183

The settlement agreement requires the Department to provide detailed COVID-19 data for the next 3 years, including vaccination counts, case counts, and deaths, aggregated weekly, by county, age group, gender, and race.

While the litigation was pending, the Department claimed in court that the records requested did not exist. But after the appellate court upheld the trial court’s order requiring the Department to produce a corporate representative for deposition, the records were produced in March 2023.

“The settlement agreement vindicates the position of Rep. Smith and FLCGA. The Department hid public records during the height of the pandemic to fit a political narrative that Florida was open for business,” said Michael Barfield, Director of Public Access Initiatives at FLCGA. “Transparency and accountability are not negotiable. The Constitution mandates it.”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] IHeartBadCode@kbin.social 17 points 1 year ago

But after the appellate court upheld the trial court’s order requiring the Department to produce a corporate representative for deposition, the records were produced in March 2023.

So they kept saying they didn't have the records, when the court was finally like "Okay send someone over to be deposed for it", all those records suddenly appeared. Why? Because sending someone over to officially be deposed for it, marks the person responsible for the testimony that is very difficult to escape. That level of deposition, you don't get a "well I wasn't aware that Bob over there was hiding documents" or any backsie outsie like that. That official person says "we don't have the records" and suddenly someone finds the records, that official person's ass is going to prison.

That's why these documents suddenly appeared out of thin air, because the court was done with the department and was like, "Okay if you're so adamant about your position, put someone's freedom on the line." And it's not like a scapegoat can be picked, because that's also very uncool and very illegal to do that for this kind of deposition and given enough time, had they chosen to go that route, many more would be finding themselves in prison.

That's literally what it took. For the court to remove all the weaselly "Oh! THOSE documents?! Why didn't you say so?" chances to get out of being found out. They literally had to be squeezed into a corner from which there was no escape to finally fess up. I'm not in Florida, never live there, never plan on living there, but if I was a Floridian I'd be calling for the Florida Assembly to out everyone involved, all the way to DeSantis.

It's one thing if no one actually knew about the documents. But for suddenly all that recall to kick into full gear when the Court gets to this kind of position. No part of that looks legit. That's like a bunch of fuckers thought they could snake their way through all the courts for long enough and suddenly when the shit hit fan and there was nowhere else to go they started screaming "HEY LET'S SETTLE!!"

But I doubt the average Florida voter will even lift a single finger about this. There will be some, but by and large, most of the Floridan voters won't care that a Governor hid information about deaths and dangers of a virus. Hell even went after that Jones lady for trying to tell everyone that they were hiding the data with police raiding her home. Nope, most Floridian voters will allow this to sweep on by like a category one hurricane.

I don't think future generations will ever understand how people kept yelling "justice" and this BS is the only kind of "justice" we ever got.

[-] Jaysyn@kbin.social 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

the Florida Assembly

The #GOP members of which are as bad or worse than #DeSantis.

EDIT: Cope & seethe, @ripcord, you pathetic bootlicker.

this post was submitted on 09 Oct 2023
183 points (98.4% liked)

politics

19080 readers
2913 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS