A story about a pathetic man's downfall [34 Felony Convictions]

[Captainant 27644]

4 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Do you deny that, if indicted, Trump will raise every objection to the search in a motion to dismiss? 

I am confident that the probable cause part of it is unimpeachable and unwinnable by Trump.

Well we've seen his legal team is pretty shit and is likely going to miss things like that, so I don't think he'll raise every objection. He hasn't so far. 

 

5 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

I don't want a Trump indictment dismissed because some FBI dildo fucked up the documents or because some judge finds that the PRA wasn't followed or some such.

The concern isn't that the case may not be watertight. It's that no matter how sound the case is, it will be dismissed because the judiciary is half calvinball and horseshit. Hell, this ruling is horseshit - you just keep tapdancing around that because iT dOeSnT mAtTer - and we've seen the supreme court just make shit up and run with it when it suits their political ideals

[CTC2 2794]

2 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Several actually.  One dealing with attorney-client privilege and three or four with technical special masters (patent infringement).

And you never have had one where the "master" is a showboater know it all and creates work for themselves?  I hear ya on most of what you have said but, the wrong master can slow down and screw up any case.

[TwiceHorn 31443]

7 minutes ago, lemonlime said:

That case was about whether the archivist could release Presidential Records, and whether a former president could assert privilege to stop the archivist from releasing those records, which were already in the government's possession as they were government records.  It has nothing to do with whether a former president could hide Presidential Records from the current executive.  The records were Presidential Records, and the issue was whether the archivist could give those records over to the January 6 Committee.

 

From your quote:

The Presidential Records Act reflects that understanding by providing that a former President may initiate an action "asserting that a determination made by the Archivist violates the former President's rights or privileges." 44 U.S.C. § 2204(e). And "[n]othing in [the] Act shall be construed to * * * limit * * * any constitutionally-based privilege which may be available to a[ ] * * * former President." Id. at § 2204(c)(2).

Read the quote before it.  And the final sentence of the above.

Trump has the right, under common law and the PRA, to assert executive privilege.

Most of the documents, and all of them subject to executive privilege claims, are Presidential Records and at all times rightfully belonged to the government, regardless of who possessed them.  The PRA almost inescapably applies to them.  I'm not contending that it provides any sort of defense to criminal charges.

The government, albeit not NARA, proposes to release Presidential Records to the FBI.  Under common law and the PRA, Trump has the right to object to that and assert executive privilege.

I am not suggesting that the executive privilege claim should prevent their disclosure to the FBI.  In fact, I think the Archivists analysis in the May letter is correct.  Even more correct when the documents themselves are the instrumentality or res of the crime.

This proceeding, however, is a mechanism for sorting the personal from the presidential from the classified from the potentially privileged and then permitting the privilege claim to be asserted and waived or "not upheld" in the parlance of the PRA, by the sitting President, and, ultimately, for the "waiver" or "not upholding" of the privilege to be affirmed by the courts.

Edited September 7, 2022 by TwiceHorn

[lemonlime 5503]

6 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Read the quote before it.  And the final sentence of the above.

Trump has the right, under common law and the PRA, to assert executive privilege.

Most of the documents, and all of them subject to executive privilege claims, are Presidential Records and at all times rightfully belonged to the government, regardless of who possessed them.  The PRA almost inescapably applies to them.

The government, albeit not NARA, proposes to release Presidential Records to the FBI.  Under common law and the PRA, Trump has the right to object to that and assert executive privilege.

I am not suggesting that the executive privilege claim should prevent their disclosure to the FBI.  In fact, I think the Archivists analysis in the May letter is correct.  This proceeding, however, is a mechanism for sorting the personal from the presidential from the classified from the potentially privileged and then permitting the privilege claim to be asserted and waived or "not upheld" in the parlance of the PRA.

Those quotes don't change my opinion.  The PRA says the government controls Presidential Records.  But a former president can sue to stop the current executive/archivist from releasing those records.  None of this has any bearing on whether a former president can steal Presidential Records and refuse to return them by claiming executive privilege, which is a tortured reading of the PRA.

[Captainant 27644]

2 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

This proceeding, however, is a mechanism for sorting the personal from the presidential from the classified from the potentially privileged and then permitting the privilege claim to be asserted and waived or "not upheld" in the parlance of the PRA.

