Most Fed employees are democrats.Im Gipper said:Quote:
No way! Two entrenched democrats quit?!
Why wouid Cannon hire "extended democrats" as clerks?
(Btw, I'll wait for better sourcing before believing this story is true)
Trump indicted over classified documents
214,415 Views |
3469 Replies |
Last: 2 days ago by aggiehawg
Good. The only way this **** will stop is if republicans start pushing back against blatant lawfare.TXAggie2011 said:ThunderCougarFalconBird said:maybe. I'm honestly surprised that she hasn't just done the usual article III judge thing, taken it all under advisement, and then sat on it until the case no longer has political value (I.e. issue orders/opinions after the election).aggiehawg said:Hmm. Maybe Cannon is leaning towards granting at least in part a motion to dismiss?Quote:
She's currently got her 2 usual clerks plus 2 extra temp clerks - almost assuredly specifically because of this case.
There are 7 motions that were filed in February that still aren't even docketed a month later because of the special redaction process she put in place for this case.
Oh, she's certainly sitting on things.
Trump has spent his entire life embracing lawfare.Ellis Wyatt said:Good. The only way this **** will stop is if republicans start pushing back against blatant lawfare.TXAggie2011 said:ThunderCougarFalconBird said:maybe. I'm honestly surprised that she hasn't just done the usual article III judge thing, taken it all under advisement, and then sat on it until the case no longer has political value (I.e. issue orders/opinions after the election).aggiehawg said:Hmm. Maybe Cannon is leaning towards granting at least in part a motion to dismiss?Quote:
She's currently got her 2 usual clerks plus 2 extra temp clerks - almost assuredly specifically because of this case.
There are 7 motions that were filed in February that still aren't even docketed a month later because of the special redaction process she put in place for this case.
Oh, she's certainly sitting on things.
So why did Cannon hire entrenched democrats? No republicans want to love in Fort Pierce?
(Hint: these weren't entrenched democrats)
I'm Gipper
(Hint: these weren't entrenched democrats)
I'm Gipper
I already said Fed employees are overwhelmingly democrats. If not, good.Im Gipper said:
So why did Cannon hire entrenched democrats? No republicans want to love in Fort Pierce?
(Hint: these weren't entrenched democrats)
Your "point" is utter nonsense.eric76 said:Trump has spent his entire life embracing lawfare.Ellis Wyatt said:Good. The only way this **** will stop is if republicans start pushing back against blatant lawfare.TXAggie2011 said:ThunderCougarFalconBird said:maybe. I'm honestly surprised that she hasn't just done the usual article III judge thing, taken it all under advisement, and then sat on it until the case no longer has political value (I.e. issue orders/opinions after the election).aggiehawg said:Hmm. Maybe Cannon is leaning towards granting at least in part a motion to dismiss?Quote:
She's currently got her 2 usual clerks plus 2 extra temp clerks - almost assuredly specifically because of this case.
There are 7 motions that were filed in February that still aren't even docketed a month later because of the special redaction process she put in place for this case.
Oh, she's certainly sitting on things.
That's no revelationEllis Wyatt said:Your "point" is utter nonsense.eric76 said:Trump has spent his entire life embracing lawfare.Ellis Wyatt said:Good. The only way this **** will stop is if republicans start pushing back against blatant lawfare.TXAggie2011 said:ThunderCougarFalconBird said:maybe. I'm honestly surprised that she hasn't just done the usual article III judge thing, taken it all under advisement, and then sat on it until the case no longer has political value (I.e. issue orders/opinions after the election).aggiehawg said:Hmm. Maybe Cannon is leaning towards granting at least in part a motion to dismiss?Quote:
She's currently got her 2 usual clerks plus 2 extra temp clerks - almost assuredly specifically because of this case.
There are 7 motions that were filed in February that still aren't even docketed a month later because of the special redaction process she put in place for this case.
Oh, she's certainly sitting on things.
“Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience" - Mark Twain
As a private citizen.Quote:
Trump has spent his entire life embracing lawfare.
Here you got the State itself being used to conduct a politically motivated prosecution of its chief political rival.
aggiehawg said:That would be a NO. Defense having to sleuth to find Brady material. Plus, EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THE EXECUTIVE AGENCIES ARE PART OF THE ARTICLE II CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITIES OF THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH.Quote:
Not sure if this an issue. The documents he was charged with are vaguely described in the indictment. You'll have to do a little sleuthing to put together what you can about who created each document and who owns the information contained in it.
