Trump Administration Kills Open.Gov, Will Not Release White House Visitor Logs

from the beat-it,-serfs dept

It will never be said that the Trump presidency began with a presumption of openness. His pre-election refusal to release his tax returns set a bit of precedent in that regard. The immediate post-election muffling of government agency social media accounts made the administration's opacity goals… um… clearer.

So, in an unsurprising move, the Trump administration will be doing the opposite of the Obama administration. The American public will no longer have the privilege of keeping tabs on White House visitors. (h/t Alex Howard)

The Trump Administration will not disclose logs of those who visit the White House complex, breaking with his predecessor, the White House announced Friday.

The administration is justifying this reversal with the usual: favorable interpretations of FOIA lawsuit rulings and "national security" mumbling.

White House communications director Michael Dubke said the decision to reverse the Obama-era policy was due to “the grave national security risks and privacy concerns of the hundreds of thousands of visitors annually.” Instead, the Trump Administration is relying on a federal court ruling that most of the logs are “presidential records” and are not subject to the Freedom of Information Act.

Yes, it's sadly true. The administration can use this ruling to lock the public out of this small layer of transparency. The rest of it, however, is bullshit.

Whatever "national security risks" may exist during White House visits should be addressed by intelligence agencies and the Secret Service rather than being withheld from the public. The White House hosts top foreign government officials all the time and it is always a "national security risk." Disclosing who's visited the White House AFTER THEY'VE ALREADY LEFT does zero damage to national security.

Additionally, there are likely several visitors to the White House every year that aren't logged for security reasons, and if it's really that much of a concern, the administration could release the logs with redactions, like Obama did.

As for visitors who aren't government officials (domestic or foreign), it's pretty imaginative to assume visits to the most well-known home of public servants in the free world carry with it some form of unbreachable privacy.

On top of everything else, it's extremely hypocritical for the administration to pretend this is about privacy and security when the president has been hosting government official get-togethers at resorts -- a place where logs aren't kept and "national security risks" seem to be less of a concern than how many holes Trump can fit in between government business.

So, to further distance himself from the people he serves (and the people who elected him), Trump and his administration have shut down the transparency portal put in place by the previous Commander-in-Chief:

White House officials said the Administration is ending the contract for Open.gov, the Obama-era site that hosted the visitor records along with staff financial disclosures, salaries, and appointments.

The administration can't even perform this move without meaningless, self-justifying dissembling. It's not about keeping secrets, of course. It's about saving taxpayers money [eyeroll]:

An official said it would save $70,000 through 2020 and that the removed disclosures, salaries and appointments would be integrated into WhiteHouse.gov in the coming months.

Thanks, Trump. I love the phrase "coming months," which means anytime between 2018 and never. The smart money's on not seeing any financial disclosures until nearly a year from now, at the earliest. The only way we'll see anything sooner is if some White House cabinet scandal manages to dislodge it first. Plus, there's this, from Trump himself, who obviously has no idea his past tweets are accessible by everyone:

If you can't see the tweet, it's Trump calling out Obama for doing the same thing Trump is now doing: rolling back a predecessor's openness.

Why does Obama believe he shouldn't comply with record releases that his predecessors did of their own volition? Hiding something?

President Obama was better talking about transparency than engaging in it. President Trump, on the other hand, has expressed zero interest in transparency and appears to be rolling back anything "open" Obama grudgingly put into place. Maybe it's better to have White House animosity towards openness and accountability right there on the surface. But right now, it really doesn't feel like an improvement.


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 17 Apr 2017 @ 9:35am

    We already know that Trump is a turd, and why this is news is questionable.

    Every administration hides shit. It's one of the reasons you are a fool if you think this is a democracy. It is simply not true, never was, and likely never will be. Sure we have some democratic similarities, but we are a republic. We elect people we think will best serve our interests... or at least that is the idea.

    Obama was just smart enough to play along with the idea of "openness" Trump just does not give a flat fuck at all.

    Maybe if you placed a pussy hat on top of openness, Trump might grab it!

