White House says it won't make visitor logs public

originally posted by: Boadicea

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Boadicea

The echo chambers are even more disheartening and destructive than the damn politicians because it actually enables and empowers the critters.

So many echos in the anti-Hillary threads.

Funny how its different on a different stage.

I sure don't see any difference! Trump this and Hillary that... There are echoes on every thread.

Let me guess.

You are pro Trump - - anti-Hillary.

a reply to: dukeofjive696969

Obama only released the "public" records.

He kept the secret one as "classified".

Time to plunge the drain.

originally posted by: dukeofjive696969

originally posted by: thesaneone

originally posted by: dukeofjive696969

originally posted by: thesaneone
Didn't Obama pick and choose which visitor logs us peons could see?

You forgot to blame hillary silly you.

This is about Trump and Obama.

Grow up.

Where does obama come in the story, no where.

Second paragraph of OPs quoted text...

originally posted by: neo96

The LEAST transparent President ever?

That was the last guy.

After all to this date we still don't have any proof 'he killed bin laden'.

Kind of like we don't have any real proof Bin Laden pulled 9/11 huh?

originally posted by: buster2010

originally posted by: neo96

The LEAST transparent President ever?

That was the last guy.

After all to this date we still don't have any proof 'he killed bin laden'.

Kind of like we don't have any real proof Bin Laden pulled 9/11 huh?

Well Clinton sure liked to blame the guy for a lot of snip now didn't he?

a reply to: neo96

You always fall back on the Clinton's or Obama somehow, you're very predictable.

a reply to: Indigo5

God damn, Trump's tweets, then vs now, are the perfect example of hypocrisy.


twitter.com...

Why is @BarackObama spending millions to try and hide his records? He is the least transparent President--ever--and he ran on transparency.

10:31 AM - 6 Jun 2012

Trump doesn't know what integrity is and neither does his supporters.

originally posted by: neo96

originally posted by: Swills
a reply to: Indigo5

Conservatives would have lost their collective minds if Obama did this because they thrived on picking apart the WH Visitor Log as much as they could spinning wacky conspiracies from them but since Trump is hiding this from the public I'm sure they'll support him 100% because partisan hackiness.

Conservatives don't have collective minds.

Liberals on the other hand.

The borg hive.

Oh no, you'd be dead wrong. This site alone has it's own hive minded conservatives all starring, flagging, defending each other on a hourly basis but just hop over to Donald's largest online community, The_Donald, and you'll see your Borg in action.

But of course, partisan political ideologies will continue to prevent you from acknowledging this so trying to convince you otherwise is always a complete waste of time. I mean, damn, you're the one person I can think of who to this day still defends the Bush/Cheney administration.

a reply to: Indigo5

Honestly...who cares? Anyone who was worth noting visiting the WH has always been scrubbed.

originally posted by: Swills
Oh no, you'd be dead wrong. This site alone has it's own hive minded conservatives all starring, flagging, defending each other on a hourly basis but just hop over to Donald's largest online community, The_Donald, and you'll see your Borg in action.

Says the person who probably has alternate facebook and twitter accounts with the name DeathToDeplorables.
You belong to the biggest collective hive mind the world has ever seen!
21st century western liberalism
A name that will reverberate throughout history as a well meaning painfully misguided set of ideals.
Good luck with that...

hero of the alt-reich. such bravery.

...b b but Clinton...

a reply to: Indigo5

Ok this was something Obama started in the name of transparency. But it states that he removed names off the list for national security purposes. So in other words it was transparent if he removed names but yet people want to continue this stupid policy. Why bother putting this out if your not going to show everyone who visited? Does anyone care if rob from topeka kansas went on a tour? Because thats all the list is going to show you if you remove other names for nat sec.

Seems like this was useless busy work under Obama admin. as far as i see it get Trump to promise not to remove names like Obama this becomes useful, If you dont its a waist of time.

Ethics watchdog CREW is already out with a statement this afternoon vowing that they’ll see Trump in court. There’s the problem, though: The White House under Obama has already fought this battle in court, and won. Disclosure of the logs is purely voluntarily by the president. Because of that, Time notes, Obama was able to carve out as many exceptions to disclosure as he liked, for whatever reason he liked — visitors involved in “sensitive” meetings could be omitted, personal guests (a.k.a. big-money political donors) could be omitted, and if all else failed, staffers could simply take visitors across the street to the coffee shop and meet with them there, bypassing the need to record their visit in the logs in the first place. All of which makes it odd that Trump is discontinuing the practice of disclosing them. Why not just follow Obama’s lead in promising to make the logs public and then turn them into swiss cheese with all sorts of inconvenient names omitted?

hotair.com...

