It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Obama to Bush: I Can Release Your Records. Don't Like It? Sue.

page: 7
46
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 22 2009 @ 04:32 PM
link   
Obama will through/put it all out on Bush and co so those who did not trust Obama or "like" him should/could then for sure put more trust and like in him. Obama has done his homework, no doubt, and it includes the people of the world.

We, well most of us know Bush made huge mistakes so i am not standing up for him IN ANY WAY, but as for Obama to many good things at once and at first day in office just makes me wonder. Well i do hope i am wrong, seriously. I will be happy to see Bush & co eat dirt the hard way just as long as Obama don't have ulterior motives so people will think he is just that and he will have the whole world in his hands. My opinion.




posted on Jan, 22 2009 @ 04:37 PM
link   
reply to post by IlluminatiKarate
 

What I found the scariest though, was the fact that Robert F. Kennedy prophetized that in 40 years, we'd see a black man "achieve the same position that my brother (former President John F Kennedy) had.”

Wow! x-cuse me??? really?
If that`s true, , I dó hope that "same position" doesn`t mean leaving the White House feet first....
(my mum was one of many 18+ kids who campained for Kennedy, and was devastated when he was assasinated)

Obama is bound to step on the toes of some pretty powerful and vengeful people in the lobby-circles, banking and whatnot.

The opening-up of all sorts of shady things that probably went on under this s.c. Executive Order, cóuld open a cesspool, yet, it could also mean that the trust of the American People will be restored. There`s nothing more detrimental to a person/President that wants to innovate, than mistrust.



posted on Jan, 22 2009 @ 04:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Keyhole
 



Why would Obama have to?


Not saying he does. We already know Congress isn't going after Bush. I am saying that the impression is being given that Obama is going after Bush. I don't think this is really the case. However, if Republicans feel that this the case, we will begin to see politics get dirtier than any other time in history. Republicans will retaliate in kind and the nation is the one that is going to suffer. Obama would be wise to articulate that this is not an attack on Bush.



posted on Jan, 22 2009 @ 04:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Keyhole
Looks like Obama isn't wasting any time!

This is what a lot of people were hoping for!

All those times Bush invoked "executive privilege" weren't always because of national security.

It was to hide something a lot of the times!

Why should he have invoked "executive privilege" on things such as:

an EPA investigation
the Valerie Plame Leak
the US attorney scandal
the FBI's misuse of crime informants
Dick Cheney's meeting with energy executives

And many more ridiculous ones like this that weren't invoked for national security reasons, but to protect people from the law, or to hide something incriminating or against his "views".

National security should be the only reason a president can invoke "executive privilege", and Obama is going to make it harder to invoke executive privilege from now on.

I'll bet ole George W didn't like hearing this!

www.motherjones.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

[edit on 1/21/2009 by Keyhole]


Very well said, and I must add that I am very happy that Obama is not wasting anytime here. This is a smart move on his part. I was one of those many that were hoping for this.

Im curious to see what Bush's move will be.

Good job Obama



posted on Jan, 22 2009 @ 04:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Amelie
 



....nope....I didn't see anything you believe in that suggests that you are "unrealistic" either way....nor do you expect or want to go back 200 years. So, you are correct. I would not be including you in any of those catagories....but of course I disagree with some, agree with some, and some I think you misunderstand. Obama is not against the 2nd amendment for example. Debating that point is useless as well because we can't even find 9 sitting SC Justices that agree on what that amendment means. But to say that Obama wants to take guns away from law abiding citizens is either ignorant or purposefully disingenious.
Obama should NOT be heading up any Bush Administration alleged misconduct. That is for the Justice Dept. and Congress and they aren't going to make that a priority right now unless the rest of the nation demands it...but right now people want to keep their jobs and their homes and Bush justice just has to wait for the majority of us.

...Now, for those of you that still think he is just a mouthpiece or better yet...that his "hiding" whatever it is you want to see...his birth certificate, whether he went to school on a different planet...his SAT scores...or any of that other retarded stuff....let me ask you this....how far along are you in your biography readings of ex-presidents? FDR wasn't hiding his Polio or anything was he? Reagan let us all know that he was slipping away mentally? Lincoln made his depression known to all. What hypocrits some of you are. You don't want the government to pry into your personal business, but you have no problem expected these....what? non-citizens? the right to some damn privacy. Ohhhhh, because they decided that they wanted to serve our Country than they have given up the right to expect that? They surrendered all their rights? If there is anything to know about a President that would reveal that they took the office in order to conduct narfarious business, to the ruin of our Country...then that of course is free game.....Clinton's screwing around? Who cares? but so many of you thought it was ohhhh so important. What about JFK? Any other unfaithful Presidents in our history?
This site is about denying ignorance....not denying what you believe or what you believe in....but come on....you can't possibly deny ignorance if you can't be intellectually honest with yourself. For example
....If you believe that Obama has been a bad President so far....well then you would qualify as ignorant at best...(in the voice of Jeff Foxworthy)
...now if you believe he will suck, or is the anti-Christ, or is the frontman for the NWO....that is an opinion that can't be labled "ignorant" per se, (certainly might be labled something else in my mind) but answer my first question and say...yeah he has sucked so far....and there ya go, you be ignorant...and that is per se.



