I swear it was overnight. The most beef I ever heard him have with anyone was with Rosie O'Donnell (no idea where she went either).

Stat Monitor Repairman said:

---

Donald Trump has access to the very best public and private legal counsel that money could buy.

And he still managed to **** this up to the point that he's facing a 37-count federal criminal indictment.

---

Well they tried to advise him to comply with the subpoena in May 2022, but Trump (allegedly) balked, telling them, "I don't want anybody looking through my boxes!". Access, yes, ... but.

TXAggie2011 said:

---

Quote:

---

You cannot be the one who decides to ship them to his house then complain about them being at his house.

How is that hard to understand? And when you say "they ship", you are referring to Team Biden's GSA and / or NARA.

---

The GSA shipped (some of) the boxes that ended up Mar-A-Lago because the Trump team said "we packed these up, we are telling you we need what are in these, please ship them." Let's be clear about what really happened when we say "Biden shipped the boxes!"

And none of that changes the fact this indictment centers around the fact that Trump was asked for documents back, certified everything that was asked for had been returned, but it turns out that doesn't appear to have been true.

---

Ok, so Biden admin has no responsibility to ship boxes that reasonably could be considered to have important. sensitive, maybe classified, maybe national defense information and sending them to a facility they themselves declared unsecure on Day 1?

Makes sense. NARA asked for documents back and Trump refused, which is governed by the PRA and is specifically a civil, not criminal matter.

Obama judge ruled that former POTUS has wide, essentially unilateral authority to determine which materials are personal v Presidential in nature.

Then why here did the FBI show up at the direction of DOJ and WH counsel? To retrieve personal items? Typically in civil disputes the FBI doesn't conduct an armed raid against a residence guarded by the government and under 24/7 recorded cctv surveillance. There are no allegations Trump was destroying information.

So you support an armed raid, criminal prosecution, finishing off any legitimacy the DOJ/FBI and the courts have for a game of "we want our ball back"?

Nice.

fka ftc said:

---

MInor clarification that Trump is only being charged with possession of military and national defense secrets and not classified documents. At least until the find the box with the Hurricane Dorian map then they will add the charge of altering a map of the National Weather Service.

---

Well classified documents are only covered in 798 ... but I digress.

Having the Dorian map in there would be gold, Jerry. They did say documents were all mixed in with each other.

Quote:

---

"Whoever having unauthorized possession of, access to, or control over any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, or note..."

---

Also ... is Sharpie permanent?

LINK

Read it. Every trial lawyer will now undrstand how Trump's attorneys and Trump was screwed...deliberately.

When faced with massive discovery requests, a rolling production is almost always granted and then followed up upon...as happened here.

Why were boxes being moved? Because Trump was working under that perception that he reviewed and then the materials shipped back as available.

Why i had asked before, why was no facility nearby designated as the NARA facility if not MAL.

Last point. Posession, alone does not equate to "willfull retention" when there are no options available.

NARA caused this. DOJ went full tilt berserk running it out of Nat Sec.

Who's the director of Nara? That person should be called out every which way possible.

Quote:

---

Because Trump was working under that perception that he reviewed and then the materials shipped back as available.

---

This may be true, but it does not fit with the story told in Corcoran's notes. So this will be a fact they have to get into the record at trial.

Corcoran the witness for that?

Quote:

---

Last point. Posession, alone does not equate to "willfull retention" when there are no options available.

---

Can you explain this? How was Trump unable to just return the boxes rather than have the valet hide them from the lawyers?

Retired FBI Agent said:

---

fka ftc said:

---

MInor clarification that Trump is only being charged with possession of military and national defense secrets and not classified documents. At least until the find the box with the Hurricane Dorian map then they will add the charge of altering a map of the National Weather Service.

---

Well classified documents are only covered in 798 ... but I digress.

Having the Dorian map in there would be gold, Jerry. They did say documents were all mixed in with each other.

Quote:

---

"Whoever having unauthorized possession of, access to, or control over any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, or note..."

---

Also ... is Sharpie permanent?

