Well, it's probably not as swash-buckling as it sounds, but Facebook did take down the poll and a Secret Service spokesman confirmed the site's cooperation in finding the perp: "We worked with Facebook to take it down, and we are currently investigating the matter."

Facebook, meanwhile, insists it will do everything in its power to find the pollster, and the company's policy spokesman used the occasion to distance the all powerful site from any and all responsibility, because polls are organized by a third-party:

People contact us all the time if they see things that are inappropriate. And we investigate all those reports. We take action by taking it down, by issuing a warning or by reporting it to law enforcement. At the same time, we want Facebook to be open to discuss ideas. We don't pre-approve postings.

As for the poll's results, those aren't being released.

Update: A man named Vann came out as the poll's mastermind, but gave few details about himself other than that he's an Obama supporter who lives on the West Coast but once lived in Illinois.

The change is a deal with Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Government Washington, which agreed to drop two FOIA lawsuits in exchange for a promise that the White House would start releasing the names. The new White House policy [pdf], which is voluntary, will be to release visitor logs on a monthly basis, with the exception of visits that were private in nature, related to national security, or related to other "sensitive" issues, like potential Supreme Court nominees.

That's all well and good, but it's voluntary. The White House will make the determination about which names to release—including which one's are "sensitive"—without recourse to any oversight or appeal, and without the force of law to keep them in line. Do you trust them?

The main issue in CREW's FOIA suits was whether the visitor logs, which are maintained by the Secret Service, are subject to FOIA. The White House is exempt from that law, but the Secret Service, which is an agency under the Department of Homeland Security, isn't. The Obama White House took the Bush view that the logs are somehow really White House records, even thought the White House doesn't maintain them. CREW's view, which has been upheld by two federal courts so far, was that if the Secret Service created and maintained them, then they're Secret Service records, and have to be turned over if someone asks for them under the FOIA.

The Obama White House still insists that the logs are not covered by FOIA, but has decided to generously release those portions of the logs that it chooses to just in order to get CREW off its back. What's the difference? Well, the FOIA has strict protocols for what can and can't be redacted from documents, and an appeals process for requesters to make sure the government isn't holding back. And if they are holding back, it's illegal. The White House's new policy has none of that. They will give out what they want to give out, and you will take it on faith that it's the whole story. And the FOIA has no provision for redacting names or documents because they're "sensitive." What's more, under the FOIA, the decisions about what names would be redacted would be made by the Secret Service. Now they're being made by the White House itself.

"Yes, it's voluntary," CREW's chief counsel Anne Weismann told us. "But I think it would be political suicide for them to retreat from it. We'll see what gets released. I think we'll be able to tell if they're holding back." Weismann points out that the White House has promised to publish the number of names it has redacted because of "sensitive" meetings, so we will get a sense of how much is being held back. And anyone is free, if they think the redactions are overbroad, to launch another lawsuit under the FOIA and finally litigate the issue of whether visitor logs are covered.

But this deal lets the White House promise to comply with the law without actually making it comply with the law. It's like a prosecutor dropping charges against someone who, in exchange, promises to go live in a jail for a year. The FOIA says what it says, and those records—at least according to two federal judges thus far—must be released. To let the Obama Administration get away with claiming that it will do so, without any system for checking that they're not lying—as all White Houses do, all the time—is a sham. It's better than nothing, but it's still a sham.

• Jon Gosselin may have found himself another ladyfriend, a tabloid writer named Kate no less. Her full name is Kate Major and supposedly she and Jon met doing a story on him and has a history of getting "too close" to her interview subjects. [Gatecrasher]
  
  
• A new book by a former Secret Service agent says that the Bush daughters were out of control heathens who did everything in their power to defy authority and just do whatever the hell they felt like doing, kinda like their dad! [Page Six]
  
  
• Some crazy Russian guy has been issuing death threats against Britney Spears, who is so spooked by it all that she's refusing to allow her children to make the trip with her. When will Vladamir Putin stop harassing Britney Spears?! [Sun]
  
  
• Tito Jackson just doesn't understand why Michael's doctor, Conrad Murray, didn't make an effort to get help sooner on the day that he died. Murray is sort of in hiding and alleged to be the main focus of a criminal probe. [Mirror]
  
  
• John Mayer is such a dick! So back when he was dating Jessica Simpson, on her birthday, he sent her a DVD of one of his live shows as a present. In other news, why do all of Jessica Simpson's men treat her like shit on her birthday? [Page Six]
  
  
• A scary-looking Cameron Diaz partied it up in London with Jude Law at some club. It's possible that The Sun obtained the worst photo ever taken of Diaz to attach to the item. [Sun]
  
  
• Patrick Swayze is looking like his health may be improving. The British tabloids are all running a picture of a relatively healthy-looking Swayze just sort of hanging out in a cowboy hat. He is apparently going through some super-duper secret revolutionary radiation treatment. [Mirror]
  
  
• Gwyneth Paltrow is pissed because the producers of Iron Man II picked Scarlett Johansson to be on the movie's poster over her. [Sun]
  
  
• The recently institutionalized Mischa Barton is rumored to have been suicidal when the LAPD arrived at her house last week. [Sun]

It's Dick Cheney! For some reason, former Vice President's Secret Service protection has been extended, though no one knows for how long. Also: these extensions must be approved by the commander in chief, so Obama is protecting Cheney from someone. Or maybe he is protecting all of us from Dick Cheney?

1.): Artist: Bobo's art gallery in Philadelphia
Art/Excuse for Raid: An installation of an office overflowing with (fake) money. Eight Secret Service men showed up, bearing files, thick with photocopies from each of the artist's myspace pages, and told them to put their hands in the air. Then they took the whole fake-money display away.

2.) Artist: Michael McDonald
Art/Excuse for Raid: cardboard cutout of Bush with a knife through it. The California artist puts his art in his front yard all the time. One day in 2007, he put out a cardboard cutout of President Bush with a knife stuck through it. Secret Service paid him a visit! Best quote? "They said, 'You've got a knife sitting in the head of the president of the United States,'" McDonald said. "I said, 'No, I got a knife in a piece of cardboard.'"

3.) Artist: Al Brandtner of Chicago
Art/Excuse for Raid: Stamp art! In 2005, Brandtner made a fake postage stamp with a gun pointing at President Bush's head (pictured); the caption read "Patriot Act." Secret Service raided the exhibit, titled "Axis of Evil, the Secret History of Sin." Man, these guys have no sense of humor.

4.) Artist: Jeremy Lassen
Art/Excuse for Raid: As the artist explains in his Livejournal:

"In response to [the above 2005 postage-stamp] incident, I created a series of collages, entitled "Bush and Guns". I "remixed" pictures of Bush (from the AP Photo wire) and guns (randomly found on Flickr)... I posted these new images to Flickr. I also urged others to create "Bush and guns" artwork, and post it online, as a sort of protest against actions and policies, that, to my mind, have a chilling effect on people's first amendment rights.

On June 7th, Two Secret Service agents showed up at my place of employment and asked to speak with me. One agent said they wanted to talk about something I posted online. I asked what, he one responded "You post a lot of stuff online, don't you?" and then showed me some color printouts of my "Bush and Guns" pictures."

Nope. At least according to one Stickam user, Dan Hendricks, who Twitters:

okay, how the hell are these stickam bots getting my email?? all the sudden i'm getting all these spam messages. bye bye stickam account.