posted on Jan, 22 2009 @ 05:02 PM
link   
This makes me think of all the people who said they would throw it in Obama voters’ faces if he didn’t “change” things. Well so far the man has a diverse cabinet, picked Rick Warren despite all the outrage from liberals or gay activist, and is going forth doing things he promised he would do already. Are you all going to admit you were wrong if things continue this way? I’m not talking about all Obama contesters; just the childishly bitter who made post like that.



posted on Jan, 22 2009 @ 05:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Res Ipsa
but answer my first question and say...yeah he has sucked so far....and there ya go, you be ignorant...and that is per se.


Well this is my general opinion so far
and on Gitmo and sideways on the overseas abortion funding, I need to know more about the ngo's operating in these poor countries. I need to see more before I can be positive about his direction.

[edit on 22-1-2009 by Amelie]



posted on Jan, 22 2009 @ 05:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Asherah
This news gave me a hearty chuckle over my morning coffee, just thinking about the look on W.'s face. I guess he thought he'd scoot on off to Texas without a hitch.



I don't think he'll be going to, or staying in Texas if all his "executive privileged" information is going to be able to be accessed by congress and the public!

Maybe that ranch he bought in Paraguay though.



posted on Jan, 22 2009 @ 05:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan
BTW - the title of this is completely wrong. No where did Obama say to bush - 'I can release your records. Don't like it? Sue!'


Correct.

I think the media kind of worked out that title for this article out of some responses they got and quoted in the article.

Obama to Bush: I Can Release Your Records. Don't Like It? Sue.


"[Obama]'s putting former presidents on notice that if you want to continue a claim of executive privilege that [Obama] doesn't think is well-placed, you're going to have to go to court," says Anne Weismann, the chief counsel for Citizens for Ethics and Responsibility in Washington (CREW).
******SKIP******
Weismann explains:

[Obama]'s basically saying if there's a dispute, and a former president thinks something should be covered by executive privilege and Obama doesn't agree, then Obama would direct the Archivist to release it [despite the former president's claim of privilege]. The only option a former President would have at that point would be to go to court and sue.



I haven't read anything YET where Obama himself is quoted as actually saying that.

[edit on 1/22/2009 by Keyhole]



posted on Jan, 22 2009 @ 05:51 PM
link   
...funny, I don't know what to think about Gitmo. What does closing the place have anything to do with anything? Get those people their chance in front of a court and decide what to do with them then, let the poor bastards that were driving a cab without insurance go, and prosecute or detain those that are bent on destroying us. We must have other places to detain prisoners so is Gitmo just a "symbol" of our unconstitutional conduct? Is closing the place just political?
So, I wouldn't jump on the Gitmo closing bandwagon just yet. Limiting the "executive privilege" to what it is suppose to be was good. Freezing pay raises was good too. Doing things to facilitate "transparency" in government was great also. One day basically. Gitmo should remain a question mark though I think, for now.
....I am thrilled to have Obama as President....but I refuse to surrender my gift of being able to separate my objectivity from my subjectivity. (A gift my ex-wife loves to exploit by the way.) ...so don't expect me to be all about love for Obama when you see me post about politics. When great I will say it, when not I will say it.....whether I agree with his position or not....(short example for you, I am against abortion and think it is pathetic that the Supreme Court has made it a fundamental right. BUT I believe the States should have the power to decide the issue...not the federal government. If a state wants to make it legal then that is the decision for the people of that state...my moral beliefs are just one voice but abortion as a fundamental right is a hypocrisy since we haven't made capital punishment a fundamental right and WE have left it to the STATES to decide....as of now of course.) Find me another fundamental right that "infringes" on someone else. I would be awfully pissed at my mother if she vaccumed me out in 1966. I would rather they let me be born, put me on trial for being born when not wanted, and then put me to death for forcing my mother to have me. That would be more "Just" in my opinion, and damn straight that is subjective.



posted on Jan, 22 2009 @ 07:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Keyhole
Looks like Obama isn't wasting any time!

