So the DOJ acknowledges that the Bush War Criminals are guilty of crimes!

[Summer Hathaway]

89. This is a civil suit

and has NOTHING to do with defending war criminals - nothing. And has been pointed out to you several times now, Bush et al are not, in law, 'war criminals', having never been prosecuted for, nor found guilty of, war crimes.

"What is clear now is that it is not just 'procedure'."

It IS procedure. A defendant named in a civil suit is bound by law to file a defense within a certain time; it is not an admission of guilt. Failing to respond to a civil suit can result in being declared in default, whereby a judge can find for the plaintiff without having heard the defendant's case.

"this administration has ... actively protected them from prosecution even in foreign jurisdictions. And now they are doing it again."

There is no "prosecution" here. A civil suit involves liability for damages, not guilt or innocence of a crime.

"You certainly deserve credit for the effort to try to defend the indefensible."

I am not defending anything or anyone. I am pointing out (yet again) that your ignorance of the law is apparent, and yet you persist in stating non-facts as facts.

Now back to your OP:

Can you point me to where the DOJ "acknowledged that the Bush War Criminals are guilty of crimes"?

Can you point me to where the DOJ stated that Bush was "just following orders"?

Can you point me to where "the US Government has admitted that crimes were committed by the Bush Administration"?

You have stated these things with great authority - where are the FACTS that support your statements?