dreyOO said:

---

TXAggie2011 said:

---

p.s. Not charging Trump would also influence the Presidential election.

---

Kinda like not charging Hillary. Or burying the case against the dirty Bidens and the laptop from hell.

The FBI and DOJ are corrupt.

---

Quote:

---

The court's showed their true colors when they refused to hear not only the election claims, but also a situation where the government mandated voluntary forced medical experimentation on human subjects without informed consent.

---

Stat Monitor Repairman said:

---

Regardless of anyones feelings about Trump, or personal opinion about Trump, the federal indictment of a former president and current presidential candidate during the campaign over some cardboard boxes full of crap is potentially the stupidest thing imaginable.

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

The Justice Department on Friday filed a motion seeking to block former President Trump from releasing any classified materials that will be shared with his legal team during his prosecution for the mishandling of records at Mar-a-Lago, noting that some are still being used in the course of their investigation.

The documents "include information pertaining to ongoing investigations" which could be used to further cases against uncharged individuals, the Department of Justice (DOJ) wrote.

---

Quote:

---

The suggested protective order, which will be reviewed by Judge Bruce Reinhart, would allow Trump to review the 31 documents the DOJ is using in the case only while in the presence of his attorneys.

"Defendants shall only have access to Discovery Materials under the direct supervision of Defense Counsel or a member of Defense Counsel's staff. Defendants shall not retain copies of Discovery Material. Defendants may take notes regarding Discovery Materials, but such notes shall be stored securely by Defense Counsel," the DOJ wrote.

---

Quote:

---

It also includes similar language to a protective order agreed to in another Trump case that bars the former president from disclosing evidence in the case. New York state prosecutors made that request as they pursue a 34-count indictment of Trump relating to a hush money scandal.

"The Discovery Materials, along with any information derived therefrom, shall not be disclosed to the public or the news media, or disseminated on any news or social media platform, without prior notice to and consent of the United States or approval of the Court," the department wrote.

Judge Aileen Cannon, who oversaw Trump's previous challenge to the investigation, referred the motion to Reinhart, who approved the initial search of Mar-a-Lago.

---

LINK

Damn, Smith sure knows about the timing of which Magistrate will be assigned when, don't they? File this on Monday and it would be another Magistrate on call.

---

ThunderCougarFalconBird said:

---

Stat Monitor Repairman said:

---

Regardless of anyones feelings about Trump, or personal opinion about Trump, the federal indictment of a former president and current presidential candidate during the campaign over some cardboard boxes full of crap is potentially the stupidest thing imaginable.

---

this is the point I've been making all along. What is stopping trump at this point from getting in his plane tomorrow, flying straight to Beijing, and spilling every last conceivable detail about US secrets he learned while in the White House purely out of spite?

---

ThunderCougarFalconBird said:

---

I know it's not in his character but what's stopping him? He's got endless amounts of information about the US in his head. What if he just decides, "you know what? **** it." What is stoping him? Serious question, by the way.

---

fka ftc said:

---

ThunderCougarFalconBird said:

---

I know it's not in his character but what's stopping him? He's got endless amounts of information about the US in his head. What if he just decides, "you know what? **** it." What is stoping him? Serious question, by the way.

---

Pride, legacy.

Legally, treason and such.

Physically, not a thing unless he was put on some sort of travel restriction.

---

jrdaustin said:

---

Bill Clinternet said:

---

The Justice Department has moral and legal agency notwithstanding the make up of the current administration. The evidence is overwhelming.

However, in the interest of saving our Republic from another right wing insurrection and further division, President Biden should pardon Mr. Trump and let him disappear back into whatever slime infested ****hole he chooses to slither back towards.

---

Yes, it does. But:

A. It is not absolute. That's why they still have to appear before a court official.
B. It is questionable whether that agency automatically and summarily supersedes a FPOTUS, who the overwhelming evidence indicates is not just some random guy.
C. It does not give DOJ the authority to pick and choose what statutes to use - or more specifically disregard - in executing such agency.

