• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Mar-a-Largo raided by FBI?

ZiprHead

Loony Running The Asylum
Staff member
Joined
Oct 23, 2002
Messages
32,023
Location
Frozen in Michigan
Gender
Old Fart
Basic Beliefs
Democratic Socialist Atheist
“We are now officially living in a Weaponized Police State, Rigged Elections, and all. Our Country is a laughing stock all over the World. The majesty of the United States is gone. Can’t let this happen. TAKE BACK AMERICA!”
 

T.G.G. Moogly

Traditional Atheist
Joined
Mar 19, 2001
Messages
9,172
Location
PA USA
Basic Beliefs
egalitarian
“We are now officially living in a Weaponized Police State, Rigged Elections, and all. Our Country is a laughing stock all over the World. The majesty of the United States is gone. Can’t let this happen. TAKE BACK AMERICA!”
The sky is falling! The sky is falling! Someone please give this child a clean diaper.
 

Ford

Contributor
Joined
Nov 30, 2010
Messages
5,959
Location
'Merica
Basic Beliefs
Godless Heathen
“We are now officially living in a Weaponized Police State, Rigged Elections, and all. Our Country is a laughing stock all over the World. The majesty of the United States is gone. Can’t let this happen. TAKE BACK AMERICA!”
And by "majesty" he means "why can't I be called Your Majesty?"
 

marc

Veteran Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2008
Messages
1,932
Location
always on the move
Basic Beliefs
Atheist, skeptic, nerd

bilby

Fair dinkum thinkum
Joined
Mar 7, 2007
Messages
28,231
Location
The Sunshine State: The one with Crocs, not Gators
Gender
He/Him
Basic Beliefs
Strong Atheist
They are trolling.
That’s what they WANT you to think.
How better to preserve their mole, while assuring the CIA they haven’t gotten copies of all the stuff Trump stole?

Honestly, I would assign equal probability to both possibilities.
That is what you want us to think because you are a quintuple spy for Russia.... or maybe its the US? It simply got too convoluted and you can't remember anymore.
Ok, I admit it. That is in fact what I wanted you to think that I thought I wanted you to think. And it might be so. Nobody really knows, least of all me.
Reminds me of the coffee mug one of my colleagues at IBM had. He did a lot of defence and government work, and his cup said: "Due to the confidentially requirements of my job, I have no idea what I am doing".
 

Patooka

Contributor
Joined
Apr 5, 2004
Messages
5,056
Location
Sydney
Basic Beliefs
aaa
“We are now officially living in a Weaponized Police State, Rigged Elections, and all. Our Country is a laughing stock all over the World. The majesty of the United States is gone. Can’t let this happen. TAKE BACK AMERICA!”
The sky is falling! The sky is falling! Someone please give this child a clean diaper.
Considering the context, I'd rather give the fucker a pillow and help him take his "nap".
 

Jimmy Higgins

Contributor
Joined
Feb 1, 2001
Messages
37,483
Basic Beliefs
Calvinistic Atheist
Oblivious to US History, former President Donald Trump suggests, on the Hugh Hewitt Show, that an indictment against him could lead to "problems in this country the likes of which perhaps we’ve never seen before."

Civil War, backlashes against Unions, Nat Turner Revolt, Shay's Rebellion, Kent State, Harper's Ferry, Bleeding Kansas, Tulsa Race Riots...

...we've seen violence in this country before. Just not because of a orange painted baboon. January 6th was unprecedented not because people died.
 

Copernicus

Industrial Grade Linguist
Joined
May 28, 2017
Messages
4,069
Location
Bellevue, WA
Basic Beliefs
Atheist humanist
Oblivious to US History, former President Donald Trump suggests, on the Hugh Hewitt Show, that an indictment against him could lead to "problems in this country the likes of which perhaps we’ve never seen before."

Civil War, backlashes against Unions, Nat Turner Revolt, Shay's Rebellion, Kent State, Harper's Ferry, Bleeding Kansas, Tulsa Race Riots...

...we've seen violence in this country before. Just not because of a orange painted baboon. January 6th was unprecedented not because people died.

It is hard to believe that all of this right wing smack talk is expected to deter prosecutions, but I do think that Trump and his band of sycophants perceive Garland and the Biden administration generally as weak and susceptible to bullying. That doesn't seem to be the case, but, if they were, they are also getting smack talk from the their own political base over their failure to act quickly and strongly enough. Who is the administration more afraid of pissing off? MAGA Republicans or their own voters? It seems more likely to me that this kind of rhetoric is directed solely at Trump's own base of support, who respond well to the idea that they can threaten and bully the authorities into dropping the investigation. The MAGA crowd haven't been in touch with reality for a very long time, and Trump depends on their gullibility to maintain control over them.
 

Jimmy Higgins

Contributor
Joined
Feb 1, 2001
Messages
37,483
Basic Beliefs
Calvinistic Atheist
Federal Judge makes persuasive argument for her impeachment.

article said:
A federal judge said she could not accept the Justice Department's claim that Donald Trump does not "have a possessory interest" in some documents that were seized from Mar-a-Lago just because they're classified government records without further review by a third party.
:oops:

article said:
"The Court does not find it appropriate to accept the Government's conclusions on these important and disputed issues without further review by a neutral third party in an expedited and orderly fashion," Cannon wrote.

Raymond Dearie, a former Chief Judge of the US District Court for the Eastern District Court of New York, was appointed to be the third-party reviewer. Cannon has given a deadline of November 30 to complete the review.

In her decision, Cannon, who was appointed by Trump, also wrote that she couldn't accept the Justice Department's argument that Trump doesn't have a "plausible claim of privilege" of the classified documents without a third-party review.
Isn't SHE supposed to be the third-party?! Why is another judge needed to determine whether a secret document is privileged? She seems, at best, to be incompetent.
 

Elixir

Made in America
Joined
Sep 23, 2012
Messages
21,291
Location
Mountains
Basic Beliefs
English is complicated
So is it... just going to be legal to steal things from the government from now on?
Only if you can afford the lawyers to launch and maintain a “storage dispute”.

I should think libberpublicans would be up in their copious arms, given this assault on Property Rights. There is nothing to prevent the same principle from applying right down to the level of street pickpockets and purse-grabbers. A gang of RW thugs can come forcibly kick you out of your house, and there’s nothing you can do about it if the thugs’ Boss has resources.
 

Politesse

Lux Aeterna
Joined
Feb 27, 2018
Messages
8,950
Location
Chochenyo Territory, US
Gender
nb; all pronouns fine
Basic Beliefs
Jedi Wayseeker
I guess it's not greatly different from the insurrection at Malheur in general principle: "the government leases it to us, so it now our property and our use of it cannot be regulated by the law". Or elaborated: "the only difference between access and ownership is a demand."
 

ZiprHead

Loony Running The Asylum
Staff member
Joined
Oct 23, 2002
Messages
32,023
Location
Frozen in Michigan
Gender
Old Fart
Basic Beliefs
Democratic Socialist Atheist
Trump team claimed boxes at Mar-a-Lago were only news clippings

Months before National Archives officials retrieved hundreds of classified documents in 15 boxes from former president Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago Club, they were told that none of the material was sensitive or classified and that Trump had only 12 boxes of “news clippings,” according to people familiar with the conversations between Trump’s team and the Archives.


During a September 2021 phone call with top Archives lawyer Gary Stern, former deputy White House counsel Pat Philbin offered reassuring news: Philbin said he had talked to former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows, who made the assertion about the dozen boxes of clippings, the people familiar with the call said. Trump’s team was aware of no other materials, Philbin said, relaying information he said he got from Meadows.

The characterization made in the call vastly misrepresented the scale and variety of documents, including classified records, eventually recovered by the Archives or the FBI.
 

ZiprHead

Loony Running The Asylum
Staff member
Joined
Oct 23, 2002
Messages
32,023
Location
Frozen in Michigan
Gender
Old Fart
Basic Beliefs
Democratic Socialist Atheist
Thursday’s 10-page opinion by U.S. District Court Judge Aileen Cannon denying the government’s motion for a stay in the Mar-a-Lago documents case is being savaged by commentators in terms normally reserved for grotesque transgressions of justice like the infamous Dred Scott Supreme Court decision.

Respected and generally sober legal analysts have called it an atrocity, “legally and practically incoherent,” “dangerous garbage,” and declared Cannon “a partisan hack.” “No honest and competent legal analyst could have ruled as she did,” tweeted Harvard Law's Laurence Tribe.

