Executive_Order_13233

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Elmer Gantry, Jan 23, 2009.

  1. Elmer Gantry

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2006
    Messages:
    1,503
    Albums:
    2
    Likes Received:
    554
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Melbourne (VIC, AU)
  2. D_Doewell Dadong

    D_Doewell Dadong New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2008
    Messages:
    650
    Likes Received:
    1
    When bills like that are passed makes you wonder whats being hidden. Well done mr president.
     
  3. SilverTrain

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2008
    Messages:
    4,582
    Albums:
    8
    Likes Received:
    404
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    USA
    Why wonder, when you can just read the bill. The text of the bill in full is on the official White House website. The OP linked to it. Nothing "hidden" about it at all.

    The subject of the bill is the official archivist's procedure in disclosing official information that may be subject to executive privilege.

    The fact that no media outlets have (apparently) reported on it is most likely due to it's mundaninity.
     
  4. musclebutt2

    musclebutt2 New Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2007
    Messages:
    458
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    3
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    San Francisco
    It has been reported. I read about it the day he signed the order on yahoo and google news. I think it was an AP story.
     
  5. TurkeyWithaSunburn

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Messages:
    3,543
    Albums:
    5
    Likes Received:
    252
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Denver, Colorado
    Uhm did you read it?

    The original order by Reagan
    Executive Order 12667 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    The order under Bush.

    Executive Order 13233 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Executive Order -- Presidential Records
    So he's going BACK to the Reagan Era Order.
     
  6. Principessa

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2006
    Messages:
    19,494
    Likes Received:
    28
    Gender:
    Female
  7. Principessa

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2006
    Messages:
    19,494
    Likes Received:
    28
    Gender:
    Female

    Neither could I, what's up with that? :irked: :confused: It garnered a brief blurb on the Huffington Post but nothing more. Nothing on CNN or MSNBC sites either; but I did find a paper out of India and one from Australia which covered it.
     
  8. D_Doewell Dadong

    D_Doewell Dadong New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2008
    Messages:
    650
    Likes Received:
    1
    I meant what has been covered up to necessitate a bill to restrict the flow of information
     
  9. Elmer Gantry

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2006
    Messages:
    1,503
    Albums:
    2
    Likes Received:
    554
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Melbourne (VIC, AU)
    LOL We'll find out when we get a hold of Cheneys emails.
     
  10. faceking

    faceking Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2004
    Messages:
    7,535
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    110
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Mavs, NOR * CAL
    I think it basically says that anyone can easily rifle through presidential records from decades ago, a la "dead" presidents... and to get "living" ex-presidents artifacts, it's up to the current president, the AG, and who know whom else to hear the case for it and they'll decide.

    In other words... don't plan on getting anything from the Clinton or Bush administrations... as you'd have to move legal mountains, per se.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted