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

[Biff Tannen 45,761]

In all seriousness, Twice, are you getting close to admitting that our justice system, which you do an admirable (I guess) job of defending is a complete fucking sham?  I mean, come on man. 

[TwiceHorn 31,653]

12 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

Get the fuck outta here!  Man, you really had me convinced that we just had to let the system run its course!  I feel so misled!

Wait, no. All of us non-lawyers have seen through this FROM THE BEGINNING. 

The system still has to run its course.  There's no play here. There's no angle. There's no champagne room. I'm not a miracle worker, I'm a janitor. The math on this is simple. The smaller the mess the easier it is for me to clean up.

And, you want it to be one way, but it's the other way.  It always has been.

[henrygandorf 29,198]

here's what happens next.

we find out it's not appealable.

but trump appeals anyway.

then they have to take 6 weeks to figure out what to do about that snafu.

am i getting warm?

[TwiceHorn 31,653]

14 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

In all seriousness, Twice, are you getting close to admitting that our justice system, which you do an admirable (I guess) job of defending is a complete fucking sham?  I mean, come on man. 

Nope.  That's a 100 year old feature of appellate law.  Nothing fucked up about it except it doesn't deliver justice swiftly enough for you.

[henrygandorf 29,198]

1 minute ago, TwiceHorn said:

There's no champagne room.

that's just what they tell the guys wearing sweatpants.

[ChiTownDoc 21,193]

32 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

So, don't get your hopes up.

Lol, only someone who had you on ignore the last several weeks could get their hopes up.  

[Tuco 5,084]

26 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Nope.  That's a 100 year old feature of appellate law.  Nothing fucked up about it except it doesn't deliver justice swiftly enough for you.

So, if I am understanding you correctly, the appointment of the Special Master cannot be appealed but the decision on whether to have certain documents bypass is.  So, in theory, the DOJ could file a motion to be able to use all the documents prior to Special Master review, Cannon would shoot it down, but that decision could be appealed, rendering the unappealable Special Master pointless.  Did I get that right? Because it sounds kind of fucked to me.  

(FWIW, I am not really that worried about the delay, I just think that it's funny how the legal system can be ridiculous.  It was invented by man, man is a ridiculous creature, so this should not surprise anyone.) 

[TwiceHorn 31,653]

16 minutes ago, Tuco said:

So, if I am understanding you correctly, the appointment of the Special Master cannot be appealed but the decision on whether to have certain documents bypass is.  So, in theory, the DOJ could file a motion to be able to use all the documents prior to Special Master review, Cannon would shoot it down, but that decision could be appealed, rendering the unappealable Special Master pointless.  Did I get that right? Because it sounds kind of fucked to me.  

(FWIW, I am not really that worried about the delay, I just think that it's funny how the legal system can be ridiculous.  It was invented by man, man is a ridiculous creature, so this should not surprise anyone.) 

Pretty close yeah.

We do need to distinguish between the Order Appointing Special Master and the stays.  The injunctive part of the Order is appealable immediately.  The part appointing the special master is not appealable until the end of the case or unless the judge certifies it for appeal.

So, the court of appeals at least has jurisdiction to hear the appeal.  Without the injunction part (DOJ can't use any of the documents pending special master review), they would lack that entirely.

The DOJ asked that the court of appeals stay the order as to the classified docs, both special master review and the injunctive part (can't use the docs).  The rules say you gotta ask the trial court first, even though that's a slim chance of winning, before you take it up to the appeals court.

So, it might seem that the appeals court says, we agree as to the injunctive part, but we have no jurisdiction over the special master part, so couldn't grant that if we wanted to.  And that's just the stay.  When they rule on the merits, it will come out the same way.

There may be a tad bit of wiggle room for the government here, but not much.

Edited September 21, 2022 by TwiceHorn

[Burt 4,093]

7 hours ago, Beau Vine said:

Maybe I'm just being stupid, but if POTUS has the "sole right to determine what's classified and what's not," then what is keeping Biden from declaring that these documents are classified?

