Trump indicted over classified documents

214,438 Views | 3469 Replies | Last: 2 days ago by aggiehawg
aggiehawg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Im Gipper • 6:01p, 2/29/24
AG
Im Gipper said:
Smith wants a July trial.



ETA: Thought that was the DC case but even the FLA case has a lot of motions to get through.
Reply Quote
3
1 edit
TXAggie2011
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
7:57p, 2/29/24
AG
Trump said August 12 so not too far off, but also said he cannot possibly get a fair trial any time this year. That argument didn't work before, so I imagine it won't work this time. But maybe she takes their August date.
Reply Quote
Stat Monitor Repairman
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:13p, 2/29/24
Any one of these cases goes during the months or weeks leading up to the election it will be the wildest spectacle of all time.

You can't imagine what that would look like.

How do you conduct a trial under those conditions?

Not only is it insane from a logistical standpoint, but you got the judiciary, the executive branch and a jury, injecting themselves into determining the outcome of the presidential election, all while trying to maintain the illusion of a fair trial.

Would be the greatest show on earth, by far.
Reply Quote
2
Ellis Wyatt
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Stat Monitor Repairman • 8:15p, 2/29/24
It's the entire point. It's why the DOJ rolled these all out in a very short time frame, with the intention being to hammer Trump constantly during campaign season. These cases are all farcical and the people behind them are Stalinists. They don't care that this violates all concepts of ethics.

These people are evil and they're playing for keeps.
Reply Quote
1
1 edit
Stat Monitor Repairman
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Ellis Wyatt • 8:22p, 2/29/24
A truly inconceivable and unprecedented situation.

No one knows what this would look like.

All three branches of government have managed to sail the ship off the map and into uncharted waters.

We're all sitting in the back of the 747 in the movie Airplane! with the inflatable pilot at the helm.
Reply Quote
3
aggiehawg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
1:04p, 3/1/24
AG


Judge to Smith: July 8th? Not happening, get real.

Entire tweet.
Quote:
At the outset, Judge Cannon stated the Special Counsel's new proposed trial schedule (May 20 trial date will be vacated) leading to trial date of July 8 is "unrealistic" given at least 13 outstanding motions and intense CIPA litigation (special guidance on the handling/access to classified evidence before and during trial.)

Another issue is Alvin Bragg's prosecution of Trump later this month; trial is expected to begin March 25 and last between 6-8 weeks, interrupting Trump's ability to attend any court proceedings in FLA for almost two months.

When Smith's team tried to blame Trump attorney Chris Kise for taking on both the Bragg case and the classified docs case and argued his work schedule related to both matters should not preclude the FLA trial from moving forward, Judge Cannon reminded DOJ that right to access all court proceedings doesn't apply to the lawyers but "to the accused."
Reply Quote
2
1 edit
barbacoa taco
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to TXAggie2011 • 1:10p, 3/1/24
AG
TXAggie2011 said:
Trump said August 12 so not too far off, but also said he cannot possibly get a fair trial any time this year. That argument didn't work before, so I imagine it won't work this time. But maybe she takes their August date.
let's be honest. Trump can't get a truly fair and impartial trial any time this year or ever. He's TRUMP.

But his excuses are still disingenuous. August is in the middle of campaign season, and anything past that is election interference. So let's do it in December! Even the dumbest person in that courtroom knows the gamesmanship that's going on.

Cannon should split the baby and start the trial the first week of August and be done with it.
Reply Quote
1
aggiehawg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to barbacoa taco • 1:13p, 3/1/24
AG
barbacoa taco said:
TXAggie2011 said:
Trump said August 12 so not too far off, but also said he cannot possibly get a fair trial any time this year. That argument didn't work before, so I imagine it won't work this time. But maybe she takes their August date.
let's be honest. Trump can't get a truly fair and impartial trial any time this year or ever. He's TRUMP.

But his excuses are still disingenuous. August is in the middle of campaign season, and anything past that is election interference. So let's do it in December! Even the dumbest person in that courtroom knows the gamesmanship that's going on.

Cannon should split the baby and start the trial the first week of August and be done with it.
CIPA cases are always complicated and for that reason, take a lot of time in pretrial motions. Those all have to be briefed, argued and decided before trial can be scheduled. This really should come as no surprise to Smith.
Reply Quote
3
Ellis Wyatt
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to barbacoa taco • 1:14p, 3/1/24
Quote:
But his excuses are still disingenuous. August is in the middle of campaign season, and anything past that is election interference. So let's do it in December! Even the dumbest person in that courtroom knows the gamesmanship that's going on.
Let me help you here: the whole thing is election interference. As the DOJ coordinated it to be. This is what you voted for.

What is the end game for you? Concentration camps? Or is that too soft?
Reply Quote
6
barbacoa taco
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Ellis Wyatt • 1:16p, 3/1/24
AG
Ellis Wyatt said:
Quote:
But his excuses are still disingenuous. August is in the middle of campaign season, and anything past that is election interference. So let's do it in December! Even the dumbest person in that courtroom knows the gamesmanship that's going on.
Let me help you here: the whole thing is election interference. As the DOJ coordinated it to be. This is what you voted for.

What is the end game for you? Concentration camps? Or is that too soft?
lol.

No one made Trump run for president again. His indictments came long ago. He can whine and cry about interference but 4 grand juries have seen enough evidence to indict him.

If you're saying the DOJ waited too long to prosecute, I think everyone on my side of the aisle would agree with you and Merrick Garland isn't well liked for that reason.
Reply Quote
2
Stat Monitor Repairman
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
1:32p, 3/1/24
What's a rough estimate of the total number of federal employee man hours dedicated to prosecuting Trump?

How many attorneys and support staff are estimated to be on the Tump cases spread across all jurisdictions?
Reply Quote
2
Ellis Wyatt
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to barbacoa taco • 1:44p, 3/1/24
barbacoa taco said:
Ellis Wyatt said:
Quote:
But his excuses are still disingenuous. August is in the middle of campaign season, and anything past that is election interference. So let's do it in December! Even the dumbest person in that courtroom knows the gamesmanship that's going on.
Let me help you here: the whole thing is election interference. As the DOJ coordinated it to be. This is what you voted for.

What is the end game for you? Concentration camps? Or is that too soft?
lol.

No one made Trump run for president again.
That has nothing to do with anything. Each of these things is completely without precedent. As was impeaching him twice. As was the Russian collusion hoax that you and yours perpetuated for years. And now the attempts to remove him from ballots because we absolutely cannot be allowed to re-elect him.

The DOJ deliberately timed all of this to hit him during the election. The bull**** he is being prosecuted for happened years ago. None of this is accidental. As you well know and fully support.
Reply Quote
5
will25u
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:22p, 3/1/24
Reply Quote
2
TXAggie2011
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to aggiehawg • 10:06p, 3/1/24
AG
aggiehawg said:
barbacoa taco said:
TXAggie2011 said:
Trump said August 12 so not too far off, but also said he cannot possibly get a fair trial any time this year. That argument didn't work before, so I imagine it won't work this time. But maybe she takes their August date.
let's be honest. Trump can't get a truly fair and impartial trial any time this year or ever. He's TRUMP.

But his excuses are still disingenuous. August is in the middle of campaign season, and anything past that is election interference. So let's do it in December! Even the dumbest person in that courtroom knows the gamesmanship that's going on.

Cannon should split the baby and start the trial the first week of August and be done with it.
CIPA cases are always complicated and for that reason, take a lot of time in pretrial motions. Those all have to be briefed, argued and decided before trial can be scheduled. This really should come as no surprise to Smith.


CIPA slows cases down, but Cannon is moving the CIPA process along glacially, rightly or wrongly. She has been going through multi-week briefing processes over issues that judges can normally decide in their chambers by themselves.

She decided one of the Section 4 issues after like a month of briefing by writing 8 pages of how she agrees with Trump but finished with a short paragraph at the end essentially saying "the 11th circuit law is abundantly clear so matter all the briefing and argument, I'm ruling for Special Counsel."

