4 ms·
They don't actually make clear where the information has been deleted from. But to me it sounds alot like the big fuss at the inauguration when Obama's Whitehou
by Robadob 10y ago
They don't actually make clear where the information has been deleted from. But to me it sounds alot like the big fuss at the inauguration when Obama's Whitehouse website was archived and replaced with Trump's.
The stated 'The US National Strategy for the Arctic' and 'Implementation Plan for the Strategy', both sound like Obama policy which would have subsequently have been archived.
Blaming Trump for this is facile at best.
http://edition.cnn.com/2017/01/20/politics/obama-white-house-website/ http://edition.cnn.com/2017/01/20/politics/obama-white-house...
- ItendToDisagree 10y agoWhat is the functional difference between 'deleted' and 'archived but not available for anyone to view' or is there one?
- Turing_Machine 10y agoThe entire Obama Whitehouse site is still available for viewing at https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/ https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/ The Obama administration sites were moved to the National Archives and Trump started over with new sites. That's exactly the same thing that happened when Bush II and Clinton left office (Clinton was the first to have a web site, so we don't have any precedent before that). Nothing has been "deleted". Oddly, no one seemed to screech when Obama "deleted" all the material from the Bush II administration. Why not?
- acqq 10y agoWhat you name "stated" was only "on January 21th." The article then continues: "Since January, the surge has transformed into a slow, incessant march of deleting datasets, webpages and policies about the Arctic." So it's not just the text of the policies. You make it appear as only policies are mentioned.