13 ms·

> fwiw, it wasn't Biden that created the court it was Merrick Garland But Merrick Garland is a Biden appointee. Don't you think leaders should be held accounta

> fwiw, it wasn't Biden that created the court it was Merrick Garland But Merrick Garland is a Biden appointee. Don't you think leaders should be held accountable for the actions of their administration? Of course, as vjulian points out, they aren't masterminding everything that their subordinates do, but they do choose who to appoint and have the power to reverse anything they disapprove of once they learn about it.

oooyay 3y ago
> Don't you think leaders should be held accountable for the actions of their administration? Color me cynical, but people only mutter this when it's someone on the other team. So, in general do I think we should follow that principle? Yes. Do I think people widely believe that enough to hold their own self-interest-adjacent parties accountable? Certainly not. If you want to be very picky, the rule Mr Garland invented was in response to a Biden executive order [1] [2]. The executive order is long, but section 3 is pretty succinct and clear. If Mr Garland implemented an opaque system then I can predict one of two scenarios occurred, maybe both: 1. All of the information the court receives is classified and should never have been leaked in the first place, so no one should know. That means the way someone does know is because of the watchdogs inside the intelligence community. 2. Mr Garland is openly defying the President through process and appeasing someone (maybe the intelligence community). 1: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2022/10/14/2022-22234/data-protection-review-court https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2022/10/14/2022-22... 2: https://www.state.gov/executive-order-14086-policy-and-procedures/#safeguarding https://www.state.gov/executive-order-14086-policy-and-proce...
- leereeves 3y ago
  Thanks for the link to the executive order. Now that I've read it, I'd say that an opaque system seems to be exactly what Biden wanted. The EO repeatedly says that results and procedures will be "classified" and "consistent with the protection of intelligence sources or methods". And the complainant not being able to represent themselves is mandated by the EO: "a special advocate will be selected by the Data Protection Review Court to advocate regarding the complainant's interest in the matter".
vjulian 3y ago
Your comment only serves to further illustrate the mystic of the US Office of Dear Leader. To what degree, if at all, did Biden drive the profiling, search, evaluation and selection processes? I feel fairly confident in guessing that you don’t know. Unelected long-tenure “officials” run the US government to a degree that you’re perhaps not appreciating. Journalists not reporting on them or their actions, and instead maintaining a ruse is shoddy and shady.

oooyay 3y ago

> Don't you think leaders should be held accountable for the actions of their administration? Color me cynical, but people only mutter this when it's someone on the other team. So, in general do I think we should follow that principle? Yes. Do I think people widely believe that enough to hold their own self-interest-adjacent parties accountable? Certainly not. If you want to be very picky, the rule Mr Garland invented was in response to a Biden executive order [1] [2]. The executive order is long, but section 3 is pretty succinct and clear. If Mr Garland implemented an opaque system then I can predict one of two scenarios occurred, maybe both: 1. All of the information the court receives is classified and should never have been leaked in the first place, so no one should know. That means the way someone does know is because of the watchdogs inside the intelligence community. 2. Mr Garland is openly defying the President through process and appeasing someone (maybe the intelligence community). 1: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2022/10/14/2022-22234/data-protection-review-court https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2022/10/14/2022-22... 2: https://www.state.gov/executive-order-14086-policy-and-procedures/#safeguarding https://www.state.gov/executive-order-14086-policy-and-proce...

leereeves 3y ago
Thanks for the link to the executive order. Now that I've read it, I'd say that an opaque system seems to be exactly what Biden wanted. The EO repeatedly says that results and procedures will be "classified" and "consistent with the protection of intelligence sources or methods". And the complainant not being able to represent themselves is mandated by the EO: "a special advocate will be selected by the Data Protection Review Court to advocate regarding the complainant's interest in the matter".

vjulian 3y ago

Your comment only serves to further illustrate the mystic of the US Office of Dear Leader. To what degree, if at all, did Biden drive the profiling, search, evaluation and selection processes? I feel fairly confident in guessing that you don’t know. Unelected long-tenure “officials” run the US government to a degree that you’re perhaps not appreciating. Journalists not reporting on them or their actions, and instead maintaining a ruse is shoddy and shady.