Most transparent administration ?.....not

bravo said:
the framers set this country up so no innocent people would be imprisoned.????

Really ?....Are you really gonna tell us that there are no innocent people in prison......?

(you gotta get back on your meds)
Click to expand...
they set the judicial part up with the belief that it was better to let 10 guilty men go free than to have one innocent person imprisoned. it was based on blackstones commentaries. look it up. I wish I could tell you that there are no innocent people in prison, however, due to sheeple like you, the government can incarcerate anyone they like, guilty or innocent. how do you like being responsible for innocent people going to prison?
 
bravo said:
The Dept. of Justice is not in the judicial branch....The United States Department of Justice (DOJ), is the United States federal executive department responsible for the enforcement of the law and administration of justice
The Department is led by the Attorney General, who is nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate and is a member of the Cabinet.
The current Attorney General is Eric Holder.
Click to expand...


Exactly. The Justice Department didn't seal anything.
 
Dungheap said:
Damo's post is nonsense. The executive branch cannot seal judicial branch records or label them Top Secret.
Click to expand...

The Executive can, however, label information referred to in the records classified, at varying levels of sensitivity up to and including TS Compartmentalized, thus effectively putting them out of the reach of the Press. The Judicial records would then have to be handled according to the proper level of sensitivity. In this case they could label the records referred to in the judicial record thus causing redactions that would render the records unusable in any "sunlight" approach. The approach that they took and the process itself could be "classified" thus making those records unavailable to the public. Even Congressional Hearings held on the subjects that include classified information must be held behind closed doors. The Congresspersons have access due to position and "need to know" but the public does not.

Basically, if they "believe" that revealing the methods used will cause issues for future law enforcement programs they would be able to classify the records referred to in the court records...

And yes, the Executive has the power to label all sorts of things classified...
 
Damocles said:
The Executive can, however, label information referred to in the records classified, at varying levels of sensitivity up to and including TS Compartmentalized, thus effectively putting them out of the reach of the Press.
Click to expand...


Just stop right there. The Executive cannot do that. It can tell the court the the information is classified and request that the court keep such information under seal, but the Executive cannot unilaterally label court records as classified and thereby keep that information from the press. Only the court can do that.
 
Dungheap said:
Just stop right there. The Executive cannot do that. It can tell the court the the information is classified and request that the court keep such information under seal, but the Executive cannot unilaterally label court records as classified and thereby keep that information from the press. Only the court can do that.
Click to expand...

Again, they can only "tell" the court that the information is classified if they actually label the information "classified".

I have never seen the courts reject such classifications, in fact there are even special courts that are designed to handle trials, etc. that also handle such classified information.

You continue to say that they can't do this. The Executive can label information as classified, and once it is the courts handle it differently. Pretending that this cannot happen is utter nonsense. It's happened in the past, and can happen now. The Executive has even labeled who met them at the White House for energy meetings as classified. It is one of the things the left complained about Bush but ignored when Obama took office when they did exactly the same thing...

It's BS to pretend that this cannot happen, or that the courts will suddenly dismiss such "concerns" now because you think that it is "impossible"...

You can tell me to "stop" but it doesn't change that they can, and have in the past, do this.
 
SmarterThanYou said:
they set the judicial part up with the belief that it was better to let 10 guilty men go free than to have one innocent person imprisoned. it was based on blackstones commentaries. look it up. I wish I could tell you that there are no innocent people in prison, however, due to sheeple like you, the government can incarcerate anyone they like, guilty or innocent. how do you like being responsible for innocent people going to prison?
Click to expand...

Oh, cut the crap. Peddle your fantasy guilt trip somewhere else. Present your points.
 
SmarterThanYou said:
they set the judicial part up with the belief that it was better to let 10 guilty men go free than to have one innocent person imprisoned. it was based on blackstones commentaries. look it up. I wish I could tell you that there are no innocent people in prison, however, due to sheeple like you, the government can incarcerate anyone they like, guilty or innocent. how do you like being responsible for innocent people going to prison?
Click to expand...