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 17 Apr 2017 @ 9:53am

      Re:

      "We elect people"

      I'm not so sure about this anymore.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Mike Masnick (profile), 17 Apr 2017 @ 10:35am

      Re:

      We already know that Trump is a turd, and why this is news is questionable.

      No offense, but to me the worst commenter we get is the one who pulls out the bullshit "why is this news?" savvy cynic line. It's news because it fucking matters. It doesn't matter if "all politicians are bad." It's news when someone does something bad that we can report on. I know, I know, you're so brilliant and above all this shit that you think it looks cool to pretend that everyone's equally bad and "it's not news" when one does something bad.

      Except you're wrong. It is news. And you don't look cool and savvy. You look like a naive cynical jackass. It was news when Obama did bad stuff and it's news when Trump does bad stuff, and we're going to report on it either way.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
        identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 17 Apr 2017 @ 10:57am

        Re: Re:

        ha ha ha... did you feel butt hurt?

        It's not news because it is nothing new. It WILL be news when someone comes along and bucks the trend, that is news!

        Sure we can have a difference of opinion on what is and is not news, but since I already KNOW THIS, it cannot be news! I think everyone else already knows it too! Sure there is a case to be make on being redundant, but there a probably better issues to report than secretive presidents doing secretive things. it is literally part of the territory!

        Naive? Over already knowing this an telling you I don't think this is news because everyone likely knows this? Okay Hoss... if your radar is that screwed up, then why should I listen to any other news stories you got huh? They are likely out of focus as well.

        Cynical Jackass? Man, I gotta tell ya, you might be spot on with that one. Watching you fruit loop suck your party dicks with sycophancy does that to folks. I hate all the pro trump, pro obama, pro bush, & pro hillary crowds.

        If you were willing to or did vote for a single one of those, you have run out of political currency and deserve no respect!

        So excuse me and my cynical ass self for watching you fucking turds work your hardest to ensure that George Washington's farewell address concerns come to life. Hell, it has already been done, we are just lowering the fucking pendulum & guillotine a little bit more here!

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 17 Apr 2017 @ 11:06am

          Re: Re: Re:

          "It's not news because it is nothing new"

          I guess I am confused. What is news then? I thought this was news. Trump rolling back transparency is fairly important news in my opinion no matter what it is in. Trump even justifies it by claiming it will save $70,000 while at the same times spends millions going to Florida every weekend.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
            identicon
            Anonymous Coward, 17 Apr 2017 @ 11:19am

            Re: Re: Re: Re:

            I fully accept that my opinion of news is different than yours.

            You think Trump is rolling back transparency, well he is not, it just looks that way because people, ignorantly, thought there was any transparency to begin with. There is a word for giving people what they want, without actually giving them what they want. It is called Deception!

            Anyone that believes this to be "new information" should realize that they just revealed that they are ignorant about this problem. There a multiple ways to hide the truth and this story is more akin to bitching about the process of being bad than the problem of being bad.

            Since stories like this have yet to change a single mind and should already be well known, I question its value as news on those merits.

            Now being that there are loads of lost and ignorant sheep in the electorate (we did vote in Bush, Obama, and now Trump after all), maybe it really is news, I am just too well informed to see it that way possibly. I have been debating this shit since Clintoon was president!

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Baron von Robber, 17 Apr 2017 @ 11:08am

          Re: Re: Re:

          Wee a knuckdragging troll!

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
            identicon
            Anonymous Coward, 17 Apr 2017 @ 11:25am

            Re: Re: Re: Re:

            Well no, just making a point and you didn't like it.

            If your only response is ad hominem attack, then like many others have stated, you admit that you lost the argument!

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            • identicon
              Baron von Robber, 17 Apr 2017 @ 11:30am

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

              Trollolol!

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
                identicon
                Anonymous Coward, 17 Apr 2017 @ 12:08pm

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                here's a little diddy, about baron von robber;
                calls folks a troll, and then just slobbers;
                thinks hes a champ, with ears all damp;
                just smacking keyboard, till tha fingas be cramped!