That sorting has already been done by DOJ's taint team, and they in fact identified and returned privileged materials that were not government records. That work is already done and the horse has left the barn. This judge is calling a full stop to that resulting criminal investigation to impede the investigation into the guy who punched her meal ticket for life.

Wether or not it makes a shit for trump is kind of missing the point. Trump isn't going to be the last fascist we need to defeat. These judges and this sort of calvinball with this ruling is what opens the door for more fascist fuckery. Don't forget how much @fattyflattie is excited to vote for desantis. 

those trump judges will do all this again for the next right wing nationalist president. Read a fucking history book. This is how fascism takes root. Including the insistent "ALL IS WELLLLL" by the people (you) who think that everyone respects the rules and process

[TwiceHorn 31443]

5 minutes ago, CTC2 said:

And you never have had one where the "master" is a showboater know it all and creates work for themselves?  I hear ya on most of what you have said but, the wrong master can slow down and screw up any case.

Definitely slow down.  I have never argued that this doesn't delay things and that's unfortunate.  But not the end of the world.

The attorney-client privilege stuff was pretty smooth, the trial judge partially didn't want to fuck with it, and allegedly could be tainted by in camera review of the materials.  It probably went faster, though, than having the judge do it.

In the patent stuff, there was a bit of self-importance to the master(s) I guess, but it beat having to try to educate the judge in an adversarial setting.

I guess having satisfactory experiences with special masters makes me tend to think this is less of a big deal.

 

 

[TwiceHorn 31443]

Just now, Captainant said:

That sorting has already been done by DOJ's taint team, and they in fact identified and returned privileged materials that were not government records. That work is already done and the horse has left the barn. This judge is calling a full stop to that resulting criminal investigation to impede the investigation into the guy who punched her meal ticket for life.

Wether or not it makes a shit for trump is kind of missing the point. Trump isn't going to be the last fascist we need to defeat. These judges and this sort of calvinball with this ruling is what opens the door for more fascist fuckery. Don't forget how much @fattyflattie is excited to vote for desantis. 

those trump judges will do all this again for the next right wing nationalist president. Read a fucking history book. This is how fascism takes root. Including the insistent "ALL IS WELLLLL" by the people (you) who think that everyone respects the rules and process

My point is that DOJ has done it behind closed doors.  This would be more open, and, it is after all what Trump asked for.  And is unlikely to change the outcome, only to delay it a couple of months.

I think it goes a long way to sanitizing any criminal prosecution.

[Captainant 27644]

1 minute ago, TwiceHorn said:

I think it goes a long way to sanitizing any criminal prosecution

Preview of twicehorn when trumpco throw shit all over the sAnItIzEd prosection and we do this whole thing over again and delay delay delay

[TwiceHorn 31443]

13 minutes ago, lemonlime said:

 None of this has any bearing on whether a former president can steal Presidential Records and refuse to return them by claiming executive privilege, which is a tortured reading of the PRA.

Where am I arguing that the President can steal them and refuse to return them?

Executive privilege is an issue as to some of these documents.  That is unavoidable.  It can't be sidestepped.

The cleanest way to dispense with the executive privilege issue, in my opinion, is to let the master sort, the Archivist/Biden evaluate and presumably deny the privilege claim and have that sustained by the courts.

The judge could have taken it upon herself to bypass all this shit and adopt the reasoning of the Archivist that a claim of executive privilege is not plausible in these circumstances. 

But to make that even halfway credible, she would have had to examine the documents, some of which she probably can't even see, mostly the "critical" classified stuff.

And, in the process, she would have technically ignored what the sitting President has to say about the privilege.  Somehow, the sitting President has to be involved to make this legitimate.

5 minutes ago, Captainant said:

Preview of twicehorn when trumpco throw shit all over the sAnItIzEd prosection and we do this whole thing over again and delay delay delay

He's going to throw shit no matter what.

I'm interested in whether it sticks.  You should be too.

This isn't that hard.

Edited September 7, 2022 by TwiceHorn

[lemonlime 5503]

7 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Where am I arguing that the President can steal them and refuse to return them?

 

How could trump have had Presidential Records in his possession unless he stole them?  How could any personal records of trump's be subject to executive privilege?