The "no take backs" rule. Damn, were you never a kid??? 

[RomaVicta 30,056]

22 hours ago, atomheartbevo said:

She has a way with words

 

And doesn’t like MTG

 

We shouldn't be simply making pithy remarks and laughing them off. In Kerrville there was a poster for an advocate of Christian Citizenship or something like that. In the country, it seem to draw crowds. 

Wikipedia Christian Nationalism

Quote

Christian nationalists believe that the US is meant to be a Christian nation and want to "take back" the US for God.[17] Experts say that Christian-associated support for right-wing politicians and social policies, such as legislation related to immigration, gun control and poverty is best understood as Christian nationalism, rather than as evangelicalism per se.[17][18] Some studies of white evangelicals show that, among people who self-identify as evangelical Christians, the more they attend church, the more they pray, and the more they read the Bible, the less support they have for nationalist (though not socially conservative) policies.[18] Non-nationalistic evangelicals agree ideologically with Christian nationalists in areas such as patriarchal policies, gender roles, and sexuality.[18]

Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene has referred to herself as a Christian nationalist. Fellow congresswomen Lauren Boebert and Mary Miller have also expressed support for Christian nationalism.[19][20] Kris Kobach has described himself as a Christian nationalist. White nationalist Nick Fuentes has expressed support for Christian nationalism.[21]

I know the concept is familiar to most around here. I think it's getting bigger. I've said a few times that our side is playing politics while the other side is playing war. Throw this shit in and you have jihad. Fortunately, I think Americans have lives that are too soft to become dedicated mujahadeen. But they will kill evil people. Like us.

[RomaVicta 30,056]

Someone characterized the Jan 6 Committee as "an investigation into what everyone saw with their own eyes."

This feels crazy having an insurrectionist would-be fascist dictator attacking the Capitol and stealing state secrets right in front of us and we're tangled in legal wrangling.

It's like we stumbled upon a brutal rape in progress and are afraid we'll rough up the rapist unless we be very gentle. Even in that case, the criminal would go to jail to await justice. That is where the fuck Donald Trump belongs right this fucking minute. His criminal actions, allegedly "alleged," merit jail for the safety of the common good. If he were anyone but Donald Trump, that's where he'd be. 

Everyday he is free under these charges discredits our legal system. He deserves his fair trial. He doesn't (okay, shouldn't) get a free pass from pre-trial jail for such serious charges. Remand. No bail. Isolate him for safety. But jail. Three channels of TV: (CNN, MSNBC, and the Hallmark channel.

But. Jail. Now.

 

[tx 3 putt 77,681]

Something or someone better knock him off course, or else this country is done for 

[Willfully Horn 8,070]

5 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

So, don't get your hopes up.

And, for God’s sake, don’t run away from cops.

[Willfully Horn 8,070]

9 minutes ago, tx 3 putt said:

Something or someone better knock him off course, or else this country is done for 

Don’t get your hopes up. That’s hysteria

[lemonlime 5,503]

6 hours ago, Biff Tannen said:

Get the fuck outta here!  Man, you really had me convinced that we just had to let the system run its course!  I feel so misled!

Wait, no. All of us non-lawyers have seen through this FROM THE BEGINNING. 

Not just the non-lawyers.  But I'll disagree on the complaints about justice being slow.  It should be careful, and that at times means slow.  The problem here is that our country is no longer led by good faith actors.  We have an ex-"president" and his entire party engaged in the indefensible and destroying institutions. And a DOJ acting like this is a typical white collar investigation.  And a judge who is a cult member.

Cannon's initial decision was bonkers.  She essentially assigned a special master to review documents to determine if documents trump stole from the government should somehow be returned to the thief under an imaginary legal theory the thief's lawyers never explained.  Yes, that's never been decided by a court before.  Because it's fucking crazy.  Cannon's not a good faith actor.  And trying to put any of the rest of this in a legal framework doesn't really work as a result.  