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                • identicon
                  Baron von Robber, 17 Apr 2017 @ 12:13pm

                  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                  Roll with the troll

                  reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                  • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
                    identicon
                    Anonymous Coward, 17 Apr 2017 @ 12:31pm

                    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                    Glad I have a fan now, I can't promise I will come up with more, but I may reuse this work in the future.

                    I do apologize that I have you at a disadvantage since I always post as an AC and you have the brass to use an account!

                    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            • identicon
              Anonymous Coward, 17 Apr 2017 @ 4:34pm

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

              " .. just making a point and you didn't like it."

              I missed it, what was your point again?

              Hmmm, best I can tell is:
              Let's see, if this dude knows something happened then no one should tell anyone else because it is not news to him - brilliant! Must be one of those "Breaking News" copyright thingies.

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 17 Apr 2017 @ 11:13am

          Re: Re: Re:

          Why are you even here if it's not news? I think we all know the real reason. A desperate need for attention and validation, coupled with a need to belittle others to cover up your feelings of inadequacy. It certainly isn't your witty repartee. Because the "I too cool for you all sheelpe" has been done to death by better people than you.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • identicon
            Anonymous Coward, 17 Apr 2017 @ 11:22am

            Re: Re: Re: Re:

            I have to first read the article to make that determination.

            Or are you recommending that I just be like many others and make my assumptions based on the title alone? Something tells me that you would be bitching about that, had I taken your logical fallacy towards its usual and unfortunate end.

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            • identicon
              Anonymous Coward, 18 Apr 2017 @ 7:31am

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

              "I have to first read the article to make that determination."

              Yes, you have to read it first (before anyone else) in order to determine whether others should be allowed to see it because you are the self appointed censor for all our data input. Thank you for your continuing effort in this field as there are many cases where the public should not be made aware of their pending doom ... errr I mean their future Great America.

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 17 Apr 2017 @ 11:17am

          Re: Re: Re:

          So then you're not free to fuck off and read something less redundant?

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • identicon
            Anonymous Coward, 17 Apr 2017 @ 11:30am

            Re: Re: Re: Re:

            I like Techdirt, so I usually read their articles, and offer my comments. You are welcome to work to make TD an echo chamber, I know you guys see the appeal of that, but that will only make TD become stale and pointless.

            Very few things in this world can spur others into vibrancy like political discourse! It has started no wars, but it sure gets blamed a lot for them! The ONLY thing(s) that starts wars is Money/Power. Two items so intertwined you can't separate them!

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            • identicon
              Anonymous Coward, 18 Apr 2017 @ 7:35am

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

              "The ONLY thing(s) that starts wars is Money/Power."

              Really - stupidity never enters the equation, lol.




              Yes, it is an echo chamber when things you disagree with are discussed and it is a great site when things you do agree with are discussed as this is the definition of echo chamber ... amirite?

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          William Braunfeld, 17 Apr 2017 @ 1:01pm

          Re: Re: Re:

          Hello! I have a question for you.

          It appears that you are making one of two possible points here; either it is not news if EVERYONE already knows it, or it is not news if YOU already know it. Can you please clarify which you mean?
          If you meant the first point, I believe most of the comments here already disprove your point. In fact, not only did I not know that Trump was shutting down Open.gov, I actually come to Techdirt for exacly that sort of information, meaning it is certainly news at least to me. You may be sure that "everyone" knows it, but I am pretty sure there are others like me; sureity isn't much of a standard anyhow.
          If your point is the latter, well... there isn't much to argue against. Don't expect any agreement outside your own head, though.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    AC, 17 Apr 2017 @ 9:44am

    So, if/when this information shows up on WhiteHouse.gov, a retraction of this article will be made? Just checking, ya know - otherwise the bias would be just too obvious.

    Obama kept secrets about Fast and Furious, the IRS scandal/Lois Lerner, Bengazi, the Clinton email scandal and probably a dozen other things which are WAY more important than the visitor's log at the WH. Noted here is the lack of previous outrage on the part of TD.

    Hypocrites.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Baron von Robber, 17 Apr 2017 @ 9:56am

      Re:

      Yea, never mind about Russian connections, filling gov jobs with lobbyists, nepotism, no tax disclosures (which would clear the Russian issue), removal of privacy rule with ISPs, going golfing the 16th time at taxpayer's expense (in less than one year compared to Obama's 8 years) saying he would work harder than Obama, making us pay for the wall (not Mexico), not repealing Obamacare, not killing off ISIS like he said he would, saying we should not attack Syria (then attacks Syria), locking up Hillary (and not locking her up), victim of a wire tapp (sic) (without evidence of it), yea, no hypocrites here.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 17 Apr 2017 @ 9:57am

      Re:

      Fast and Furious was Bush leftovers
      IRS scandal was made up silliness
      Benghazi was complete bullshit
      Clinton email was a mole hill
      dozen other things - yeah, probably (shrug)

      What else ya got ... anything of substance?

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 17 Apr 2017 @ 10:04am

      Re:

      Bengazi

      You fuckers investigated it 7 times...are you that incompetent to fuck up an investigation not once, not twice, but 7 times?

      Finally glad to hear one of you dipshits admit it.

      the Clinton email scandal

      I'm still waiting for Trump to lock her up like he promised. Along with securing a check from Mexico for your stupid fucking wall.

      So, if/when this information shows up on WhiteHouse.gov, a retraction of this article will be made?

      I'd trust TD to print a retraction more than Trump actually keeping a promise.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 17 Apr 2017 @ 10:15am

      Re:

      What are you talking about? Techdirt has several stories on those points you brought up. Did you even try using the Techdirt search function. Took me .31 seconds to see you were just blow hot air. There have been hundreds of stories about the last administration and secrecy. I don't always agree with Techdirt but haven't ever seen them as hypocrites. Please point out with links if I am wrong. I have only read their articles for the past few years so there may be something I missed. I do think both Trump and Obama have been hypocrites at one time or another. Obama at least had some style while Trump just seems to blunder into things and change his mind on a whim.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 17 Apr 2017 @ 10:19am

        Re: Re:

        I doubt that it only took you .31 seconds!

        I want to see video proof of your claims!

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 17 Apr 2017 @ 10:28am

          Re: Re: Re:

          Sorry. Wasn't as fast as last time. Link

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • identicon
            Anonymous Coward, 17 Apr 2017 @ 11:44am

            Re: Re: Re: Re:

            no no no, you misunderstand... that is only how long it took TD to produce results. I was asking you to prove something you could not prove as in... proving that in just .31 seconds you completed the search AND read all the titles of the article to understand that they were 1. TD Articles and 2. Spoke to the subject at hand. Had you stated that it only took you seconds...

            Anyway, I was just yanking your chain, I though you new that... I guess people really do need to add the /s at the end.

            So I was really intending to infer that you are correct, a little bit of searching would have benefited the person you were responding too.

            That said, he did mention lack of outrage, which on a technical level has nothing to do with TD having published any articles on it. It could be that their perception is that they felt no outrage from the articles and TD and the communities stance on the subject matter. I an understand this to a small degree as I have a similar view point. TD may have an article but I feel a different level of outrage or concern in some of them compared to others.

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            • icon
              Roger Strong (profile), 17 Apr 2017 @ 11:50am

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

              How are you calibrating your outrage meter?

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              • identicon
                Anonymous Coward, 17 Apr 2017 @ 11:57am

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                Like everyone else, very biased!

                Take this story for example. I am more outraged at the fact that idiot citizens are not in a march demanding that the government stop hiding shit, creating secret courts, holding secret interpretations of laws. Keeping diplomatic communications secret (for long), and just generally keeping multiple new bills secret until the last minute!

                I am not outraged or consider it news in the least to be told that Trump is just like Obama... keeps secrets from us! It's going to happen and manor in which it happens is of very little consequence compared to the fact of it happening!

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                • icon
                  Roger Strong (profile), 17 Apr 2017 @ 12:53pm

                  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                  Your defense of Trump - insisting that his level of transparency is just like Obama's - would be more credible if it weren't in response to a story about Trump doing away with Obama-era transparency.

                  reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                  • identicon
                    Anonymous Coward, 17 Apr 2017 @ 4:38pm

                    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                    Oh ... but they're all the same!

