Trump Tops Obama, Hands Over Full Torture Report To Court Previous Administration Refused To

from the still-a-lot-of-marks-in-the-'L'-column-tho dept

Credit where credit is due: Trump has done more to preserve the full CIA Torture Report than Obama ever did. On his way out the door, the DOJ fought on his behalf in federal court, arguing against an order to deposit the full report with the court clerk for preservation in the ongoing trial of Abd al-Rahim Al-Nashiri, who has alleged he was waterboarded while detained by the CIA.

Barack Obama did stuff one copy of the full report in his presidential archives before Trump took over, perhaps in response to fears that the incoming president might make the whole thing vanish. Trump did mention his support for the use of torture on more than one occasion, and it would have been somewhat inconvenient to have an official document laying around saying torture is bad and the US shouldn't do it.

Maybe it's oneupmanship or maybe the Trump's legal counsel feels it has too much on its plate already, but as the New York Times' Charlie Savage reports, Team Trump is handing over a full copy of the Torture Report to the court as requested.

[A]s the Obama era came to an end, two Federal District Court judges for the District of Columbia ordered the executive branch to provide a copy of the report to the court’s security officer, and today, on the deadline set by one of them, the Trump administration complied rather than appeal.

A one-page notice of compliance [PDF] was issued by the White House on February 10th.

Respondents are filing this notice to advise the Court that, in accordance with the orders entered in the above captioned cases on December 28, 2016, and January 23, 2017,2 on February 6, 2017, the Government deposited for the Court Information Security Officers (CISOs) for secure storage a complete and unredacted electronic copy of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence Committee Study of the CIA’s Detention and Interrogation Program (2014). Specifically, the Government deposited the electronic copy that had been previously delivered to the Department of Justice Office of Legislative Affairs.

The last sentence of the notice kills me. The government apparently carried the electronic copy from the DOJ's Office of Legislative Affairs to the court clerk. The clunky wording suggests this copy no longer resides at the DOJ and that the court has this particular copy of an electronic document in its hands -- one that could be copied infinitely with no discernible loss in quality or content.

Considering the full report is still classified, there are definitely plenty of dissemination control procedures in place. But without any further information to go on, the notice gives the appearance that the DOJ Office of Legislative Affairs no longer has a copy of the full report. So, that can be put on the scorecard of places the document no longer can be found, even though it could be distributed anywhere with minimal effort, cost, or replication of anything more than 1s and 0s.


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  • icon
    Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 16 Feb 2017 @ 8:39am

    Motivation

    I am glad to see the Trump administration complying with court orders, something that had me somewhat worried for a bit.

    On the other hand, Trump's apparent willingness to continue torture (something that doesn't work all that well) tells us that since he knows it doesn't work all that well, that his interest is in punishment for people who have not been convicted of anything. Punishment that would not be allowed within the confines of the USofA, at least not to the degree alleged to be in the report.

    How do we know that he knows? Because no one has as of yet been able to point to anything learned from torture that made anyone 'safer'.

    What psychology explains that?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 16 Feb 2017 @ 12:13pm

      Re: Motivation

      What psychology explains that?

      Humans will take great mental leaps in order to avoid being wrong, particularly when them being wrong includes them doing things that they know are highly immoral. Taken in this context, governments do not torture in order to obtain information from, or to punish, those undergoing the torture, but rather to ensure the loyalty of the torturer (and by extension, those who knew of the torture). The fact that torture is both immoral and ineffective means that the torturer cannot allow themselves to stop believing in and following "The Cause" (the person or institution for whom they did the torturing), as that would mean they did said terrible thing without justification.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 16 Feb 2017 @ 1:16pm

        Re: Re: Motivation

        "Humans will take great mental leaps in order to avoid being wrong,"

        Should be...

