Did A Purloined Letter Save a Supreme Court Nomination?
May 12, 2006 1:56 PM Subscribe
The Case of the Disappearing Affirmative Action Letters In August 2005, letters written by future Chief Justice John Roberts, dealing with the Reagan Administration's policies on affirmative action, disappeared from the Ronald Reagan Library in Simi Valley, California. The National Archives and Record Administration was so concerned they conducted their own investigation, but their report on the investigation has so many redactions it raises more new questions than it answers about White House lawyers who had unguarded access to the papers.
Move along, nothing to see here...
...literally, in this case.
posted by you just lost the game at 2:10 PM on May 12, 2006
...literally, in this case.
posted by you just lost the game at 2:10 PM on May 12, 2006
Until the makeup of the Senate changes, neither Roberts nor Bush — let alone their associates — can be impeached and convicted for contempt of Congress.
posted by Mr. Six at 3:29 PM on May 12, 2006
posted by Mr. Six at 3:29 PM on May 12, 2006
So, I guess I should ask the question: How come that NARA document is redacted so heavily? Is this a matter of national security or privacy?
posted by chef_boyardee at 3:32 PM on May 12, 2006
posted by chef_boyardee at 3:32 PM on May 12, 2006
Actually Mr. Six, since Nancy Pelosi has put her foot down and insisted that Democrats won't impeach Bush even if he raped a five-year-old on the South Lawn, your statement is insufficient. What you meant to say was, "Until the makeup of the House and Senate change to non-Democrat, non-Republican majorities, neither Bush nor Roberts can be impeached." Sadly, you don't have to run one party out of town to see change; you have to run two parties out of town.
posted by jellicle at 3:59 PM on May 12, 2006
posted by jellicle at 3:59 PM on May 12, 2006
Sadly, you don't have to run one party out of town to see change; you have to run two parties out of town.
posted by jellicle at 3:59 PM PST on May 12 [+fave] [!]
Almost enough for one to go ahead and offer up their bodies as the independent canadate next election cycle eh?
posted by rough ashlar at 6:46 PM on May 12, 2006
posted by jellicle at 3:59 PM PST on May 12 [+fave] [!]
Almost enough for one to go ahead and offer up their bodies as the independent canadate next election cycle eh?
posted by rough ashlar at 6:46 PM on May 12, 2006
So......... obvious.
When this is all a matter of public record 30, 40 years down the line and everything has been revealed, 7th graders will read their history books and see things like this and say, "COME ON. No one is that stupid, how could people not have seen this or stopped it?"
posted by BlackLeotardFront at 7:05 PM on May 12, 2006
When this is all a matter of public record 30, 40 years down the line and everything has been revealed, 7th graders will read their history books and see things like this and say, "COME ON. No one is that stupid, how could people not have seen this or stopped it?"
posted by BlackLeotardFront at 7:05 PM on May 12, 2006
oh that Reagan Library. I thought the coloring books were keepsies.
posted by trondant at 8:21 PM on May 12, 2006
posted by trondant at 8:21 PM on May 12, 2006
7th graders will read their history books and see things like this and say, "COME ON. No one is that stupid, how could people not have seen this or stopped it?"
Wow, when I was in 7th grade, I'm pretty sure we didn't study the history of what documentary evidence was used in the vetting of past supreme court nominees. What a marvelous modern age we'll live in 30 to 40 years from now when our grandchildren will study such arcane stuff in 7th grade!
posted by JekPorkins at 8:32 PM on May 12, 2006
Wow, when I was in 7th grade, I'm pretty sure we didn't study the history of what documentary evidence was used in the vetting of past supreme court nominees. What a marvelous modern age we'll live in 30 to 40 years from now when our grandchildren will study such arcane stuff in 7th grade!
posted by JekPorkins at 8:32 PM on May 12, 2006
Wow, when I was in 7th grade, I'm pretty sure we didn't study the history of what documentary evidence was used in the vetting of past supreme court nominees. What a marvelous modern age we'll live in 30 to 40 years from now when our grandchildren will study such arcane stuff in 7th grade!
Lol.
posted by delmoi at 9:26 PM on May 12, 2006
Lol.
posted by delmoi at 9:26 PM on May 12, 2006
from: Lake Tahoe Unified School District's seventh grade History and Social Science curriculum (which was the first I found on Google):
1. All Students will demonstrate knowledge of some of the methods we use to uncover the past
* describe the work of archaeologists and historians
* explain some of the processes and records used in reconstructing the past
* explain why many perceptions of the past are tentative and can be changed with new discoveries and theories.
If the story became a big enough scandal, I would have thought it would make the perfect illustration for such a curriculum in forty years time.
posted by PeterMcDermott at 5:03 AM on May 13, 2006
1. All Students will demonstrate knowledge of some of the methods we use to uncover the past
* describe the work of archaeologists and historians
* explain some of the processes and records used in reconstructing the past
* explain why many perceptions of the past are tentative and can be changed with new discoveries and theories.
If the story became a big enough scandal, I would have thought it would make the perfect illustration for such a curriculum in forty years time.
posted by PeterMcDermott at 5:03 AM on May 13, 2006
« Older Hot For Teacher | It's kind of like a giant, marsupial, video rodent... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by ND¢ at 1:58 PM on May 12, 2006