Let's go back over that pesky separation of powers issue, shall we?
On which planet does any Executive Branch agency is authorized to become POTUS? With all of the powers afforded thereto?
No where. Either POTUS has plenary power or that office does not.
The PRA only applies to documents actually for the person of the President, the person of the Vice President and the Executive Office of the President (not the Executice Branch)
Lots of documents, most documents, from executive branch agencies fall under the Federal Records Act. That's not what determines whether something would be a "federal record" or a "presidential record."
I don't think the government is arguing that these documents are not "presidential records" and rather "federal records", but the FRA applies to executive branch agencies if that's what you're trying to get at
Sometimes a wealthy individual will have even more legal resources available to him than the state.Stat Monitor Repairman said:As a private citizen.Quote:
Trump has spent his entire life embracing lawfare.
Here you got the State itself being used to conduct a politically motivated prosecution of its chief political rival.
At any rate, Cannon would be ignoring precedent to say there isn't any judicial review possible of the documents.
https://casetext.com/case/american-historical-assn-v-peterson
Quote:
Accordingly, in turn, the Court observes that Armstrong II does not necessarily foreclose judicial review of a decision to denominate certain materials "personal records" of a former President. Such judicial review may be available to ensure that Presidential records are not disposed of as personal records at the end of an Administration and that, instead, all Presidential records fall subject to the Archivist's " affirmative duty to make such records available to the public." 44 U.S.C. 2203(f)(1) (emphasis added).
https://casetext.com/case/american-historical-assn-v-peterson
Just a question, given your scenario how is Jack Smith going to demonstrate a legitimate entitlement to compel Cannon to hurry up. And if I read it correctly his mandamus must possess two essential characteristics, that being that it must be a duty of public in nature. So what would be his justification? He can't say it's the duty of the court to get this done before the election, that will never stand, and as you well know Smith isn't entitled to a speedy trial for any reason, and his political deadline was set by his own actions of dragging his feet for two years to try and get the trial in the middle of the primaries schedule and before the election. Now that crunch time is nearing, suddenly he wants to get in a hurry and mandamus her to act quickly? Just not seeing where he can reach the bar for mandamus. The 11th is a little heavy with Trump appointments and very heavy with republican appointments. Biden's stupidity in attacking the SCOTUS during the SOU might not set well with enough judges to tell Jack Smith to GF himself.TXAggie2011 said:The Judge is going to have to very carefully craft an order to try to get around what the 11th Circuit already said in 2022 when Trump sued after the Mar-A-Lago raid. Or, I guess she can just choose to ignore it.jt2hunt said:nonsensical?MiamiHopper said:
"On the right is Judge Cannon"
As other commenters have noted, imagine a judge asking the prosecution in a murder case to prepare jury instructions to assume that the murder took place during The Purge.
That's the nonsensical direction this is headed.
The judge or the original filing?
If she adopts one of those two theories in any kind of order, the government will probably mandamus her at the 11th Circuit faster than her clerk can post the order online.Quote:
We cannot discern why Trump would have an individual interest in...any of the...classified documents...Even if we assumed that Trump did declassify some or all of the documents, that would not explain why he has a personal interest in them.
Trump does not have a possessory interest in the documents at issue...he neither owns nor has a personal interest in the documents
“Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience" - Mark Twain
No wealthy individual could spend what the government has spent trying to destroy Donald Trump. Stop with these unhinged posts.eric76 said:Sometimes a wealthy individual will have even more legal resources available to him than the state.Stat Monitor Repairman said:As a private citizen.Quote:
Trump has spent his entire life embracing lawfare.
Here you got the State itself being used to conduct a politically motivated prosecution of its chief political rival.
Ellis Wyatt said:No wealthy individual could spend what the government has spent trying to destroy Donald Trump. Stop with these unhinged posts.eric76 said:Sometimes a wealthy individual will have even more legal resources available to him than the state.Stat Monitor Repairman said:As a private citizen.Quote:
Trump has spent his entire life embracing lawfare.
Here you got the State itself being used to conduct a politically motivated prosecution of its chief political rival.
