3 ms·

So, I am the person who wrote that petition. (and yes I'm aware of the issues with the wording ) The decision to name Carmen Ortiz was deliberate; she is a pol

by olefoo 12y ago

So, I am the person who wrote that petition. (and yes I'm aware of the issues with the wording ) The decision to name Carmen Ortiz was deliberate; she is a political appointee and thus could be dismissed at the administrations pleasure. That they chose to hide behind the 'cannot discuss personnel matters' figleaf is to put it plainly; bullshit. Political appointees are just that, political; and the fact that the administration is too cowardly to defend their choice in this matter speaks volumes. It doesn't really matter; Aaron is still dead, Carmen Ortiz still has her job (although hopefully her political career has topped out) and we carry on.

tootie 12y ago
Honestly, the fact that she's a political appointee is what makes your petition moot. They'll just appoint someone else. She was following directives from the DOJ based on the law. The petition should have called for end to the acadmic papers paywall racket. If you call for a rule that any research receiving government (or at least NIH or NSF) funding must be made freely available upon publish, that is within the purview of the executive and would solve the root problem once and for all.
- dangrossman 12y ago
  > If you call for a rule that any research receiving government (or at least NIH or NSF) funding must be made freely available upon publish, that is within the purview of the executive and would solve the root problem once and for all. That already happened -- https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/response/increasing-public-access-results-scientific-research https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/response/increasing-public-...
- olefoo 12y ago
  > the fact that she's a political appointee is what makes your petition moot. They'll just appoint someone else. If they had sacked her, that would have been an important signal to other prosecutors as to the limits of what is appropriate. And mootness or lack thereof is irrelevant in this context. It was a petition for redress of grievances not a pleading in court. That the grievance is still not redressed does not make the petition invalid or irrelevant. And the larger point here that should concern us all is that prosecutors have unchecked power and regularly exercise it in unjust and corrupt ways. If you draw the attention of a United States Attorney; it does not matter if you committed a crime or not, you will be ruined financially and most likely put into a position of pleading out so as not be in jeopardy of multiple lifetimes of prison.

by olefoo 12y ago

tootie 12y ago

Honestly, the fact that she's a political appointee is what makes your petition moot. They'll just appoint someone else. She was following directives from the DOJ based on the law. The petition should have called for end to the acadmic papers paywall racket. If you call for a rule that any research receiving government (or at least NIH or NSF) funding must be made freely available upon publish, that is within the purview of the executive and would solve the root problem once and for all.

dangrossman 12y ago
> If you call for a rule that any research receiving government (or at least NIH or NSF) funding must be made freely available upon publish, that is within the purview of the executive and would solve the root problem once and for all. That already happened -- https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/response/increasing-public-access-results-scientific-research https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/response/increasing-public-...
olefoo 12y ago
> the fact that she's a political appointee is what makes your petition moot. They'll just appoint someone else. If they had sacked her, that would have been an important signal to other prosecutors as to the limits of what is appropriate. And mootness or lack thereof is irrelevant in this context. It was a petition for redress of grievances not a pleading in court. That the grievance is still not redressed does not make the petition invalid or irrelevant. And the larger point here that should concern us all is that prosecutors have unchecked power and regularly exercise it in unjust and corrupt ways. If you draw the attention of a United States Attorney; it does not matter if you committed a crime or not, you will be ruined financially and most likely put into a position of pleading out so as not be in jeopardy of multiple lifetimes of prison.