        "Humans will take great mental leaps in order to avoid 'admitting' being wrong,"

        There is a reason people hate having to face their own iniquities.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 16 Feb 2017 @ 1:25pm

        Re: Re: Motivation

        As twisted as your analysis is, it does make some sense. Though I suppose it would also force most reasonable people to toss out the idea of integrity any time the word Government (Hi, we're from the Government, were here to help) comes up in discussion.

        I would prefer my Government obtain loyalty from integrity, rather than loyalty from a lack of integrity.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 17 Feb 2017 @ 11:45am

        Re: Re: Motivation

        The only who think that torture is ineffective are those who've never been tortured and those who have been, but don't want to admit to what secrets they spilled.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 16 Feb 2017 @ 4:54pm

      Re: Motivation

      Torture works fine.

      If your goal is to terrorize a population.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Jonathan, 17 Feb 2017 @ 11:59am

      Re: Motivation

      Torture works quite well, witness the case of KSM giving up substantially all of al Qaeda in Pakistan after an hour or so on the waterboard.

      If it weren't spectacularly successful, there wouldn't be a debate around its use.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      RealityCheck, 17 Feb 2017 @ 1:51pm

      Re: Motivation

      It's not the torture Team Trump wants to preserve. It's the threat of torture and the uncertainty of it's deliverance that matters.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 16 Feb 2017 @ 9:54am

    One week into Oroville dam disaster and msm fail to blame djt. Oh, wait, they do.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 16 Feb 2017 @ 10:00am

      Re:

      Marked as funny.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      DannyB (profile), 16 Feb 2017 @ 10:05am

      Re:

      Mr. Trump should not be blamed for the Oroville dam disaster.

      Mr. Trump is a successful business man, who believes in capitalism, and has become president.

      https://postimg.org/image/w0b24zott/

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Roger Strong (profile), 16 Feb 2017 @ 10:09am

      Re:

      I've seen comments in the media to the effect that Trump’s plan to privatize infrastructure development through the use of tax credits wouldn't help in the Oroville case. Armoring the Oroville Dam’s emergency spillway wouldn't lead to profit, so it wouldn't attract investors.

      But blaming Trump for it? Citation?

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 16 Feb 2017 @ 1:57pm

      Re:

      Bawk!

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Thad, 17 Feb 2017 @ 11:33am

      Re:

      One week into Oroville dam disaster and msm fail to blame djt. Oh, wait, they do.

      Oh God, are we having the Katrina argument again?

      A President who fails to respond to a governor's request for a state of emergency in a timely fashion deserves to be criticized for it, even if he is not personally responsible for the emergency. This is not rocket science.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        PaulT (profile), 20 Feb 2017 @ 1:54am

        Re: Re:

        The Katrina thing was even better than that - Bush appointed someone not really qualified for the job (but who he knew personally), said department severely messed up advance preperation and early rescue operations, and while people were suffering he told his friend that he was doing "a heckuva job".

        He didn't merely fail to respond, he was directly responsible for putting incompetents in charge, while pretending at the same time that they were doing good work. Given the parade of fools that Trump has been putting in charge of each government department, there's going to be a lot of similar criticisms of him, all perfectly justified.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 17 Feb 2017 @ 12:37pm

      Re: Oroville

      Trump to California: Drop Dead

      I'm afraid that Trump's infrastructure
      investment program won't make it all
      the way to the West Coast, where CA's
      deferred maintenance & incompetence
      will have to be covered by CA's own
      taxes.

      CA will now be busy building their own
      multi-billion dollar wall -- to hold
      onto water.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    DannyB (profile), 16 Feb 2017 @ 10:01am

    Credit where credit is due

    Thank you Trump administration for sending this to the court and complying with this particular court order.

    Mr. Trump, If you chose to do this and signed it, then a sincere thank you! Thanks!

    If you signed this without reading it, because you are unable to read what you sign, then also my thanks to whoever got a signature on this!

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    killthelawyers (profile), 16 Feb 2017 @ 10:01am

    Reading too much into "deposited"

    I think you're reading more than is there into the use of the word deposited. Don't think the implication is that they no longer have a copy, only that they sent a disc containing the report to the court.

    Of course, you could be right that there are some extraordinary copy protections oin place, but even that seems unlikely.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 16 Feb 2017 @ 11:09am

      Re: Reading too much into "deposited"

      I don't think he's reading too much into it. What likely happened is the DoJ had a CD with the document on it, and they picked up the DoJ's CD to hand to the court clerks.

      It is possible that the DoJ retained a copy by copying it off the CD but if the rest of the Federal Government is so anal over writing data to a removable device (including a CD) then I could easily see the DoJ not having another physically portable copy of the report. And given the attention surrounding the report, I could also see that the DoJ never pulled a copy from the CD onto a server for archival or just general access.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 16 Feb 2017 @ 11:41am

      Re: Reading too much into "deposited"

      Ya know, they could have sent it over on 8" floppies, CP/M 1.4 formatted single sided single density. They look at it and think, "great. now how the hell are we supposed to do anything with this stack of crap!" :)

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      That One Guy (profile), 16 Feb 2017 @ 5:28pm

      Re: Reading too much into "deposited"

      Specifically, the Government deposited the electronic copy that had been previously delivered to the Department of Justice Office of Legislative Affairs.

      It's a messy sentence, but saying they deposited the electronic copy rather than a copy could be read as 'the previous department had a copy, we took that one, and now they don't have a copy.'

      Or it could mean that they made a copy and took that to the court, because yeesh is that a mess of a sentence.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    onthewaterfront, 16 Feb 2017 @ 10:08am

    Trump

    I have no problem giving him credit for this, but when will the time for honoring himself come to an end?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 16 Feb 2017 @ 11:26am

      Re: Trump

      There seems to be some progress on Trumps side of things: He is trying with another furthering of restrictions on foreigners after actually listening to his advisors. His repick for secretary of labour sounds a lot more balanced than mr. junkfood and while Harward is working for a defence contractor, he is at least less of a bull in a chinashop compared to Flynn.

      Nobody would have seen these things as particularly positive when Bush reigned, but compared to the abysmal garbage he keeps tweeting, these things are at least somewhat reasonable and any level of reasoning is good in this circumstance.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 21 Feb 2017 @ 8:20am

      Re: Trump

      You mean it started? Because he's been nothing but bashed since he won the election and it hasn't stopped yet.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 16 Feb 2017 @ 10:38am

    Transfer of physical storage

    While there is no strong technical reason that they needed to transfer the DOJ's copy instead of creating a new copy for the court, there may have been procedural problems doing so. The rules for handling classified data may have made it more convenient to transport as-is an existing copy than to get the approvals to have the right people make a new copy just to give it to the court, particularly if the decision to comply (rather than appeal) came in shortly before the court's deadline.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    jamiahx, 16 Feb 2017 @ 10:56am

    Regarding transfer as opposed to copy

    IANAL and I'm unsure of the actual procedures governing classified info, but I speculate that there is a state interest in legal restrictions in making true and permanent copies of classified info, similar to the legal restrictions on making copies of certain physical keys. You know, the ones that have "duplication prohibited" stamped on them and that a locksmith (or anyone else) can get in a lot of trouble for copying without the paperwork authorizing such duplication.
    Notuce I said "true and permanent" copies; this is to distinguish from temporal copies like those made when reading into RAM or displaying on a screen (which would have its own legal restrictions).
    Again, I am speculating, but it makes sense under my own understanding of the relevant security principles.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 16 Feb 2017 @ 11:08am

    Thank you Trump

    I look forward to seeing more responses to Judicial requests resolved in this manner by the Trump administration.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 16 Feb 2017 @ 11:24am

      Re: Thank you Trump

      Yes because Trump in his own words "I never settle", settled his personal lawsuits very quickly once he was elected.

      I applaud him for releasing the document but I'm betting it has more to do with getting his administration out of the courts quickly as opposed to doing the right thing.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 16 Feb 2017 @ 11:41am

    I doubt trump is even aware that one of his servants deposited a report as ordered.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 16 Feb 2017 @ 11:49am

    what are the chances that this is retaliation against the intelligence community for their "russian ties" leaks against his administration?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Wendy Cockcroft, 17 Feb 2017 @ 5:26am

      Re:

      That'd be delicious, but I'm not complaining. If the right thing gets done, however wrong the reasoning behind it is, at least it got done.

      If Trump gets a giggle out of it, go Trump. At last I've got a reason to say something nice about him; I've been ragging on him since he got involved in the Birther thing.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 17 Feb 2017 @ 8:16am

      Re:

      Unlikely. This is actually a point where him knowing little of politics is massively to his and the publics benefit. There are many politicians in congress that wants to bury this report forever, likely because it is rather damaging to several carreers as well as americas international ethical standing (allowing torture defeats the purpose of condemning others for doing it!). Since Trump doesn't care much about either, this is just him doing the logical thing and actually hanging some of the dirty laundry out to dry, like he said he would. This is as close to "draining the swamp" as he gets!

      Be aware that this is not sensitive materials to him and his administration. That is why he doesn't mind doing this. If people in his inner circle was involved, I would bet you that he would see it in a different light.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 16 Feb 2017 @ 11:57am

    Isnt this a Tech Blog? Lol

    I want to see the comments that complain that TechDirt should keep their opinions to themselves and stick to covering tech.

    I suppose that's only when the article is critical of Trump though. ;)

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 16 Feb 2017 @ 1:52pm

      Re: Isnt this a Tech Blog? Lol

      That would just be silly even if you accept the premise. They specifically referenced electronic copies, and ones and zeros, in the article. That makes it tech, right? And it's the "dirt" on torture.

      Next up: complaining when StackOverflow has a question about a NullReferenceException, since that isn't a stack overflow.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 17 Feb 2017 @ 2:27am

      Re: Isnt this a Tech Blog? Lol

      I'm pretty sure in one recent thread that the Techdirt blog owner made it clear that he didn't care what readers thought about his choice of articles, and that he wanted non-tech posts about Trump featured here?

      To be fair tho, this particular topic (torture report) and general theme (gov't transparency) IS somewhat of a staple here...

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        PaulT (profile), 17 Feb 2017 @ 2:43am

        Re: Re: Isnt this a Tech Blog? Lol

        Actually, it's always been clear that legal issues relating to non-tech subjects like torture, police activity and constitutional issues have always been subjects that are written about here. I have noticed an increase of anonymous commenters moaning that the site isn't only writing about what they think they should be writing about, but no real change in the remit.

        Plus, articles *on this exact issue* were critical of Obama, Clinton, etc., but partisan idiots only seem to have noticed when their hero is the one being questioned. This site itself is actually pretty consistent.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Wendy Cockcroft, 17 Feb 2017 @ 5:31am

          Re: Re: Re: Isnt this a Tech Blog? Lol

          Indeed, and as promised, when they have something good to say about the president, they'll say it.

          While I'd happily slap him around the room for a multitude of things I'll pat him nicely on the back for this. The man got a thing right. I don't care why and if he did it for a laugh at the CIA's expense, I say "Go ahead, Mr. President. You can have this one, sir."

          I'll be ragging on him next time he does something to annoy me but today he's "The president," and well done that man for releasing the report.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 16 Feb 2017 @ 12:38pm

    "...the notice gives the appearance that the DOJ Office of Legislative Affairs no longer has a copy of the full report..."

    They made that statement to sound like they dont have a copy. They just dont have an electronic copy.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 16 Feb 2017 @ 12:47pm

    This just fits in with him doing the opposite of whatever Obama did. If Obama had handed it over then Trump would be calling for it to be taken away.
    It's great that it was handed over though so he does get a little credit for actually doing it.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 16 Feb 2017 @ 1:03pm

    Given that Trump would ok torture if the professionals told him they wanted to do it, I would imagine the report demonstrates that torture actually worked and accomplished its mission?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      orbitalinsertion (profile), 16 Feb 2017 @ 1:33pm

      Re:

      I sort of imagine that Trump and friends simply may not care what the report says at all.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        That One Guy (profile), 16 Feb 2017 @ 5:32pm

        Re: Re:

        That's my thinking on it. He doesn't care what the report says because unless it agrees with him(it doesn't) he plans on ignoring it anyway, so what does he care if people see it?

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 17 Feb 2017 @ 8:34am

      Re:

      A summary has been released about the report. In it you can see that torture doesn't even remotely give the unique information. So your conspiracy is not true. Most of the summary seems to be a burn of CIAs actions as very irresponsible and likely downright illegal in their withholding of information to the senate.

      The primary summary written by Feinstein et al. is here:
      [link]https://www.amnestyusa.org/pdfs/sscistudy1.pdf[/link]

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Tynkir (profile), 16 Feb 2017 @ 3:57pm

    It's really hard to tell if it's just a poorly structured sentence, or if they did just take the one and only CD over and hand it to them, without considering keeping a copy for their own use... It sounds like they walked the only copy they had over.

    On top of handing over their only copy though, keeping backups of data at more than one location is sort of the minimum standard for important data, what if a fire happened and you lost your CD? Submit a new request for information?

    Not saying I'm surprised...

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 16 Feb 2017 @ 9:51pm

    I think I can explain this

    even though it could be distributed anywhere with minimal effort, cost, or replication of anything more than 1s and 0s.

    Classified documents (even in electronic form) are serialized and are not to be copied under most circumstances. For instance, most NOFORN, all Secret, Top Secret, SCI, and OPLAN (formerly SIOP), are such documents as are any with operational security implication. At this point, those documents are still classified until they are declassified. Even if the court releases them, it's still considered classified and persons "read in" to secure materials are to avoid reading them absent need to know. This is why people with a clearance are not supposed to read wikileaks.

    I know it's crazy but it doesn't have to make sense; it's government policy.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 16 Feb 2017 @ 9:58pm

      Re: I think I can explain this

      I'll add in that this sort of thing is why a US "official secrets" act is so pernicious in my opinion. It would require people that are otherwise not required to maintain confidentially to then be required to become conservators of secrets. I believe that is antithetical to free speech rights to require, say, a reporter that is given classified documents to keep them secret. It is illegal for him to steal them himself, but it is not currently illegal for him to receive them.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    PaulT (profile), 17 Feb 2017 @ 12:42am

    Well, of course he did. Releasing such a thing only paints a negative light on his predecessors and helps distract from the circus show that's characterised his administration so far.

    Wake me up when he's asked to release documents regarding his own conduct in office and actually agrees to release them. Bearing in mind that he openly supported the use of torture during his campaign.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Wendy Cockcroft, 17 Feb 2017 @ 5:37am

      Re:

      I hear you, PaulT, but consider this: remember the shenanigans between the DOJ and Kim Dotcom? What about the other cases still pending where extradition is OTT for the crime where the alleged perps haven't even faced a trial, only accusations?

      I'm all for using his pettiness to get wrongs righted. We can slap him around for his own conduct later, let's see how we can use his thin skin to our advantage.

      Heck, we might even get mass surveillance scaled back to the effective targeted form + warrant requirement that we ought to have in place right now. It's just a matter of pointing out to him how bad he can make Obama look if he sorts this out for us. A girl can dream...

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        PaulT (profile), 17 Feb 2017 @ 5:53am

        Re: Re:

        "Heck, we might even get mass surveillance scaled back to the effective targeted form + warrant requirement that we ought to have in place right now."

        Unlikely. I'm actually of the opinion that there's only so much random crap he can say or do before he gets ousted in some way. Once that happens, Pence will be free to push as much draconian crap as he can get away with, and he will get away with it because he looks positively sane and moderate compared to the orange shitgibbon.

        My only hope is that the current sideshow gets people motivated enough to vote out enough Republicans in 2 years to get some form of balance in Congress so he has to fight for the worse stuff.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 17 Feb 2017 @ 6:16am

          Re: Re: Re:

          I agree, vote republicans out. And vote democrats out. You want to replace republicans with democrats who have been creating this shit for the past 6 or 8 years? Give me a break. Neither republicans or democrats like Trump much. That may not be such a bad thing.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • icon
            PaulT (profile), 17 Feb 2017 @ 6:39am

            Re: Re: Re: Re:

            "You want to replace republicans with democrats who have been creating this shit for the past 6 or 8 years?"

            Citation needed for that.

            Either way, yes I definitely do. The Republicans at present can push through a lot of negative things without much opposition, as they both support a lot of negative things and have shown willingness to march in lockstep even when they secretly disagree with each other on an issue. There needs to be an effective opposition to keep them in check, and the only choice the US system offers for that is Democrats. Until a viable 3rd party appears, they're the only other choice.

            It's sad that the 2 party system works like that, but it only really works when you have a real opposition and both parties are willing to negotiate and compromise. Given that Republicans have openly made it their mission to oppose everything the Democrats do while in office, compromise is probably not on the table so there needs to be numbers to block some of the truly despicable things that are being proposed.

            Not that I'm saying everything is despicable, by the way - it's just that things like removing equal rights for gay people and removing healthcare from people who cannot otherwise get insured without a solid replacement are things that are on the table now.

            "Neither republicans or democrats like Trump much"

            Again, you might note that I was referring mostly to Pence, not to Trump. I doubt he'll finish his first term at the current rate, whether he jumps or is pushed.

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            • identicon
              Anonymous Coward, 17 Feb 2017 @ 7:31am

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

              I agree, Pence would be much worse. If you don't like him, Cruz would have been even worse. And I agree, Congress is the problem, not Trump. The president really can't do much by himself, and I think there is a chance that Congress actually wants Trump in place so people pay attention to him and not them. Trump may have bad approval ratings, but I think they are still higher than the Congress approval ratings. Is Trump just a smoke screen?

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              • icon
                PaulT (profile), 17 Feb 2017 @ 7:57am

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                It's certainly possible. In fact, I'm not sure which is more worrying - that the unstable child using his position to threaten retailers because they won't sell his daughter's tat can effectively wield his power or that others are planning something so heinous that they'd need to have such a loud distraction.

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          The Wanderer (profile), 18 Feb 2017 @ 11:54pm

          Re: Re: Re:

          > My only hope is that the current sideshow gets people motivated enough to vote out enough Republicans in 2
          > years to get some form of balance in Congress so he has to fight for the worse stuff.

          My understanding is that this is extremely unlikely, regardless of what level of voter activism there is at that point, simply because of which Congressional districts are up for re-election in that cycle; IIRC (from a source I no longer recall), there is at most exactly one such district which is neither held by a Democrat nor a near-100%-"safe" district for the Republican incumbent.

          It really looks as if the "permanent Republican majority" strategy/initiative, from a decade or two back, of focusing heavily on gerrymandering "safe" districts on a per-state basis may be paying off...

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    oliver, 17 Feb 2017 @ 1:38am

    How long until that copy is leaked.....?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 17 Feb 2017 @ 10:24pm

    Secrets

    "The last sentence of the notice kills me. The government apparently carried the electronic copy from the DOJ's Office of Legislative Affairs to the court clerk. The clunky wording suggests this copy no longer resides at the DOJ and that the court has this particular copy of an electronic document in its hands -- one that could be copied infinitely with no discernible loss in quality or content."

    The point is to know where the copies are. *They* really don't want multiple copies - the fact they are trivial to make is a minus not a plus.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Use markdown for basic formatting. HTML is no longer supported.
  Save me a cookie
Follow Techdirt
New And For A Limited Time
New Gear By Techdirt: I Invented Email
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads

Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.