---

He was not charged under 798, which is quite conspicuous and if likely done to preempt any Trump defense that he "declassified". Recall from the original M-A-L thread than many folks, including myself, pointed out the actual classification status was irrelevant as the first order of business is determining the applicability of the PRA.

They are charging him in the first 31 counts under 793 with the willful retention of national defense information regardless of classification status.

fka ftc said:

---

TXAggie2011 said:

---

Quote:

---

You cannot be the one who decides to ship them to his house then complain about them being at his house.

How is that hard to understand? And when you say "they ship", you are referring to Team Biden's GSA and / or NARA.

---

The GSA shipped (some of) the boxes that ended up Mar-A-Lago because the Trump team said "we packed these up, we are telling you we need what are in these, please ship them." Let's be clear about what really happened when we say "Biden shipped the boxes!"

And none of that changes the fact this indictment centers around the fact that Trump was asked for documents back, certified everything that was asked for had been returned, but it turns out that doesn't appear to have been true.

---

Ok, so Biden admin has no responsibility to ship boxes that reasonably could be considered to have important. sensitive, maybe classified, maybe national defense information and sending them to a facility they themselves declared unsecure on Day 1?

Makes sense. NARA asked for documents back and Trump refused, which is governed by the PRA and is specifically a civil, not criminal matter.

Obama judge ruled that former POTUS has wide, essentially unilateral authority to determine which materials are personal v Presidential in nature.

Then why here did the FBI show up at the direction of DOJ and WH counsel? To retrieve personal items? Typically in civil disputes the FBI doesn't conduct an armed raid against a residence guarded by the government and under 24/7 recorded cctv surveillance. There are no allegations Trump was destroying information.

So you support an armed raid, criminal prosecution, finishing off any legitimacy the DOJ/FBI and the courts have for a game of "we want our ball back"?

Nice.

---

Come Feb 9, 2022, NARA was no longer calling the shots once they flagged possible classified docs (ie possible crimes entered the picture, no longer just civil). Merely a courier at that point, but eventually letters, subpoenas, warrants, and a RAID. As a reminder for when they hand it over:

2/9/2022
NARA refers the matter to DOJ after a preliminary review finds the (returned) boxes contain numerous classified documents.

3/30/2022
FBI opens its investigation.

4/12/22
NARA informs Trump that, at the DOJ's request, it intends to provide the FBI with the 15 boxes he turned over on 1/17/2022. Trump's representative asks for an extension until 4/29.

4/29/22
DOJ asks Trump's lawyers for immediate access to the 15 boxes, citing national security interests. Trump's lawyers again ask for an extension.

5/10/22
NARA informs Trump's lawyers that it will provide the FBI access to the boxes as soon as 5/12.

5/11/22
A grand jury issues a subpoena to Trump and his office requiring that they turn over all classified materials in their possession. 371 days have past since the NARA first requested all documents.

5/23/22
Trump's lawyers advise him to comply with the subpoena, but Trump (allegedly) balks, telling them, "I don't want anybody looking through my boxes."


6/2/22
Trump's lawyer returns to MAL to search boxes in the storage room and finds 38 additional classified documents. After the search, Trump (allegedly) asks: "Did you find anything? ... Is it bad? Good?"

Quote:

---

Then why here did the FBI show up at the direction of DOJ and WH counsel?

---

***FBI Shows Up Here - Knock Knock***

6/3/22
FBI agents and a Justice Department lawyer visit MAL to collect the 38 classified documents from Trump's lawyer. Another Trump lawyer, acting as his custodian of records, provides investigators a sworn certification that prosecutors say falsely claimed they had conducted a "diligent search" of boxes moved from the White House and "any and all responsive documents" were turned over.

6/8/22
DOJ sends Trump's lawyer a letter asking that the storage room be secured, and that "all of the boxes that were moved from the White House to MAL (along with any other items in that room) be preserved in that room in their current condition until farther notice."

7/2022
The grand jury is shown surveillance video of boxes being moved at MAL.