There's no legal system, with this, or the transfer of power, or anything, that will withstand being hijacked by bad faith actors.  Our entire government, not just the courts, requires that the people in charge actually respect the government.  The laws are just paper. If you treat them like toilet paper then that's what they are.

[GW Hayduke 1,953]

2 minutes ago, lemonlime said:

Cannon's initial decision was bonkers.  She essentially assigned a special master to review documents to determine if documents trump stole from the government should somehow be returned to the thief under an imaginary legal theory the thief's lawyers never explained.  Yes, that's never been decided by a court before.  Because it's fucking crazy.

Personal and attorney-client privileged documents will be returned to Trump.  Classified documents and presidential  records will not be returned to Trump. Trump may get access to presidential records for things like a library or whatever, but he will not have ownership of them. 

[lemonlime 5,503]

Personal and attorney-client privileged documents will be returned to Trump.  Classified documents and presidential  records will not be returned to Trump. Trump may get access to presidential records for things like a library or whatever, but he will not have ownership of them. 

Right. But he plainly never had ownership of documents marked classified. Meaning he stole them. Or even under the best possible interpretation since there’s been no trial he somehow possessed documents he didn’t own. To appoint a special master over those documents is still bonkers.

[GW Hayduke 1,953]

3 minutes ago, lemonlime said:

Right. But he plainly never had ownership of documents marked classified. Meaning he stole them. Or even under the best possible interpretation since there’s been no trial he somehow possessed documents he didn’t own. To appoint a special master over those documents is still bonkers.

Yeah.  And stealing, hiding, and not returning classified documents is a crime.  That is why the FBI obtained a search warrant and took possession of the classified documents from Mar-a-Lago.  That is why there is chatter that Trump is under threat of a criminal indictment.  

[miguelito 11,333]

3 hours ago, RomaVicta said:

But jail. Three channels of TV: (CNN, MSNBC, and the Hallmark channel.

But. Jail. Now.

Not even the Gorilla Channel?

Man, that's cruel and unusual punishment.

[Bookman 4,649]

The appointment of a Special Master can't be appealed, but there is precedent under the Free Property Rights of Horse and Carriage Act of 1798 to appoint a chancery master over the Special Master to hear appeals. Technically, this is called a Juris Exemplar Dominus Intelligencia Master, or JEDI Master for short.

[Captainant 27,889]

48 minutes ago, GW Hayduke said:

Yeah.  And stealing, hiding, and not returning classified documents is a crime.  That is why the FBI obtained a search warrant and took possession of the classified documents from Mar-a-Lago.  That is why there is chatter that Trump is under threat of a criminal indictment.  

And it's also why the trumpy justice system is throwing itself infront of this issue and entertaining every feckless and facile legal filing by trump and giving them equal weight as a century of precedence and jurisprudence. It's just another example by trump to weaponize and exploit our cautious by design legal system, only to pull the rug out from under the pollyanas who lack the vision to actually see and recognize what's happening. 

I remain wishing I had just a whif of the faith twice had in our system. Trump is too rich and too well connected to actually face any real consequence, because he'll always have an avenue for appealing and delaying. And we'll get tut-tut-ed at by twice for being impatient, TWO FUCKING YEARS AFTER THE CRIME HAPPENED AND WE STILL HAVENT EVEN CHARGED THE FUCKING TANGERINE 

[wildcat09 29,447]

Yeah, it’s pretty obvious Cannon is in the bag for Trump and making shit up on the fly to cover for him. The way to deal with her bullshit isn’t to validate it by behaving as if it’s normal process. The way to deal with it is to say she doesn’t have the power to do what she’s trying to do and ignore her.

[Pig Bellmont 8,745]

1 hour ago, GW Hayduke said:

Personal and attorney-client privileged documents will be returned to Trump.  Classified documents and presidential  records will not be returned to Trump. Trump may get access to presidential records for things like a library or whatever, but he will not have ownership of them. 

