Tag Archives: John D. Bates

Amoral vs. Immoral

Posted on by

According to the ConstitutionCenter.org:

If there is a lesson in all of this it is that our Constitution is neither a self-actuating nor a self-correcting document. It requires the constant attention and devotion of all citizens. There is a story, often told, that upon exiting the Constitutional Convention Benjamin Franklin was approached by a group of citizens asking what sort of government the delegates had created. His answer was: “A republic, if you can keep it.” The brevity of that response should not cause us to under-value its essential meaning: democratic republics are not merely founded upon the consent of the people, they are also absolutely dependent upon the active and informed involvement of the people for their continued good health.

Somehow we have not done as good a job of keeping our republic as we might have. The recent election was a ray of hope, but we have a long way to go to get back to the government our Founding Fathers envisioned.

Fox News is reporting:

The Justice Department released nearly 65,000 pages of subpoenaed documents related to the DOJ’s botched gunrunning sting, after a federal judge overruled the Obama administration’s decision to withhold the records by invoking executive privilege. The program, which targeted Mexican gun cartels, came under scrutiny after weapons involved in the operation were connected to the killing of U.S. Border Patrol agent Brian Terry in 2010.

“Issa and his idiot cronies never gave a damn about this when all that was happening was that thousands of Mexicans were being killed with guns from our country,” Holder wrote to members of his staff in April 2011, after Issa threatened to subpoena a Federal Firearms Licensee witness to testify on the investigation. “All they want to do — in reality — is cripple ATF and suck up to the gun lobby,” he continued, referring to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, the branch of the Justice Department that was in charge of the gunrunning operation.

“Politics at its worst — maybe the media will get it,” Holder’s email added.

It is obvious from that statement that Eric Holder did not believe he had done anything wrong. There is no acknowledgement that running guns to Mexico might be illegal or immoral.

According to the dictionary:

amoral – lacking a moral sense; unconcerned with the rightness or wrongness of something

immoral – not conforming to accepted standards of morality

Somehow we have morphed from the representative republic created by the U.S. Constitution to a country ruled by a bunch of elite political class who can no longer distinguish between right and wrong. If we do not remedy this situation in 2016, we will lose our republic.

Also, please note that the documents released were released on the eve of the election in the hopes that no one would pay attention to them.

 

 

It’s Easier To Rewrite History If You Delete The Actual Records

Posted on by

I never thought I would agree with Patrick Leahy {Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vermont)}, but in this case he is absolutely right. Eastman’s Online Geneology Newsletter posted an article yesterday about Senator Leahy’s fight to preserve court records that have recently been erased by the government due to a computer update.

The article reports:

“Wholesale removal of thousands of cases from PACER, particularly from four of our federal courts of appeals, will severely limit access to information not only for legal practitioners, but also for legal scholars, historians, journalists, and private litigants for whom PACER has become the go-to source for most court filings,” Leahy wrote Friday to US District Judge John D. Bates, the director of the Administrative Office of the Courts (AO).

A spokesperson for the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts said the removals were due to technical differences between the archives maintained by local courts and a new electronic case file system being adopted by the judiciary. The documents are still available on paper but were deleted from online access “without any warning to the public, and without prior notification or consultation with Congress,” according to Senator Leahy.

This may be a totally innocent event, but it is an example of how history can easily be rewritten because so much of our records are digital. When information was in printed books, revising that information was more complicated than it is today. The downside of record books is that there was a period in American history when courthouses would catch fire, burn quickly because of all the records in them, and those records would be lost. Now, in the electronic age, we face the challenge of losing electronic records because the electronic platforms change. When was the last time you watched a videotape rather than a DVD?

Thank you, Senator Leahy, for trying to save the deleted records. I am sure there will be many lawyers and genealogists who will be grateful for your efforts.