TDS never stops. It keeps going and going and going. It's become a lifestyle.
I don't know that Smith can compel Judge Cannon to speed up, per se.
I think Smith could raise that issue alongside another substantive issue. If she were to issue a sufficiently wonky order about something that warrants an appeal/mandamus, in the government's eyes at least, they would probably mention how she's seemingly avoiding issuing any actual rulings on most things.
And hope the 11th Circuit strongly "encourages" her to speed up.
I think Smith could raise that issue alongside another substantive issue. If she were to issue a sufficiently wonky order about something that warrants an appeal/mandamus, in the government's eyes at least, they would probably mention how she's seemingly avoiding issuing any actual rulings on most things.
And hope the 11th Circuit strongly "encourages" her to speed up.
TXAggie2011 said:
The PRA only applies to documents actually for the person of the President, the person of the Vice President and the Executive Office of the President (not the Executice Branch)
Lots of documents, most documents, from executive branch agencies fall under the Federal Records Act. That's not what determines whether something would be a "federal record" or a "presidential record."
I don't think the government is arguing that these documents are not "presidential records" and rather "federal records", but the FRA applies to executive branch agencies if that's what you're trying to get at
They're arguing that Section 793 applies whether or not they were personal, Presidential, or agency records. The records preservation laws are not relevant to this prosecution.
So assume these are all personal records.
How does Trump get around the obstruction of justice charges? The allegation is he conspired to hide documents responsive to grand jury and caused the false certification to be made.
How does Trump get around the obstruction of justice charges? The allegation is he conspired to hide documents responsive to grand jury and caused the false certification to be made.
ThunderCougarFalconBird
Joined:
Oct 10, 2006
Posts:
48,827
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
But that's the inherent problem with article III judges. They have so much control over their dockets that there simply isn't much you can do by way of exerting external control over timing.
Cannon isn't dumb. She knows leftist pundits across the board are watching what she's doing. I suspect she'll either (1) run out the clock by sitting on a lot of stuff there isn't much the 11th circuit can do by way of cajoling her to act or (2) dismiss the indictment but time the dismissal so that there isn't much an appellate court can do in a politically effective time.
Cannon isn't dumb. She knows leftist pundits across the board are watching what she's doing. I suspect she'll either (1) run out the clock by sitting on a lot of stuff there isn't much the 11th circuit can do by way of cajoling her to act or (2) dismiss the indictment but time the dismissal so that there isn't much an appellate court can do in a politically effective time.
BMX Bandit said:
So assume these are all personal records.
How does Trump get around the obstruction of justice charges? The allegation is he conspired to hide documents responsive to grand jury and caused the false certification to be made.
I don't know that he can on that argument. And frankly if that's their position, that these were all personal because they "were sent to Mar-a-Lago" and therefore they didn't need to turn them over, they didn't help themselves by returning some documents and keeping others.
And the result of their civil litigation probably makes it impossible for Cannon to dismiss those charges (unless she wants to lose on appeal and get kicked off the case.)
ThunderCougarFalconBird
Joined:
Oct 10, 2006
Posts:
48,827
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I've seen a lot of pundits on the left insisting that the case will almost assuredly be reassigned for just about any "misstep" (read: result they disagree with) by the judge. The only cases I've seen reassigned by force were some situations where the judge showed blatant open hostility to a litigant (culprit was Lynn Hughes, S.D. Tex. and more than once). Seems a little much at this point but who knows.
I think cannon just sort of rope-a-dopes this until it's impossible to try before the election. After that the political value is gone and no one will really care.
I think cannon just sort of rope-a-dopes this until it's impossible to try before the election. After that the political value is gone and no one will really care.
Which brings us back to the probable cause affidavit supporting the warrant. What does that say?BMX Bandit said:
So assume these are all personal records.
How does Trump get around the obstruction of justice charges? The allegation is he conspired to hide documents responsive to grand jury and caused the false certification to be made.
They took his passports and bank records too. Were those listed on the warrant?
I assume they were not listed.
What dies that have to do with my question? If Trump did as alleged, the fbi grabbing passports etc is not a defense, is it?
What dies that have to do with my question? If Trump did as alleged, the fbi grabbing passports etc is not a defense, is it?