Maybe it's just inexperience and unfamiliarity with CIPA law. I don't know what it is. She gets to run her court. But some of these issues could be decided in a day to a week and they're taking a month(s).
Reply Quote
6 edits
captkirk
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:40p, 3/2/24
AG
Reply Quote
2
Rockdoc
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to captkirk • 2:48p, 3/2/24
AG
captkirk said:

Oh there will be plenty of answers for this. The posters are already here.
Reply Quote
4
Ellis Wyatt
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to will25u • 5:13p, 3/2/24
will25u said:
Boasberg is another piece of **** tool of Hussein. Was in the middle of all the illegal FISA activity targeting Trump and his people.
Reply Quote
1
Im Gipper
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
5:15p, 3/2/24
Quote:
Nixon never got criminally arrested for Watergate, because he had presidential
immunity.


This is false. Nixon was not arrested because he was pardoned by Ford.


Im in the camp that presidential criminal immunity does exist for official acts. Watergate was not an official act.

The author of that tweet (or whatever it's.called now on X) is not very knowledgeable of history or the issues at play.

I'm Gipper
Reply Quote
6
1 edit
Watermelon Man
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Im Gipper • 8:11p, 3/2/24
Im Gipper said:
Quote:
Nixon never got criminally arrested for Watergate, because he had presidential
immunity.


This is false. Nixon was not arrested because he was pardoned by Ford.


Im in the camp that presidential criminal immunity does exist for official acts. Watergate was not an official act.

The author of that tweet (or whatever it's.called now on X) is not very knowledgeable of history or the issues at play.
Or, just doesn't care.
It is much easier to fool someone than it is to convince someone that he has been fooled.
Reply Quote
4
aggiehawg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Im Gipper • 8:17p, 3/2/24
AG
Im Gipper said:
Quote:
Nixon never got criminally arrested for Watergate, because he had presidential
immunity.


This is false. Nixon was not arrested because he was pardoned by Ford.


Im in the camp that presidential criminal immunity does exist for official acts. Watergate was not an official act.

The author of that tweet (or whatever it's.called now on X) is not very knowledgeable of history or the issues at play.
Of course it wasn't. CREEP did that during a reelection campaign in June 1972 while there was actually a campaign happening.
Reply Quote
3
TheAngelFlight
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to aggiehawg • 8:58p, 3/2/24
aggiehawg said:
Im Gipper said:
Quote:
Nixon never got criminally arrested for Watergate, because he had presidential
immunity.


This is false. Nixon was not arrested because he was pardoned by Ford.


Im in the camp that presidential criminal immunity does exist for official acts. Watergate was not an official act.

The author of that tweet (or whatever it's.called now on X) is not very knowledgeable of history or the issues at play.
Of course it wasn't. CREEP did that during a reelection campaign in June 1972 while there was actually a campaign happening.


Oh yes. The date is what made Watergate a problem.

If Nixon had just waited until December, 1972 to have non-government employees working with his "Committee for Re-election" to hire guys to wiretap a political party's private offices, it would have been A-OK.
Reply Quote
4
1 edit
Ellis Wyatt
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to TheAngelFlight • 9:58p, 3/2/24
TheAngelFlight said:
aggiehawg said:
Im Gipper said:
Quote:
Nixon never got criminally arrested for Watergate, because he had presidential
immunity.


This is false. Nixon was not arrested because he was pardoned by Ford.


Im in the camp that presidential criminal immunity does exist for official acts. Watergate was not an official act.

The author of that tweet (or whatever it's.called now on X) is not very knowledgeable of history or the issues at play.
Of course it wasn't. CREEP did that during a reelection campaign in June 1972 while there was actually a campaign happening.


Oh yes. The date is what made Watergate a problem.

