If A implies B...
- Jan 26, 2008
don't think that's true for literally all of the documents, but could you link the court's decision and i will take a look?Yes it has. The Court of Appeals said yesterday that the classified documents belong to the people of the United States and that Trump has no personal claim on them.
- other poster makes a post about how biden administration should commit armed robberyYou're the one who brought up armed robbery.
- i point out the issues with this, including that armed robbery merits defending against it in a way i don't think anybody here actually wants to see
- somehow, pointing out that a hypothetical armed robbery action is armed robbery makes me the one who "brought up" armed robbery
the question is whether this particular raid was given an affidavit under lawful conditions (most of it redacted so it's hard to tell), and whether search itself was conducted lawfully.Police carry out lawful searches and raids all the time
Trumps own lawyers arent even claiming that those documents belong to him.
i was under impression per earlier that part of the reason for special master request was due to alleged possession of attorney/client privilege items that were seized + that some of the alleged classified documents were actually not classified (any longer), and were personal records. whether or not that's true, i'm pretty sure trump's team is at least claiming it? or did they drop that claim and i haven't been following closely enough?