Big deal. http://wfla.com/2017/10/21/...assassination-files/ Anything of real 'importance' that was ever in those 'files' has long ago been permanently deleted/expunged/redacted and will never see the light of day. Only the fluff remains. The days of any honesty in all levels of any govt investigations/reports/findings disappeared in this country many decades ago as the govt and it's agencies primary purpose is to try to CY (own) A and that of all those in the agencies. As of 2015, only 19% of America's nearly 400 million population trusts it's govt and it's agencies and employees...and for good reason.
yeah its likely whatever "files" are left are all chopped up and cut full of holes where all the actual information was. Basically releasing confetti paper.
yeah its likely whatever "files" are left are all chopped up and cut full of holes where all the actual information was. Basically releasing confetti paper.
Hey, we could save it for the 2nd inaugural parade.
Oh c'mon. You know the only things he'll leave redacted are the files tying Trump to the JFK assassination. You know he did it. Hillary went on a talk show and said it. lol
More than likely someone took home the complete files as a 'trophy', and hopefully they'll be uncovered and released by the executor of that person's estate.
Did you read the story? "Trump to order National Archives..." is BS. Congress ordered that 20+ years ago and Trump is going to let that happen Unlike some others.
Did you read the story? "Trump to order National Archives..." is BS. Congress ordered that 20+ years ago and Trump is going to let that happen Unlike some others.
Yes, I read it. 'Congress mandated...' (with outs for each prez....provisos) Any president since 1992 could have ordered NARA to follow that mandate. Without an executive action, the congressional provisos became the rule. There are at least 2 analogies to this in our system. 1. Congress (or state legislatures) write legislation. Unless a president or governor signs the legislation, it's just words on paper and has no standing as statute law. Zero action takes place and whatever pre-existing statute law that was in place stays in place.
2. Appeals courts. Anything submitted to an appeals court (including SCOTUS) can either be ignored (not heard) by an upper court and whatever ruling a regular or lower court gave, stands, but if a higher court does agree to hear a case, it must order the lower court's ruling overturned in order for anything to change from that lower court's ruling.
IOW, doing 'nothing' is a defacto order that congress' provisos stand. The president's signature on the certification that he believes no harm comes with full disclosure and release nullifies the provisos. The full text of S.3006 is available online, but the relevant part is below:
quote
(C) The periodic review of postponed assassination records shall serve to downgrade and declassify security classified information. (D) Each assassination record shall be publicly disclosed in full, and available in the Collection no later than the date that is 25 years after the date of enactment of this Act, unless the President certifies, as required by this Act, that-- (i) continued postponement is made necessary by an identifiable harm to the military defense, intelligence operations, law enforcement, or conduct of foreign relations; and (ii) the identifiable harm is of such gravity that it outweighs the public interest in disclosure. (h) FEES FOR COPYING- Executive branch agencies shall-- (1) charge fees for copying assassination records; and (2) grant waivers of such fees pursuant to the standards established by section 552(a)(4) of title 5, United States Code. SEC. 6. GROUNDS FOR POSTPONEMENT OF PUBLIC DISCLOSURE OF RECORDS. Disclosure of assassination records or particular information in assassination records to the public may be postponed subject to the limitations of this Act if there is clear and convincing evidence that-- (1) the threat to the military defense, intelligence operations, or conduct of foreign relations of the United States posed by the public disclosure of the assassination is of such gravity that it outweighs the public interest, and such public disclosure would reveal-- (A) an intelligence agent whose identity currently requires protection; (B) an intelligence source or method which is currently utilized, or reasonably expected to be utilized, by the United States Government and which has not been officially disclosed, the disclosure of which would interfere with the conduct of intelligence activities; or (C) any other matter currently relating to the military defense, intelligence operations or conduct of foreign relations of the United States, the disclosure of which would demonstrably impair the national security of the United States; (2) the public disclosure of the assassination record would reveal the name or identity of a living person who provided confidential information to the United States and would pose a substantial risk of harm to that person; (3) the public disclosure of the assassination record could reasonably be expected to constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy, and that invasion of privacy is so substantial that it outweighs the public interest; (4) the public disclosure of the assassination record would compromise the existence of an understanding of confidentiality currently requiring protection between a Government agent and a cooperating individual or a foreign government, and public disclosure would be so harmful that it outweighs the public interest; or (5) the public disclosure of the assassination record would reveal a security or protective procedure currently utilized, or reasonably expected to be utilized, by the Secret Service or another Government agency responsible for protecting Government officials, and public disclosure would be so harmful that it outweighs the public interest.
2. Appeals courts. Anything submitted to an appeals court (including SCOTUS) can either be ignored (not heard) by an upper court and whatever ruling a regular or lower court gave, stands, but if a higher court does agree to hear a case, it must order the lower court's ruling overturned in order for anything to change from that lower court's ruling.
Mostly, but not entirely, correct.
The SCOTUS could for example agree to hear a lower court appeal case and ultimately find to uphold the lower court ruling.
Depending on the nature of the case, SCOTUS upholding the lower court ruling can have the effect of making that the defacto "law of the land" for the entire country.
At a minimum it carries the weight of stare decisis, case law, for future litigation.
[This message has been edited by randye (edited 10-23-2017).]
Well, they did not release them all. Some 300 files are under a 6 month review before being able to be released. Apparently the 25 or so years since they were supposed to be released was not enough time
lol
