News Trump: Mar-a-Lago just raided by FBI

[dank69]

The problem with this, of course, is that if then President Trump can wave his magic wand and declassify documents, then that same wand passed to now President Biden can be waved to reclassify them. Leaving Trump holding classified documents that he refused to turn over....

You're forgetting that Biden isn't actually the President. Trump is, behind the scenes.

 

[Pens1566]

You're forgetting that Biden isn't actually the President. Trump is, behind the scenes.

It's not Biden, it's someone in a mask. And it's not the WH, but a replica set built in Hollywood so they have access to the cannibal tunnels more easily.

 

[BoomerD]

It's not Biden, it's someone in a mask. And it's not the WH, but a replica set built in Hollywood so they have access to the cannibal tunnels more easily.

It's Queen Hillary. Haven't you been paying attention?

 

[Pens1566]

It's Queen Hillary. Haven't you been paying attention?

Nope. She's already been executed at least 3 times on CCTV for a later PPV event.

 

[SMOGZINN]

Nope. She's already been executed at least 3 times on CCTV for a later PPV event.

I thought it was her dirty pedo email server that is currently the shadow president.

 

[pmv]

I fail to understand the notion that the documents have been declassified by Trump. The documents belong to the US government whether they are classified or not. Trump stole them and refused to give them back. Any judge who sides with the Trump team has little or no understanding of the law.

Interesting argument along those lines here (I'm not entirely sure what I think of it, but does seem like there are likely better ways to hold Trump to account)

Don’t cheer for the Espionage Act being used against Donald Trump. It will backfire | Trevor Timm

Wishing to see Trump called to account need not make us champion a 100-year-old statute used to target whistleblowers

www.theguardian.com

 

[eelw]

To quote Sideshow Bob, “attempted chemistry?”

Like I get what that writer doesn’t want to convict any whistleblowers, but really ignore what the orange monkey did at the same time? It’s plain treasonous what he did.

 

[Fenixgoon]

To quote Sideshow Bob, “attempted chemistry?”

Like I get what that writer doesn’t want to convict any whistleblowers, but really ignore what the orange monkey did at the same time? It’s plain treasonous what he did.

I need to listen to that clip now!

 

[darkswordsman17]

To quote Sideshow Bob, “attempted chemistry?”

Like I get what that writer doesn’t want to convict any whistleblowers, but really ignore what the orange monkey did at the same time? It’s plain treasonous what he did.

This is exactly the type of situation that it should be used for, not for targeting whistleblowers so their base argument is just baffling.

 

[Pens1566]

This is exactly the type of situation that it should be used for, not for targeting whistleblowers so their base argument is just baffling.

Yeah, using this scenario as some sort of noble "cautionary tale" is just a fucking joke. If this isn't the case to use it, we might as well not even bother having it on the books.

 

[eelw]

Appeal ruling - allowing DOJ to resume investigation on the 100 classified documents. And they have been removed from special master review. 3 - 0 ruling. 1 Obama appointee and 2 orange monkey appointees

 

[emperus]

The decision is a good read. Basically took apart the district court judge's rational.
One section:
The remaining potential injury identified by the district court is “the threat of future prosecution and the serious, often indelible stigma associated therewith.” Doc. No. 64 at 10. No doubt the threat of prosecution can weigh heavily on the mind of someone under investigation. But without diminishing the seriousness of that burden, “if the mere threat of prosecution were allowed to constitute irreparable harm . . . every potential defendant could point to the same harm and invoke the equitable powers of the district court.” United States v. Search of Law Office, Residence, and Storage Unit Alan Brown, 341 F.3d 404, 415 (5th Cir. 2003) (quotation omitted). If this concern were sufficient to constitute irreparable harm, courts’ “exercise of [their] equitable jurisdiction would not be extraordinary, but instead quite ordinary.” Id.

Also argues what most have. Trump doesn't own the 100 documents. Even it they were not classified they would be owned by the government. He has no personal interest in the documents.
Plaintiff has not even attempted to show that he has a need to know the information contained in the classified documents. Nor has he established that the current administration has waived that requirement for these documents. And even if he had, that, in and of itself, would not explain why Plaintiff has an individual interest in the classified documents. Plaintiff suggests that he may have declassified these documents when he was President. But the record contains no evidence that any of these records were declassified. And before the special master, Plaintiff resisted providing any evidence that he had declassified any of these documents. See Doc. No. 97 at 2–3., Sept. 19, 2022, letter from James M. Trusty, et al., to Special Master Raymond J. Dearie, at 2–3. In any event, at least for these purposes, the declassification argument is a red herring because declassifying an official document would not change its content or render it personal. So even if we assumed that Plaintiff did declassify some or all of the documents, that would not explain why he has a personal interest in them.

https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000183-625b-da48-a3e3-e2ff83050000

 

[ivwshane]

Finally, some sanity.

