what is with whiteyu house visitor list secrecy????
 

Does anyone else find this very suspicious??????

Not sure at this point about "suspicious" but certanly it is very curious for a man who talked so much about transparency.

Adding this to not releasing tax returns, not really separating from businesses, etc do not a transparent White House make.

I will tell you.....seen others try these games...they always backfire in time

I don't find it suspicious at all. Maybe bad people are visitng...

I was more suspicious about the woman with a child that demanded to see the president, and after being denied she tried to crash thru the white house gate, and then she fled, they chased her down, and a few miles away the woman was shot dead. She was unarmed. That was during Obamma's presidency. I wonder what happened to the child...

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk

Obama was the supposed "TRANSPARENT" one. He is the one that wanted to make the guest log in at the WH availible. Then he could not walk it back when it came back to bite him in the @ss. Like Trump's taxes, just because some wannabe community organizer with no job experience did something a certain way, does not make it a rule. It's no one's business how Trump does this. You libtards are a nosy lot and need to go to your safe space and cry some more.

Your total and complete obsession with Obama is very tiring.

You do not seem to be able to discuss anything with calling his name or that of Clinton.

Grow up and get in the present day

You would have more success asking the sun to quit shining and go dark, than getting MOCPD (Multiple Obsessive Compulsive Posting Disorder) to stop always answering criticisms of the Narcissistic Sociopath....with Obama/Clinton, this or that. :blahblahblah:...:blahblahblah:

Your stupidity is "very tiring. " Who was it that is causing you libtards the basis for your consternation? Obama. It is his fault, not mine that you think that the gov is supposed to be so transparent. He is the one that ran on transparency, not Trump.

Your obsession with looking for ANY flaw in your president is childish.

Grow up.

Why would the Trump administration not make the White House Visitors Log Available? Hmmm

Couldn't be because every psycho in America has threatened the life of Trump, his family and/or anyone wearing a Trump sweatshirt or Make America Great Again hat or in any way or fashion connected to Trump,his family or Business.

Couldn't be because Trump recognizes the press continues to spin a false and vicious narrative about Trump the man, the businessman, the president, the husband,his family, his friends and his supporters.

Couldn't be because the radical progressives (Obama holdovers) still in Washington continue to act like a virus that infects a computer to stop Trump's agenda

Couldn't be that Trump is concerned that there have been so many leaks, again Obama holdovers that he has a concern for security.

Oh you say Obama made the log available for public scrutiny. Hmm but the fine print at the bottom left him the right to chose what names became public and what names remained private. Besides Obama adoration by the press would always provide cover.
I mean who other than the press would spin a story that a dignitary and great statesman such as Al Sharpton graced the White House on several occasions.

Trump Derangement Syndrome appears to have the same staying power as Lyme disease . I suspect to hear shortly from CNN that even though the logs have gone dark one of their reporters can confirm unequivocally that Putin has been visiting the White House in secret for weeks now.

Personal Best Regards:

what is with whiteyu house visitor list secrecy????

Copied and pasted the title to this thread "whiteyu".. gosh you don't suppose with that depiction of the White House that any bias has entered the OP's thinking.

Naw progressives are open minded folks and have the patience, understanding, objectivity and fairness to provide an opportunity for this Administration to prove itself and they will do so without resistance and in full support in order to Make America Great Again.

Let's see GOP is the party of "No"

Yet, rumor has it the Democratic Party has been labeled the party of "Hell No":D Progressives you got to love them

Personal Best Regards:

:agree:

Leftards have no tolerance for National Security. Top Secret to them means, it's supposed to be released to the liberal media only.

How many years did you libtards AND Obie blame and complain Bush for everything that bothered them?

Like they say, turnabout is fair play. In this case, the blame on Obama is valid.

This okay with you superior folks ?

"WASHINGTON — President Trump is populating the White House and federal agencies with former lobbyists, lawyers and consultants who in many cases are helping to craft new policies for the same industries in which they recently earned a paycheck.

The potential conflicts are arising across the executive branch, according to an analysis of recently released financial disclosures, lobbying records and interviews with current and former ethics officials by The New York Times in collaboration with ProPublica.

In at least two cases, the appointments may have already led to violations of the administration’s own ethics rules. But evaluating if and when such violations have occurred has become almost impossible because the Trump administration is secretly issuing waivers to the rules."

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/15/u...icts.html?_r=0

Did not Trump promise transparency in DC if he were elected???

Donald Trump is setting a new standard for lack of transparency - The Washington Post

The latest news is that Mr. Trump will not routinely release White House visitor records, as Mr. Obama did. The White House cited “grave national security risks and privacy concerns.” The former is not persuasive, since a national security exception was built into the policy. So Mr. Trump must argue that his right to privacy, or that of the lobbyists coming to see him, outweighs the public’s interest in knowing who is getting an audience. We don’t find that persuasive, either.