If you think about it, your blanket statement could be the bedrock for the establishment of a true third world government placing unelected bureaucrats at the highest point in the food chain - enabling them to eliminate political opponents at will.

No thanks. But thank you for playing.

---

Quote:

---

can't the district just just withdraw the reference to the magistrate whenever they want?

---

Quote:

---

Or decline their recommendations? ).

---

TexasAggie73 said:

---

For all you legal eagles out there. What are the odds that this even goes to trial and if it does,
how long will it take for this to happen?

---

BMX Bandit said:

---

Quote:

---

can't the district just just withdraw the reference to the magistrate whenever they want?

---

The referral to the magistrate is done on a motion by motion basis. She did not have to refer this motion to the magistrate, and could always take it back if she wanted. But there is no reason to right now. It's a pretty ministerial task at this point. it will be a standard protective order

Quote:

---

Or decline their recommendations? ).

---

Yes, after the magistrate recommendation is made, the parties have a chance to object and the district judge then rules

---

fka ftc said:

---

eric76 said:

---

Many people have gone to prison for less.

If you take classified documents home with you and they likely won't even give you the opportunity of getting off scot-free if you return them.

Trump already had the deal of a life-time but he was too stupid to take advantage of it. If he had returned them when asked, none of this would be happening.

---

He is not being charged with taking classified documents, quit listening to Manhattan.

At least read the indictment so you can refer to the charges correctly.

Adding a flag for derail. There are 50 pages of discussion that clearly and repeated refer to the indictment. Refrain from derailing by posting lies.

---

Stat Monitor Repairman said:

---

That's a good argument from you eric76, but Trump should get the Supreme Court to tell us exactly what you just said. Let a bunch of constitutional scholars sort it out. Deny original jurisdiction in this case and allow criminal prosecution of presidents after they leave office by their political opponents.

This happens all the time in countries not named the US. But the difference between the US and the rest of the world was political stability, economic stability and the peaceful transfer of power. But since the year 2000 that is no longer the case.

If Trump tries and fails to get the supreme court to take original jurisdiction in this case involving a former president and current presidential candidate in a case arising out of a criminal defendants service as president of the United States, then that will confirm to us exactly what we can anticipate from our government from here on out.

To have the president of the United States under threat of criminal prosecution once they leave office may be the stupidest thing imaginable from a constitutional, and functionality of government standpoint.

But we've already crossed that threshold now and there's no going back.

It is also telling that there would be any objection to the SC assuming jurisdiction over this unprecedented case.

Arguing that this unprecedented case should not immediately be before the Supreme Court is an argument that this case should be tied up in the district and circuit courts for no less than 3-years .... which is the entire rationale for this politically motivated prosecution in the first place.

---

Quote:

---

While they would still be wanting Trump to return the Presidential Records, I don't think that they would have gone after him like this if it weren't for the Classified/National Defense Information documents which he had no legitimate right to have in his possession.

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

While they would still be wanting Trump to return the Presidential Records, I don't think that they would have gone after him like this if it weren't for the Classified/National Defense Information documents which he had no legitimate right to have in his possession.

---

Uhm, see that is the problem here.

I am going to paraphrase something I read from Shipwreckedcrew about how the statutory construction works when the PRA is involved.

Trump gets into a vehicle with "National Defense Information" documents at 11:45 AM on January 20, 2021. He arrives at Joint Base Andrews at 12:05PM with the same documents.

Does the FBI or NARA Archivist have the right to tackle him the moment he steps out of the vehicle since he is now technically not in authorized possession uner the Espionage Act, according to Jack Smith?

If you think that is absurd, as most would, that's the test for when the absurd becomes the definition of the application of a statute. But that absurdity, is exactly what has been alleged in Counts 1-31 in the indictmet. That he was in "unauthorized possession" and then "willfully retained" records having supposed NDI in them.

Smith went out on a ledge here.

---

aggiehaw said:

---

Trump gets into a vehicle with "National Defense Information" documents at 11:45 AM on January 20, 2021. He arrives at Joint Base Andrews at 12:05PM with the same documents.

Does the FBI or NARA Archivist have the right to tackle him the moment he steps out of the vehicle since he is now technically not in authorized possession uner the Espionage Act, according to Jack Smith?

---

• as the Head of government and Head of state, with the authority to make political appointments, veto a bill, issue a pardon, among other authority.
• as Commander in Chief, with the authority to launch a missile strike, direct a military assault, among other authority.
• with authorized access to and possession of sensitive classified documents and national defense information.

• as a private citizen with lifetime benefits associated with The Former Presidents Act.
• as a private citizen who no longer holds the roles, responsibilities, authorities, etc. of the POTUS.
• with unauthorized access to and possession of sensitive classified documents and national defense information.

• 100+ Days after "leaving the vehicle", NARA asks that Trump turn over any presidential records he may have kept upon leaving WH. They make repeated requests.
• 300+ Days after "leaving the vehicle", NARA warns Trump through his attorneys that it will refer the matter to DOJ if he does not comply. They make repeated requests.
• 362 Days after "leaving the vehicle", Trump returns 15 boxes to NARA.
• 385 Days after "leaving the vehicle", NARA refers the matter to DOJ after their initial review finds the 15 boxes contain numerous classified documents.
• 465 Days after "leaving the vehicle", DOJ asks Trump attorneys for immediate access to the 15 boxes. Trump attorneys ask for extension.
• 477 Days after "leaving the vehicle", a grand jury issues issues a subpoena to Trump and his office requiring that they turn over all classified materials in their possession.
• 489 Days after "leaving the vehicle", Trump's lawyers advise him to comply. "Hey we think you might get tackled since you've left the vehicle".
• 500 Days after "leaving the vehicle", FBI/DOJ visits MAL to collect 38 classified documents from Trump's lawyer.
• 563 Days after "leaving the vehicle", DOJ applies for a warrant to search Mar-a-Lago.
• 566 Days after "leaving the vehicle", FBI tackles Trump outside of the vehicle to seize remaining documents, via MAL raid.

TXAggie2011 said:

---

Trump would have no property interest in Presidential Records at 12:05pm and the government would have every right to have those documents returned. Period.

But stop raising bull**** scenarios and acting like this indictment is not predicated on the government asking multiple times for the documents to be returned over a period of months.

---

Retired FBI Agent said:

---

aggiehaw said:

---

Trump gets into a vehicle with "National Defense Information" documents at 11:45 AM on January 20, 2021. He arrives at Joint Base Andrews at 12:05PM with the same documents.

Does the FBI or NARA Archivist have the right to tackle him the moment he steps out of the vehicle since he is now technically not in authorized possession uner the Espionage Act, according to Jack Smith?

---

Well that's the kicker isn't it? Trump gets into a vehicle. And gets out of the vehicle. In that analogy, he gets in the vehicle as POTUS and exits it as FPOTUS. An extraordinary change has taken place for him, and the country:

Trump enters the vehicle:

• as the Head of government and Head of state, with the authority to make political appointments, veto a bill, issue a pardon, among other authority.
• as Commander in Chief, with the authority to launch a missile strike, direct a military assault, among other authority.
• with authorized access to and possession of sensitive classified documents and national defense information.

Trump exists the vehicle:

• as a private citizen with lifetime benefits associated with The Former Presidents Act.
• as a private citizen who no longer holds the roles, responsibilities, authorities, etc. of the POTUS.
• with unauthorized access to and possession of sensitive classified documents and national defense information.

And yet, despite this major shift in his authority, Trump isn't tackled outside of his vehicle for another 566 days.