If Nixon had just waited until December, 1972 to have non-government employees working with his "Committee for Re-election" to hire guys to wiretap a political party's private offices, it would have been A-OK.
Nothing happened to Hussein.
Reply Quote
5
Stat Monitor Repairman
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:23p, 3/3/24
'Lawfare' is just another name for the Cloward Piven strategy being employed against a political opponent.
Reply Quote
2
1 edit
will25u
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
12:59p, 3/6/24
Reply Quote
3
aggiehawg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to will25u • 1:22p, 3/6/24
AG
will25u said:
Just a reminder by the time of oral arguments the issues have been fully briefed and positions have been taken. So that fact could indicate a quick decision after oral arguments. OTOH, this is a complex and novel issue requiring a very thorough analysis and reasoning for their decisions. That would indicate a lot of drafts among the justices for a lot of fine tuning and nuance.

I will point out however there was a disconnect in the recent CO ballot case between ACB's concerrence and Sotomayor's. Likely due to a last minute change in the latter's concurrence and ACB didn't edit hers to reflect that change in the rush to get the opinion out before Super Tuesday.

I doubt the Court allows the same to happen on such a momentous case as immunity. So more likely in my estimation a late June decision.
Reply Quote
2
MiamiHopper
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to TXAggie2011 • 1:25p, 3/6/24
TXAggie2011 said:

Maybe it's just inexperience and unfamiliarity with CIPA law. I don't know what it is. She gets to run her court. But some of these issues could be decided in a day to a week and they're taking a month(s).


Aren't we still waiting for her to set the trial date? Can't imagine what the hold up could be.
Reply Quote
1
Im Gipper
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to will25u • 1:26p, 3/6/24
Wrong case.

I'm Gipper
Reply Quote
2
will25u
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Im Gipper • 1:33p, 3/6/24
Im Gipper said:
Wrong case.
I really am not good at posting between these two cases. lol
Reply Quote
1
Im Gipper
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to will25u • 1:36p, 3/6/24
Happens do us all!

I'm Gipper
Reply Quote
1
will25u
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
4:11p, 3/6/24
Reply Quote
1
aggiehawg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
4:14p, 3/6/24
AG
Quote:
Judge Cannon has granted the filing of two Amicus Briefs in this case and will consider them.

One from America First Legal and the other from Citizens United Foundation.

The AFL brief argues that criminal referral from NARA which lead to the indictment of Trump violated the Administrative Procedures Act should therefore be dismissed as should the indictment.
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flsd.648652/gov.uscourts.flsd.648652.360.1.pdf…

The CUF brief is the Ed Meese filing that was filed with SCOTUS arguing that Jack Smith was unlawfully appointed and does not have the authority to prosecute the case.
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flsd.648653/gov.uscourts.flsd.648653.364.1.pdf…

Special Counsel Smith and President Trump have until March 15, 2024 to respond to the briefs if they wish to do so.
Rest of the tweet.
Reply Quote
2
oysterbayAG
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
6:20p, 3/6/24
AG
Look up Ed Meese's biography. He was a very gifted student and the best of the best as a lawyer. I'm glad he's still around. He may save Trump !
Reply Quote
4
aggiehawg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to oysterbayAG • 6:30p, 3/6/24
AG
oysterbayAG said:
Look up Ed Meese's biography. He was a very gifted student and the best of the best as a lawyer. I'm glad he's still around. He may save Trump !
Meese's argument is quite persuasive in fact.

Here's a thought. Same brief as amici is before SCOTUS on the immunity issue. Possible off ramp for a 9-0 per curiam to avoid addressing immunity? Smith has no authority so they don't have to address the criminal immunity issue?

Shuts down both DC and Florida cases immediately. The Georgia case is disinetegrating before our eyes. What's left? Stormy Daniels case which completely depends upon a convicted felon( for lying) Michael Cohen?
Reply Quote
4
PA24
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
12:53a, 3/7/24
AG
Now that President Trump is the obvious Republican nominee for the Presidency, election interference is a valid claim.

Immunity is the answer.

Trump 2024
Reply Quote
3
Stat Monitor Repairman
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to aggiehawg • 3:13a, 3/7/24
Quote:
What's left? Stormy Daniels
Imagine Trump runs the gauntlet on all this only to get tripped up at the goal line by Stormy D in New York state court. Should this happen, then the people of New York will have done more to damage to Trump than the rest of the country and federal government combined.

Set for trial on March 25th. So we'll see.
Reply Quote
3
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.