FBI raids Mar-A-Lago; Known criminal Donald Trump still at large

Will they find smoking gun evidence?


  • Total voters
    40

El_Machinae

Colour vision since 2018
Retired Moderator
Joined
Nov 24, 2005
Messages
47,908
Location
Pale Blue Dot youtube=wupToqz1e2g
As opposed to... what exactly? Trump "leaking" that he was holding onto classified documents? What's your alternative scenario here where you'd be fine with this situation?

Two wrongs don't make a right. If there IS leaking on the government side, it's okay if it's bothering people. Of course, letting Trump control the narrative is also dangerous. There's no way to maintain the high ground if someone is too devoted to eroding it. That said, of course any specific leak can be criticised as a 'failure' while knowing there might be no better alternative.
 

FriendlyFire

Codex WMDicanious
Joined
Jan 4, 2002
Messages
21,104
Location
Sydney
Iam surprised Trump lawyers havent been censored for this kind of thing.
Or more likely they knew that their careers would be toast afterwards but that was a price worth paying to advance Trumps gaslighting / defence

Trump presented his Russia hoax theory to a court. It went poorly.​

The suit was filed in a specific courthouse in the Southern District of Florida, apparently with the hope that it would be heard by a particular judge that Trump himself had appointed.
It wasn’t. Instead, it landed with District Judge Donald M. Middlebrooks. When Trump’s legal team quickly moved to have Middlebrooks removed from the case, alleging bias, Middlebrooks responded by disparaging the transparency of Trump’s effort.
“I note that Plaintiff filed this lawsuit in the Fort Pierce division of this District, where only one federal judge sits: Judge Aileen Cannon, who Plaintiff appointed in 2020,” he wrote in denying Trump’s request. “Despite the odds, this case landed with me instead. And when Plaintiff is a litigant before a judge that he himself appointed, he does not tend to advance these same sorts of bias concerns.”
Aileen Cannon, you may be aware, is the jurist who recently issued a ruling of remarkable favorability on Trump’s behalf in the matter of the FBI search of Mar-a-Lago.
Middlebrooks’s blunt tone in assessing Trump’s intent carried through to his dismissal of the lawsuit this week.
“Plaintiff’s theory of this case, set forth over 527 paragraphs in the first 118 pages of the Amended Complaint, is difficult to summarize in a concise and cohesive manner,” Middlebrooks wrote as he began picking Trump’s allegations apart. “It was certainly not presented that way.”
“Plaintiff cannot state a RICO claim without two predicate acts,” he writes, for example, “and, after two attempts, he has failed to plausibly allege even one.”
“Perplexingly, Plaintiff appears to argue that the Defendants obstructed investigation Crossfire Hurricane by contributing to the initiation of Crossfire Hurricane,” he writes. “That Defendants could have obstructed a proceeding by initiating it defies logic.”
“At its core, the problem with Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint is that Plaintiff is not attempting to seek redress for any legal harm … instead, he is seeking to flaunt a two-hundred-page political manifesto outlining his grievances against those that have opposed him, and this Court is not the appropriate forum,” he wrote.

 

Broken_Erika

Nothing
Joined
Dec 12, 2004
Messages
9,917
Location
Glasgnopolis, Grottland

Trump asks U.S. Supreme Court to step into legal battle over Mar-a-Lago classified documents​

Ex-president's lawyers ask top court to overturn lower court ruling on special master

Lawyers for former U.S. president Donald Trump asked the U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday to step into the legal fight over the classified documents seized during an FBI search of his Florida estate, escalating a dispute over the powers of an independent arbiter appointed to inspect the records.

The Trump team asked the court to overturn a lower court ruling and permit an independent arbiter, or special master, to review the roughly 100 documents with classified markings that were taken in the Aug. 8 search of Mar-a-Lago.

A three-judge panel last month limited the special master's review to the much larger tranche of non-classified documents. The judges, including two Trump appointees, sided with the U.S. Justice Department, which had argued there was no legal basis for the special master to conduct his own review of the classified records.

But Trump's lawyers said in their application to the Supreme Court that it was essential for the special master to have access to the classified records to "determine whether documents bearing classification markings are in fact classified, and regardless of classification, whether those records are personal records or presidential records."

"Since President Trump had absolute authority over classification decisions during his presidency, the current status of any disputed document cannot possibly be determined solely by reference to the markings on that document," the application states.

It says that without the special master review, "the unchallenged views of the current Justice Department would supersede the established authority of the chief executive."

The FBI says it seized roughly 11,000 documents, including about 100 with classification markings, during its search. The Trump team asked a judge in Florida, Aileen Cannon, to appoint a special master to do an independent review of the records.

Cannon subsequently assigned a veteran Brooklyn judge, Raymond Dearie, to review the records and segregate those that may be protected by claims of attorney-client privilege and executive privilege. The Justice Department objected to Dearie's ability to review the classified records, prompting the 11th Circuit to side with the department.