                    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                    • identicon
                      Anonymous Coward, 17 Apr 2017 @ 11:00pm

                      Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                      The thought of all things being equal in politics is a bit sickening and extremely disenfranchising politically.

                      Why can't we just agree that not everything being done politically is equal and that most people want something good for USA but disagree on how to do it?

                      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                      • identicon
                        Anonymous Coward, 18 Apr 2017 @ 7:43am

                        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                        Why can't we all just tell the truth?
                        Lies come in many forms.

                        Claiming that both parties do it and therefore both parties are the same is a simple argument intended to sway simple people, it ignores the extent to which the public is being lied to.

                        For example, some politicians use lies of omission because of sensitive info or other such restrains while other politicians blatantly lie to your face. But these two are supposed to be equal?

                        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            • identicon
              Anonymous Coward, 17 Apr 2017 @ 12:15pm

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

              You comment only made me put proof behind my comment. It wouldn't matter if there was a /s or not. I would have still posted it. Only takes about a minute to post it and it also backed up my original point to the other poster. But I thought you knew that.

              I did respond to the lack of outrage in my first message but here is a bit more of my view of that. Obama was a lot more skilled at moving the spotlight. Also, his continued abuses to transparency happened for so long that it was becoming apathetic to everyone. Trump is new and is taking the bull in the china shop approach. He likes the spotlight to be him at all times. I believe he he sets things up to be chaotic and the comes up this "great" solution. So yes there is definitely more outrage but I bet in 6-7 years, everyone will be apathetic instead of outraged. I sure hope it is only 1 term though.

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              • identicon
                Anonymous Coward, 17 Apr 2017 @ 12:27pm

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                I do see where you pointed out the hypocrisy part. But for me that did not address the outrage. But if that was your intent, then I can accept that, I just mistook your aim.

                I do agree with you that Obama was far more skilled at moving the spotlight. Trump has always been a caricature, I think that is oddly what attracts so many people. I am beginning to think, its an accidentally genius move, because people think that if he lies this terribly then we can trust him more than people that lie far better.

                I do not subscribe to that logic, but apparently many folks do.

                An on the Apathy, I think you hit the nail on the head there. Most people don't seem to care, I mean, they talk like they do, but they still get out and vote that party ticket. I am more of an original liberal, I hate the left and the right, I think liberal has become the new conservative, and conservative has become the new right and the old right moved to alt-right.

                I espouse liberty before everything else. The Constitution is critical and important. Governments #1 job is to ensure my liberty just as stated in the Declaration of Independence. The idea that Government should be in the business of protecting my life is an anathema to liberty! Because protecting life is the "Armed" vehicle in which they ride to rob our liberties!

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 17 Apr 2017 @ 1:44pm

      Re:

      Oh look, a bunch of non-scandals that you regurgitated from Fox News.

      Go educate yourself.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Michael, 17 Apr 2017 @ 9:51am

    “the grave national security risks and privacy concerns of the hundreds of thousands of visitors annually.”


    But it's just metadata...

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    TheKid, 17 Apr 2017 @ 9:53am

    This is preferrable...

    ... to having a list and falsifying it like the previous administration.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    The Orange Monster, 17 Apr 2017 @ 10:00am

    Yes - hiding many things

    "Why does Obama believe he shouldn't comply with record releases that his predecessors did of their own volition? Hiding something?"

    - Donald Trump ... 30 Oct 2012

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 17 Apr 2017 @ 10:21am

      Re: Yes - hiding many things

      I had a suspicion about why he wouldn't release his tax return. I always thought he was hiding that he wasn't actually a billionaire. His ego couldn't handle the public backlash if everyone found out he was only a multimillionaire.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Baron von Robber, 17 Apr 2017 @ 11:06am

        Re: Re: Yes - hiding many things

        Or that he owes Russian banks lots of money that he can't pay back. Ergo, friends with benefits for Russia.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 17 Apr 2017 @ 11:50am

          Re: Re: Re: Yes - hiding many things

          This may be the most intelligent thing you might have EVER said. And that is a compliment!