Could the opinion really be that bad?

In a word, yes.
The article then goes on to explain...
But Cannon adopted Trump’s Alice-in-Wonderland approach. She concluded that it would not be “appropriate” — the closest thing to legal reasoning in her opinion — "to accept the government’s conclusion on these important and disputed issues without further review by a neutral third-party," that is, a special master.

Cannon, in essence, is redefining the classification process to be simply a provisional executive branch judgment subject to overruling by individual judges such as herself. Apart from its legal bankruptcy, such a process would wreak bedlam in matters of national intelligence, which turn on the very designations that Cannon set aside.

The Trump team’s next gambit, which the judge also adopted, was even more logically and legally threadbare. The former president has argued repeatedly in public that he declassified the documents. But his attorneys have studiously avoided saying that in court papers, where lies are subject to professional and criminal penalties. The Trump filings indicate only that he perhaps had declassified the documents.

The appropriate response for a judge in these circumstances is to put Trump on the stand and ask him, “Did you or didn’t you?” Failing that, “perhaps” means the matter is not established and the argument loses.

But Cannon either does not know or does not care what judges do in such a situation. It is important to emphasize that she isn’t simply leaning in Trump’s direction, she’s falling all over him.
 

ZiprHead

Loony Running The Asylum
Staff member
Joined
Oct 23, 2002
Messages
32,023
Location
Frozen in Michigan
Gender
Old Fart
Basic Beliefs
Democratic Socialist Atheist
Former President Trump’s legal team on Monday night resisted a request to elaborate on his claims around declassifying the documents recovered last month from his Mar-a-Lago home.

In a filing to the court-appointed special master that Trump requested, his attorneys said the “time and place” for making such a disclosure would come in a motion in a criminal trial as an effort to recover his property.

“Otherwise, the Special Master process will have forced the Plaintiff to fully and specifically disclose a defense to the merits of any subsequent indictment without such a requirement being evident in the District Court’s order,” Trump’s legal team wrote.
 
  • Roll Eyes
Reactions: jab

Jimmy Higgins

Contributor
Joined
Feb 1, 2001
Messages
37,483
Basic Beliefs
Calvinistic Atheist
Plaintiff (yeah, Trump is the fucking Plaintiff in this portion of the case): I didn't steal that coat. I can prove it!

Judge: Do you have the receipt?

Plaintiff: Providing a receipt could be detrimental to our case.

Judge: *drops anvil on lawyers*

So, Special Master says these documents aren't privileged because Trump didn't show cause for that, and they appeal eventually to SCOTUS? Seems like a massive delay strategy.
 

ZiprHead

Loony Running The Asylum
Staff member
Joined
Oct 23, 2002
Messages
32,023
Location
Frozen in Michigan
Gender
Old Fart
Basic Beliefs
Democratic Socialist Atheist
From the Trump response:
"The fact that the documents contain classification marks does not necessarily negate claims of privilege. For example, the partially unredacted search warrant affidavit states that certain documents with classification markings allegedly contain what appear to be President Trump's handwritten notes. A57-58. Those notes could certainly contain privileged information; further supporting the need for an independent third-party review of these documents"
Just admitting to another crime, defacing classified documents.

And he's not the fucking president. He doesn't have privilege anymore.
 

Copernicus

Industrial Grade Linguist
Joined
May 28, 2017
Messages
4,069
Location
Bellevue, WA
Basic Beliefs
Atheist humanist

blastula

Contributor
Joined
Apr 14, 2006
Messages
8,251
Gender
Late for dinner
Basic Beliefs
Gnostic atheist

Patooka

Contributor
Joined
Apr 5, 2004
Messages
5,056
Location
Sydney
Basic Beliefs
aaa
Trump's lawyer's response

Basically, "Can we delay this until after the mid-terms pretty please?" with the very classy letterhead,

ifrah.png

If you can't read the slogan, it says "Hands-on counsel, gloves off litigation". You just fucking know Trump has heard about Better Call Saul and thought, "I need a layer just like that! What could go wrong?"
 

Ford

Contributor
Joined
Nov 30, 2010
Messages
5,959
Location
'Merica
Basic Beliefs
Godless Heathen
Trump's lawyer's response

Basically, "Can we delay this until after the mid-terms pretty please?" with the very classy letterhead,

View attachment 40413

If you can't read the slogan, it says "Hands-on counsel, gloves off litigation". You just fucking know Trump has heard about Better Call Saul and thought, "I need a layer just like that! What could go wrong?"
I used to produce the radio ads for a law firm. They were known primarily for their personal injury cases ("in a wreck? Need a check? Make one call, that's all.") and their phone number is in the jingle. (Lerner and Rowe for those of you in Arizona, Las Vegas, and Chicago). The one partner I worked with was actually a nice guy, and I'd bet money that if someone - even Trump - asked them to handle anything other than injury, bankruptcy, or a low level criminal offense, he'd say "that's way out of my wheelhouse...you need to get a firm that specializes in that sort of thing."

In other words, an ambulance-chasing personal injury lawyer has more integrity that the folks Trump has hired.
 

Copernicus

Industrial Grade Linguist
Joined
May 28, 2017
Messages
4,069
Location
Bellevue, WA
Basic Beliefs
Atheist humanist
Judge Dearie asked lawyers for the plaintiff in their civil suit, Donald Trump, to present his case for ownership of the classified documents. He said that, in the absence of some coherent argument from the plaintiff, he had to go with the prima facie evidence that they were government documents, because they were marked as government classified documents. He didn't need to actually read the documents to determine whether Trump was entitled to them. He just needed some basis for believing that there was a bona fide dispute over ownership. The lawyers said it would be premature to present evidence, so that leaves the judge with no choice but to leave them in government hands. The plaintiff had the burden of proof, but he offered none. The judge is not putting up with Trump's delaying tactics.

 

Jimmy Higgins

Contributor
Joined
Feb 1, 2001
Messages
37,483
Basic Beliefs
Calvinistic Atheist
This is the problem Trump has... his bullshit lying doesn't work in court. Evidence and arguments actually matter. Granted, I think the lawyers will just appeal the appeal of the appeal to delay this as long as possible.

The funny thing is that in asking for a Special Master, they negated the most important ally they had, the ignorant and incompetent District Court Judge, where the bullshit arguments carried enough weight for that judge because they are way over their head on this bench. The Special Master ain't having any of this garbage. Can't wait for Trump's lawyers to argue the Special Master has no standing in his judgement on the documents.
 

marc

Veteran Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2008
Messages
1,932
Location
always on the move
Basic Beliefs
Atheist, skeptic, nerd
I think his long standing tactic in courts before going into politics was to delay, drag it out, until the other party gave up or would accept a settlement, so he could deny loosing anything. (not that different from Scientology tactics) Getting elected got him extra options to avoid the law. Plus tons of potentially violent followers and a political party that has his back has intimidated at least one AG from persuing a case against him.

But what happens if one of those cases finally goes to court and gets a conviction? The GOP has already backed off of paying his legal bills for the documents case. If he gets convicted with they pull out of supporting him in all the other ones? Will it be a domino effect where all the other cases will see they can win against him and push forward, giving us one conviction after another? I hope so, and do think it is likely. I think once he faces real consequences Trump will eagerly throw people under the bus to save himself, and they will rat him out first.
 

Copernicus

Industrial Grade Linguist
Joined
May 28, 2017
Messages
4,069
Location
Bellevue, WA
Basic Beliefs
Atheist humanist
The Appeals Court just sided with the DOJ.

Yes, and here is the ruling itself from the Court of Appeals:


It is a complete rejection of the district court's ruling in Trump's favor. Trump's handpicked judge got her ass handed to her on a platter. There was nothing in this ruling that had anything good to say about the district magistrate judge's ruling or Trump's case for stopping the criminal investigation or claiming any kind of ownership of the classified documents that he stole.

I tried to find out what the Fox News site is saying about this story, but, so far, not a peep out of them. They don't have a story on it yet.
 
Last edited:

Copernicus

Industrial Grade Linguist
Joined
May 28, 2017
Messages
4,069
Location
Bellevue, WA
Basic Beliefs
Atheist humanist
Wow. They say Cannon "abused" her discretion.

And how. The tone of the ruling was matter-of-fact, but they thoroughly detailed the history and went through all of her arguments meticulously. They rejected every one of them. She was given every opportunity to back away from this, but she just doubled down on her interference with the investigation. Two of the three judges that authored the ruling were Trump appointees, but the decision was by all three judges in concert.
 