[Bullneck 19073]

1 hour ago, Goredho said:

In on 421, because it's 1 higher than 420, isn't it?

420, 421, whatever it takes.

[Captainant 27644]

3 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

The cleanest way to dispense with the executive privilege issue, in my opinion, is to let the master sort, the Archivist/Biden evaluate and presumably deny the privilege claim and have that sustained by the courts.

ITS NOT A FUCKING ISSUE IN THE FIRST FUCKING PLACE! 

Just keep getting distracted by their baseless shit and jingling keys. 

5 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

He's going to throw shit no matter what.

I'm interested in whether it sticks.  You should be too.

This isn't that hard.

This. This matter of executive privilege where there is none has stuck enough to buy trumpco more time to continue to spread his lies and STEAL OUR FUCKING NUCLEAR SECRETS. There's 90+ goddamn classified folders missing their contents, but we can't do anything about it because [insert some new grievance here]. Nope nothing criminal there! We'd better take his court filling and argue stuff for him that he didn't think of, because otherwise it may get appealed? 

You're outlining how private citizen trump uses the judiciary as his private legal representation thanks to his fedsoc friends with lifetime appointments. You really should read a fucking history book on how fascism happens. It looks quite a lot like this in the early stages with special dispensations for the strong men and political leaders

[Biff Tannen 45670]

I can’t believe I now know what a special master is. Non lawyers have no business knowing that definition or any of the other dozens of judicial shit we’ve all learned in the last 6 years, yet here we are. Thanks Dotard. I feel like I could probably get half of the LSAT right at this point. 

[TwiceHorn 31443]

1 minute ago, lemonlime said:

How could trump have had Presidential Records in his possession unless he stole them?  How could any personal records of trump's be subject to executive privilege?

I guess I'm missing what you're trying to argue.

Are most of these documents, including any subject to a claim of executive privilege, Presidential Records under 44 USC 2201?

If your answer is yes, then explain how the PRA does not govern the process for asserting executive privilege?  The process only.  Not the outcome of that process, but the process.

Part of the problem here is that none of us know exactly what documents we're talking about.  Some of that information we'll never know because of the nature of the documents.  But someone has to look at the goddamn things and figure out what's what.  To me, there are advantages to letting a special master do it and then letting the PRA run its course.

 

[fattyflattie 4639]

20 minutes ago, Captainant said:

Don't forget how much @fattyflattie is excited to vote for desantis. 

As evidenced by all the times I’ve never mentioned him?  Cool.  I guess it doesn’t really matter who’s name is next to the R, but you’re above just out and out making bullshit up? Maybe not. Carry on. 

[TwiceHorn 31443]

5 minutes ago, Captainant said:

ITS NOT A FUCKING ISSUE IN THE FIRST FUCKING PLACE! 

Just keep getting distracted by their baseless shit and jingling keys. 

This. This matter of executive privilege where there is none has stuck enough to buy trumpco more time to continue to spread his lies and STEAL OUR FUCKING NUCLEAR SECRETS. There's 90+ goddamn classified folders missing their contents, but we can't do anything about it because [insert some new grievance here]. Nope nothing criminal there! We'd better take his court filling and argue stuff for him that he didn't think of, because otherwise it may get appealed? 

You're outlining how private citizen trump uses the judiciary as his private legal representation thanks to his fedsoc friends with lifetime appointments. You really should read a fucking history book on how fascism happens. It looks quite a lot like this in the early stages with special dispensations for the strong men and political leaders

Let me ask you this.

Who determined that there's no privilege here?

How do you know it's not an issue in the first place?  Who told you? Where did you read it?  What statute, court case, or decision are you relying upon?

In your answer, skip clever memes.  And tweets don't count unless they cite statute or court cases and show their work.

Edited September 7, 2022 by TwiceHorn

[WhatTheBuck 28776]

1 hour ago, trauma babe said:

From The Solution to the Trump Judge Problem Nobody Wants to Talk About

Interested in your thoughts @TwiceHorn

Quote

If there were a principle that best embodies why progressives are losing ground so quickly—even as they are correct on the facts, and the law, and the zeitgeist—it must be this tendency to just keep on lawyering the other side’s bad law in the hopes that the lawyering itself will make all the bad faith and crooked law go away.

When the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail.