• 100+ Days after "leaving the vehicle", NARA asks that Trump turn over any presidential records he may have kept upon leaving WH. They make repeated requests.
• 300+ Days after "leaving the vehicle", NARA warns Trump through his attorneys that it will refer the matter to DOJ if he does not comply. They make repeated requests.
• 362 Days after "leaving the vehicle", Trump returns 15 boxes to NARA.
• 385 Days after "leaving the vehicle", NARA refers the matter to DOJ after their initial review finds the 15 boxes contain numerous classified documents.
• 465 Days after "leaving the vehicle", DOJ asks Trump attorneys for immediate access to the 15 boxes. Trump attorneys ask for extension.
• 477 Days after "leaving the vehicle", a grand jury issues issues a subpoena to Trump and his office requiring that they turn over all classified materials in their possession.
• 489 Days after "leaving the vehicle", Trump's lawyers advise him to comply. "Hey we think you might get tackled since you've left the vehicle".
• 500 Days after "leaving the vehicle", FBI/DOJ visits MAL to collect 38 classified documents from Trump's lawyer.
• 563 Days after "leaving the vehicle", DOJ applies for a warrant to search Mar-a-Lago.
• 566 Days after "leaving the vehicle", FBI tackles Trump outside of the vehicle to seize remaining documents, via MAL raid.

Say instead of POTUS-FPOTUS, it's an intelligence analyst, attorney, or administrative assistant. Their last day of employment is January 20, 2021 with a stated end time of 12:00 PMwhere they are walked off Pentagon/campus/office by Human Resources. All parties knew this was the scheduled last day of employment.

Do those ex-employees walk out that day with sensitive documents, thumb drives, existing case files, etc? Are they mixing those documents with personal documents, and their cardboard box with a picture frame, plant, and their lunchbox? Did they keep an iPad, perhaps on accident, loaded with case files? Do they get stopped by security in the parking lot, perhaps tackled? Does IT shut down their electronic access to systems? Are they given 1 week to give back their company cell phone? 2 weeks?

At what point does the company have the right to take it's "valuable" property back after the person's employment has clearly ended?

---

BMX Bandit said:

---

Quote:

---

The court's showed their true colors when they refused to hear not only the election claims, but also a situation where the government mandated voluntary forced medical experimentation on human subjects without informed consent.

---

"True colors" of following the constitution? Zero justices wanted to give trump the emergency relief he wanted for election (though there was a good argument for jurisdiction, just not emergency relief) & no basis for original jurisdiction on vaccine mandate.

Here, there is no basis for original jurisdiction here. It's an argument you may hear on twitter and YouTube, but not one Trumps attorneys will ever make.

---

eric76 said:

---

Stat Monitor Repairman said:

---

That's a good argument from you eric76, but Trump should get the Supreme Court to tell us exactly what you just said. Let a bunch of constitutional scholars sort it out. Deny original jurisdiction in this case and allow criminal prosecution of presidents after they leave office by their political opponents.

This happens all the time in countries not named the US. But the difference between the US and the rest of the world was political stability, economic stability and the peaceful transfer of power. But since the year 2000 that is no longer the case.

If Trump tries and fails to get the supreme court to take original jurisdiction in this case involving a former president and current presidential candidate in a case arising out of a criminal defendants service as president of the United States, then that will confirm to us exactly what we can anticipate from our government from here on out.

To have the president of the United States under threat of criminal prosecution once they leave office may be the stupidest thing imaginable from a constitutional, and functionality of government standpoint.

But we've already crossed that threshold now and there's no going back.

It is also telling that there would be any objection to the SC assuming jurisdiction over this unprecedented case.

Arguing that this unprecedented case should not immediately be before the Supreme Court is an argument that this case should be tied up in the district and circuit courts for no less than 3-years .... which is the entire rationale for this politically motivated prosecution in the first place.

---

Some of us would prefer that the Supreme Court to stick to the law instead of expanding it willy nilly by ignoring the Constitution or by creating new interpretations that did not exist before.

