Dems Want Law to Keep Obama Records Secret

[JohnRich 4]

News:

Dems Want Law To Keep Obama Records Secret

"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...'"

Full story: Judicial Watch

[billvon 2,427]

>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.

JohnRich, 2006: "The reason it quit happening in the first place is that one or more of those people entrusted with the oversight were leaking secret information to the press. Those people should be hunted down and tried for treason."

JohnRich, 2006 (posting a quote to defend Bush) - "This Nation has a long tradition of wartime enemy surveillance—a tradition that can be traced to George Washington, who made frequent and effective use of secret intelligence. . . .This Administration has chosen to act now to prevent the next attack with every lawful tool at its disposal, rather than wait until it is too late. It is hard to imagine a President who would not elect to use these tools in defense of the American people—in fact, it would be irresponsible to do otherwise. The terrorist surveillance program is both necessary and lawful."

Of course that was Bush, so it was OK.

[quade 3]

I'm not a lawyer, but my reading of the bill is in disagreement with the Judicial Watch analysis.

Here's what JW says the bill says;

Quote

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.

I read the bill differently.

The way I read it the Archivist has to notify the former and incumbent President. If the former objects AND the incumbent objects, then it doesn't get released. However, if the former objects and the incumbent doesn't, then the Archivist releases the records.

In any case, the court can step in and demand the release of the records in question.

To me, this seems pretty reasonable.

Here's the actual bill itself so you can read it;
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:H.R.3071:

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

However, if the former objects and the incumbent doesn't, then the Archivist releases the records.

In any case, the court can step in and demand the release of the records in question.

To me, this seems pretty reasonable.

Then what's the point of having to consult the former at all?

[quade 3]

Quote

Quote

However, if the former objects and the incumbent doesn't, then the Archivist releases the records.
In any case, the court can step in and demand the release of the records in question.
To me, this seems pretty reasonable.

Then what's the point of having to consult the former at all?

Who knows more about the implications of revealing state secrets in that President's Executive Privilege records than the President himself?

For instance, there may very well be some bit of information in it that would not only embarrass the former President, but could put international intelligence operations in danger.

To me, that seems like a good move overall to at least ask the former President.

The objection to the 43rd Administration's approach was that pretty much everything was considered Executive Privilege and no one had recourse to change it. That's simply inexcusable.

The idea of Executive Privilege was to enable the Administration to be able to freely discuss ideas and options on various topics. As you can imagine, some of those things, probably MOST of those things, are options that will simply never happen and an untimely reveal of those discussions could really screw up international policy.

For instance, War Plan Red.

However, for historical purposes there has to be a way in place to eventually make it part of the public record at some point. This seems as if it's a step toward that direction. I can certainly see why members and supporters of previous Administrations might not like the idea though.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver