fka ftc said:

---

TXAggie2011 said:

---

Even if Trump is innocent as a newborn dove, it still seems he'll find a way pain in the ass for his attorneys.

---

Never heard this saying. Do doves become less innocent as they age? Pigeons I can see leading a life of disgust and violence, but I thought doves were better than that.

This case will be dropped by Merrick Garland's replacement, likely before end of this year.

---

I think that would upset Trump's primary challengers' game plans. There seems to be a lot of people jumping into the race likely on the thought that Trump being in court will actually help them peel off some of his supporters. I knows he won't lose a single supporter, even if found guilty or if he admitted to being in the wrong of all that's being brought against him, but hope seems to be the biggest driving force for anyone running that isn't Desantis.

Wish we could get a definitive answer to that.

Quote:

---

The document and recording are described in the indictment Smith's team secured against Trump earlier this month, recounted as an alleged meeting with "a writer, a publisher, and two members of" Trump's staff, "none of whom possessed a security clearance."

But according to a source familiar with the matter, Trump was not charged with unlawfully holding onto the Iran-related document discussed in the recording.

---

Quote:

---

Smith's 37-count indictment against Trump includes 31 charges of willfully retaining national defense information. It generally outlines each of the 31 classified records that prosecutors allege Trump illegally kept, without naming the exact subject matter. The Iran memo is not part of the list of the 31 records in the indictment, the source said.

Throughout the years-long federal investigation into Trump's White House records, investigators have collected more than 300 documents with classified markings on them including 103 seized during the execution of a search warrant at Trump's Florida residence last year.

Multiple sources familiar with the investigation previously told CBS News that defense attorneys were not certain the Iran memo in question was ever recovered and returned to the government. Still, the 2021 incident is one of two instances referenced in the indictment, in which Smith describes Trump allegedly showing national defense information to individuals without proper clearance.

---

Quote:

---

Smith's 37-count indictment against Trump includes 31 charges of willfully retaining national defense information. It generally outlines each of the 31 classified records that prosecutors allege Trump illegally kept, without naming the exact subject matter. The Iran memo is not part of the list of the 31 records in the indictment, the source said.

---

CBS News

Thanks for that link!

At this point, it would be shocking if this, Iran document was any of the ones at issue in the actual counts.

Is there anyone out there that thinks it is?

Im Gipper said:

---

Thanks for that link!

At this point, it would be shocking if this, Iran document was any of the ones at issue in the actual counts.

Is there anyone out there that thinks it is?

---

So now we are back to the admissibility of the tape at trial. Recording was not made in Florida. Recording does not address any documents in the case. Is the recording propensity evidence? Would its admittance be more prejudicial than probative of a material issue in the case?

Can see that last question argued either way.

We will definitely see lots of briefing on that issue for sure!

Federal Rules of Evidence 404:

Quote:

---

(b) Other Crimes, Wrongs, or Acts.
(1) Prohibited Uses. Evidence of any other crime, wrong, or act is not admissible to prove a person's character in order to show that on a particular occasion the person acted in accordance with the character.

(2) Permitted Uses. This evidence may be admissible for another purpose, such as proving motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, absence of mistake, or lack of accident.

(3) Notice in a Criminal Case. In a criminal case, the prosecutor must:

(A) provide reasonable notice of any such evidence that the prosecutor intends to offer at trial, so that the defendant has a fair opportunity to meet it;
(B) articulate in the notice the permitted purpose for which the prosecutor intends to offer the evidence and the reasoning that supports the purpose; and
(C) do so in writing before trial or in any form during trial if the court, for good cause, excuses lack of pretrial notice.

---

LINK

aggiehawg said:

---

Federal Rules of Evidence 404:

Quote:

---

(b) Other Crimes, Wrongs, or Acts.
(1) Prohibited Uses. Evidence of any other crime, wrong, or act is not admissible to prove a person's character in order to show that on a particular occasion the person acted in accordance with the character.

(2) Permitted Uses. This evidence may be admissible for another purpose, such as proving motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, absence of mistake, or lack of accident.

---

---

I may not have completely mastered the Engrish language, but how and the hell are the definitions of Prohibited vs Permitted not in complete conflict with one another?

Im Gipper said:

---

Quote:

---

And if Smith does not have the exact document they claim Trump was holding, the tape could be excluded at trial. (Assuming it ever reaches trial, that is.)

---

Agree on all! It will be extremely hard to get that tape in if the document isn't one of the ones Smith lists in the indictment.


On a side note, always enjoy discussing cases with you because I know you have read the source documents. Seems many Internet Super Lawyers (one from each side on this page) know everything but don't bother to read anything!

---

How will they prove it is "the" document?

If you watched the Alex Murdaugh trial, all of his financial crimes were admitted into his murder trial under the motive exception, even though Murdaugh did not benefit from the deaths of his wife and son financially. The judge instructed the jury that they could only consider that evidence as to motive but limiting instructions do not put the s*** back into the horse.

Here I would expect the state's argument will be his statements goes to intent under the "willfull" part of the retention charges.

aggiehawg said:

---

If you watched the Alex Murdaugh trial, all of his financial crimes were admitted into his murder trial under the motive exception, even though Murdaugh did not benefit from the deaths of his wife and son financially. The judge instructed the jury that they could only consider that evidence as to motive but limiting instructions do not put the s*** back into the horse.

Here I would expect the state's argument will be his statements goes to intent under the "willfull" part of the retention charges.

---

Murdaugh was set to benefit by delaying a pending court motion that was set to expose all his financial crimes. This is why it was brought into evidence and why it's going to stand up on appeal.

aggiehawg said:

---

If you watched the Alex Murdaugh trial, all of his financial crimes were admitted into his murder trial under the motive exception, even though Murdaugh did not benefit from the deaths of his wife and son financially. The judge instructed the jury that they could only consider that evidence as to motive but limiting instructions do not put the s*** back into the horse.

Here I would expect the state's argument will be his statements goes to intent under the "willfull" part of the retention charges.

---

I think their "willful" stuff is undermined by them starting the clock on Jan 20, 2021.

So his role ended and he willfully retained documents that were boxed up, stored, and shipped by others.

Oh, and I think NARA originally told him to go and sort through the boxes at M-A-L. Oh, and the FBI told him he should consider storing the boxes more securely.

You could argue the FBI superseded any previous subpoena when they went through previously and told him how to store the boxes. It is also not willful retention of something you are not allowed to have if someone tells you to keep it but secure it better.

To me, this all supports the idea this is nothing more than theater. DOJ knows they have zero chance of conviction, just need to create enough smoke for a diversion.

Absolutely disgusting that people cheer this on.

Trump changes defense again, now says he was lying on the audio tape when he was showing off stolen confidential documents.

“I would say it was bravado, if you want to know the truth, it was bravado,” Trump told Semafor and ABC News. “I was talking and just holding up papers… pic.twitter.com/VAS8g1AP4e

— Mike Sington (@MikeSington) June 28, 2023

DallasAg03 said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

If you watched the Alex Murdaugh trial, all of his financial crimes were admitted into his murder trial under the motive exception, even though Murdaugh did not benefit from the deaths of his wife and son financially. The judge instructed the jury that they could only consider that evidence as to motive but limiting instructions do not put the s*** back into the horse.

Here I would expect the state's argument will be his statements goes to intent under the "willfull" part of the retention charges.

---

Murdaugh was set to benefit by delaying a pending court motion that was set to expose all his financial crimes. This is why it was brought into evidence and why it's going to stand up on appeal.

---

So I assuming we are all cool now in bringing up a girl's sexual promiscuity if she accuses someone of rape.

Got it. Man these legal rules seem to change all the time.

You really believe AM personally murdered his wife and son?

GeorgiAg said:

---

Trump changes defense again, now says he was lying on the audio tape when he was showing off stolen confidential documents.

“I would say it was bravado, if you want to know the truth, it was bravado,” Trump told Semafor and ABC News. “I was talking and just holding up papers… pic.twitter.com/VAS8g1AP4e

— Mike Sington (@MikeSington) June 28, 2023

---

Considering there are no charges related to the document waving, then its sort of wrong to call it a "defense".

Flagged for misinformation.

GeorgiAg said:

---

Trump changes defense again, now says he was lying on the audio tape when he was showing off stolen confidential documents.

“I would say it was bravado, if you want to know the truth, it was bravado,” Trump told Semafor and ABC News. “I was talking and just holding up papers… pic.twitter.com/VAS8g1AP4e

— Mike Sington (@MikeSington) June 28, 2023

---

For those saying "They would do the same thing to Desantis", THIS is the difference. Yes, they WANT to do the same thing to anyone that is against them, but Trump gives them the opportunity to make it work.

Phatbob said:

---

For those saying "They would do the same thing to Desantis", THIS is the difference. Yes, they WANT to do the same thing to anyone that is against them, but Trump gives them the opportunity to make it work.

---

Impossibly bad take. Think of how hard the DOJ, Bragg, MSM and others have worked to pin ANYTHING on Trump, and to date have not gotten one thing to stick. Not one.

And I am not counting the sham Bergdorf *****-****-lying ***** trial that will get tossed on appeal.

Jesus was not persecuted as hard as DJT and they still got a conviction on him. Ergo, Trump is cleaner than Jesus.

fka ftc said:

---

Phatbob said:

---

For those saying "They would do the same thing to Desantis", THIS is the difference. Yes, they WANT to do the same thing to anyone that is against them, but Trump gives them the opportunity to make it work.

---

Impossibly bad take. Think of how hard the DOJ, Bragg, MSM and others have worked to pin ANYTHING on Trump, and to date have not gotten one thing to stick. Not one.

And I am not counting the sham Bergdorf *****-****-lying ***** trial that will get tossed on appeal.

Jesus was not persecuted as hard as DJT and they still got a conviction on him. Ergo, Trump is cleaner than Jesus.

---

Like was mentioned on the other thread... not Jesus... Samson. He brings all sorts of problems on himself

fka ftc said:

---

GeorgiAg said:

---

Trump changes defense again, now says he was lying on the audio tape when he was showing off stolen confidential documents.

“I would say it was bravado, if you want to know the truth, it was bravado,” Trump told Semafor and ABC News. “I was talking and just holding up papers… pic.twitter.com/VAS8g1AP4e

— Mike Sington (@MikeSington) June 28, 2023

---

Considering there are no charges related to the document waving, then its sort of wrong to call it a "defense".

Flagged for misinformation.

---

You, of all people, flagging someone for misinformation, is pretty dang funny

2040huck said:

---

fka ftc said:

---

GeorgiAg said:

---

Trump changes defense again, now says he was lying on the audio tape when he was showing off stolen confidential documents.

“I would say it was bravado, if you want to know the truth, it was bravado,” Trump told Semafor and ABC News. “I was talking and just holding up papers… pic.twitter.com/VAS8g1AP4e

— Mike Sington (@MikeSington) June 28, 2023

---

Considering there are no charges related to the document waving, then its sort of wrong to call it a "defense".

Flagged for misinformation.

---

You, of all people, flagging someone for misinformation, is pretty dang funny

---

Flagged as well. If you want to point to misinformation I have posted, have at it.

Quit derailing this thread with your nonsense.

Phatbob said:

---

Like was mentioned on the other thread... not Jesus... Samson. He brings all sorts of problems on himself

---

How did Trump bring this particular case on himself?

He was sorting documents as they asked. They requested them back but under the PRA he has rights to possess (temporarily) and make determinations personal v private. Any dispute is a civil matter.

He consulted with his attorneys and was continuing the process. NARA colluded with WH counsel and the DOJ to try and get Trump on some made up criminal charge stringing together several very weak theories to get there, then add on the obstruction charges and photos as "evidence".

Pardon him for calling bull**** and acting like he did nothing wrong... because he did nothing wrong.

fka ftc said:

---

Phatbob said:

---

Like was mentioned on the other thread... not Jesus... Samson. He brings all sorts of problems on himself

---

How did Trump bring this particular case on himself?

He was sorting documents as they asked. They requested them back but under the PRA he has rights to possess (temporarily) and make determinations personal v private. Any dispute is a civil matter.

He consulted with his attorneys and was continuing the process. NARA colluded with WH counsel and the DOJ to try and get Trump on some made up criminal charge stringing together several very weak theories to get there, then add on the obstruction charges and photos as "evidence".

Pardon him for calling bull**** and acting like he did nothing wrong... because he did nothing wrong.

---

I'm not saying he did. I am just saying you can't act like a dick all the time and then complain about people treating you like a dick. When you say stuff that is ridiculous and outlandish that can't be backed up, expect the people who want to destroy you to use it against you.

fka ftc said:

---

2040huck said:

---

fka ftc said:

---

GeorgiAg said:

---

Trump changes defense again, now says he was lying on the audio tape when he was showing off stolen confidential documents.

“I would say it was bravado, if you want to know the truth, it was bravado,” Trump told Semafor and ABC News. “I was talking and just holding up papers… pic.twitter.com/VAS8g1AP4e

— Mike Sington (@MikeSington) June 28, 2023

---

Considering there are no charges related to the document waving, then its sort of wrong to call it a "defense".

Flagged for misinformation.

---

You, of all people, flagging someone for misinformation, is pretty dang funny

---

Flagged as well. If you want to point to misinformation I have posted, have at it.

Quit derailing this thread with your nonsense.

---

Flagged? I'm flagging you for flagging him for criticizing you for flagging me.

And if you flag me for flagging you for flagging him for criticizing you for flagging me, I will flag you yet again.

Just kidding, I didn't flag you.

aggiehawg said:

---

Im Gipper said:

---

Thanks for that link!

At this point, it would be shocking if this, Iran document was any of the ones at issue in the actual counts.

Is there anyone out there that thinks it is?

---

So now we are back to the admissibility of the tape at trial. Recording was not made in Florida. Recording does not address any documents in the case. Is the recording propensity evidence? Would its admittance be more prejudicial than probative of a material issue in the case?

Can see that last question argued either way.

---

If Trump tries to exclude it under 404(a) as inappropriate character evidence, the government can lean into multiple prongs of 404(b), including, at least but perhaps not limited to, motive, intent, and a lack of mistake.

I think Trump's best possibility for inadmissibility would be under 403, but any effort to claim it isn't probative enough evaporates the second anyone starts talking about any kind of standing and/or broad declassification orders.

As I and others in the thread have been saying all along, the audiotape is most clearly a hedge against some of the defenses that have been raised (outside of court, to this point.) As I said this morning, I think the tape presents an "annoying hurdle" for the defense but its "strictly legal importance" is probably overblown.

We just have to wait and see how it fits within the larger theory and larger body of evidence that we just don't know at this point.

Ignore him

TXAggie2011 said:

---

Ignore him

---

That's cute. About as cute thinking any legal analyze provided that does not start "this is a miscarriage of justice and should be tossed" is probably not worth the price of an Obamaphone.

TXAggie2011 said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Im Gipper said:

---

Thanks for that link!

At this point, it would be shocking if this, Iran document was any of the ones at issue in the actual counts.

Is there anyone out there that thinks it is?

---

So now we are back to the admissibility of the tape at trial. Recording was not made in Florida. Recording does not address any documents in the case. Is the recording propensity evidence? Would its admittance be more prejudicial than probative of a material issue in the case?

Can see that last question argued either way.

---

If Trump tries to exclude it under 404(a) as inappropriate character evidence, the government can lean into multiple prongs of 404(b), including, at least but perhaps not limited to, motive, intent, and a lack of mistake.

I think Trump's best possibility for inadmissibility would be under 403, but any effort to claim it isn't probative enough evaporates the second anyone starts talking about any kind of standing and/or broad declassification orders.

As I and others in the thread have been saying all along, the audiotape is most clearly a hedge against some of the defenses that have been raised (outside of court, to this point.) As I said this morning, I think the tape presents an "annoying hurdle" for the defense but its "strictly legal importance" is probably overblown.

We just have to wait and see how it fits within the larger theory and larger body of evidence that we just don't know at this point.

---

The best "evidence" is presented in the indictment. The next best "evidence" has been selectively leaked to the DOJ.

You think DOJ is sitting on some yet revealed explosive new evidence that will be used to show Trump's guilt?

Not that's funny right there. The indictment was DOJ / Biden's press release to the public about how bad Orange Man is with documents.

DOJ got nothing. 4-oh-this and that's are irrelevant to charges that are deficient to begin with.

fka ftc said:

---

Jesus was not persecuted as hard as DJT and they still got a conviction on him. Ergo, Trump is cleaner than Jesus.