There’s also agency documents that cannot be presidential records or personal to Trump. Those go back to the government along with all the classified docs. This legal process is all a sham to delay because we all know he’s guilty 

[Pig Bellmont 8,745]

1 hour ago, GW Hayduke said:

Yeah.  And stealing, hiding, and not returning classified documents is a crime.  That is why the FBI obtained a search warrant and took possession of the classified documents from Mar-a-Lago.  That is why there is chatter that Trump is under threat of a criminal indictment.  

Not to be that guy, but the crime was that the documents were important to national security. The classification issue is kind of a side show. But yes anyone else would already be in jail

[Captainant 27,889]

10 minutes ago, Pig Bellmont said:

But yes anyone else would already be in jail

[Twice]Why are you so impatient and hate the justice process?? We must let the fascists abuse the system in bad faith, otherwise the court system the fascists appointed will overturn it.[/horn]

[Nice Guy Eddie 13,537]

Imagine being trumps lawyers. He lies to them. Other orders probably include end this quickly or delay it forever. Calls them incompetent. Then they receive the inevitable call from their billing clerks about non-payment.

do you raise the non-payment with him before or after he berates you for incompetency?

and while the whole thing is going on, you have to agree on whatever new crazy election theory he heard on OAN. Does he have any lawyer stay for a second issue?

[AnTiM 1,675]

I am patiently waiting for someone to ask me how I always know when trump is telling a lie.  

[GW Hayduke 1,953]

47 minutes ago, Captainant said:

And it's also why the trumpy justice system is throwing itself infront of this issue and entertaining every feckless and facile legal filing by trump and giving them equal weight as a century of precedence and jurisprudence. It's just another example by trump to weaponize and exploit our cautious by design legal system, only to pull the rug out from under the pollyanas who lack the vision to actually see and recognize what's happening. 

I remain wishing I had just a whif of the faith twice had in our system. Trump is too rich and too well connected to actually face any real consequence, because he'll always have an avenue for appealing and delaying. And we'll get tut-tut-ed at by twice for being impatient, TWO FUCKING YEARS AFTER THE CRIME HAPPENED AND WE STILL HAVENT EVEN CHARGED THE FUCKING TANGERINE 

This is clearly a tactic by team trump to try and stall the investigation and indictment. People can see that as the sky is falling I guess.  

But hopefully everyone can once and for all dispel the idea that this is somehow about returning classified documents back to trump.  

[lemonlime 5,503]

There’s also agency documents that cannot be presidential records or personal to Trump. Those go back to the government along with all the classified docs. This legal process is all a sham to delay because we all know he’s guilty 

It’s all a sham. The guy who orchestrated a coup attempt and stole national security documents appointed around a third of the federal judiciary. Many (most?) of whom are grossly unqualified for their role. And all of whom trump appointed with the intention of having them in his corner. Maybe some have maintained their judicial independence. But many, obviously including Cannon who he judge shopped for, are in the bag for perhaps the greatest criminal ever in this country. It’s madness.

Trump should have been arrested in January 2021. He’s had another twenty months to consolidate his sycophantic base

[DDD Dad 14,365]

1 hour ago, Bookman said:

The appointment of a Special Master can't be appealed, but there is precedent under the Free Property Rights of Horse and Carriage Act of 1798 to appoint a chancery master over the Special Master to hear appeals. Technically, this is called a Juris Exemplar Dominus Intelligencia Master, or JEDI Master for short.

 

[TwiceHorn 31,653]

46 minutes ago, Captainant said:

[Twice]Why are you so impatient and hate the justice process?? We must let the fascists abuse the system in bad faith, otherwise the court system the fascists appointed will overturn it.[/horn]

I'm not saying we "let" them.  But our system has a degree of tolerance even for the "frivolous."  This is not frivolous, and, legally, it is not abusive.  Even the government doesn't characterize it that way, because it's not and they can't.

