Garland ignores presidential order
-
Yeah, it's Trump's order, but it still stands:
Nine months into the Biden presidency, Garland has yet to comply with a perfectly legitimate order issued by former President Donald Trump on his last day in office. The order, made in the worthy cause of public transparency, would declassify much of the material from the investigation into Russia’s efforts to help Trump win the presidency.
When U.S. senators — who are, of course, elected delegates of the public and rightly enjoy oversight authority vis-a-vis executive agencies such as the Justice Department — repeatedly request documents declassified by a president, the department has an absolute duty to comply in a timely fashion. In this instance, Republican Sens. Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Ron Johnson of Wisconsin have been requesting the documents since Feb. 25, eight months ago. Since then, they say they have made “countless emails and phone calls requesting updates.” They say the department “has not produced a single declassified record to Congress and the American people.”
Absent a countervailing public order by President Joe Biden, it is the absolute, lawful duty of Garland to comply with Trump’s order and with the senators’ demands. In this case, it would be highly improper for Biden to issue such an order, as it would amount to protecting his close political allies at the expense of the public’s right to know how its own government was compromised.
It's almost as though there's something to hide.
-
-
Was there some reason why Trump waited to issue this “perfectly legitimate” order until his last day in office? Something this important?
-
Was the order in fact legitimate? Executive orders have been abused for long and long; maybe Trump had no authority to order this.
-
Is public transparency always ipso facto a worthy cause? Particularly as relates to a past, dormantly present, and possibly future enemy of the state?
-
Is it possible that Garland reviewed this material and determined that its revelation would cause an unholy kerfuffle of massive proportions, to the delight of Congress and detriment of America and the American people -- if not the world? And he decided that disobeying the order would be less costly to the country?
-
Is it possible Congress doesn't actually give a hoot and is only making waves to satisfy some folks back home?
-
Because there is a political sector which refuses to accept that in matters of governance Trump did not know his ass from his elbow doesn’t mean it wasn’t true.
-
“ . . . highly improper for Biden to issue such an order, as it would amount to protecting his close political allies . . .” Does this statement not more properly belong in the realm of surmise, rather than assertion as fact?
-
On the “public’s right to know”, what is that, exactly? Is it the public’s right to know every move the fedgov makes, just because something they do is castigated by somebody as “compromising government”? Is it really?
-
You think governance is that simple?
Note: With the exception of #6, I do not know the answer to any of these questions, and I’m grinding no axe. Just pointing out how easy it is to build a case without knowing all the facts, even when the facts are absolutely outside your right -- or capacity -- to know.
-
-
-
Was there some reason why Trump waited to issue this “perfectly legitimate” order until his last day in office? Something this important?
-
Was the order in fact legitimate? Executive orders have been abused for long and long; maybe Trump had no authority to order this.
-
Is public transparency always ipso facto a worthy cause? Particularly as relates to a past, dormantly present, and possibly future enemy of the state?
-
Is it possible that Garland reviewed this material and determined that its revelation would cause an unholy kerfuffle of massive proportions, to the delight of Congress and detriment of America and the American people -- if not the world? And he decided that disobeying the order would be less costly to the country?
-
Is it possible Congress doesn't actually give a hoot and is only making waves to satisfy some folks back home?
-
Because there is a political sector which refuses to accept that in matters of governance Trump did not know his ass from his elbow doesn’t mean it wasn’t true.
-
“ . . . highly improper for Biden to issue such an order, as it would amount to protecting his close political allies . . .” Does this statement not more properly belong in the realm of surmise, rather than assertion as fact?
-
On the “public’s right to know”, what is that, exactly? Is it the public’s right to know every move the fedgov makes, just because something they do is castigated by somebody as “compromising government”? Is it really?
-
You think governance is that simple?
Note: With the exception of #6, I do not know the answer to any of these questions, and I’m grinding no axe. Just pointing out how easy it is to build a case without knowing all the facts, even when the facts are absolutely outside your right -- or capacity -- to know.
@catseye3 said in Garland ignores presidential order:
-
Was there some reason why Trump waited to issue this “perfectly legitimate” order until his last day in office? Something this important?
-
Was the order in fact legitimate? Executive orders have been abused for long and long; maybe Trump had no authority to order this.
-
Is public transparency always ipso facto a worthy cause? Particularly as relates to a past, dormantly present, and possibly future enemy of the state?
-
Is it possible that Garland reviewed this material and determined that its revelation would cause an unholy kerfuffle of massive proportions, to the delight of Congress and detriment of America and the American people -- if not the world? And he decided that disobeying the order would be less costly to the country?
-
Is it possible Congress doesn't actually give a hoot and is only making waves to satisfy some folks back home?
-
Because there is a political sector which refuses to accept that in matters of governance Trump did not know his ass from his elbow doesn’t mean it wasn’t true.
-
“ . . . highly improper for Biden to issue such an order, as it would amount to protecting his close political allies . . .” Does this statement not more properly belong in the realm of surmise, rather than assertion as fact?
-
On the “public’s right to know”, what is that, exactly? Is it the public’s right to know every move the fedgov makes, just because something they do is castigated by somebody as “compromising government”? Is it really?
-
You think governance is that simple?
Note: With the exception of #6, I do not know the answer to any of these questions, and I’m grinding no axe. Just pointing out how easy it is to build a case without knowing all the facts, even when the facts are absolutely outside your right -- or capacity -- to know.
I don't see where there is any case at all. The President has the right to declassify those documents.
Period.
Anything after that, is somebody not doing their job, or worse, deciding they are a better arbitrator of Truth than the actual documents.
-
