People have admitted in news interviews to destroying government data to prevent others from knowing what the government was doing. That’s likely criminal. This is a legitimate reason to get at information before people who might destroy have the opportunity.

What’s happening with judges is very political. We likely won’t know what’s allowed until things have gone through the appeals process. There have been cases of judges admitting they will rule against the current administration no matter the topic or law. This is messy, to say the least.

>There have been cases of judges admitting they will rule against the current administration no matter the topic or law

What exactly did they say and who said it?

>What’s happening with judges is very political. We likely won’t know what’s allowed until things have gone through the appeals process.

What is very political about it?

Since appeals are also decided by judges why is that a better system?

>People have admitted in news interviews to destroying government data to prevent others from knowing what the government was doing. That’s likely criminal. This is a legitimate reason to get at information before people who might destroy have the opportunity.

Yes, this is precisely the accusation being made against DOGE: they are the government actors criminally trying to to prevent the public from knowing what they're doing.

>There have been cases of judges admitting they will rule against the current administration no matter the topic or law.

No, there haven't, but feel free to provide a source.

Citation or you're full of shit.

In American system, appeal process is a very formal thing - it checks whether all the ts were crossed, whether process was followed. It is not checking the evidence, it is bringing new evidence, nothing like that.

That is how it was designed.