Stander: dont know answer. J: you don't know. then why did i receive testimony & arg and sworn declarations that tree management plan had nothing to do with Trump's Washington National Plan? J: DOJ attys arguing as officers of court made arguments. did doj know TMP ... /15

Show Post

J: govt's behavior in this case has been nothing if not extraordinary. J: who plans to argue for govt in the prelminary injunction motion? Robert Stander for DOJ. J: 1st question, was it coincidence that NPS cut down 500 trees based on 2019 plan, & that had nothing to do with Trump plan? /14

Show Post

[she's reading fast; I can't begin to keep up]. Judge: i am not seeking to compel testimony of Secy Burgum at this time. not seeking testmony of anyone at White House at this time. calling Wischer who has personal knowledge of why 100s of trees cut down lst week. And NPS employees who approved /13

Show Post

but people i heard from last week and will hear from today (unlike those in precedents govt cited) each has personal knowledge of facts of this case. will help me understand if agency has been accurate & forthcoming. ... essential to understanding how plan was developed. 2 are not high-ranking. /12

Show Post

Govt has claimed changes were only about executing a 2019 plan. ... but now Trump says his new plan is starting immediately. strong showing of bad faith. govt argues i'm violating fundamental separation of powers principles. says i can't compel testimony of high-level officials. /11

Show Post