[Captainant 27644]

1 minute ago, fattyflattie said:

As evidenced by all the times I’ve never mentioned him?  Cool.  I guess it doesn’t really matter who’s name is next to the R, but you’re above just out and out making bullshit up? Maybe not. Carry on. 

My bad, I lumped you in with your buddies unfairly again. I just assumed that you'd be voting for him since Biden will take your guns away, or something. Mea culpa. 

1 minute ago, TwiceHorn said:

Let me ask you this.

Who determined that there's no privilege here?

Privilege over classified materials? That he is legally not allowed to possess, much less lie to the government about and obstruct their recovery?

I'd be much less upset if the judge drew a line between classified and unclassified materials recovered. That's a bright red line, and there's no reflection of that in this unilateral trumpists judge ruling to block a criminal investigation based on a civil matter

[TwiceHorn 31443]

2 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

When the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail.

Well, you know what.  The rule of law saved us from Trump's election bullshit.  I harbor hope that the rule of law will finally make Trump see consequences.

So, yeah, I'm a hammer, and I'm gonna pound that fucking nail.

[lemonlime 5503]

4 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

I guess I'm missing what you're trying to argue.

Are most of these documents, including any subject to a claim of executive privilege, Presidential Records under 44 USC 2201?

If your answer is yes, then explain how the PRA does not govern the process for asserting executive privilege?  The process only.  Not the outcome of that process, but the process.

Part of the problem here is that none of us know exactly what documents we're talking about.  Some of that information we'll never know because of the nature of the documents.  But someone has to look at the goddamn things and figure out what's what.  To me, there are advantages to letting a special master do it and then letting the PRA run its course.

 

Any documents potentially (in the world at large, not just related to trump) subject to executive privilege would be definition be Presidential Records.  The PRA requires that the government possess and control all Presidential Records.  If trump took Presidential Records and hid them in his private office he stole them.  If trump had personal records in his private office, then those aren't subject to executive privilege.  The documents the FBI seized had to either be (1) not ever subject to executive privilege under any circumstance or (2) Presidential Records that trump had no business having in his club in the first place.  Those are the only options.  These are either stolen documents or documents that couldn't possibly subject to executive privilege in the first instance.

And trump has argued that the FBI planted the documents he's now claiming they can't look at because they're privileged.  And that he somehow magically declassified documents.  That he won the 2020 election in a landslide.  And that windmills cause cancer.  I don't know why you're giving his nonsense arguments weight.

[WhatTheBuck 28776]

1 hour ago, TwiceHorn said:

With all due respect, people just want to throw their little tantrums without understanding how the law works.

Works for Trump. 

[TwiceHorn 31443]

13 minutes ago, Captainant said:

My bad, I lumped you in with your buddies unfairly again. I just assumed that you'd be voting for him since Biden will take your guns away, or something. Mea culpa. 

Privilege over classified materials? That he is legally not allowed to possess, much less lie to the government about and obstruct their recovery?

I'd be much less upset if the judge drew a line between classified and unclassified materials recovered. That's a bright red line, and there's no reflection of that in this unilateral trumpists judge ruling to block a criminal investigation based on a civil matter

Yeah, fail, like I suspected.

How many times have I said that the master is going to sort classified from unclassified, personal from presidential, and potentially privileged from not potentially privileged.  There's value in that being done by someone other than the prosecution.

I agree that it is highly extremely unlikely that the classified documents are subject to a claim of privilege, even one that will ultimately be waived by Biden/his delegates.

But until someone actually looks at the goddamn things, besides the prosecution, and the DOJ, even their filter team, is the prosecution, we can't be sure.  I like to be sure.  Especially when a successful prosecution of Trump hangs in the balance.

Edited September 7, 2022 by TwiceHorn

[fattyflattie 4639]

7 minutes ago, Captainant said:

My bad, I lumped you in with your buddies unfairly again. I just assumed that you'd be voting for him since Biden will take your guns away, or something. Mea culpa. 

11 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Probably not wrong. But I won’t be excited. Way too much culture war bullshit with that guy, at least from what I’ve seen that’s all he’s hung up on. 

[TwiceHorn 31443]

7 hours ago, lemonlime said:

The documents the FBI seized had to either be (1) not ever subject to executive privilege under any circumstance or (2) Presidential Records that trump had no business having in his club in the first place.

