Trump - A born liar

That's exactly the reason why Hillary didn't want to release her e-mails, but I doubt that's the reason why Trump is waiting to release his. After all, if tax attorneys told him to wait, he should wait, right? After all, his tax records are his personal business unlike Hillary's e-mails which belong to the government (in other words, "the people"). Right?

 

Exactly! But the spin twins here need to stand behind the lies as not to lose face. They have never had the courage to tell the truth in the face of an obvious lie but if it is Clinton or any other Democrat, oh, well then they perceived everything as all lies and dishonesty.

What I want to know is how do you get to be an adult and live like that? They remind me of children. No wonder Trump's 5th grade rhetoric is so appealing to them. Every time they say anything, I just want to say GROW UP!

If you have the ability to be so intellectually dishonest with yourself, what kind of psycho are you? It must be a southern thing. I admit to not wanting to deal with these children some days and end up just telling them to go fuck themselves. I think any intelligent person can only suffer fools for so long and these fools are extremely committed to utter stupidity. I guess it could be worse, at least I get to turn off the inter-webs and get away from them. Imagine being exposed to them every day. OUCH!

 

That's a stupid lie on your part. Clinton asked that her emails be released. All the underlining in the world won't help that lie.

 

Hillary the harridan, a born tyrant!

 

Hillary the harridan is too scared to release her medical records. Hillary the harridan is too scared to release her billing records from the Rose law firm. Hillary the harridan is too scared to release her e-mails. And finally, IHopeless1 is too scared to call me a chump face-to-face! Ha, ha, ha, ha, haaaaaa!!!!!!!!!!

 

And just how many years after the court order were they released? And just how were those ILLEGAL "top secret" and "SAP' email to be released?

 

Idiot. Hillary did not act PROACTIVELY to release the emails, rather, her actions were REACTIVE in light of the FOIA requests being filed. She knew she had no choice at that point and made a Hail Mary pass to make it seem like she was being transparent. The funny thing is, you actually fell for it.

 

Politicians are generally immune from FOIs requests.

 

Ah! Would you care to try that again. Then you might try to convince Judge Emmet G. Sullivan.

 

Not too many, well, except for Obama who thinks he is above the law:

WASHINGTON — The White House is removing a federal regulation that subjects its Office of Administration to the Freedom of Information Act, making official a policy under Presidents Bush and Obama to reject requests for records to that office.

The White House said the cleanup of FOIA regulations is consistent with court rulings that hold that the office is not subject to the transparency law. The office handles, among other things, White House record-keeping duties like the archiving of e-mails.

But the timing of the move raised eyebrows among transparency advocates, coming on National Freedom of Information Day and during a national debate over the preservation of Obama administration records. It's also Sunshine Week, an effort by news organizations and watchdog groups to highlight issues of government transparency.

"The irony of this being Sunshine Week is not lost on me," said Anne Weismann of the liberal Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, or CREW.

"It is completely out of step with the president's supposed commitment to transparency," she said. "That is a critical office, especially if you want to know, for example, how the White House is dealing with e-mail."

 

In Michigan, the governor and the legislature are immune, for example. I'll bet that most, if not all, states have that immunity, as well as the federal equivalency, the President, the Administration and the legislature, maybe even the judiciary. That's not "not too many", that's nearly "all", with the possible exception of government agencies. Even then, I'd bet a lot of them are immune. Then there's the military. A lot of the stuff the military does is immune from FOI requests.

 

Emails have had an interesting history, in regards to the National Archives and administration's attempts to purge them from history:

E-mail

In the case of Scott Armstrong v. Executive Office of the President, et al., the White House used the PROFS computer communications software. With encryption designed for secure messaging, PROFS notes concerning the Iran-Contra affair (arms-for-hostages) under the Reagan Administration were insulated. However, they were also backed up and transferred to paper memos. The National Security Council, on the eve of President George H.W. Bush's inauguration, planned to destroy these records. The National Security Archive, Armstrong's association for the preservation of government historical documents, obtained an injunction in Federal District Court against the head, John Fawcett, of the National Archives and Records Administration and the National Security Council's purging of PROFS records. A Temporary Restraining Order was approved by Senior U.S. District Court Judge Barrington D. Parker. Suit was filed at District Court under Judge Richey, who upheld the injunction of PROFS records.

Richey gave a further injunction to prevent a purging of the George H.W. Bush's administration's records as well. On counts of leaving the White House clean for the new Clinton Administration, the Bush group appealed but was denied its request. Finally, the Clinton Administration appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals, stating that the National Security Council was not truly an agency but a group of aides to the President and thus not subject to FOIA regulations. Under the Presidential Records Act, "FOIA requests for NSC [could] not be filed until five years after the president ha[d] left office... or twelve years if the records [were] classified." The Clinton administration won, and the National Security Archive was not granted a writ of certiorari by the Supreme Court on these grounds. According to Scott Armstrong, taking into account labor and material costs, the three presidential administrations spent almost $9.3 million on contesting the National Security Archive FOIA requests for PROFS e-mail records.

Source

 

But, when you go to the horse mouth you will find that certain types of information is exempt, but NO POLITICIANS are specifically exempted - INCLUDING THE PRESIDENT. Regarding your post above, I am sure NSA records fall into at least one of the exemptions, but NOT because it had to do with the president.

Per FOIA.gov;

What are FOIA exemptions?

Not all records can be released under the FOIA. Congress established certain categories of information that are not required to be released in response to a FOIA request because release would be harmful to a government or private interest. These categories are called "exemptions" from disclosures. Still, even if an exemption applies, agencies may use their discretion to release information when there is no foreseeable harm in doing so and disclosure is not otherwise prohibited by law. There are nine categories of exempt information and each is described below.

Exemption 1: Information that is classified to protect national security.

Exemption 2: Information related solely to the internal personnel rules and practices of an agency.

Exemption 3: Information that is prohibited from disclosure by another federal law.

Exemption 4: Trade secrets or commercial or financial information that is confidential or privileged.

Exemption 5: Privileged communications within or between agencies, including:

1. Deliberative Process Privilege
2. Attorney-Work Product Privilege
3. Attorney-Client Privilege

Exemption 6: Information that, if disclosed, would invade another individual's personal privacy.

Exemption 7: Information compiled for law enforcement purposes that:

• 7(A). Could reasonably be expected to interfere with enforcement proceedings
• 7(B). Would deprive a person of a right to a fair trial or an impartial adjudication
• 7(C). Could reasonably be expected to constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy
• 7(D). Could reasonably be expected to disclose the identity of a confidential source
• 7(E). Would disclose techniques and procedures for law enforcement investigations or prosecutions
• 7(F). Could reasonably be expected to endanger the life or physical safety of any individual

Exemption 8: Information that concerns the supervision of financial institutions.

Exemption 9: Geological information on wells.

What are exclusions?
Congress has provided special protection in the FOIA for three narrow categories of law enforcement and national security records. The provisions protecting those records are known as “exclusions.” The first exclusion protects the existence of an ongoing criminal law enforcement investigation when the subject of the investigation is unaware that it is pending and disclosure could reasonably be expected to interfere with enforcement proceedings. The second exclusion is limited to criminal law enforcement agencies and protects the existence of informant records when the informant’s status has not been officially confirmed. The third exclusion is limited to the Federal Bureau of Investigation and protects the existence of foreign intelligence or counterintelligence, or international terrorism records when the existence of such records is classified. Records falling within an exclusion are not subject to the requirements of the FOIA. So, when an office or agency responds to your request, its response will encompass those records that are subject to the FOIA.

www.foia.gov/

 

Correct, I misspoke when I said "politicians". It is more correct to say that the offices politicians hold have certain immunities. That's not really a huge difference but go ahead and continue to focus on the word and not the general point, which is that many, many politicians enjoy exemptions from FOI requests.

 

Meanwhile, Trump the chump is still a lying prick.

 

Try naming one! Bear in mind I have just dispelled that one of these privileged "politicians" is the president. And for further proof, the presidents emails were among those released under the FOIA petition granted by Judge Sullivan. So were the CIA's, the FBI's, etc.

 

And Hillary the harridan is as honest as the wind driven snow??? You pathetic little lying sack of...........you know!

 

Trump only got a million $$$ from his daddy back in the fifties. He mentioned that in the last debate. By 2016 standards, that translates to about 10 million $$$. His trust fund ensured his fat ass got fatter, and although he mentioned his inheritance, he was quick to point out that he had to share it with his siblings.

But yeah, anyone should be as "capable" as the Chump, right?

 

And you misspoke again when you said "many politicians enjoy exemptions". I will let you speak of Michigan politicians, but federally, NO politicians enjoy exemptions except for those listed above.

 

That's right, Dick....hang on to a worthless point as if your life depended on it.

On a related note, I need your address if you want that FREE water I mentioned.