8/5/22
DOJ applies for a warrant to search MAL, citing "probable cause" that additional presidential records and classified documents were being stored there. U.S. Magistrate Judge approves the application the same day.

Quote:

---

Typically in civil disputes the FBI doesn't conduct an armed raid

---

Well it is no longer civil, is it?


***FBI Shows Up Here Again - Knock Knock - With Signed Warrant***

8/8/22
FBI searches searches MAL, seizing 102 classified documents 75 in the storage room and 27 in Trump's office, including three found in office desks. 460 days have past since the NARA first requested all documents.

--

Are you sure the "raid" was armed? Or just photos of Secret Service and local PD around MAR armed?

Let's start with a correction.

Quote:

---

Come Feb 9, 2022, Biden's White House counsel meets with NARA and instructs them to involve DOJ in getting the documents back under the idea was no longer calling the shots once they flagged possible classified docs national defense information (ie possible crimes (Espionage Act nonsense) entered the picture, no longer just civil). Merely a courier at that point, but eventually letters, subpoenas, warrants, and a RAID. As a reminder for when they hand it over:

2/9/2022
NARA refers the matter to DOJ after a preliminary review finds the (returned) boxes contain numerous classified documents.

---

They did not "hand it over". WH counsel met with NARA and colluded with corrupt DOJ (there is no longer any doubt here the lengths they will go to to fabricate a "crime" - see Durham Report).

Never any alleged crime from the search warrant to the indictment about possession of classified documents... just "national defense information" assumed by the evidence of "classified markings".

Again, this was done intentionally to undermine any "I declassified that" defense.

Retired FBI Agent said:

---

Are you sure the "raid" was armed? Or just photos of Secret Service and local PD around MAR armed?

---

Well, do you have a copy of who instructed them not to be armed? Would seem pretty odd for them not to be,

https://www.fbi.gov/about/faqs/what-kinds-of-guns-do-fbi-agents-use

Quote:

---

Agents carry Bureau-issued or approved handguns and may be issued additional equipment as needed. Those in specialized areas like the Hostage Rescue Teams may also be issued weapons that fit their duties. Agents are allowed to carry personal weapons, provided they do not violate the policies regarding firearms. Unless otherwise instructed, agents are required to be armed at all times.

---

You may need to brief yourself on these matters or let your former employer know they need to correct their website.

If they are always armed, why are you making a deal out of them being armed?

TheAngelFlight said:

---

If they are always armed, why are you making a deal out of them being armed?

---

Because, its further to the point that it was unwarranted and unneeded for the FBI to conduct the search.

It may ultimately prove to be unlawful for them to have conducted such a broad and baseless search, but as many have noted the threshold to get a search warrant is very very low.

Almost as low as making **** up to get a FISA warrant.

The guy is in the 70's

Look at the long day he just had.

Just listened to his speech in NJ tonight. He is still going strong.

He looked really good inside the courtroom today as well.

TheAngelFlight said:

---

If they are always armed, why are you making a deal out of them being armed?

---

FBI sure weren't armed when they invited Hillary to lawyer up and have a sit down discussion of her disposition of 33,000 emails then announced, though serious misconduct, no reasonable prosecutor would pursue this case against her.

I don't think these scumbags in the Biden DOJ will get a conviction and send Trump to prison, However, I've not seen it mentioned about how the Secret Service would have to be there with him! That would be some weird situation. Would Trump still be entitled to an office and staff ?

Trump is not going to jail. LOL

oysterbayAG said:

---

I don't think these scumbags in the Biden DOJ will get a conviction and send Trump to prison, However, I've not seen it mentioned about how the Secret Service would have to be there with him! That would be some weird situation. Would Trump still be entitled to an office and staff ?

---

It would literally be a violation of law not to provide him with such.

There is no provision in the former POTUS act (it has an official name) that carves out what happens when an illegitimate regime decides to persecute a former POTUS through weaponization of the DOJ.

Retired FBI Agent said:

---

Stat Monitor Repairman said:

---

Donald Trump has access to the very best public and private legal counsel that money could buy.