I agree that some of the documents are not going to be subject to a claim of executive privilege under any circustances, your item 1).

I agree that Trump has no business having personal possession of Presidential Records, your item 2).  But I fail to see how that precludes him from asserting executive privilege.  Not winning it, but asserting it.

ETA:  Ok, I think I get what you're saying.  When the possession of the documents themselves is the crime, and the documents then are the "instrumentality" or "res" of the crime, criminal authorities (who also happen to be executive officials) should be able to look at the documents to determine that their possession was indeed criminal.

And, I agree on that, although I'm not sure either of us has worded it right.  But I don't think I have seen that advanced as a reason to blow through executive privilege.

Someone, somewhere, with the proper security clearance, needs to look at the documents hear Trump's claim of privilege, and articulate why either the privilege doesn't apply, or yields to other concerns.  When the Committee wanted the 1/6 documents, the Archivist and Biden administration did that, and the courts backed them all the way.

Edited September 7, 2022 by TwiceHorn

[Captainant 27644]

Just now, fattyflattie said:

Probably not wrong. But I won’t be excited. Way too much culture war bullshit with that guy, at least from what I’ve seen that’s all he’s hung up on. 

Lmfao, so you're offended that I called you out for wanting to vote for a fascist? The unfair bit is just that you hadn't said those exact words I guess ¯⁠\⁠_⁠(⁠ツ⁠)⁠_⁠/⁠¯

2 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

I agree that Trump has no business having personal possession of Presidential Records.  But I fail to see how that precludes him from asserting executive privilege.  Not winning it, but asserting it.

If someone asserts something that is not possible, why should we waste time proving them wrong? If trump said the moon is made of cheddar cheese, you'd first try to investigate if it was sharp or mild rather than dismiss the absurdity

[TwiceHorn 31443]

10 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Works for Trump. 

And that's why tantrums offend me.

[TwiceHorn 31443]

6 minutes ago, Captainant said:

Lmfao, so you're offended that I called you out for wanting to vote for a fascist? The unfair bit is just that you hadn't said those exact words I guess ¯⁠\⁠_⁠(⁠ツ⁠)⁠_⁠/⁠¯

If someone asserts something that is not possible, why should we waste time proving them wrong? If trump said the moon is made of cheddar cheese, you'd first try to investigate if it was sharp or mild rather than dismiss the absurdity

You have the cart before the horse.

No one with judicial authority, or the authority conferred under the PRA, has decided that privilege doesn't apply to these documents.

I don't think it does.  You don't think it does.  Most of the people on here don't think it does.  But our opinions and arguments are the proverbial assholes.  We may be right.  We probably are right.  But our opinions don't count.  Neither does Barr's or Tribe's or Vladeck's or Katyal's or anyone else's, even the fucking filter team of the US DOJ, unless it's a federal judge with jurisdiction over the case.

Let's hypothetically take Cannon off the case and put any Obama or Clinton or Carter appointee on the case you want to name. Do you think that judge should review the documents in question before making any decision?  Especially the classified ones?  To make damned sure that there's no plausible claim of privilege? Does that judge have a security clearance permitting that review?

 

Edited September 7, 2022 by TwiceHorn

[fattyflattie 4639]

4 minutes ago, Captainant said:

Lmfao, so you're offended that I called you out for wanting to vote for a fascist? The unfair bit is just that you hadn't said those exact words I guess ¯⁠\⁠_⁠(⁠ツ⁠)⁠_⁠/⁠¯

9 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

I mean yeah. You could easily say, we know who FF going to vote for rah rah. But instead you went on talking about how I just loved Desantis so.  This will be news to a Biden guy, but you don’t have to deep throat your candidate.  They’re just the name on the the back of your teams jersey. 

[WhatTheBuck 28776]

1 hour ago, Woland said:

There is all that this speculation about nuclear secrets, but my bet on intel that could be sold for top dollar would be information on the opposition to MBS.

Shit, Jared turned that over to MBS years ago, back when he was consolidating power and arresting the other Saudi royals who opposed him and seizing their assets, etc. (Sometimes killing them if they didn’t play ball.) Jared didn’t get a $2 Billion investment in his new business venture from MBS because of secrets Trump stole after he lost the election. That investment was payback for services already rendered and maybe a downpayment for future favors that might be obtained in case Trump returns to power. 

