I don't believe the claim of good faith that you propose: I think that they knew they were committing crimes and that they intended to get away with it, because

I don't believe the claim of good faith that you propose: I think that they knew they were committing crimes and that they intended to get away with it, because they could count on people like you to not hold them accountable. I'm so displeased with the government taking actions like this, I think it's preferable if we do cause a massive panic and shut down the system at a high level -- even while we let some of the bureaucracies run -- until we can sort this out. I think that we need to make it clear that it's unacceptable to cross some lines in the name of "making a hard choice", and that there are personal consequences to signing off on those kinds of crimes -- that as a nation, we mean it when we declare certain kinds of actions beyond the authorization of government. Were it more timely, I also think that we should prosecute on a number of the other things you listed. Alas, we didn't, because of thinking like yours, and it seems merely to have encouraged more lawlessness from officials. You didn't actually propose fixing anything: you merely advocated doing more of the same and hoping that it just gets better, nor did you propose any reason that prosecuting people for knowingly breaking the law wouldn't lead to a change in the behavior of officials. Your answer was a non-answer.