And there's an analysis to be applied and rules to follow even when something is legally frivolous, or less-than-frivolous and just poorly or ill-founded.  These things aren't dismissed at the drop of a hat because angry, armchair lawyers insist they are frivolous or abusive.

It's exactly akin to those heinous murders and child abuse cases where the surl is howling for summary execution in cruel and unusual fashion.  That's not how this works.  Sorry to be the voice of reason.

I do happen to disagree with lemonlime's characterization of the thing, in that there are 11,000 someodd documents and things, some of which rightfully a) should be returned to the subject of the warrant (those things truly personal) and b) rightfully cannot be used against him in a prosecution (attorney-client privileged).  There are also a bunch of things that he has no right to that are the fruits and instrumentalities of a crime or crimes.  And, right now, the government is holding all of those things and saying "take our word for it."  Does the government have a basis, and a good-faith one for doing that?  Sure, but it should make people nervous.

The government also may be stepping on its dick by insisting the PRA applies while not, yet anyway, invoking any of its procedures.  This should worry people.

I could easily see a judge not in the bag for Trump agreeing to hit the pause button while the sheep are sorted from the goats by a guy like Dearie.  And I think there are a lotta fuckin goats, very dirty, Black Phillip goats.

At the same time, I could see another, more experienced judge, like Donald Middlebury (the Clinton lolsuit judge), saying fuck all that and I'm not sure I'd disagree with that, either.  But, as I have said repeatedly, if and when an indictment came down, I would be nervous about a motion to suppress evidence or quash the indictment based on FBI/DOJ mishandling/mischaracterization of the documents.  Anyone who doesn't see that is, in my opinion, a complete fool.

Whether Cannon would or would not do this for any other defendant is irrelevant speculation at this point.  Even if you hate his guts, as I do, Trump has the same rights as any other defendant (as might pertain to personal or attorney-client privileged items), and a few other "rights" that any former POTUS has that any other defendant doesn't, namely a slender entitlement to a privilege no one else has.

The only real, non-speculative harm the government and the public is forced to endure here is a couple month's delay.  That aggravates the fuck out of people, but it's nothing new.  It's not optimal, but it's the nature of the beast.  Regular people in the legal system have to deal with delays, for their benefit and detriment, all the time.

 

Edited September 21, 2022 by TwiceHorn

[Pig Bellmont 8,745]

4 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Trump has the same rights as any other defendant

Well not according to Cannon. She expressly says her ruling was made considering Trump’s former office. He’s getting deferential treatment and we’re all hoping that it won’t matter and no one in this country will be above the law.  Meanwhile justice delayed is justice denied

[lemonlime 5,503]

I'm not saying we "let" them.  But our system has a degree of tolerance even for the "frivolous."  This is not frivolous, and, legally, it is not abusive.  Even the government doesn't characterize it that way, because it's not and they can't.
And there's an analysis to be applied and rules to follow even when something is legally frivolous, or less-than-frivolous and just poorly or ill-founded.  These things aren't dismissed at the drop of a hat because angry, armchair lawyers insist they are frivolous or abusive.
It's exactly akin to those heinous murders and child abuse cases where the surl is howling for summary execution in cruel and unusual fashion.  That's not how this works.  Sorry to be the voice of reason.
I do happen to disagree with lemonlime's characterization of the thing, in that there are 11,000 someodd documents and things, some of which rightfully a) should be returned to the subject of the warrant (those things truly personal) and b) rightfully cannot be used against him in a prosecution (attorney-client privileged).  There are also a bunch of things that he has no right to that are the fruits and instrumentalities of a crime or crimes.  And, right now, the government is holding all of those things and saying "take our word for it."  Does the government have a basis, and a good-faith one for doing that?  Sure, but it should make people nervous.
The government also may be stepping on its dick by insisting the PRA applies while not, yet anyway, invoking any of its procedures.  This should worry people.
I could easily see a judge not in the bag for Trump agreeing to hit the pause button while the sheep are sorted from the goats by a guy like Dearie.  And I think there are a lotta fuckin goats, very dirty, Black Phillip goats.
At the same time, I could see another, more experienced judge, like Donald Middlebury (the Clinton lolsuit judge), saying fuck all that and I'm not sure I'd disagree with that, either.  But, as I have said repeatedly, if and when an indictment came down, I would be nervous about a motion to suppress evidence or quash the indictment based on FBI/DOJ mishandling/mischaracterization of the documents.  Anyone who doesn't see that is, in my opinion, a complete fool.
Whether Cannon would or would not do this for any other defendant is irrelevant speculation at this point.  Even if you hate his guts, as I do, Trump has the same rights as any other defendant (as might pertain to personal or attorney-client privileged items), and a few other "rights" that any former POTUS has that any other defendant doesn't, namely a slender entitlement to a privilege no one else has.
The only real, non-speculative harm the government and the public is forced to endure here is a couple month's delay.  That aggravates the fuck out of people, but it's nothing new.  It's not optimal, but it's the nature of the beast.  Regular people in the legal system have to deal with delays, for their benefit and detriment, all the time.
 

