Skip to main content

Replies sorted oldest to newest

 

In May 2006, the White House and the Secret Service asserted that the visitor records were presidential records, as opposed to agency records belonging to the Secret Service. Under federal law, presidential records can remain confidential for up to 12 years. As an executive branch agency, the Secret Service is subject to the Freedom of Information Act, which requires public release of material unless one of nine exemptions applies.

In Friday's ruling, Garland said that construing the term "agency records" to extend to White House visitor logs could substantially affect the president's ability to meet confidentially with foreign leaders, agency officials or members of the public, which could make the Freedom of Information Act a potentially serious congressional intrusion into the conduct of the president's daily operations.

 

yep, the case started in 2006.... i'm sure it's all obama's fault, since he was the president in 2006... well, that and bush would NEVER do anything like that.

careful guys, your hypocrisy is showing!

Originally Posted by Crash.Override:
Originally Posted by JJ:

But I thought Pres. Obama was going to fix all of the wrongs of the Bush administration not continue them?

________________

so, now obama has control over the judicial system? really? and a case started years before he took office?  as i said, rt. wingnut bizarro world, it's different from reality. 

 

No Pres Obama doesn't control the judiciary. The decision issued yesterday was not related to any cases filed "years ago".

The decision issued yesterday by the US Appeals Court was related to a case that went to trial in 12-09. Judicial Watch requested a guest list from the Secret Service under the FOIA for a period of time in the early days of the Obama administration. The request was denied and Judicial Watch filed suit in 12-09. The Secret Service was represented  by the US Dept of Justice headed by AG Holder. The trial judge found in favor of Judicial Watch. The Justice Dept filed an appeal. The Appeals Court reversed the trial court. The appeal was heard in 9-12 and the decision was issued on 8-30-13

 

So all of this particular case was tried and appealed on Pres Obama's watch. And while I trust the judiciary I don't hold the Holder Justice Dept  in the same high regard. So back to the original question. Does Pres Obama really want transparency in his White House?

Originally Posted by Jankinonya:

Why would ANY President lay bare his meetings with foreign leaders, diplomats, ambassadors, etc. to be scrutinized by the world at large? How stupid would that be? 

 

There has to be a certain amount of secrecy. Surely everyone with sense knows that....of course not everyone has common sense. 

_________________________________________

Presidential meetings with diplomats, foreign leaders and embassy personnel are, usually, well publicized.  Its the meetings with labor leaders, lobbyists, cronies and government personnel like the IRS Director and General Counsel the WH wishes to keep from the public.   

Add Reply

Post

Untitled Document
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×