So fake newsThunderCougarFalconBird said:there are updates in the story. One quit because she had a baby. The other quit for reasons yet unknown. The author of the article solicited intel and the responses widely panned any suggestion of anything remotely nefarious going on with Judge Cannon.Im Gipper said:Quote:
No way! Two entrenched democrats quit?!
Why wouid Cannon hire "extended democrats" as clerks?
(Btw, I'll wait for better sourcing before believing this story is true)
LOLwut?eric76 said:Sometimes a wealthy individual will have even more legal resources available to him than the state.Stat Monitor Repairman said:As a private citizen.Quote:
Trump has spent his entire life embracing lawfare.
Here you got the State itself being used to conduct a politically motivated prosecution of its chief political rival.
How is obstructing an invalid search warrant a crime (even if he did that)?BMX Bandit said:
I assume they were not listed.
What dies that have to do with my question? If Trump did as alleged, the fbi grabbing passports etc is not a defense, is it?
The whole raid was sus at the time. Now we have seen how little credibility Smith has since he was using a DC grand jury for a case based in Florida. That is all kinds of messed up.
ThunderCougarFalconBird said:
I've seen a lot of pundits on the left insisting that the case will almost assuredly be reassigned for just about any "misstep" (read: result they disagree with) by the judge. The only cases I've seen reassigned by force were some situations where the judge showed blatant open hostility to a litigant (culprit was Lynn Hughes, S.D. Tex. and more than once). Seems a little much at this point but who knows.
I think cannon just sort of rope-a-dopes this until it's impossible to try before the election. After that the political value is gone and no one will really care.
If the 11th Circuit were to be convinced she's ignoring what they've already told her, they very well could remove her. They've done it before to other judges. Judges looking for end-rounds around a Circuit Court is usually the quickest and most likely way to get removed.
I'm not saying it will happen, by the way. I certainly don't know how this will all go. Can only speak in hypotheticals.
I don't see how it's an invalid search warrant if the allegations are true. If trump hid things from his lawyers responding to subpoena, I don't see how he can claim a search warrant based on probable cause he was doing that is invalid.
11th circuit removing Cannon is about as close to 0% as you can get.
Why do you believe the search warrant was invalid?
ThunderCougarFalconBird
Joined:
Oct 10, 2006
Posts:
48,827
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
That's why I think we see the rope-a-dope until the election comes and goes. Once the election is over, no one will really care.
Gee, I don't know maybe because Jack Smith has a history of being an agenda driven hack? According to a unanimous decision of the Supreme Court. Using a grand jury in DC? Really?MiamiHopper said:
Why do you believe the search warrant was invalid?
Is there a legally cognizable reason why this search warrant would be invalid?
aggiehawg said:Gee, I don't know maybe because Jack Smith has a history of being an agenda driven hack? According to a unanimous decision of the Supreme Court. Using a grand jury in DC? Really?MiamiHopper said:
Why do you believe the search warrant was invalid?
They started with a DC grand jury because documents that were in DC appeared to have went missing.
The only legally cognizable question about the DC jury was whether it should have continued to investigate the issue after the Florida grand jury started and indicted Trump. But if people allegedly lied to the grand jury in DC, it would be entirely proper for the DC grand jury to continue to investigate the alleged lies.
It's forum cognizable, which usually suffices.
NEW: This matter was discussed during the March 14 hearing in Florida. Nearly all of the DOJ's classified documents investigation took place in Trump-hating DC--even though the alleged crime happened in FLA.
— Julie Kelly 🇺🇸 (@julie_kelly2) March 26, 2024
Materials remained under seal by DC chief judge and were not… pic.twitter.com/EbeLG9rE2F
Featured Stories
See All
21:33
42m ago
690
GOOD: Texas A&M comes from behind to secure emphatic MCWS berth
by Richard Zane
21:33
3h ago
11k
23:18
1h ago
714
WestTexasAg
One of the most electric moments in Aggie sports history
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
37
painkiller06
One of the most electric moments in Aggie sports history
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
23
Poot
FINAL from Blue Bell: #3 Texas A&M 15, Oregon 9 (Super Regional, Game 2)
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
19
btk55
FINAL from Blue Bell: #3 Texas A&M 15, Oregon 9 (Super Regional, Game 2)
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
17