They Probably Have Food Poisoning Too

3 Comments on “They Probably Have Food Poisoning Too”

1. Well earned, you have stayed on things so many others have been too lazy to dig into….thanks

2. Well deserved kudos, Brad! If enough people were paying attention you would have already gotten rid of that obscene DRE plague.

3. the palast piece was excellent…..now that you gathered the evidence and palast has presented the case of kochs/christie coordinating (the one law left to break)…where is the justice department???

   and wtf is going on at justice in general…. this post piece has received very little coverage but it boogles my mind

   ///////////////////////

   Muhtorov’s challenge has its roots in the case rejected by the Supreme Court last year. In deciding to dismiss, the Supreme Court relied upon the assurance by the U.S. solicitor general that the government would notify criminal defendants when it had used evidence from the surveillance.

   But the solicitor general at the time did not know that the Justice Department had a policy to conceal such evidence from defendants. He learned of it only after some criminal defendants sought clarification of remarks that Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) made in late 2012 that the government had used evidence from warrantless monitoring in certain cases. The department reversed its policy last year.
   /////////////////////////////////////////////

   so the solicitor general presented false info to the supreme court????? because he did not know that justice department was (illegally) concealing evidence???

   http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/terrorism-suspect-challenges-warrantless-surveillance/2014/01/29/fb9cc2ae-88f1-11e3-a5bd-844629433ba3_story.html

   how does the solicitor general not know justice is doing parallel construction…do they not read reuters?

Comments are closed.