…acted in bad faith on immigration, and has finally gotten a comeuppance for it:
These accusations aren’t even the most audacious aspect of the court’s 28-page order. In a decision that will be studied in legal-ethics classes for decades to come, Judge Hanen placed many of the lawyers at the Justice Department’s headquarters in Washington, D.C. — known as “Main Justice” — under his personal supervision. This relief is reminiscent of federal courts that placed recalcitrant school districts under supervision to ensure compliance with desegregation orders. Or more recently, this relief is akin to judges who placed deficient police departments under federal oversight to ensure they reduce police brutality or other offenses. What is remarkable here is that Main Justice will now be required to report to Judge Hanen’s authority for the next five years to improve its ethics.
Of course, when has this administration ever acted in good faith? It just usually gets away with it. “Improving their ethics” would seem to be an effort in futility.
Will Jim finally admit his lauded, most transparent administration is unethical?
Why should he admit it? Embarrassment seems the only pain possible, and progressives seem to be impervious to that, due to their “shield of everlasting righteousness”. If a Judge limits progressive policies, it’s only because he’s one of those too ignorant to be progressive himself. The idea that such limitations could be righteous would have to start at the idea that government properly should be limited. That is against the basic creed of the progressive engrossment of the State.
Once he admits of that, then he has cut himself off from his entire emotional support system, so why should he?
I’m sure there’s unethical behavior in every administration, but this article doesn’t convince me that this is such an example. The DOJ says that they made a mistake, issuing 3 year extensions rather than the 2 year extensions they should have been issuing. How exactly does Judge Hanen know that that isn’t the case?
Judge Hanen, for his part, seems to be acting rather bizarrely. Issuing orders to DOJ lawyers who have nothing to do with any case before his court? What makes him think he has that power? And demanding personal information about 100,000 immigrants that he can disclose to the plaintiffs at his discretion? What’s that about?
It seems clear that the plaintiffs sought out this particular judge because they knew he was likely to be on their side (why else would they be arguing the case in Brownsville?). I don’t see much reason to consider him a neutral party in the dispute.
If anything, the lengths that the right has to go to try to find Obama administration scandals (which, on closer inspection, tend to crumble into nothing) tends to reinforce my view that it’s been (so far) the most scandal-free administration of the last fifty years.
Here’s an article that lays out the DOJ’s side of the story. For example:
You always have an excuse.
If we ever have a President Trump, it will be fun using circumlocution and obfuscation in response to your comments.
Even better, use his direct quotes in response to his comments during the Trump administration. There’s surely a treasure trove of Jim-isms to excuse anything Trump might do.
“The Justice Department claims that, at most, they misunderstood what Hanen was asking for. ”
Yes that’s ALWAYS their excuse…we misunderstood….we mispoke…..we didn’t communicate…we didn’t understand….so we are not culpable. Running out the clock….apologizing after the fact with absolutely zero consequences…..slow walking…prevaricating…dissembling…..the disks were destroyed…we lost the backups….
This has been their excuse so often over the last 7+ years…used to cover SO MANY mistakes or outright violations of the law that I simply don’t believe them. I don’t believe they misunderstood.
I believe they purposefully did not tell the judge.
I don’t get to say I misunderstood the speed laws if I get stopped for speeding.
And this isn’t the first time they’ve toyed with this Judge and so he doesn’t believe them either.
Jim explain to us what direct evidence you have to accept the excuse that they misunderstood.
Hanen was clear. The states wanted an injunction. The DOJ claimed it wasn’t necessary, because there was nothing to stop. Hanen sided with the DOJ taking the attorneys word. The DOJ lied. Either the attorneys themselves or their client. Their is no question about what Hanen asked and why he asked. The DOJ is signaling they intend to continue lying.
That is insanely hilarious.
DOJ says that they made a mistake
So the Obama administration is either the most incapable in our history, because every department has a chronic case of making mistakes when it comes to ignoring courts, breaking laws, and running guns, or it is the most unethical in history.
Jim, don’t you think the Obama administration is the most effective administration ever, leading to unprecedented peace and prosperity? So you don’t think they are incompetent. You know they are corrupt.
Judge Hanen, for his part, seems to be acting rather bizarrely. Issuing orders to DOJ lawyers who have nothing to do with any case before his court? What makes him think he has that power? And demanding personal information about 100,000 immigrants that he can disclose to the plaintiffs at his discretion? What’s that about?
Sounds like you need to read up on the situation. This wouldn’t be the first time you’ve written on something you’ve been clueless about. My take is that mandated oversight by a federal judge doesn’t magically happen. There has to be a pattern of abuse first.