No it’s akin to I’m trafficking cocaine and the government seized the contents of my car including kilos of coke, and I start yelling “attorney client” privilege because I happen to be attorney. And then get a special master to review everything that was in my car including the kilos of coke. While the government is forbidden from using the kilos of coke until the judge I hired and picked out says that kilos of coke aren’t subject to attorney client privilege.

And then the kicker is that my client is the government. So I’m arguing that my attorney client documents are privileged from disclosure to the client.

I respect a lot of your takes. But think this one is bananas.

[Nice Guy Eddie 13,537]

Trump has a belief that as soon as he announces his '24 candidacy, the DOJ has to back off him. Hence the need for delays. There are stories that he's held off because the GOP national party has asked him to do so until at least after the midterms, and they've backed that up with only agreeing to pay some of his legal bills as long as he's not a declared candidate.

Plan B & C for Trump is to either win in '24, or give support to DeSantis in exchange for a pardon.

 

[TwiceHorn 31,653]

20 minutes ago, lemonlime said:

No it’s akin to I’m trafficking cocaine and the government seized the contents of my car including kilos of coke, and I start yelling “attorney client” privilege because I happen to be attorney. And then get a special master to review everything that was in my car including the kilos of coke. While the government is forbidden from using the kilos of coke until the judge I hired and picked out says that kilos of coke aren’t subject to attorney client privilege.

And then the kicker is that my client is the government. So I’m arguing that my attorney client documents are privileged from disclosure to the client.

I respect a lot of your takes. But think this one is bananas.

I agree that the unlawfully possessed documents bear a lot of similarities to the hypothetical kilo of cocaine, or the murder weapon. or the cash stolen from the bank heist.

Nevertheless, there are questions about privilege raised by these documents that can in no way be applied to a kilo of cocaine, a murder weapon, or cash from a bank heist.  The questions are slender and I think (key word here is think) that they have one resolution, and that is against Trump.

A better analogy would be cash from a bank heist kept in a box and commingled with attorney-client privileged documents.  And, reducing it to absurdity, where correspondence between attorney and client is scribbled on some of the bills.

And, here's where I think we run into a potential problem.  The government asserts, probably correctly, that executive privilege categorically cannot apply to these documents, while also invoking the PRA.  Well, the PRA has a process for answering that question, that isn't being followed right now. 

And, also, the government is saying executive privilege categorically cannot apply to these documents without letting anyone see the documents, including, apparently, the Archivist.  If you take off your Trump-hating hat for just a millisecond, you'd see that that proposition is a bit gamey, on general principles, and moreso when you consider that, by statute, it is the Archivist, acting in tandem with the Biden Adminstration, and NOT THE FBI and NOT THE DOJ, that makes calls on executive privilege concerning Presidential Records.