          That said, it is in the public interest to know if Trump is financially compromised. His financial information or the financial information of ANY public official for that matter should be "by law", public data!

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Roger Strong (profile), 17 Apr 2017 @ 10:02am

    This is Different...

    Previous administrations didn't want to be linked to certain visitors.

    Now it's the visitors who don't want to be linked to a certain administration.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 17 Apr 2017 @ 10:18am

      Re: This is Different...

      lol, this one is funny!

      But no, its the same problem as before... those in power just like to hide what they are doing for the obvious reasons. They all just like to hide them in different ways!

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 17 Apr 2017 @ 11:58am

        Re: Re: This is Different...

        Some things like visitor logs made conspiracies run rampant and didn't reveal anything relevant about what the meeting was about. Thus it didn't actually inform a relevant political discussion as much as inform rumours, fake news and certainly some of the oppositional conspiracies (certain republican radio hosts etc. excel at that). The economic side is a lot more sinister, but we will see when the storm ends and the hurricane begins.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 17 Apr 2017 @ 12:16pm

          Re: Re: Re: This is Different...

          It is my opinion that these conspiracies are played to great effect.

          Take the whole Obama is not native born issue. I think it was a genius move to play that the way he did. Obama was born to an American citizen which qualifies him as being a citizen in my book. He sure kept a lot of the loonies on the run with it, and that speaks to some form of genius or just pure luck and the appearance of it. I just didn't like Obama period and the way people latched onto that story was more of a distraction than anything worthwhile.

          So I am certain these all play into conspiracies that play well with certain political narratives, but that is a huge problem. Like you said, it still keep citizens ignorant and foments rumors that can easily be played into partizan politics for each parties base.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • identicon
            Anonymous Coward, 17 Apr 2017 @ 11:09pm

            Re: Re: Re: Re: This is Different...

            The distractions and red herrings are too prominent in politics today. It is not because these things are credible or interesting, but the media can cook soup on it for years.

            It is much more interesting if the media digged more into internationalism and how deals between nations work. That would be extremely informative in domestic debates, since it reveals more about what is behind the deals.

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 17 Apr 2017 @ 1:03pm

    To be fair (and rational about it), POTUS is not required to release his tax returns ever, either before the election nor after it. It's well within his (or her) right to refuse to do so. This is largely a political stunt rather than any real kind of "transparency" as the IRS can audit the President and anyone else they want to at any time.

    If I were President, I wouldn't release my tax returns either, because it's no one's business other than mine and the IRS. This is not a matter of supporting the man or the office, but rather a slap in the face of people advancing conspiracies over a lack of release. If you're for privacy, but demand someone (anyone) turn over their personal financial records to the public for some vague hand waving notion of "transparency" then you're a damned hypocrite. It shouldn't matter if the man was your worst enemy, your representative in government, or your own finances, privacy for one and not someone else is bullshit.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Baron von Robber, 17 Apr 2017 @ 1:14pm

      Re:

      The reason (if you know how) tax returns were released was due to the corruption of the White House in the 70s with Spiro Agnew.
      "I am not a crook" - Nixon. Ever since then, till now, candidates would show their returns for all to see they were not crooks. Looks like Drumpf is a crook.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Nixon

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Roger Strong (profile), 17 Apr 2017 @ 1:51pm

      Re:

      If I were President, I wouldn't release my tax returns either, because it's no one's business other than mine and the IRS.

      Incorrect. We're talking about someone with business holdings and debts not just in Russia and America but around the world. Americans have every right to know who he's beholden to and who can put pressure on him by threatening his businesses.

      That's also why previous Presidents have divested themselves of business holdings or put them in a blind trust. Something else that Trump has refused to do.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 17 Apr 2017 @ 1:53pm

      Re:

      but rather a slap in the face of people advancing conspiracies over a lack of release

      But some conspiracies are good, right?

      Pizzagate?

      Obama's birth certificate?