Copernicus

Industrial Grade Linguist
Joined
May 28, 2017
Messages
4,069
Location
Bellevue, WA
Basic Beliefs
Atheist humanist
In a Sean Hannity interview on Fox News tonight, Hannity asked Trump what process he used to declassify the Mar-a-Lago documents. Trump, in his usual motor-mouth mode, explained that the president has an "absolute right" to declassify any document. He said that there didn't need to be a process but there could be a process. Then he said that he was able to declassify any document just by saying that it was declassified. Then, without missing a beat, he said he could declassify documents by thinking them declassified. He didn't even need to say it, if he thought it.

So there you have it--Donald Trump's own explanation of how he declassified all of those Top Secret documents. Of course, the courts have already ruled that everyone, including the president, has to follow published guidelines for declassifying documents, and there doesn't appear to be a provision for just thinking a document declassified. So I guess he'll be explaining to a court at some point that he just didn't know that. :shrug:
 

Loren Pechtel

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 16, 2000
Messages
36,998
Location
Nevada
Gender
Yes
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
I used to produce the radio ads for a law firm. They were known primarily for their personal injury cases ("in a wreck? Need a check? Make one call, that's all.") and their phone number is in the jingle. (Lerner and Rowe for those of you in Arizona, Las Vegas, and Chicago). The one partner I worked with was actually a nice guy, and I'd bet money that if someone - even Trump - asked them to handle anything other than injury, bankruptcy, or a low level criminal offense, he'd say "that's way out of my wheelhouse...you need to get a firm that specializes in that sort of thing."

In other words, an ambulance-chasing personal injury lawyer has more integrity that the folks Trump has hired.
The jingle was familiar but I couldn't place it until you gave the name. I didn't realize they were more than local.
 

Ford

Contributor
Joined
Nov 30, 2010
Messages
5,959
Location
'Merica
Basic Beliefs
Godless Heathen
I used to produce the radio ads for a law firm. They were known primarily for their personal injury cases ("in a wreck? Need a check? Make one call, that's all.") and their phone number is in the jingle. (Lerner and Rowe for those of you in Arizona, Las Vegas, and Chicago). The one partner I worked with was actually a nice guy, and I'd bet money that if someone - even Trump - asked them to handle anything other than injury, bankruptcy, or a low level criminal offense, he'd say "that's way out of my wheelhouse...you need to get a firm that specializes in that sort of thing."

In other words, an ambulance-chasing personal injury lawyer has more integrity that the folks Trump has hired.
The jingle was familiar but I couldn't place it until you gave the name. I didn't realize they were more than local.
Yep. Lerner handles the Vegas and Chicago offices, and Kevin Rowe (the one I know) covers Phoenix. Other attorneys have tried their own catchy jingle, but if I tell anyone I used to do the spots, they know the tune by heart.
 

Jimmy Higgins

Contributor
Joined
Feb 1, 2001
Messages
37,483
Basic Beliefs
Calvinistic Atheist
Wow. They say Cannon "abused" her discretion.

And how. The tone of the ruling was matter-of-fact, but they thoroughly detailed the history and went through all of her arguments meticulously. They rejected every one of them. She was given every opportunity to back away from this, but she just doubled down on her interference with the investigation. Two of the three judges that authored the ruling were Trump appointees, but the decision was by all three judges in concert.
The interesting parts are the whole document, which didn't actually overrule Cannon's ruling... rather it was just staying it. But the overruling was so thorough and professionally blunt, it read like they said Cannon's ruling didn't have a shot in heck of surviving, at least relative to the classified documents.

It is interesting that I don't think Trump's lawyers have any recourse here. I don't think they can appeal this ruling because they didn't bother to make an adequate case in the first place.
 

bilby

Fair dinkum thinkum
Joined
Mar 7, 2007
Messages
28,231
Location
The Sunshine State: The one with Crocs, not Gators
Gender
He/Him
Basic Beliefs
Strong Atheist
Indeed he did.


They put "FMR." Interesting.

But it'll no doubt be whatever the programming dictates in a day or two.

Nah. His detractors are gonna be all "Hey, Fox aren't so bad, they're recognising that he's no longer President"; While his supporters will be all "See, I told y'all he's one of us. I didn't even know before that he's a farmer".
 
Top Bottom