Democrats Introduce Bill to Seal Up Obama’s Presidential Records

[Si modo]

Democrats Introduce Bill to Seal Up Obama’s Presidential Records

Bill Text - 112th Congress (2011-2012) - THOMAS (Library of Congress)

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CU0m6Rxm9vU]Barack Obama on Government Transparency - YouTube[/ame]


Did he really promise that?

He is so full of shit . . . how anyone still supports him is beyond me.

Talk is cheap, it's what you do that counts. And boy does he ever 'do'.

[emphasis added] Racist!

 

[Zoom-boing]

Barack Obama on Government Transparency - YouTube


Did he really promise that?

He is so full of shit . . . how anyone still supports him is beyond me.

Talk is cheap, it's what you do that counts. And boy does he ever 'do'.

[emphasis added] Racist!

 

[Full-Auto]

Barack Obama on Government Transparency - YouTube


Did he really promise that?

He is so full of shit . . . how anyone still supports him is beyond me.

Talk is cheap, it's what you do that counts. And boy does he ever 'do'.

[emphasis added] Racist!

Congress can pass the law, However the executive is under no obligation to follow it.

 

[signelect]

Surprise Surprise, remember this is Obama we are talking about.

 

[Ropey]

According to Judicial Watch, Rep. Edolphous Towns (D-NY) has introduced the Presidential Records Act Amendments of 2011. That bill would do with Obama’s presidential records what Obama has already done to his personal and collegiate records: Seal them up.

In an obvious effort to protect President Barack Obama, a group of congressional Democrats has introduced legislation to create an official process that will allow the commander-in-chief to keep presidential records secret after he leaves office.

Ironically, Obama revoked a similar George W. Bush order in one of his first official acts as president. In 2001 Bush penned an executive order severely limiting public access to his presidential records. Shortly after swearing in, Obama killed it as part of his much-ballyhooed commitment to government transparency. At the time, the new president claimed that he was giving the American people greater access to “historic documents.”

If the Democrats’ proposed measure (Presidential Records Act Amendments of 2011) becomes law, former presidents will be allowed to assert a new “constitutionally based privilege” against disclosing records of their liking. Here is how it would work; the Archivist of the United States would be required to notify the former president, as well as the incumbent, of intentions to make records public. Anything that either the former or current president claims should be kept private won’t be released.

The veteran Brooklyn congressman (Edolphus Towns) who recently introduced the law in the U.S. House has yet to explain why it’s necessary.

Democrats Introduce Bill to Seal Up Obama’s Presidential Records

Bill Text - 112th Congress (2011-2012) - THOMAS (Library of Congress)

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CU0m6Rxm9vU]Barack Obama on Government Transparency - YouTube[/ame]


Did he really promise that?

The definitive word is 'did'. And yes, he 'did'.



He's done gone and said a lot of things ....

 

[freedombecki]

This is quite stupid!!!

The idiot already has his info covered up!!!!!!!!

That's the private stuff . . . you know college transcripts, personal records and the like. This is the presidential stuff.

So he doesn't want his gaffes and decisions to come under public scrutiny during the election of 2012?

This is starting to sound like Hugo Chavez' moves to get a life term as Emperadoro of Venezuela.

Nope. Make him account to the public for his bank takeover blunders, his closure of the Gulf of Mexico to oil drilling, his do-nothing toward developing oil resources on American soil, etc.

Elections are about facing the facts of service to ALL OF THE PEOPLE, not only the select few Obama has chosen to serve and excluding the many based on race.

The Democrats have already tried to rid the National Archives by sending Sandy Berger to lay his thieving hands on anything that tells the truth about Bill Clinton's presidency in order to politically pave the way for Hillary Clinton to hold the office.

Americans do not want to be told to do what Congress was told by Pelosi: "Just vote now and everything will be okay."

Well, everything was not okay. Bills should never be more than a page or two long, so people can understand them. If it requires more than 2,000 pages to be digested in less than 2 weeks until voting time, you can be certain there is something rotten in Denmark about the bill.

 

[Ropey]

This is quite stupid!!!

The idiot already has his info covered up!!!!!!!!

That's the private stuff . . . you know college transcripts, personal records and the like. This is the presidential stuff.

So he doesn't want his gaffes and decisions to come under public scrutiny during the election of 2012?

This is starting to sound like Hugo Chavez' moves to get a life term as Emperadoro of Venezuela.

Nope. Make him account to the public for his bank takeover blunders, his closure of the Gulf of Mexico to oil drilling, his do-nothing toward developing oil resources on American soil, etc.

Elections are about facing the facts of service to ALL OF THE PEOPLE, not only the select few Obama has chosen to serve and excluding the many based on race.

The Democrats have already tried to rid the National Archives by sending Sandy Berger to lay his thieving hands on anything that tells the truth about Bill Clinton's presidency in order to politically pave the way for Hillary Clinton to hold the office.

Americans do not want to be told to do what Congress was told by Pelosi: "Just vote now and everything will be okay."

Well, everything was not okay. Bills should never be more than a page or two long, so people can understand them. If it requires more than 2,000 pages to be digested in less than 2 weeks until voting time, you can be certain there is something rotten in Denmark about the bill.

Obama was for transparency I thought.



http://www.realclearpolitics.com/vi...cks_transparency_of_obama_administration.html

^ To watch the actual interview.

