The agency has offered little explanation for its action, saying in statements that it is the result of a review, guided by court opinions, privacy laws and current litigation, that began last year. And though the decision was made under the Trump administration — which named a longtime foe of the Humane Society of the United States to head the USDA transition — the McGartlands’ lawsuit and interviews with former agency officials and animal protection advocates suggest that changes had partially begun several months before.
Former Agriculture secretary Tom Vilsack said Tuesday that his senior staff informed him toward the end of his term that the agency division responsible for enforcing the Horse Protection and Animal Welfare acts was recommending pulling the records from the website and instead making them available via Freedom of Information Act requests. He said one rationale was that doing so would reduce staff time spent on the documents. Litigation was also a factor, he added, though he could not recall a specific court case.
But Vilsack did not sign off on the recommendation — not because he disagreed with it but because he believed it had major implications that he didn’t have time to consider fully, he said. “There was not enough time for us to properly vet the recommendation, and I was concerned about transparency,” he explained.
Yet animal advocacy groups say access had already begun to be reduced last fall. The USDA last posted enforcement records in August, according to Eric Kleiman, a researcher at the Animal Welfare Institute who shared information about the lawsuit with The Washington Post. Other records were retroactively redacted, he said.
But in November, Kleiman noted, the USDA filed a motion to seal its own complaint. It sought to redact information about SNBL’s nearly $10 million profit over two years, as well as the number of monkeys it imported and used annually — the kind of information not covered under FOIA exemptions.
The removal of information from the USDA website actually began before Trump took office. The reasons were not to benefit those who were cruel to animals but to ensure due process for those accused of wrong-doing and mitigate liability for litigation against the USDA. But why the hell let facts stand in the way. Let's just say that Trump hates animals, right. And of course why would those who attack Trump want to rely on facts when the lies, distortions and fake news from the Daily Kos are so much more fun.
This means war. So now it's riot, loot, burn, pillage
Of course, these are the pillars and foundation of the liberal ideology inculcated in to every small liberal brain by their Fuhrer, Sal Alinsky. One would expect no less from them. Their desire to pepper spray women in the face:
To assault women and children:
To lynch people for supporting Trump
And normal Americans are getting sick of it. The majority of Americans are just hard-working people who just want to live their lives in peace with their family. They do not want or care for the chaos and mayhem the left desires to inflict.
But I do appreciate the fact that you are at least honest with your true intentions and ultimate goals. Although the average American is already becoming aware of the liberal's penchant for violence and lust to inflict pain, especially on the elderly, women and children.