In 2001, * reversed the right of public access to presidential papers.

[babylonsister]

What did he know then, what was he trying to or expecting to hide? For a man and admin who seem to have no foresight, he sure tried/tries to cover his ass.


http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/17/opinion/17sun2.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

Presidential Stone Walls
Published: June 17, 2007

The template for the Bush administration’s mania for secrecy was signed by the president six years ago — Executive Order 13233, reversing the presumption of right of public access to presidential papers. This basic right of taxpayers and historians alike was embedded in the 1978 laws enacted after the Nixon administration. The reforms established a reasonable 12-year waiting period for access. But Mr. Bush’s reversal lets presidents or vice presidents (guess who?) keep their records sealed in perpetuity unless they or their heirs approve access.

Fortunately, Congress is in the process of demonstrating that such hermetic devotion to secrecy has no place in a democracy. Mr. Bush’s order would be rescinded by a proposal approved overwhelmingly in the House in March and now making its way to passage in the Senate. The White House, of course, is vowing to veto any final bill. So it is important that the Senate re-establish the public’s obvious right to historical transparency with the same veto-proof support achieved in the House.

Otherwise, Mr. Bush’s dictum will stand, with no explanation required for denying requests, nor any appeal allowed. The executive order leaves a costly, lengthy lawsuit as Americans’ only avenue of possible redress.

Hiding secrets and embarrassments may be a predictable part of a politician’s instinct for survival. But attempting to enshrine this instinct timelessly is a stain on the Constitution and an insult to history. The administration insists that only 64 of more than two million pages have been sealed thus far. They would be a good place to start reading once Congress re-establishes the public’s right to know.

[kenny blankenship]

1. Everything must be exposed. Every document made public. Every dungeon excavated.

A thousand years of sunlight may not be enough to disinfect the corruption that chokes our system of government. No possible effort to dig out the rottenness can be spared.

[napi21]

2. Yep, and he sealed Poppy's papers too!

At the time, I figured he made that ex. order to protect Poppy from unknown BS from Iran Contra. Now, I'm not so sure.

[Horse with no Name]

5. Didn't he seal Clinton's papers

I read an interesting article about that and that it was possibly a motivating factor in what Sandy Berger did.

[napi21]

6. Yes, I believe all Presidential papers from Poppy on, which

of course includes Clinton. I think Clinton objected but, as usual, Shrub wouldn't budge.

[lonestarnot]

3. Serial killer has also tried to destroy FOIA

[Horse with no Name]

4. They have left no stone unturned while they were in the planning stages

of this coup. None.

[HCE SuiGeneris]

7. You know that this was a directive straight from the dick.

Illegal elections, and illegal occupation of office, needs much attention to secrecy.

[CGowen]

8. A dictatorship would be a heck of a lot easier, there's no question about it. n/t

[The Backlash Cometh]

9. I think he was hiding plans that were hatched when Poppy Bush was

president. Think about it. Rumsferrata and co., pretty much went ahead with plans that were poo-poo'd in the early 90s. And worse, they did nasty things that they wanted no one to know about.

White men have lots of secrets. That's why they appear to be so effective in positions of leadership. They know how to hide their mistakes.

[NobleCynic]

10. I think this might have more to do with Reagan than Bush

And which term of Reagan's presidency he was diagnosed with Alzheimer's in.

[WinkyDink]

11. Could a Democratic President un-do this?

Should I ask Ralph "They're All the Same" Nader?