Sure, I read the above link, and if I was like you, I would be totally fooled and convinced, "LMAO" at the "conspiracy theorists". My IQ, however, doesn't afford me that luxury, and after fact-checking some of the statements made in your link, I immediately found the piece to be a deceptive piece of propaganda. You'd have been correct about snopes being in on it, if you weren't being sarcastic.
Snopes says, for example, that "Obama has added to Section 201(b) the phrase "under both emergency and non-emergency conditions." In 12919, though, the duties of the Cabinet Secretaries were not limited to emergency situations in Section 201(b), either." Snopes has attempted to use word play to deceive us into believing that there's really no difference between the older one and the new one and that "The timing of this release might have looked a little strange, but this is really nothing to worry about at all."
Look at the statement again: "In 12919, though, the duties of the Cabinet Secretaries were not limited to emergency situations in Section 201(b), either." The non-deceptive statement would be "In 12919, though, the duties of the Cabinet Secretaries were not expanded to non-emergency situations in Section 201(b)"
I just found that right away, I'm sure if I went through the whole thing there would be many more.