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

[Summer Hathaway]

93. So your 'defense' is that you didn't state

that this wasn't a criminal trial in your OP?

Then why did you bring up issues that would ONLY APPLY to a criminal case?

"Do YOU know the difference between defending a lawsuit on its merits because the evidence will show a lack of responsibility, and avoiding presenting any defense by asking for immunity from guilt based on the claim that the defendants were not working on their own, that they were working in their capacity as employees of the US Government."

Do YOU know the difference? Apparently not.

The DOJ is not "avoiding presenting any defense" - they are pointing out that the inappropriate defendants were named. This suit will presumably go forward after the plaintiff refiles, naming the United States as the defendant.

Happens all the time in civil suits. A plaintiff sues the human resources director of a corporation because they were unjustifiably fired from their job. The plaintiff would be instructed to re-file naming the corporation as the defendant, as the individual who handed them their pink slip would NOT be the appropriate party to be held liable for the plaintiff's alleged damages.

You keep accusing people of "defending the Bush Cabal". The only thing people are defending here is the law - which you persist in assaulting by declaring your non-facts about what the law IS and how it is applied.