Saturday, October 08, 2016 9:37:40 AM
It is my sense that she saw at least 1 document among the 50+ she reviewed that would be considered a "bombshell" if it were made public.
We have 2 scenarios here: 1) The documents corroborate the government's position. 2) At least 1 of the documents has the potential to severely damage the the government's legal position.
In the first scenario, the judge would simply have advised the government to make everything public now and clear the deck, so to speak. In the second scenario, she would have been bitterly critical of the government for trying every subterfuge possible to keep the document(s) hidden from the plaintiffs.
It is clear that Judge Sweeney worded her ruling per the second scenario!!!
FEATURED BNCM and DELEX Healthcare Group Announce Strategic Merger to Drive Expansion and Growth • Jul 2, 2024 7:19 AM
EWRC's 21 Moves Gaming Studios Moves to SONY Pictures Studios and Green Lights Development of a Third Upcoming Game • EWRC • Jul 2, 2024 8:00 AM
NUBURU Announces Upcoming TV Interview Featuring CEO Brian Knaley on Fox Business, Bloomberg TV, and Newsmax TV as Sponsored Programming • BURU • Jul 1, 2024 1:57 PM
Mass Megawatts Announces $220,500 Debt Cancellation Agreement to Improve Financing and Sales of a New Product to be Announced on July 11 • MMMW • Jun 28, 2024 7:30 AM
VAYK Exited Caribbean Investments for $320,000 Profit • VAYK • Jun 27, 2024 9:00 AM
North Bay Resources Announces Successful Flotation Cell Test at Bishop Gold Mill, Inyo County, California • NBRI • Jun 27, 2024 9:00 AM