Reply #19: I am not wrong, you post as many slanted articles as you want

[merh]

that doesn't make you right (it makes it apparent how much you DON'T KNOW and how much you have an agenda - slam Obama at all costs).

Focus on the important issues and stop with the anti-Obama rhetoric and someone might start to pay attention to you.

Does the DOJ need to focus on the torture investigation? Yes.

Does the DOJ need to look at itself and get to the bottom of the political proscecutions, you betcha.

Does the torture loophole in the Army Field manual need to be closed? Yes, without a doubt.

Is Obama perfect? No, not by a long shot. Maybe you need to pay heed to Hillary, he is the one that is elected to office and if she didn't think he wanted what was best for the nation, she wouldn't have taken the job as his SOS.

I've posted plenty of stuff against the Obama admin and his policies, I will speak out when he or his department heads do things that are wrong. I don't believe this is the case. Michigan v. Jackson wasn't even argued by the Defendant, it isn't accepted as law in the 5th Circuit. It came up during oral arguments and the Court wants the opinions of both sides as to whether it applies, whether it is relevant and whether it is good law or unnecessary.

I worked in law enforcement, I know how confusing and frustrating it has to be to have a defendant come in to confess only to be told that confession is no good because the defendant had an attorney in some other criminal case. Like I said, the DOJ represents the accused and the accusers, they have an obligation to all citizens, just not the ones you decide today are relevant because of some slanted article.

The Solicitor General's office is involved in 2/3rds of the filings before SCOTUS, they were a party to this case before Obama was sworn in, before he won the election. They enter an appearance in most criminal cases because they have a vested interest in the proceedings. They represent the prosecution and law enforcement, as well as the unaccused and the average citizen. They have a duty to ensure that the guilty are brought to justice and the innocent are acquitted. It is a double duty and for the most part (prior to buscho) they do a decent job of balancing the duties.

And the damnedest thing about the adversary system, both sides are entitled to representation and to have their sides heard. That is how our system of justice works.

I don't agree with the DOJ's position but I understand it and I don't blame the Obama administration for taking the position.

Oh, and just food for thought about the lawyer knowing what she is talking about. Just remember, so did Bybee and Yoo and Haines - being a lawyer doesn't make them right or even reasonable, doesn't mean that they and they alone understand the system or want justice.