Really ? "the government can incarcerate anyone they like, guilty or innocent."......?

Then it looks like your wrong again....."the framers set this country up so no innocent people would be imprisoned" is totally incorrect.....

Our justice system isn't perfect, never was and never will be.....thats the nature of the beast......and its getting worse.....

Due to the insane partisanship of left and right, we can't even trust the SC....our last resort....

and give it a break....I'm not responsible for anyone going to prison, guilty or innocent.....you sound like a desperate _____, well....desperate.
 
Dungheap said:
Just stop right there. The Executive cannot do that. It can tell the court the the information is classified and request that the court keep such information under seal, but the Executive cannot unilaterally label court records as classified and thereby keep that information from the press. Only the court can do that.
Click to expand...



I guess they don't know they can't do that......because they did that.
 
bravo said:
Really ? "the government can incarcerate anyone they like, guilty or innocent."......?

Then it looks like your wrong again....."the framers set this country up so no innocent people would be imprisoned" is totally incorrect.....

Our justice system isn't perfect, never was and never will be.....thats the nature of the beast......and its getting worse.....

Due to the insane partisanship of left and right, we can't even trust the SC....our last resort....

and give it a break....I'm not responsible for anyone going to prison, guilty or innocent.....you sound like a desperate _____, well....desperate.
Click to expand...

you're a moron and part of the destruction of this country. congratulations.
 
Dungheap said:
Apparently so. Only judges can seal court records. Executive branch officials can merely request that a judge do so.
Click to expand...

Hair-splitting. Reality: Judges regularly seal "classified" information, hence my suggestion that they could simply classify some of the information then request they be sealed... I said it conversationally so I said "have it sealed" and used words like "effectively putting it out of the reach of the Press"...

However, the meaning of what I said fit the reality. They "can" and have in the past used exactly that ability of the Executive to do exactly what I said they can do...

The courts regularly (I've never seen it refused) seal classified documents at the request of the Executive.
 
Dungheap said:
Apparently so. Only judges can seal court records. Executive branch officials can merely request that a judge do so.
Click to expand...


Well, no shit, Charlie Chan.....Obama orders it done and some judge does it........the judge don't do it on a whim....

you're reduced to playing word games now that you've been pwned again.....?

The records are sealed because Obama wants the records sealed....the details are irrelevant.

How infantile.


Soon you'll be saying Obama didn't kill the US dude in Yemen, he didn't fly the drone......
 
bravo said:
Well, no shit, Charlie Chan.....Obama orders it done and some judge does it........the judge don't do it on a whim....

you reduced to playing word games now that you've been pwned again.....?

The records are sealed because Obama wants the records sealed.....

How infantile.


Soon you'll be saying Obama didn't kill the US dude in Yemen, he didn't fly the drone......
Click to expand...


Obama is commander in chief of the armed forces. Obama is not commander chief of the judicial branch. He cannot order a judge to do anything.
 
bravo said:
Well, no shit, Charlie Chan.....Obama orders it done and some judge does it........the judge don't do it on a whim....

you're reduced to playing word games now that you've been pwned again.....?

The records are sealed because Obama wants the records sealed....the details are irrelevant.

How infantile.


Soon you'll be saying Obama didn't kill the US dude in Yemen, he didn't fly the drone......
Click to expand...

i see where your idiotic constitutional notions come in to play now. you've taken away the autonomy of the courts as one of the checks and balances of our government.
 
SmarterThanYou said:
i see where your idiotic constitutional notions come in to play now. you've taken away the autonomy of the courts as one of the checks and balances of our government.
Click to expand...


the autonomy of the courts ????

Is that supposed to be clever......Obama says seal the files and its done......you call that autonomy....???

Maybe you should look up the definition first pinhead....
 
bravo said:
the autonomy of the courts ????

Is that supposed to be clever......Obama says seal the files and its done......you call that autonomy....???

Maybe you should look up the definition first pinhead....
Click to expand...
why are you complaining? you've been supportive of it for a long time now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top