That said, there are a great many who want to subvert the Constitution whenever it fits their bias without realizing just how much it opens to their opposition.

The proper way to give original jurisdiction to the Supreme Court is by amending the Constitution to explicitly permit it.

---

Stat Monitor Repairman said:

---

The supreme court needs to weigh in on this case asap because it's the right thing to do.

---

fka ftc said:

---

362 Days after "leaving the vehicle", Trump returns 15 boxes to NARA.
385 Days after "leaving the vehicle", NARA refers the matter to DOJ after their initial review finds the 15 boxes contain numerous classified documents.
465 Days after "leaving the vehicle", DOJ asks Trump attorneys for immediate access to the 15 boxes. Trump attorneys ask for extension.


From Retired FBI Agent, there seems to be an issue. At day 362, Trump returns 15 boxes to NARA. At 385, NARA finds "documents with classified markings", notice the nomenclature.

Also, notice that a part of that NARA "referral" to DOJ is done after instruction / consult with Biden WH Counsel. Strange.

Inexplicably, roughly 3 months later and even stranger, DOJ is asking for access to 15 boxes Trump has evidently already returned to NARA that contain "documents with classified markings" that DOJ now, also inexplicably, say must contain "national defense information" which means it falls under Espionage Act, which means criminal, which means they want a warrant for any and all Trump property that may contain "national defense information", including Barron's mattress and Melania's painted.

All seems totally legit.

---

eric76 said:

---

Stat Monitor Repairman said:

---

The supreme court needs to weigh in on this case asap because it's the right thing to do.

---

I've heard that kind of argument before and it is as wrong today as the first time I ever heard it. It is an argument for evil, not for good.


It's the same kind of argument as that of trying to force the country to pay slavery reparations to people who have never been slaves.

It's the same kind of argument as that of convincing minors that they need gender reassignments.

It's the same kind of argument as that of having drag queens at the library doing shows for the kids.

It's the argument of those who want to give participation trophies for anything and who do not value hard work at all.

Any time someone claims that we should overlook the legalities because "it's the right thing to do", the only thing you can count on is that it is very much the wrong thing to do. It's an argument for people who don't have any Conservative principles at all. It is an argument against everything Conservatism has ever stood for, but it's right up there for despots and people who want to destroy governments and peoples.

---

Maroon Dawn said:

---

eric76 said:

---

Stat Monitor Repairman said:

---

The supreme court needs to weigh in on this case asap because it's the right thing to do.

---

I've heard that kind of argument before and it is as wrong today as the first time I ever heard it. It is an argument for evil, not for good.


It's the same kind of argument as that of trying to force the country to pay slavery reparations to people who have never been slaves.

It's the same kind of argument as that of convincing minors that they need gender reassignments.

It's the same kind of argument as that of having drag queens at the library doing shows for the kids.

It's the argument of those who want to give participation trophies for anything and who do not value hard work at all.

Any time someone claims that we should overlook the legalities because "it's the right thing to do", the only thing you can count on is that it is very much the wrong thing to do. It's an argument for people who don't have any Conservative principles at all. It is an argument against everything Conservatism has ever stood for, but it's right up there for despots and people who want to destroy governments and peoples.

---

Unless you're a Democrat of course

Then you can possess or destroy classified documents you never had any authority to possess in the first place and the FBI calls it cooperation and says no reasonable person would ever prosecute you

---

Quote:

---

All you're doing is enabling this nana republik two tier justice system with your "Republicans must be prosecuted for jay walking but oh well guess we can't do anything about blatant Dem corruption going untouched!"

---

fka ftc said:

---

You have repeatedly advocated for the violation of Trump's rights under the Constitution, so I hardly think you are the one to now draw the line of following it word by word when it comes to SCOTUS original jurisdiction.

You right, it does say a lot about someone when they pick and choose who gets what rights under the Constitution.

---