---

That is truly hilarious. Comedy of the year hilarious.

Edit: "is cleaner than" apparently has a brand new meaning that is not yet in the dictionaries.

eric76 said:

---

fka ftc said:

---

Jesus was not persecuted as hard as DJT and they still got a conviction on him. Ergo, Trump is cleaner than Jesus.

---

That is truly hilarious. Comedy of the year hilarious.

I take it you are an atheist?

---

Why would you say that? I am a Christian, love my lord and savior Jesus with all my heart.

The comparison is on the political persecution of both men. I am arguing Trump has received harsher persecution and still not been convicted and hung from a cross, tree, Epstein's prison cell etc.

I think its a bit bizarre to all someone an atheist over the comparison.

fka ftc said:

---

eric76 said:

---

fka ftc said:

---

Jesus was not persecuted as hard as DJT and they still got a conviction on him. Ergo, Trump is cleaner than Jesus.

---

That is truly hilarious. Comedy of the year hilarious.

I take it you are an atheist?

---

Why would you say that? I am a Christian, love my lord and savior Jesus with all my heart.

The comparison is on the political persecution of both men. I am arguing Trump has received harsher persecution and still not been convicted and hung from a cross, tree, Epstein's prison cell etc.

I think its a bit bizarre to all someone an atheist over the comparison.

---

I can't imagine any Christian saying that Jesus was even a little crooked, much less on the order of Trump.

This thread is off the rails now

Quote:

---

I think Trump's best possibility for inadmissibility would be under 403, but any effort to claim it isn't probative enough evaporates the second anyone starts talking about any kind of standing and/or broad declassification orders.

---

I thought 404 applied more than 403 because of the requirement in 403 for the evidence to first to be relevant. Both 403 and 404 have some issues as to their potential applicability to the audio recording depending on how the state would try to use it, if they do try.

Not really character evidence nor propensity evidence in their truest forms because the actual document is not part of the case (as reported), conversation did not take place in Florida and there is currently no evidence the document (if it exists) was ever in Florida. If it wasn't in Florida, by definition it could not have been "willfully retained" in Florida as the indictment requires.

eric76 said:

---

fka ftc said:

---

eric76 said:

---

fka ftc said:

---

Jesus was not persecuted as hard as DJT and they still got a conviction on him. Ergo, Trump is cleaner than Jesus.

---

That is truly hilarious. Comedy of the year hilarious.

I take it you are an atheist?

---

Why would you say that? I am a Christian, love my lord and savior Jesus with all my heart.

The comparison is on the political persecution of both men. I am arguing Trump has received harsher persecution and still not been convicted and hung from a cross, tree, Epstein's prison cell etc.

I think its a bit bizarre to all someone an atheist over the comparison.

---

I can't imagine any Christian saying that Jesus was even a little crooked, much less on the order of Trump.

---

Try reading what I wrote. I did not say Jesus was crooked. I said he was persecuted. DJT is revered differently by different folks. I am not opining on his crookedness, I am comparing persecution. And the facts are they got a conviction on Jesus with less effort they have put into Trump.

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

I think Trump's best possibility for inadmissibility would be under 403, but any effort to claim it isn't probative enough evaporates the second anyone starts talking about any kind of standing and/or broad declassification orders.

---

I thought 404 applied more than 403 because of the requirement in 403 for the evidence to first to be relevant. Both 403 and 404 have some issues as to their potential applicability to the audio recording depending on how the state would try to use it, if they do try.

Not really character evidence nor propensity evidence in their truest forms because the actual document is not part of the case (as reported), conversation did not take place in Florida and there is currently no evidence the document (if it exists) was ever in Florida. If it wasn't in Florida, be definition it could not have been "willfully retained" in Florida as the indictment requires.

---

Can they use the Hurricane Dorian map as evidence of his known alteration of official government documents? I mean, pics of boxes in a bathroom (that can be locked) are supposedly evidence he has no regards for national defense information.

Seems like Smith missed an opportunity to strengthen his case with that one.

And I am being facetious, but only to point to the absolute absurdity that is this indictment (raid and continued persecution).