If the government is wrong, or has fucked up procedurally, I'd rather have that determined now than later.  And don't try to tell me that the government is not wholly capable of fucking this up.  It's what most of you "why not done" people argue all the time.

Edited September 21, 2022 by TwiceHorn

[Fudge Nuggets 19,244]

30 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

I'm not saying we "let" them.... blah blah fucking blah...

[Marcusshelton 86]

26 minutes ago, Pig Bellmont said:

Well not according to Cannon. She expressly says her ruling was made considering Trump’s former office. He’s getting deferential treatment and we’re all hoping that it won’t matter and no one in this country will be above the law. 

I’d like to know Twice’s take on this. I’ve seen this sentiment a few times in the thread, but haven’t seen (or perhaps missed) the response. 

[DigglerontheHoof 21,263]

All this does is further the truth that there are and will be zero consequences for dotard.  Not even sure why the govt. is wasting its time.

Calvinball

Edited September 21, 2022 by DigglerontheHoof

[Neonmoon 38,130]

13 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

evertheless, there are questions about privilege raised by these documents

This is where you’re falling for the trap. No, there are NO questions about privilege raised. Trumps team isn’t even arguing they are privileged. Just they COULD be. Not to mention. There is no theoretical way these classified documents COULD be privileged. So we are stuck sucking Trumps delay tactic dick because our system of law and lawyers are fucking morons who want spend months paper fighting each other about a theoretical decision all the while being ruled on by a judge appointed by the defendant. The fact that we all have to sit here and get buttfucked by this farce doesn’t mean the system is working, it means the system is broken. 

[The Dog 44,176]

Y'all ain't on the ledge - you've attached ropes to it and are swinging and howling like crazed chimpanzees. 

[GW Hayduke 1,953]

4 minutes ago, Marcusshelton said:

I’d like to know Twice’s take on this. I’ve seen this sentiment a few times in the thread, but haven’t seen (or perhaps missed) the response. 

The difference between an ex-president and a normal citizen is that a normal citizen can’t assert executive privilege over certain documents generated during their presidency.  A main thrust of the special master is to determine which documents (if any) should be shielded from investigators due to executive privilege.  

[TwiceHorn 31,653]

1 minute ago, Marcusshelton said:

I’d like to know Twice’s take on this. I’ve seen this sentiment a few times in the thread, but haven’t seen (or perhaps missed) the response. 

I have expressed my take on this.  As a purely legal matter, Trump is different from everyone else because he has a slender ability to invoke executive privilege.  The only people on earth that can do that are:  Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, GW Bush, Barack Obama and Joe Biden.

So, the part about treating Trump differently because he is an ex-president is accurate and itself does not demonstrate bias.

It is also true that no former president has ever been the subject of a search warrant, and the converse that no former president has been as big a crook as Trump, except maybe Nixon.  Does that require some sort of "special handling" or deferential treatment? No, not under the "rule of law" applied fairly and without fear.  Are there some kind of "appearances" that should be maintained in the face of unprecedented legal action?  Much tougher call.  

As has been pointed out, no amount of "due process" is going to satisfy the Trumpers.  It's always going to be a "witch hunt."  But I ultimately don't have much of a problem with doing this now if it makes a future indictment less problematic.

[TwiceHorn 31,653]

10 minutes ago, The Dog said:

Y'all ain't on the ledge - you've attached ropes to it and are swinging and howling like crazed chimpanzees. 

[TwiceHorn 31,653]

29 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

This is where you’re falling for the trap. No, there are NO questions about privilege raised. Trumps team isn’t even arguing they are privileged. Just they COULD be. Not to mention. There is no theoretical way these classified documents COULD be privileged. So we are stuck sucking Trumps delay tactic dick because our system of law and lawyers are fucking morons who want spend months paper fighting each other about a theoretical decision all the while being ruled on by a judge appointed by the defendant. The fact that we all have to sit here and get buttfucked by this farce doesn’t mean the system is working, it means the system is broken. 