      Climate change being a Chinese hoax?

      Mexico will pay for the wall?

      Why the fucking fuck doesn't he slap those ridiculous fucking theories first?

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      That One Guy (profile), 17 Apr 2017 @ 2:00pm

      When your choices can affect millions, it's more than just 'your business'

      Sure, absolutely, they can refuse to do so. The public is also well within their rights to call them out on it and point out that refusing to do so opens up questions.

      As for the hypocrisy angle, no, not really.

      It's not so much a 'privacy' issues as it is a 'Does the president have financial ties to certain groups/industries/individuals that might influence their actions while in office?' As a hypothetical example, if a town elects a mayor, it would be nice to know beforehand that said mayor has a financial stake in a local business, as it's likely to impact any actions they take that might benefit or be detrimental to that business, and therefore themself.

      Move from mayor to president and that issue becomes a lot more important, especially when talking about the current president, given Trump still maintains ties to his businesses.

      Your average person isn't likely to have a huge impact on those around them, so their tax returns aren't really important. Someone in the gorram White House on the other hand can easily impact millions with their decisions, so who and what they have ties with most certainly does matter.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 17 Apr 2017 @ 4:47pm

      Re:

      I think anyone given a security clearance is required to divulge loads of info (to whatever agency) and not just financial in nature, hopefully this requirement has not been circumvented. It's not just the irs that access to his returns.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Se Habla Espol, 18 Apr 2017 @ 10:51am

        Re: Re:

        Methinks you would find, were you to look, that POTUS has a statutory clearance for everything. In other words, the holder of the office has no need to go through any of the normal procedures, and is subject to none of the requirements to divulge anything.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 19 Apr 2017 @ 7:33am

          Re: Re: Re:

          Could it be that the three letter agencies would look a bit on their own?

          Nah ... that would never happen.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    AC, 17 Apr 2017 @ 2:59pm

    Transparency and Obama

    Lol. You Obama fanbois are very amusing. How many of you know how he *actually* got elected to be a senator? How he ran "unopposed" for the seat after the previous senator resigned? Anyone remember why the previous senator resigned? Anyone remember how many people who also wanted to run for that seat who were eliminated from that ballot because their eligibility was removed beforehand? (5) How long was he a Senator before he started running for President?

    Obama started out opaque, and kept being that way his entire presidency while shouting to the heavens that he was transparent. Now you guys are all butthurt because Trump is being upfront about being less than transparent?

    Hilarious!

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 17 Apr 2017 @ 4:01pm

    Keep throwing good money after bad, I will still pay my taxes. Seems the present POTUS has no rights, civil or otherwise.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 17 Apr 2017 @ 10:45pm

    "So, in an unsurprising move, the Trump administration will be doing the opposite of the Obama administration"

    There the phucktard goes again... trying to imply that "somehow" the Obama administration was "open" and "honest", when he knows good and goddamn well thats a lie of the highest caliber.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 18 Apr 2017 @ 5:27am

      Re:

      You can say fuck on the internet. Your mommy isn't here.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Roger Strong (profile), 18 Apr 2017 @ 7:05am

      Re:

      Articles on this site often criticized the Obama administration for not being open, among other things.

      Republicans make things even LESS open, and you think it's dishonest to criticize them?

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 18 Apr 2017 @ 7:47am

        Re: Re:

        Yes, that is their mindset

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 20 Apr 2017 @ 10:34am

        Re: Re:

        It's dishonest to imply that the lesser of two evils is suddenly respectable when convenient to one's never ending Trump bashathon.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          William Braunfeld, 20 Apr 2017 @ 2:53pm

          Re: Re: Re:

          No, what is dishonest is to quote a single line from an article, out of context, and use it to broadly declare someone making a point they're not making, especially when it's an issue they've specifically railed against repeatedly in the past.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 18 Apr 2017 @ 8:19am

    Nice being brigaded by trolls from /r/idiot (r/the_donald)

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Use markdown for basic formatting. HTML is no longer supported.
  Save me a cookie
Follow Techdirt
Insider Shop - Show Your Support!

Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads

Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.