 

[westwall]

Every president wants this privilege. After Nixon, none of them are going to get it.

Nor do they deserve it.

 

[Inthemiddle]

Bush only wanted certain things redacted to protect the actions of future presidents. obama wants it ALL sealed because he doesn't want to go to prison.

Show me one thing that said that Obama was in favor of this? What a small few Congresspeople do is not necessarily the same as what Obama supports. I think we've all seen by now that Obama and Congressional Democrats are often on different pages.

 

[Zoom-boing]

Bush only wanted certain things redacted to protect the actions of future presidents. obama wants it ALL sealed because he doesn't want to go to prison.

Show me one thing that said that Obama was in favor of this? What a small few Congresspeople do is not necessarily the same as what Obama supports. I think we've all seen by now that Obama and Congressional Democrats are often on different pages.

He sealed his personal records; no reason to believe he isn't in favor of sealing his presidential records. Do you have a link saying he is or isn't in favor of it?

 

[Inthemiddle]

He sealed his personal records; no reason to believe he isn't in favor of sealing his presidential records. Do you have a link saying he is or isn't in favor of it?

Are you kidding me? That's the best that you can come up with? You simply assume he's behind it because nothing says he's not? I'm really beside myself. How can you not see how completely illogical that is? I mean Hell, by your logic we may as well conclude that Bush was behind the 9-11 attacks. I mean, do you have a link saying otherwise?

 

[Zoom-boing]

He sealed his personal records; no reason to believe he isn't in favor of sealing his presidential records. Do you have a link saying he is or isn't in favor of it?

Are you kidding me? That's the best that you can come up with? You simply assume he's behind it because nothing says he's not? I'm really beside myself. How can you not see how completely illogical that is? I mean Hell, by your logic we may as well conclude that Bush was behind the 9-11 attacks. I mean, do you have a link saying otherwise?

No. Do you? I do see they have a bill and I haven't heard Obama say anything about it, including objecting to it. He was so quick to unseal Shrubby's records and he did tout about that he would have the most transparent presidency < --- good one, Barry! . . surely if he objected to this bill we'd have heard about it. Right? Ok, so go find it cause I looked and didn't see it. Anywhere. The Dems must be really losing confidence in him if they're attempting to pass this bill to cover his tracks.

 

[mudwhistle]

According to Judicial Watch, Rep. Edolphous Towns (D-NY) has introduced the Presidential Records Act Amendments of 2011. That bill would do with Obama’s presidential records what Obama has already done to his personal and collegiate records: Seal them up.

In an obvious effort to protect President Barack Obama, a group of congressional Democrats has introduced legislation to create an official process that will allow the commander-in-chief to keep presidential records secret after he leaves office.

Ironically, Obama revoked a similar George W. Bush order in one of his first official acts as president. In 2001 Bush penned an executive order severely limiting public access to his presidential records. Shortly after swearing in, Obama killed it as part of his much-ballyhooed commitment to government transparency. At the time, the new president claimed that he was giving the American people greater access to “historic documents.”

If the Democrats’ proposed measure (Presidential Records Act Amendments of 2011) becomes law, former presidents will be allowed to assert a new “constitutionally based privilege” against disclosing records of their liking. Here is how it would work; the Archivist of the United States would be required to notify the former president, as well as the incumbent, of intentions to make records public. Anything that either the former or current president claims should be kept private won’t be released.

The veteran Brooklyn congressman (Edolphus Towns) who recently introduced the law in the U.S. House has yet to explain why it’s necessary.

Democrats Introduce Bill to Seal Up Obama’s Presidential Records

Bill Text - 112th Congress (2011-2012) - THOMAS (Library of Congress)

Ironically, Obama revoked a similar George W. Bush order in one of his first official acts as president. In 2001 Bush penned an executive order severely limiting public access to his presidential records. Shortly after swearing in, Obama killed it as part of his much-ballyhooed commitment to government transparency. At the time, the new president claimed that he was giving the American people greater access to “historic documents.”

Obama wanted a series of investigations and show trials so he could trash Bush and this country in the process.

Then he discovered he actually had a job to do. He couldn't come in and lay waste to the presidency. Things were expected of him.

 

[Ropey]

Bush only wanted certain things redacted to protect the actions of future presidents. obama wants it ALL sealed because he doesn't want to go to prison.

Show me one thing that said that Obama was in favor of this? What a small few Congresspeople do is not necessarily the same as what Obama supports. I think we've all seen by now that Obama and Congressional Democrats are often on different pages.

He sealed his personal records; no reason to believe he isn't in favor of sealing his presidential records. Do you have a link saying he is or isn't in favor of it?

His new book might well be called, "What Me Worry?" Well, he's already written two autobiographies before he was POTUS.

That says something in and of itself.

 

[mudwhistle]

Show me one thing that said that Obama was in favor of this? What a small few Congresspeople do is not necessarily the same as what Obama supports. I think we've all seen by now that Obama and Congressional Democrats are often on different pages.

He sealed his personal records; no reason to believe he isn't in favor of sealing his presidential records. Do you have a link saying he is or isn't in favor of it?

His new book might well be called, "What Me Worry?" Well, he's already written two autobiographies before he was POTUS.

That says something in and of itself.

You mean a Ghost Writer wrote them for him.

He spent so much time coked up and partying he didn't have time to work on his book much.