Not a lawyer but if I were Kel McClanahan I'd use what Trump just in the Oval as evidence that DoJ lawyers are de facto lying to the court, even if they didn't lie knowingly, and rush to court again.
Trump: "It's somewhat voluntary but it's also if you don't answer it, I guess you get fired."
Yeah, but his next mass email going out to all federal employees reminding them to include the cover sheet on all TPS reports because "that would be great" is really going to solve the "waste, fraud, and abuse"!
Here's a good piece on the arrogance of the culture Musk represents so well. While they're good at what they do, they have no interest in or informed perspective on complicated things like government.
So how does Elon vowing to do this again this week work? Elon is doubling down on the firing part. Trump is now backing this bullshit, which makes Trump look like a weak cowardly toadie.
Josh, I included a short bit about this same PIA you flagged for Slate yesterday and I'm glad you're on top of it b/c it seems like a serious screwup. One thing you may not have picked up on is that in the Feb 5 PIA ...
1/3
... (the preamble to which argues that a (real) PIA wasn't required for Musk's email server), they attempt to craft a 3-part test to retroactively justify the Fork email (i.e., 1. only gov't names, 2. voluntary, 3. *short* replies). Musk's Saturday email is less than voluntary ...
2/3
...when you consider the full context, but as for replies, the request is open ended--some might be short, many won't. In other words, they created a limitation for themselves on how the GWES should be used based on how they'd already used it. Then they just ignored that limitation on Saturday.
3/3
Comments
Trump: "It's somewhat voluntary but it's also if you don't answer it, I guess you get fired."
https://share.inquirer.com/yNvC2m
1/3
2/3
3/3