Let’s take one of the examples posted above. In a court of law the fact that a highway is being built would probably be stipulated by both sides, but the accusation that it is part of a scheme to erase the national border would be subject to the regular rules of evidence.
Let’s take the working groups.
They refused, even under FOIA, to release the names of people who are in the committees so that these people can be contacted and asked questions about what they are doing, either in writing, or by various other means.
Let’s take this meeting in Canada. It’s behind closed doors and those who are opposed to its meeting, such as representatives of Eagle Forum, are not allowed to get near the place so that 1) whomever is arriving can arrive in secret 2) whomever is attending cannot be asked questions.