And he still managed to **** this up to the point that he's facing a 37-count federal criminal indictment.

---

Well they tried to advise him to comply with the subpoena in May 2022, but Trump (allegedly) balked, telling them, "I don't want anybody looking through my boxes!". Access, yes, ... but.

---

I agree.

Willful conduct is all that is required under the 793 statute.

Thats a low bar based on what we've seen.

The DOJ has all the cards here.

None of the other arguments that I've seen floated strike me as anything other than something argue about.

The willful failure to surrender defense information to an officer of the United States, ON DEMAND, shall be subject to a fine, imprisonment for up to 10-years, or both.

And that's the entire case in boiled down to a single sentence.

I've heard 6 legal experts on TV plus Aggiehawg that all say that the presidential record act first, followed if necessary by Atty client privilege rule, followed by inability to prove intent will prevent conviction of Trump. Dershowitz adds that equal protection under law argument also will win for Trump.

Bryanisbest said:

---

I've heard 6 legal experts on TV plus Aggiehawg that all say that the presidential record act first, followed if necessary by Atty client privilege rule, followed by inability to prove intent will prevent conviction of Trump. Dershowitz adds that equal protection under law argument also will win for Trump.

---

Please explain equal protection under the law angle.

Im Gipper said:

---

Trump is not going to jail. LOL

---

duh. Also, antagonizing him is going to make things worse, not better.

The federal government rarely doesn't get a conviction in trial, and in fact the vast majority of folks indicted by the fed don't even go to trial. They plead guilty.

If he wants to get out of this jam, don't go to trial, he will lose and get slammed hard.

Either get the case tossed or accept a plea deal. My bet is he will accept a plea deal so he doesn't spend the rest of his life in jail. Very unlikely they get it tossed, but his lawyers will certainly try.

https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2019/06/11/only-2-of-federal-criminal-defendants-go-to-trial-and-most-who-do-are-found-guilty/#:~:text=Only%202%25%20of%20federal%20criminal%20defendants%20go%20to%20trial%2C%20and,who%20do%20are%20found%20guilty

Stat Monitor Repairman said:

---

Retired FBI Agent said:

---

Stat Monitor Repairman said:

---

Donald Trump has access to the very best public and private legal counsel that money could buy.

And he still managed to **** this up to the point that he's facing a 37-count federal criminal indictment.

---

Well they tried to advise him to comply with the subpoena in May 2022, but Trump (allegedly) balked, telling them, "I don't want anybody looking through my boxes!". Access, yes, ... but.

---

I agree.

Willful conduct is all that is required under the 793 statute.

The willful failure to surrender defense information to an officer of the United States, ON DEMAND, shall be subject to a fine, imprisonment for up to 10-years, or both.

And that's the entire case in boiled down to a single sentence.

---

Impressive. Now try that with the 2A.

Bryanisbest said:

---

I've heard 6 legal experts on TV plus Aggiehawg that all say that the presidential record act first, followed if necessary by Atty client privilege rule, followed by inability to prove intent will prevent conviction of Trump. Dershowitz adds that equal protection under law argument also will win for Trump.

---

Found two articles from Dershowitz that speak to what you're referencing:

ALAN DERSHOWITZ: The DOJ's Indictment Against Trump Is Strong, But Will It Be Enough To Take Him Down?

ALAN DERSHOWITZ: What If Both Trump And His Prosecutors Are Guilty?

GMaster0 said:

---

The federal government rarely doesn't get a conviction in trial, and in fact the vast majority of folks indicted by the fed don't even go to trial. They plead guilty.

If he wants to get out of this jam, don't go to trial, he will lose and get slammed hard.

Either get the case tossed or accept a plea deal. My bet is he will accept a plea deal so he doesn't spend the rest of his life in jail. Very unlikely they get it tossed, but his lawyers will certainly try.

https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2019/06/11/only-2-of-federal-criminal-defendants-go-to-trial-and-most-who-do-are-found-guilty/#:~:text=Only%202%25%20of%20federal%20criminal%20defendants%20go%20to%20trial%2C%20and,who%20do%20are%20found%20guilty

---

Wow you have it figured out. You should give him a call and let him know.