This is what a lot of people were hoping for!

All those times Bush invoked "executive privilege" weren't always because of national security.

It was to hide something a lot of the times!

Why should he have invoked "executive privilege" on things such as:

an EPA investigation
the Valerie Plame Leak
the US attorney scandal
the FBI's misuse of crime informants
Dick Cheney's meeting with energy executives

And many more ridiculous ones like this that weren't invoked for national security reasons, but to protect people from the law, or to hide something incriminating or against his "views".

National security should be the only reason a president can invoke "executive privilege", and Obama is going to make it harder to invoke executive privilege from now on.

I'll bet ole George W didn't like hearing this!

www.motherjones.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

[edit on 1/21/2009 by Keyhole]


In 2001 the LOC had in it's possession DOE Tennessee Valley Authority Martin Marietta at Cambridge Tennessee's Security Report to the Vice President which may explain their EPA and Cheney's meeting with the Energy Executives.
Here is my request for it and the response.






> [Original Message]
> From:
> To:
> Date: 1/14/2009 9:12:07 AM
> Subject: Library Question - Answer [Question #4100727]
>
>
>
>
> Dear David,
>
> The Library of Congress does not collect every document, nor does it keep
every document. This policy is outlined in all of our policy statements,
which you can read at:
> . This is even more true for the Web
site, and its thousands of iterations since 2001. If you want to view
archived editions of our Web site for that year or any other, go to the
Internet Archive page for loc.gov:
. We are sorry you think
that subsequent editions are "dumbed down," as we are always striving to
improve the content and format for our users.
>
> We have searched for your Martin Marietta annual report, but as
described, this document does not appear in any of our catalogs or indexes.
You are free to search our online catalog yourself, at:
. Searches can be constructed with keywords,
corporate names and countless other options, in a variety of combinations.
>
> A broader catalog of resources that includes materials held in libraries
around the world, and includes many not held by the Library, is at:
. If you search for "Martin Marietta annual
report," you will find that this series is held in a number of US
libraries, but NOT at LC.
>
> For reports from DOE you can search the public, open-access site, DOE
Information Bridge, at: . Some of
these materials are available in full-text online.
>
> Other free and open resources for technical reports include the Defense
Technical Information Center: , and the National
Technical Information Center, .
>
> If you are particularly interested in government reports in general, we
recommend that you ask your local librarian for the nearest location of the
indexes of government and military technical reports, dating to the 1940s.
Between the current DTIC and NTIS indexes and these, all available
technical government reports will be listed. LC does have a large
collection of old technical reports, and reproduction services are
available through the Photoduplication Service, but you have to identify
the report by its Publications Board (PB) number in order for us to see if
we have it. We searched the Bibliography of Scientific & Technical Reports
and found nothing under 'iridium.'
>
> A full list of indexes and descriptions and additional information on
locating technical reports is available at the Technical Reports Section
Web page, . They also
hold a large collection of DOE reports, and more information is on this
page, . For details
you can contact them directly.
>
> If you are particularly interested in topics related to extra-terrestrial
origins and life beyond Earth, please take a look at our guide,
"Extraterrestrial Life," published in 2007, and online at:
.
>
> And everything you might possibly want to know about Iridium itself, is
in the Wikipedia entry at: .
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Science Reference Section/mrc
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -----------------------
>
> Question History:
>
> Patron: I know for a fact and without question the LOC has information on
Iridium 115 experiments done in the early 1940's and later. It is an
element obtained from meteorites which is not found on earth but is space
oriented in origin. It is heavier than lead in it's unexcited state and
becomes lighter than hydrogen when an electrical current is passed through
it. To prevent overheating of components, etc. used in the experiments a
magnesium based, white chalky like fiber board was used as an insulater. It
is a perfect substance for anti gravitic flight and I'm curious why I can't
find it anymore. The day after I researched it on the LOC's site in 2001
the site closed for reconstruction after which it became a dumbed down
version of it's former self where nothing of any real interest could be
found. I still have the original PC used so I'm sure since I used Print
Screen and what not I could still extract it from the memory. That and the
2001 Annual Report to the Vice President issued by Martin Marietta
Cambridge, Tn. requesting additional fencing and an extension of the fence
area to keep the EPA from discovering the high soil saturation of open air
bomb testing of things like Scarlet Fever, Typhoid, Malaria, Bubonic
Plague, an airbourne strain of HIV/AIDS, and the like- some 14 diseases
exploded in the air in all. And other such topics are no longer seemingly
available. Will you please find and send me data the Iridium 115
experiments and the 2001 Annual Security Report to the US Vice President by
the Martin Marietta (DOE) at Cambridge, Tn. Or would you deny you have such
things in your records or on your micro film caches. I'd hate to have to
pull the info off the PC I used to find it from the LOC in the first place.
I watch Law & Order and CSI, it can be done. Like I say, it's not a
question of if you have it. I'm 100% confident you do. The question is why
can't I find it now that your site was conveniently revamped in 2001, the
day after I pulled up the material from you, and will you send it to me now
so I don't have to go through the trouble of pulling it off of the old PC.
Thank you. I look forward to a favorable response.
>
> Librarian 1: Dear David,
>
> The Library of Congress does not collect every document, nor does it keep
every document. This policy is outlined in all of our policy statements,
which you can read at:
> . This is even more true for the Web
site, and its thousands of iterations since 2001. If you want to view
archived editions of our Web site for that year or any other, go to the
Internet Archive page for loc.gov:
. We are sorry you think
that subsequent editions are "dumbed down," as we are always striving to
improve the content and format for our users.
>
> We have searched for your Martin Marietta annual report, but as
described, this document does not appear in any of our catalogs or indexes.
You are free to search our online catalog yourself, at:
. Searches can be constructed with keywords,
corporate names and countless other options, in a variety of combinations.
>
> A broader catalog of resources that includes materials held in libraries
around the world, and includes many not held by the Library, is at:
. If you search for "Martin Marietta annual
report," you will find that this series is held in a number of US
libraries, but NOT at LC.
>
> For reports from DOE you can search the public, open-access site, DOE
Information Bridge, at: . Some of
these materials are available in full-text online.
>
> Other free and open resources for technical reports include the Defense
Technical Information Center: , and the National
Technical Information Center, .
>
> If you are particularly interested in government reports in general, we
recommend that you ask your local librarian for the nearest location of the
indexes of government and military technical reports, dating to the 1940s.
Between the current DTIC and NTIS indexes and these, all available
technical government reports will be listed. LC does have a large
collection of old technical reports, and reproduction services are
available through the Photoduplication Service, but you have to identify
the report by its Publications Board (PB) number in order for us to see if
we have it. We searched the Bibliography of Scientific & Technical Reports
and found nothing under 'iridium.'
>
> A full list of indexes and descriptions and additional information on
locating technical reports is available at the Technical Reports Section
Web page, . They also
hold a large collection of DOE reports, and more information is on this
page, . For details
you can contact them directly.
>
> If you are particularly interested in topics related to extra-terrestrial
origins and life beyond Earth, please take a look at our guide,
"Extraterrestrial Life," published in 2007, and online at:
.
>
> And everything you might possibly want to know about Iridium itself, is
in the Wikipedia entry at: .
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Science Reference Section/mrc
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> To check the status or the history of your library question(s), go to:
www.questionpoint.org...
=1&email=howdebm@earthlink.net&qid=4100727
>
> Please take a moment to fill out a survey at:
www.questionpoint.org...
uage=1&type=ask&qid=4100727
>
>
>
>
> You have submitted a question to the Science Science Reference
Section of the Science, Technology and Business Division of the Library of
Congress. Your question will be assigned to a reference specialist
and we will attempt to answer it within 5 business days. If, after 5
business days you have not received a response from us, please go to the
acknowledgement email that you will receive and reply to it, to dialog with
the reference section to determine the status of your question.
>
> Best wishes,
>
> The Science Reference Section
>
>



