few years as a result. Oil companies are forced to defer investments in domestic production. Meanwhile, with the Moratorium in effect, Obama personnally approves the U.S. Export-Import Bank guaranteeing $5 billion in loans to Petrobras for deepwater FOR DEEPWATER DEVLOPMENT OFFSHORE BRAZIL, and $1 billion dollars to the Mexican National Oil Company, PEMEX, FOR OFFSHORE OIL & GAS DEVELOPMENT IN THE GULF OF MEXICO. And Obama personally approves another $1 billion or so to several U.S. companies manufacturing solar panels and wind turbines, businesses (Like Solyndra) that are generally failing due to overseas competition and falling demand.

Obama has to be stopped. His administration and policies need to be exposed. Investigations have to be held. Obama should be held accountable for destroying the lives of good people along the Gulf Coast, and the domestic oil & gas industry that he and the environmental lobby despises. What an awful and corrupt President we have. This is bordering on impeachable offenses. God help us all.

16MPG on November 10, 2010 at 11:04 AM

Manipulation.

But this White House would NEVER rewrite jobless reports, or economic summaries in their favor. No. Never.

portlandon on November 10, 2010 at 11:07 AM

It was edited, not falsified.

Jimbo3 on November 10, 2010 at 10:10 AM

You’re gutsy…like Pelosi.

Schadenfreude on November 10, 2010 at 11:16 AM

The issuance of the moratorium in advance of the report is evidence that the administration knew what it wanted the report to say, and that the administration was going to rewrite the report to back its actions no matter what the report actually said.

JEM on November 10, 2010 at 11:27 AM

No one other than HO will cover this.

Alden Pyle on November 10, 2010 at 11:28 AM

Jimbo3, were the independent engineers and scientists lying? THEY said that the Administration misrepresented their words, not me, not others on this blog.

Are you accusing the engineers and scientists of lying? If you are, then you are also accusing the Administration of lying, when Salazar called them to apologize. Exactly what was Salazar apologizing for?

barnone on November 10, 2010 at 11:39 AM

. Looking at the entire report in context, it’s somewhat clear what the experts recommended and didn’t. It was sloppy editing in the executive summary.

Jimbo3 on November 10, 2010 at 10:41 AM

So your defense is that this administration isn’t dishonest, just incompetent. Well, I do agree with you that they are incompetent. Anyone who believes in far left ideology can be nothing but incompetent by definition.

I do, however, disagree that they are not dishonest. there has been a plethora of evidence on various issues that this is probably the most dishonest administration in my lifetime. And, that is saying a lot, particularly in just a short 2 years.

Monkeytoe on November 10, 2010 at 11:49 AM

It was sloppy editing in the executive summary.

Jimbo3 on November 10, 2010 at 10:41 AM

Based on my 15 years of federal research experience, let me assure you that this section is generally required because it’s the only part that will actually be read by an agency signatory — or, in many cases, by the press.

DrSteve on November 10, 2010 at 11:51 AM

Original: There is no need for a moratorium on off-shore drilling.

One “sloppy edit” later: There is…need for a moratorium on off-shore drilling.
.
.
What? I just left out one word, cut me some slack.

DrAllecon on November 10, 2010 at 12:02 PM

I got into real problems with the Secret Service a few years back when I tried to ‘edit’ some US paper currency.

slickwillie2001 on November 10, 2010 at 12:07 PM

Heckuva job Brownie.

Scrappy on November 10, 2010 at 12:14 PM

Jimbo3, were the independent engineers and scientists lying? THEY said that the Administration misrepresented their words, not me, not others on this blog.

Are you accusing the engineers and scientists of lying? If you are, then you are also accusing the Administration of lying, when Salazar called them to apologize. Exactly what was Salazar apologizing for?

barnone on November 10, 2010 at 11:39 AM

Where did I ever accuse them of lying? You’re jumping all over me for things I didn’t say. From reading the Politico article, it sounds like the confusion about what part was “certified” was handled on the first call with the press.

Monkeytoe, this rewrite was done around 2 a.m., if I understand the timeline correctly. People are known to make mistakes if they’ve been up for 18 hours.

Jimbo3 on November 10, 2010 at 12:18 PM

The report was used to justify it, but the government already had issued the moratorium.

Jimbo3 on November 10, 2010 at 9:52 AM

Which makes it even worse…they chose an action without any real accurate information that fit what THEY wanted, not what was needed…then they “edited” the information to back up their poor and inexcusable response to a problem that didn’t exist, or at least the threat was not what was reported.
So the policeman can arrest you for no reason…then write a false report to substantiate the arrest? Yeah, the liberals world is so wonderful, a regular utopia.

right2bright on November 10, 2010 at 12:23 PM

This will be the first of many “revelations”, well not the first the first was forced out of the scientists with the false information on Global Warming.
But this is the first in the Obama administration, I think they know what is coming down the pike.
An objective look and review at many of their decisions that were based on “facts” at the time…like the union gave them facts, Media Matters gave them facts, Soros gave them facts, Google gave them facts…
This is going to be a messy 6 months of “facts” being revealed as “poorly edited” or “poorly worded”, and then a recant.
Kind of like changing the word “enemies” to “opposition” after the election and the horrible beating Obama took for his lies.

right2bright on November 10, 2010 at 12:27 PM

Comment pages: 1 2