Just facts, it is highly unlikely he will win his case. That is probably what his lawyers are getting him to grapple.

I think you can debate the merits of trying and convicting former presidents. Not the best look, but when you are dealing with something as serious as National Security,
the stakes are high.

Bryanisbest said:

---

I've heard 6 legal experts on TV plus Aggiehawg that all say that the presidential record act first, followed if necessary by Atty client privilege rule, followed by inability to prove intent will prevent conviction of Trump. Dershowitz adds that equal protection under law argument also will win for Trump.

---

The people on TV are wrong.

You got to look at the text of the indictment and you got to look at the text of the statute. those are the only two things that matter, All the rest of this stuff is extraneous.

This case is about

1. Was the warrant defective; and

2. Did Trump willfully fail to surrender defense information to an officer of the United States on demand.

All other issues are cream gravy. Something to go on tv and talk about.

Stat Monitor Repairman said:

---

Bryanisbest said:

---

I've heard 6 legal experts on TV plus Aggiehawg that all say that the presidential record act first, followed if necessary by Atty client privilege rule, followed by inability to prove intent will prevent conviction of Trump. Dershowitz adds that equal protection under law argument also will win for Trump.

---

The people on TV are wrong.

You got to look at the text of the indictment and you got to look at the text of the statute. those are the only two things that matter, All the rest of this stuff is extraneous.

This case is about

1. Was the warrant defective; and

2. Did Trump willfully fail to surrender defense information to an officer of the United States on demand.

All other issues are cream gravy. Something to go on tv and talk about.

---

Sorry Buddy, having heard from people who have intensely studied the issues, I'm going with them

How does Trump win this case?

[takes huff of magic marker]

Trump has got to attack that warrant.

Full court press. Find the smartest people you can find in that field. Hire a team of law professors as consulting experts. Do whatever the hell you got to do. Throw the kitchen sink at this warrant and worry about the rest later. If the Court finds that the warrant is defective then Trump goes home a winner.

Secondary to that, Tump has got to put himself in a position to negotiate a deal if need be. Get some motions on file. Apply some leverage. Give the court something to work with. Give the DOJ something to think about.

Then try to work a deal. Get the judge to put the DOJ and Trump's people in a room and say don't come out until the case gets settled.' Trump cuts a deal with the DOJ. Trump pays a fine, and goes home a winner. No jail time. Case is over. Trump looks like a hero because they didn't manage to put him in jail.

That's best case scenario for Trump.

If this case drags out 3 -4 years going back and forth between the district and circuit court I think they try and put Trump in jail to prove a point.

So it may not be as bad as it looks for Trump. He's got some options.

Trump might well beat the espionage act part of the charges as I'm not seeing anything that makes it clear someone known not to be allowed to to possess national security information actually received it as defined by the law.

Seeing that a page exists is not the same as having the knowledge of the information on the document conveyed. Did they get to hold and read it? I'm did they get a picture of it? Did they get to take notes about the contents of the document? Or, did they just see Trump waving it about making claims about how he has a document? The indictment never clearly states any of the unauthorized persons actually received knowledge of the actual contents of the documents or copies of the documents. There is a critical distinction there with regards to what actions the espionage act covers.

If that espionage act part fails, what does it mean for the rest of the case? How much is based on that?

Trump might be damaged politically by this but the specific legal case has some problems at least in this area based on what we know. If it becomes purely a presidential records act issue, that is more or less a civil matter over who possesses what, not a criminal act with criminal penalties.

Lying repeatedly to government agencies, willfully hiding documents and ignoring a subpoena for confidential and top secret documents is not a "civil matter". Orange Man Bad.

GeorgiAg said:

---

Lying repeatedly to government agencies, willfully hiding documents and ignoring a subpoena for confidential and top secret documents is not a "civil matter". Orange Man Bad.

---

This thread is about Trump, not Hillary.