The “Bush Crime Family” has gotten extremely proficient at playing a game with the members of Congress that in “ghetto-speak” would be called “the Boo Game.” It’s a way to use fear as a tool to keep someone or group “in check” or “at bay”  in order to maintain control.

The has had several, very effective tools. in their “boo game” arsenal such as: Al Qaeda, Osama bin Laden, Saddam Hussein, Weapons of Mass Destructions (WMDs) and the ever popular Terror Alert Color Chart.

Whenever there is an issue that Congress appears to switch mindset and allegiance on, we are usually told that they have been given privy to “sensitive information” that made them relent with any former promises made. (signs of the “boo game” being played)

One of those issues has been the detainment of so-called “enemy combatants” held primarily at Guantanamo Bay. The Bush Crime Family has been digging into their boo game bag of tricks to answer and address many of the questions that Congress has made.

Now that the Supreme Court has forced their hand, ruling that detainees have the right to challenge their detention in civilian court, not just before secret military panels, Bush (and friends) has said, “wait, we need some more time.”

At a closed-door meeting with judges and defense attorneys this week, government lawyers said they needed time to add new evidence and make other changes to evidentiary documents known as "factual returns."

The Bush administration wants to rewrite the official evidence against Guantanamo Bay detainees, allowing it to shore up its cases before they come under scrutiny by civilian judges for the first time.

The government has stood behind the evidence for years. Military review boards relied on it to justify holding hundreds of prisoners indefinitely without charge. Justice Department attorneys said it was thoroughly and fairly reviewed.

Now that federal judges are about to review the evidence, however, the government says it needs to make changes.

Attorneys for the detainees criticized the idea, saying the government is basically asking for a last-minute do-over.

"It’s sort of an admission that the original returns were defective," said attorney David Remes, who represents many detainees and attended Wednesday’s meeting. "It’s also an admission that the government thinks it needs to beef up the evidence."

Justice Department spokesman Erik Ablin declined to comment on the plan. The discussions were confirmed by several attorneys and officials who attended or were briefed on the meeting with the judges and defense lawyers.

"It’s a totally fishy maneuver that suggests that the government wants, at the 11th hour, to get its ducks in a row," said Jonathan Hafetz, an attorney representing several detainees. He was briefed on the plan.

The documents include the government’s accusations and summaries of the evidence that was presented to the military review panel. The records were filed in federal court in many detainee cases in 2004 and 2005, before Congress stripped those courts of the authority to hold hearings.

Detainees’ attorneys who have reviewed the records criticized much of the evidence as hearsay cobbled together from bounty hunters and border guards who accused people of being terrorists in exchange for reward money.

At Guantanamo Bay, the traditional rules of evidence do not apply in trials run by the military. In a Washington federal courtroom, they would.

The government wants to submit new records, which would allow it to add (manufacture) new intelligence and expand its reasoning (lie) for holding the detainees. Since the hearings will decide whether the detainees are lawfully being held now — not whether they were lawfully being held over the past several years — the government wants to provide the court its newest, best evidence.

It will be up to federal judges to decide whether the Justice Department can rewrite those documents.

The question is part of a broader dispute over what the upcoming hearings will look like. Attorneys for the detainees want judges to review all the evidence and decide whether each prisoner should be released. The government believes the judges should look only at limited evidence (rigged) prepared by officials at Guantanamo Bay.

That’s why defense attorneys are troubled by the idea that authorities now want to rewrite that evidence. If the court limits arguments to just the government’s record, and gives the government a chance to improve that record, they believe the detainees’ chances will be hurt.

"They’re not just talking about making a little supplement where they’ve learned something new," said attorney Charles H. Carpenter, who was in the meeting. "They’re talking about possibly amending every single one." (Lie, lie, and lie some more)

ACLU Update from Guantanamo: Supreme Court Decision, Arraignments … - In a stunning blow to the administration’s failed detention policies, the Supreme Court ruled last week in Boumediene v. Bush that the US Constitution applies to the government’s detention policies at Guantanamo Bay . …

White House Dismissed Legal Advice On Detainees - The result, they said, has been a series of losses at the Supreme Court, including last week’s 5 to 4 ruling that detainees at Guantanamo have a constitutional right to a review of their detention in federal courts — a ruling that …

Inside Guantanamo: What does the 5-4 Supreme Court decision really … - A Public Defender representing seven Gitmo detainees shares misgivings about the Supreme Court decision upholding habeas corpus.