[edit on 22-1-2009 by PhyberDragon]



posted on Jan, 22 2009 @ 07:52 PM
link   



posted on Jan, 22 2009 @ 08:15 PM
link   
Unfortunately, I believe this is an empty claim by the President. I thought once envoked, a federal judge is needed to order the release of documents or force someone to testify as Bill Clinton learned. I also thought only the Executive that envoked the executive priviledge could release the sought after information and the protection of the data does not extend from one Executive to another.

Obama can release Whitehouse documents from previous adminstrations which are not sealed but not those already protected by executive priviledge. His access to the information is the same as yours and mine. I believe a Federal judge has already ordered the Bush Administration to preserve all records but it is likely only SCOTUS will force the Bush library to release the data, not Obama.



posted on Jan, 22 2009 @ 10:08 PM
link   
This is a typical sociological event being used to enforce the system to be, the one world government.

Bush was a puppet and i would not be surprised if the people behind the scenes planned this out all to well... Its very scary to see some posters on this site think this is a "good" thing as Barack will use George and co to further degrade the country when in reality he is working with the same people who destroyed it.

This plan is so genius that i wouldn't be surprised if people even thought i was a shill or trying to "take his thunder".

How much money did these people spend on Obama to get him into this cult status??? ALOT!! now you tell me why they need this! they need to make it look so cut and dry that the average person (and you) think its just that easy, well folks Obama is the prime subject to bring in a one world government, if you look at what he speaks about the red flags should be flying all over the place.

The Federal Reserve will not stop until the dollar is broken and this is EXACTLY what Obama IS doing... now he will blame everything on Bush and his neo-con friends when in reality the situation will become there card to a "new age", this has all been planned in a sense of what human beings react to on a social level... I must say its working absolutey perfect and i don't know how long it will take people to realize whats really going on with Obama.

He tricked everyone into believing in the mutant country, not for hope but for design. We need people all hyped up and willing to throw down everything for this to work, without that normality will continue.

Normality is not the problem the Federal Reserve and its interests are, i knew its not that black and white but they will drive the country into shambles all the while we think we are being set free... It sickens me to see my thoughts which i might add gave credence to serious doubt of whats really going on, but rest assured i have known these things personally for sometime and when i see them unfold and fool i stand in shock, the manipulation being used on us is something i have never EVER seen before.

The truth seen in stuff like this is so far from the end result that it dictates the end result.



posted on Jan, 22 2009 @ 10:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by PhyberDragon


In 2001 the LOC had in it's possession DOE Tennessee Valley Authority Martin Marietta at Cambridge Tennessee's Security Report to the Vice President which may explain their EPA and Cheney's meeting with the Energy Executives.
Here is my request for it and the response.


Cool, I hope you get some answers and share it here!

I see NO reasons why their meetings back then should have been something that was of national security to warrant the use of our president (at the time, Bush) to authorize "executive privilege"!

Hope you get the info and let us in on it!

Thanks, (in head of trime)



[edit on 1/22/2009 by Keyhole]



posted on Jan, 22 2009 @ 10:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by jam321
We already know Congress isn't going after Bush.



I don't know, there has been a couple of them (in Congress) that really wanted to see him fry on the skillet, who's to say they lost their passion for that cause yet?

And if documents come out, that Bush claimed "executive privilege" on, and it turns out that he was hiding things that had nothing to do with our military or national security, things that were, let's just say, "not right" who knows?

I think only time will tell.

[edit on 1/22/2009 by Keyhole]



posted on Jan, 22 2009 @ 11:00 PM
link   
reply to post by Keyhole
 



I don't know, there has been a couple of them (in Congress) that really wanted to see him fry on the skillet, who's to say they lost their passion for that cause yet?


First, Great thread.

The ones that did, I believe Paul and Kunishi(??), tried but it fell on deaf hears. I feel they at least should have been heard out and had an investigation to see if the claims merit more attention. No person should be above the law. The only conclusion I can come up with is that either the rest felt there was nothing to it or that they could be implicated for going along with the President. Just my opinion. If they had heard those few maybe some of this could have already been put to rest.

As far as time will tell, I agree with you 100%.



posted on Jan, 22 2009 @ 11:05 PM
link   
Im pretty sure this is just a bit over the top.

I really hope he does it but you're not going to get a disclosure or 9/11 truth.

Maybe something a little less dramatic.

Good thread!



posted on Jan, 23 2009 @ 12:40 AM
link   
I am totally aghast at some of the responses here on ATS, especially in this thread. It's as if the "They Live" satellite has been erected overnight! :shk:


Listen, I am much as an advocate for hope as the next person, but one must see through the cyclical trap. This repetition of history is not going to cut it folks!

So George Bush is out of office. Big woop. Barack Obama may fulfill some of his promises but what about the next president and the one after that? Problem - Reaction - Solution - BOOM! Faster than you can say "uncle", we will be in another large scale war. Another war that will perpetuate the disgusting, abhorrent, putrid 'circle of hate'!



A bad president prior, a new hopeful president elect, another future bad president, etc.

La..la..la ..Fairytale land...la..la."Now I think I will turn on the T.V. and see what our new 'hopeful' will do next" ....la la...

Anyway, you get the point. If Obama wants to make some real change and change that will last the rest of this country's life time, he should convene all the world's smartest political philosophers together and devise a solution to this nightmare we call "democracy".

No more wars, no more perpetuating this 'circle of freaking hate'. Peace for this country at last ...PLEASE!



[edit on 23-1-2009 by Unlimitedpossibilities]

[edit on 23-1-2009 by Unlimitedpossibilities]



posted on Jan, 23 2009 @ 01:49 AM
link   
is it too late or too cliche to say "Oh snap!" or "No he di'int!"?



new topics

top topics



 
46
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join