[Beau Vine 54209]

2 hours ago, HenryJames said:

Look it’s perfectly normal for a federal judge in a civil case to stop the attorney general from looking at classified documents because the private citizen who stole them might claim executive privilege.

"There's no precedent against it." -- TH

[Beau Vine 54209]

2 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

What's going to happen is that the Special Master will decide almost immediately that the classified documents, because they don't reflect executive process or deliberation (Agency, maybe, but not the executive or advisors) are not plausibly the subject of any executive privilege claim at all, and will be passed to FBI directly.

You really think Special Master Rudy Guiliani can fit that in his head?

[tx 3 putt 76881]

Now we know why the Saudis gave the Kush $2bil !

[TwiceHorn 31443]

24 minutes ago, Beau Vine said:

You really think Special Master Rudy Guiliani can fit that in his head?

I don't think even team Trump would put Rudy up for the spot.  It will be interesting to see who does get put up.

Also, I think we have seen that most people with top security clearances take that shit pretty seriously, so it's going to be hard for Trump to find one with the appropriate clearance that isn't predisposed to think this was pretty grotesque on his part.

Edited September 7, 2022 by TwiceHorn

[Beau Vine 54209]

54 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Well, you know what.  The rule of law saved us from Trump's election bullshit.  I harbor hope that the rule of law will finally make Trump see consequences.

So, yeah, I'm a hammer, and I'm gonna pound that fucking nail.

That's not a nail; that's a melded quarter.

[WhatTheBuck 28776]

57 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Well, you know what.  The rule of law saved us from Trump's election bullshit.  I harbor hope that the rule of law will finally make Trump see consequences.

So, yeah, I'm a hammer, and I'm gonna pound that fucking nail.

I’m just worried that you’re pounding the nail into our coffin while we’re all getting screwed. 

[TwiceHorn 31443]

3 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

A bit hysterical.  "Potentially devastating." JFC.

The Special Master thing is eminently survivable by the DOJ, no matter how much you may disagree with it or think it's corrupt.

I have said repeatedly that this will not affect the outcome of the issues.  The Biden Administration will most likely waive or refuse to uphold any privilege claim made by Trump, and Trump wont' be able to articulate any reason why that's wrong and the D DC will uphold the Biden decision as it did in Thompson.  And the documents will be turned over to the FBI (and, I should note, the classified stuff almost immediately because it won't be subject to a privilege claim), and the investigation will proceed.

Also, @trauma babe, the outsized influence of Trump at the Supreme Court tends to infect our thinking on the lower courts.  While Trump did appoint a lot of judges, Obama actually appointed one more appellate court judge than Trump, and they are probably the most influential overall, when you include day-to-day legal stuff.

In the lower courts, you have a 1 in 3 chance of drawing a Trump appointee.  And slightly less to get 2 of 3 Trump appointees on an appeal panel, which is three judges, or more.  There are, of course, Reagan, Bush, and Shrub appointees, but they're far less reliably MAGA.  And there are the Carter, Clinton and Obama appointees.

And even a fair number of Trump appointees at the district court level have had the opportunity to carry his water and declined it.  I think a majority, actually.

One thing that needs to happen is that a lot of judicial districts are short of judges.  Congress needs to create more judgeships, when things are favorable, of course. 

Edited September 7, 2022 by TwiceHorn

[RomaVicta 29904]

Ya know, you tell some lawyers you appreciate their input and expertise, and you end up with three pages of longdicksmanship. 

Guys, gals, whatever, please start exchanging argumentative briefs about what each of you has heretofore said regarding the issue, henceforth named "The Issue," in the proper forum henceforth to be named "Not Here."

I don't think you will be able to argue to conclusion, so the discussion is eating page after page. Or maybe I'm just too dumb to appreciate it.

I will restate that I am among those glad for your opinions. Just not the extensive arguments between you about them.

Edited September 7, 2022 by RomaVicta

[elfenix 34228]

the fact that a lifetime appointment can be done in a lame duck session is a horrible design flaw in the system. 

[Satchel 6935]

1 hour ago, TwiceHorn said:

Yeah, fail, like I suspected.

