By Rhett Jones
2/14/2017
The new presidential administration
has a problem with accurate information. The number of falsehoods
that pile up on a daily basis is unnerving enough,
but according to a new USA Today
report, the administration isn’t even accurately posting its own executive orders
to the White House website.
It’s only been three weeks since
Donald Trump was sworn in as president, but the administration’s use of
government websites has already been a frequent source of
conflict. Among other issues, it has removed vital public
information while simultaneously promoting
the first lady’s jewelry line. This latest report, however, suggests an even
more disturbing level of negligence.
The text of executive orders that
are stored in the Federal Register
reflects their final, legally binding language. But that process can be slow
and many look to the White House for confirmation on the exact content of an
order. USA Today found at least five instances in which the White House’s
version of an order differed from the official version in the register. The
differences range from grammatical adjustments to correcting a citation of a
non-existent law.
Here are the reported
major changes related to law:
The
controversial travel ban
executive order suspended the Visa Interview Waiver Program and
required the secretary of State to enforce a section of the Immigration and
Naturalization Act requiring an in-person interview for everyone seeking a
non-immigrant visa. But the White House
version of the order referred to that provision as 8 U.S.C. 1222, which
requires a physical and mental examination — not 8 U.S.C. 1202, which
requires an interview.
An executive
order on ethical standards for administration appointees, as it appears on the White
House website, refers to “section 207 of title 28"
of the U.S. Code. As the nonprofit news site Pro Publica
reported last week, that section does not exist. The Federal
Register correctly cited section 207 of title 18,
which does exist.
And here are the more minor
reported changes:
An executive
order asking the secretary of Labor to re-examine the “Fiduciary Rule” is
missing the beginning of a sentence describing what rule the memo is referring
to. The official version
reads, “The Department of Labor’s (Department) final rule entitled, Definition
of the Term ‘Fiduciary.’ “ The White House
version simply says “Term ‘Fiduciary.’ “
A memorandum on
construction of the Dakota Access Pipeline contained minor grammatical changes,
with the official version putting instructions to the secretary of the Army in
the passive voice. Instead of “the Secretary of
the Army shall promptly provide a copy of this memorandum” to
Congress, the final text said “a copy of this
memorandum shall be provided immediately.”
The Federal Register renumbered a
presidential memorandum on a plan to defeat the Islamic State to include a
Section 3. The White House
version put all the effective clauses in Section 2.
Gizmodo has reviewed the documents
on whitehouse.gov and the inaccuracies remain.
The White House has not responded
to requests for comment but Jim Hemphill, special assistant to the director of
the Federal Register tells USA Today, “We would never correct something that
the president signs.” He says that the final documents sent to the register are
what is recorded.
One possibility is that the White
House is publishing older drafts of executive orders. Another is that the
president is signing newly revised versions that are then delivered to the
register. Of course, it could be something else entirely. No one seems to know
for sure what’s going on right now, a situation that reflects how generally
careless the White House has been.
The administration’s travel ban was
broadly seen as a rushed and
unvetted document that was unconstitutional. A federal court
recently said as much
and it appears that decision will stand.
This order is estimated
to affect the lives of at least 90,000 people. But the administration can’t be
bothered to double-check the document, thoroughly review the legalities,
properly cite case law, or (it turns out) even share the correct content of the
president’s orders with the public expected to abide them.
=====================================================================
CNN posted a great article the
other day that made me laugh and cry at the same time. It is about people in a
small town who voted for Donald Trump.
“I hope [Trump] don’t take the
benefits away, but at the same time, I think that once more jobs come in a lot
of people won’t need the benefits,” says Hayes, who currently receives about
$500 a month from government assistance. She’s also on Obamacare.
Oh really? You voted for Trump, yet
you are worried about losing your social benefits and Obamacare huh?
Beattyville residents want jobs,
especially ones that pay more than the minimum wage of
$7.25 an hour. They think if anyone can bring jobs back, it’s
Trump.
Or.. you could have voted for the
person who wanted to raise minimum wage. Just saying...
“Donald Trump’s got all the money
he’ll ever need,” says Steve Mays, judge-executive for the county and life-long
Beattyville resident. The 49-year-old says he’s never been more excited about a
president than he is now. “Trump will be a president for the common man.”
Common man? He has only lived as a
millionaire his entire life and up until recently lived in a 30,000 square foot
penthouse suite in New York... he has no concept of the “Common man”.
“I believe he wants to take care of
us, the little people,” says Coomer, the gas station manager. “I think he’s
going to quit giving money to all these other countries and take care of
America. I truly do.”
Unless by “us” you mean “Russians”,
no.
He could care less about you.
What kind of news outlet uses Bulls.. in a story? A fake one.
ReplyDelete