Trump's lawyers submitted the Supreme Court application to Justice Clarence Thomas, who oversees emergency matters from Florida and several other southern states.

Thomas can act on his own or, as is usually done, refer the emergency appeal to the rest of the court.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/trump-supreme-court-mar-a-lago-1.6605956
 

Arakhor

Dremora Courtier
Super Moderator
Joined
Mar 27, 2009
Messages
38,318
Location
UK
If the orange buffoon classified  personal documents, that would mean that he considered them state secrets, and now he's no longer part of the state, he no longer has access to said "secrets". How can anyone sensible believe this obviously specious court defence?
 

Birdjaguar

Hanafubuki
Super Moderator
Supporter
Joined
Dec 24, 2001
Messages
49,633
Location
Albuquerque, NM
It's a "Hail Mary" attempt save his butt. If the court takes it, Trump gets his delay and the last shreds of impartiality will be striped from SCOTUS.
 

Arakhor

Dremora Courtier
Super Moderator
Joined
Mar 27, 2009
Messages
38,318
Location
UK
You say that as if they had any dignity left.
 

Birdjaguar

Hanafubuki
Super Moderator
Supporter
Joined
Dec 24, 2001
Messages
49,633
Location
Albuquerque, NM

Gorbles

Load Balanced
Joined
Nov 24, 2014
Messages
8,771
Location
UK

Sommerswerd

Shades of the Sun
Supporter
Joined
Oct 10, 2007
Messages
21,580
Location
Murica

This done the rounds yet? Eagerly awaiting folks to claim how it's a false flag op and they're not actually guilty, etc, et al.

Capitol attack: Proud Boys leader pleads guilty to seditious conspiracy​

A North Carolina man pleaded guilty on Thursday to plotting with other members of the far-right Proud Boys to violently stop the transfer of presidential power after the 2020 election, making him the first member of the extremist group to plead guilty to a seditious conspiracy charge.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/oct/06/proud-boys-capitol-attack-seditious-conspiracy

So this tends to vindicate calling Jan 6 a coup attempt and the participants seditionists, traitors and generally whatever nasty name in that category that gets hung on them.
 

Gori the Grey

The Poster
Joined
Jan 5, 2009
Messages
8,068
Not just "vindicates," in a general sense. Legally establishes that the event was an attempted coup. I think that will prove legally meaningful when it comes time for the ringleaders of that coup to be tried for it.
 

Lexicus

Deity
Joined
Aug 28, 2007
Messages
28,543
Location
Sovereign State of the Have-Nots
Not just "vindicates," in a general sense. Legally establishes that the event was an attempted coup. I think that will prove legally meaningful when it comes time for the ringleaders of that coup to be tried for it.

I am curious about why you used the word "when" here.
 

Gori the Grey

The Poster
Joined
Jan 5, 2009
Messages
8,068
Hopeful thinking. You're right, I'm usually more careful. Replace with "Should it prove that anyone higher up was involved in instigating and directing the Proud Boys and Oathkeepers' actions . . . "

But don't all signs sort of point that way? At least as far as Roger Stone, say? -- even if they'll never be able to make that last jump.
 

Lexicus

Deity
Joined
Aug 28, 2007
Messages
28,543
Location
Sovereign State of the Have-Nots
Hopeful thinking. You're right, I'm usually more careful. Replace with "Should it prove that anyone higher up was involved in instigating and directing the Proud Boys and Oathkeepers' actions . . . "

But don't all signs sort of point that way? At least as far as Roger Stone, say? -- even if they'll never be able to make that last jump.

It is interesting to speculate about what kind of case could be made in court about this. But fundamentally I just do not believe the federal government will ever charge Trump with anything, regardless of the evidence against him.
 

Gori the Grey

The Poster
Joined
Jan 5, 2009
Messages
8,068
I think they're going to charge him with the records thing. And possibly also the coup attempt--basing that case on his lining up the fake electors.
 

Lexicus

Deity
Joined
Aug 28, 2007
Messages
28,543
Location
Sovereign State of the Have-Nots
I think they're going to charge him with the records thing. And possibly also the coup attempt--basing that case on his lining up the fake electors.

I think he might get charged in Georgia over the phone call but everything else I am pretty confident he will not be charged over.
 

Birdjaguar

Hanafubuki
Super Moderator
Supporter
Joined
Dec 24, 2001
Messages
49,633
Location
Albuquerque, NM
I do not think that Garland can avoid charges in the stolen docs case. I do think Trump will avoid a trial through settlement. There are too many precedents for indicting such cases for Trump to be skipped and if evidence shows up that he released secret docs to others, I don't think Trump will be able to avoid a trial.
 
Top Bottom