As I have repeatedly pointed out, there are questions raised.  I think the answer is ultimately clear.  Whether that answer should have come in a summary ruling of GTFO Trump or after some more deliberation that actually considers the documents in question is a different question entirely.

But what troubles the fuck out of me is that the PRA has a process for resolving these questions, inevitably, I think, against Trump.

Explain to me why the PRA shouldn't be applied here and show your work.

The rest of your post is a moronic tantrum.

Edited September 21, 2022 by TwiceHorn

[WhatTheBuck 28,824]

11 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

the converse that no former president has been as big a crook as Trump, except maybe Nixon

Nixon was a Boy Scout compared to Trump. If Nixon were alive today he’d be thinking, “Damn, that is one corrupt motherfucker!”

[Captainant 27,889]

13 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

As I have repeatedly pointed out, there are questions raised.  I think the answer is ultimately clear.

But what troubles the fuck out of me is that the PRA has a process for resolving these questions, inevitably, I think, against Trump.

Explain to me why the PRA shouldn't be applied here and show your work.

The rest of your post is moronic.

You're doing the same thing cannon did. You're taking trump's obvious lie at face value that there's privileged documents interspersed without them even giving a record of which documents or actually asserting anything. It's the same tactic they used during the impeachment to shield him from complying with subpoenas: "we aren't saying they're privileged, but they could be, so we aren't complying"

You're like the refs at the bama game taking away our safety: you know the call is wrong so you're bending over backwards to justify it and act like everything is fine, when in reality the passer was down anyways and it's all an exercise in mootness to show you spent a lot of time reading the rulebook

[TwiceHorn 31,653]

Just now, WhatTheBuck said:

Nixon was a Boy Scout compared to Trump. If Nixon were alive today he’d be thinking, “Damn, that is one corrupt motherfucker!”

I tend to agree.  And that nature of their crimes differs a great deal.  I tend to think the Nixon pardon was the right thing to do.  I do not think it is the right thing to do here, or any other method by which Trump avoids prosecution.

[Neonmoon 38,130]

16 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

As I have repeatedly pointed out, there are questions raised.  I think the answer is ultimately clear.

But what troubles the fuck out of me is that the PRA has a process for resolving these questions, inevitably, I think, against Trump.

Explain to me why the PRA shouldn't be applied here and show your work.

The rest of your post is moronic.

We’ve seen Trump appointed judges ignore legal precedent time and time again this year, and you are hearing telling us that don’t worry, the legal system is working, important questions are raised. Explain this to me, why should we give a fuck about the legal procedure if the judges don’t?

[TwiceHorn 31,653]

2 minutes ago, Captainant said:

You're doing the same thing cannon did. You're taking trump's obvious lie at face value that there's privileged documents interspersed without them even giving a record of which documents or actually asserting anything. It's the same tactic they used during the impeachment to shield him from complying with subpoenas: "we aren't saying they're privileged, but they could be, so we aren't complying"

You're like the refs at the bama game taking away our safety: you know the call is wrong so you're bending over backwards to justify it and act like everything is fine, when in reality the passer was down anyways and it's all an exercise in mootness to show you spent a lot of time reading the rulebook

The fact of the matter is, for whatever reason, Trump doesn't have the documents anymore.

And, the government won't let him see them.

It can be kind of difficult to make reasoned arguments about the documents when you can't look at them.

The government has valid, rational reasons for not letting him see them, but that still doesn't change the fact that he can't see them.

The choice you want to make is deference to the government and no deference to Trump.  I get it.  

Trump argues no deference to the government and deference to him. That's bullshit.

This decision splits the baby, as judicial decisions tend to do.

[safe sex 11,800]

Isn't this the point about Solomon splitting the baby: it's a terrible way to achieve justice?

Been a long time since I've revisited that one

Edited September 21, 2022 by trauma babe