Nixon appoints special team to investigate Blunt's office

Missouri Attorney General Jay Nixon announced today that he appointed a special team headed by Mel Fisher, former superintendent of the Highway Patrol, to look into whether the governor’s office followed the "sunshine law" and records retention policies. The sunshine laws and the record retention laws provide for both civil and criminal sanctions. Nixon's announcement comes on the same day that Blunt announced his new email retention policy for state offices. Both moves are good news.

One would hope we could focus on the issues rather than on the politics. Certainly there is a political angle to this story but we need to separate that from the hard news. You can expect the partisans from both parties to put their "spin" on both stories. And there certainly is a political angle that needs to be covered. However, to focus just on the political fight plays right into the hands of law breaking politicians of both parties.

Blunt's change in policy on email retention is a victory for open government. You know most democrats are not going to applaud Blunt's decision but instead will attack his motives. Maybe they are right but shouldn't truly independent journalists focus on what Blunt's changes mean first?

In no way, however, should Blunt's office get a pass on their prior actions and that is why Nixon did the right thing in appointing an outside team to investigate. The investigation needs to focus on:

• What Blunt's office actually did in regard to retaining emails and other public documents.
• In regard to the destruction of public documents we need to know what authority Blunt's office relied on for these actions. This should include any internal policies and legal authorities.
• Was their any internal discussion regarding these policies and, if so, the who, what, when,why and how of such debate.
• Who actually was involved in the destruction of public records and who was aware of these actions..
• What action if any was taken to stop this practice.
• What records were destroyed and is there any way to retrieve them.
• What is being done to make sure this does not happen again.

After this is done there must be consequences. This should include everyone involved whether they are the governor or one of his assistants. And let's hope the media makes this the focus of their stories and understands the difference between the actual investigation and the politics. We are not off to a good start.

The only story I could find in the Post-Dispatch had a headline of: Blunt, Nixon spar over e-mails. As the title of the article suggests, the story is mainly about politics. Couldn't they at least have reported the facts about Nixon's appointment before a column on the political dispute? As I stated in an earlier post every politician that is accused of wrongdoing immediately cries out "its all about politics." It works and because of this public corruption is rarely investigated and even more rarely prosecuted.

To avoid this I suggest a journalist treat the story as they would any other criminal investigation. Let the readers know what is being alleged, what facts are uncovered, what the law is and what legal defenses the accused may have. And just to make this clear "this is about politics" is not a legal defense. If you follow this standard your readers will be able to tell when it really is just about politics.