How many times have I said that the master is going to sort classified from unclassified, personal from presidential, and potentially privileged from not potentially privileged.  There's value in that being done by someone other than the prosecution.

I agree that it is highly extremely unlikely that the classified documents are subject to a claim of privilege, even one that will ultimately be waived by Biden/his delegates.

But until someone actually looks at the goddamn things, besides the prosecution, and the DOJ, even their filter team, is the prosecution, we can't be sure.  I like to be sure.  Especially when a successful prosecution of Trump hangs in the balance.

Problem is Trump will continue to move the goalpost even after the SM has made his/her determination. He and his people will continue to advance the political process in a judicial proceeding. How can one ever be sure in this clearly political process?

[Horn Under a Bad Sign 20394]

I'm thinking Trump stole information about Iran's nuclear defenses and sold it to the Saudis for two billion dollars to be made payable to Jared Kushner.

[TwiceHorn 31443]

3 hours ago, TXSG8R said:

Is DOJ forced to appeal because of the bad precedent it would set if they go along with it?  Would it breathe more life into Trump and his cronies other claims of executive privilege?  

No, it's not much of a precedent as a district court opinion, which is not binding in the stare decisis sense over any other court.    District court opinions can be persuasive, but are not precedential. If it turns into a shitshow, it will be looked upon with disfavor in terms of persuasive value.  Just the controversy alone probably already does that.

Again, this is mostly procedural in nature.  It won't likely affect executive privilege per se.

Edited September 7, 2022 by TwiceHorn

[TwiceHorn 31443]

9 minutes ago, Satchel said:

Problem is Trump will continue to move the goalpost even after the SM has made his/her determination. He and his people will continue to advance the political process in a judicial proceeding. How can one ever be sure in this clearly political process?

That's fairly inevitable.  If the judge had ruled less favorably, they would have appealed that.

What I am concerned about is what happens if/when Trump is indicted.  By hashing this out where the indictment doesn't hang in the balance, that's going to make the indictment more invulnerable.  He's going to challenge that, too, but this makes it more likely to fail.

[tx 3 putt 76881]

 

 

[atomheartbevo 89635]

38 minutes ago, Horn Under a Bad Sign said:

I'm thinking Trump stole information about Iran's nuclear defenses and sold it to the Saudis for two billion dollars to be made payable to Jared Kushner.

After reading that story about it...I'm wondering.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/material-on-foreign-nations-nuclear-capabilities-seized-at-trumps-mar-a-lago/ar-AA11x5kH

 

[atomheartbevo 89635]

Or it could be Israeli nuke secrets - Saudis and others would pay a pretty penny for that info.

[tx 3 putt 76881]

Just now, atomheartbevo said:

Or it could be Israeli nuke secrets - Saudis and others would pay a pretty penny for that info.

[tx 3 putt 76881]

So this is bugging me ….

 

isn’t there some kind of tracking system for all these documents ? 
 

who checked them out and where are they going  ?

Did someone receive and sign for them ?

WERE ALL DOCUMENTS RETURNED ?

 

Someone was pulling documents  ?

[RPM 26318]

Here's my point. Did Trump do it?

Then it's probably illegal, unethical or immoral.

Or all of the above.

[Fudge Nuggets 19189]

9 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

What's going to happen is that the Special Master will decide almost immediately that the classified documents, because they don't reflect executive process or deliberation (Agency, maybe, but not the executive or advisors) are not plausibly the subject of any executive privilege claim at all, and will be passed to FBI directly.

If by ‘immediately’ you mean within the next five years, then sure. 

[Tuco 5076]

1 hour ago, tx 3 putt said:

So this is bugging me ….

 

isn’t there some kind of tracking system for all these documents ? 
 

who checked them out and where are they going  ?

Did someone receive and sign for them ?

WERE ALL DOCUMENTS RETURNED ?

 

Someone was pulling documents  ?

I think for Top Secret documents, there is a definitely a tracking system.  

But, any system is reliant on people following it.  If Trump just said "Oh, I already gave that back" there isn't much some executive branch official can do while he is office.  I am sure the DOJ has a pretty good list of what has not been returned.  It does put a new perspective on the story that Trump would flush documents.  At the time, that story looked like people leaking what a dipshit he was.  Now it looks like spin.  It's a common theme: something that looks horrible for any other politician is actually "best case scenario" for Trump.