Why doesn't he just follow Obama's example indeed?!

originally posted by: dragonridr
a reply to: Indigo5

Ok this was something Obama started in the name of transparency. But it states that he removed names off the list for national security purposes. So in other words it was transparent if he removed names but yet people want to continue this stupid policy. Why bother putting this out if your not going to show everyone who visited? Does anyone care if rob from topeka kansas went on a tour? Because thats all the list is going to show you if you remove other names for nat sec.

Seems like this was useless busy work under Obama admin. as far as i see it get Trump to promise not to remove names like Obama this becomes useful, If you dont its a waist of time.

Then why bother hiding it

Same logic as the tax returns.

originally posted by: fencesitter85

originally posted by: dragonridr
a reply to: Indigo5

Ok this was something Obama started in the name of transparency. But it states that he removed names off the list for national security purposes. So in other words it was transparent if he removed names but yet people want to continue this stupid policy. Why bother putting this out if your not going to show everyone who visited? Does anyone care if rob from topeka kansas went on a tour? Because thats all the list is going to show you if you remove other names for nat sec.

Seems like this was useless busy work under Obama admin. as far as i see it get Trump to promise not to remove names like Obama this becomes useful, If you dont its a waist of time.

Then why bother hiding it

Same logic as the tax returns.

Not bothering is not the same as hiding. It was just a complete waste of time consider this saving money not having to appoint a staffer to alter the list.

a reply to: Indigo5

It is entirely predictable that Trumps administration shows no intention of being honest about who comes and goes from the White House. Whereas the previous administration relied upon back channels to arrange things which go against the principles of the electorate, Trump seems to have no problem with bringing the undesirable elements with whom the people would rather he refrain from conspiring, directly into the halls which contain his power. Rather than make any effort to appear legitimate, he is perfectly happy to merely hide behind a refusal to show who he has visited with, as opposed to avoiding actually conversing directly with those undesirables, as no doubt the previous president did.

Some, the particularly unenlightened, will see this as merely another string on the bow comprising his honesty. Others however, will see this for what it is.

Situations have arisen during the period for which I have been actively ruminating on matters political, and arisen often, which necessitate that the observer cease to pay attention specifically to the tidbits of information fed one by the controlled media, and rely instead on observing matters unreported, or only reported in a limited sense. I often refer to those who fail to connect the big picture with the small event, as being incapable of "watching the right hand". It seems to me that all too often, folk are unwilling or incapable of observing the hand which holds the card, rather than the hand which appears to be doing all the work. Their inattention permits sleight of hand to be performed upon them, which, in the event that one is merely watching a magic show, is no bad thing. It permits a great deal more wonder to be experienced, than one might otherwise experience.

However, when one is about the business of keeping an eye on the powerful, so that one might know a measure of their intent, watching the wrong hand is a luxury that no one can afford, but many seem to prefer. Sleight of hand is impressive because it requires so much dexterity, commitment, skill and speed. It requires such timing as to be nearly impossible to perceive its action, unless one knows PRECISELY what one ought to be looking for to find the trick out. That is the sort of thing which the previous administration were intensely good at. But Trump has not the skill for that. Instead, he merely erects a grand curtain between the prying eye of the observer, and the trembling hands whose issue could be the life and death of a world.

While neither method actually achieves honesty or transparency in truth, one of them at least expresses an understanding on the part of the person in power, that they must APPEAR to do right, even if they in truth do great wrong. Trumps approach however, seems to be:

"F--- 'em. F--- the people, f--- their rights, f--- representation. I am not here to do the right thing. I am here to do what I want, AND get away with it, no matter how shady, illegal, unconstitutional, no matter how corporate influenced, no matter how bad for the people, no matter how immoral or likely it is that my actions will make more enemies for my nation than we had yesterday, and I demand to be able to do these things without the nuance necessary to make people believe that I fart rainbows and crap out gold dust. I will just put a wall between myself and the people, so they never know what industry owns me this week."

ok, it is funny.

a reply to: Annee

Let me guess.

You are pro Trump - - anti-Hillary.

Nope. I think they're ALL rotten to the core!!! I'm anti-partisan and pro-we the people. My vote was third party and purely strategic, hoping to break the stranglehold of the major parties.