 

[Dave_5k]

The decision is a good read. Basically took apart the district court judge's rational.

https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000183-625b-da48-a3e3-e2ff83050000

Very good read - in regards to the classified documents, reversed on every single point that Trump's Cannon had invented to issue the injunction - highlighting a wide range of flat-out errors as well as "substantially likely" abuse of discretion by Cannon, although they did refrain from calling her an idiot directly.

But in appeals court language, this is about as close as they get to reprimanding a federal district judge.

 

[Pens1566]

Well that's a good turn. Not what I expected honestly given the recent topsy-turvy kind of legal decisions that seem to be spitting out one after the other, but welcomed indeed.

 

[sportage]

Finally, some sanity.

Give it 24 hours.
Trump will appeal. Heading for the supreme court.

 

[Pens1566]

Adding in, hopefully this is the start of the "finding out" phase after all of the "fucking around".

 

[Dave_5k]

Give it 24 hours.
Trump will appeal. Heading for the supreme court.

Unfortunately Clarence Thomas has the first shot at 11th Circuit sourced appeals, and can screw with the case via shadow docket. The 11th Circuit opinion leaves Supremes very little wiggle room - outside of hiding behind shadow docket.

Honestly, I don't see the Supreme Court actually taking up the case at this point, it is just too far-fetched even for them with their Calvinball rules. They'll save screwing with justice for during any subsequent criminal prosecution.

 

[eelw]

Adding in, hopefully this is the start of the "finding out" phase after all of the "fucking around".

Lol yeah I bet they called in as many people as possible ASAP. Get as much done before next delay tactic.

 

[sportage]

Adding in, hopefully this is the start of the "finding out" phase after all of the "fucking around".

I think we already know what is to find out in the finding out phase.
The fucking around phase is typically called the cover-up phase.

 

[VRAMdemon]

This may be one of the most important parts of the ruling:

For our part, we cannot discern why Plaintiff would have an individual interest in or need for any of the one-hundred documents with classification markings. Classified documents are marked to show they are classified, for instance, with their classification level. Classified National Security Information, Exec. Order No. 13,526, § 1.6, 3 C.F.R. 298, 301 (2009 Comp.), reprinted in 50
U.S.C. § 3161 app. at 290–301. They are “owned by, produced by or for, or . . . under the control of the United States Government.” Id. § 1.1. And they include information the “unauthorized disclosure [of which] could reasonably be expected to cause identifiable or describable damage to the national security.” Id. § 1.4. For this reason, a person may have access to classified information only if, among other requirements, he “has a need-to-know the information.” Id. § 4.1(a)(3). This requirement pertains equally to former Presidents, unless the current administration, in its discretion, chooses to waive that requirement. Id. § 4.4(3).

https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000183-625b-da48-a3e3-e2ff83050000

In other words, they declined to grant Trump ANY claim to executive privilege – which (at least for now) will continue to rest exclusively with the current Executive. Not some wannabe King.

 

[BoomerD]

Give it 24 hours.
Trump will appeal. Heading for the supreme court.

View attachment 67929

Exactly. Trump ain't goin down easily.

 

[Fenixgoon]

Give it 24 hours.
Trump will appeal. Heading for the supreme court.

View attachment 67929

Exactly. Trump ain't goin down easily.

true, but appeals can get denied. or the supreme court takes the case and slow-walks it.

but if that happens, don't be surprise if there are more supreme court leaks, but worse than Roe v Wade.

shit's too important.

 

[Stopsignhank]

I like this part.

As to executive privilege, the United States noted, Plaintiff
had not asserted executive privilege in response to the May sub-
poena; instead, he had produced documents and his custodian had
certified that he had produced all responsive documents, which
meant that he could not assert executive privilege over documents
that he was supposed to have already produced (but did not).

In other words, the government asked for the documents back. You gave back some of them. They asked again, you gave some more back and said you did not have anymore. Now that they found more documents you said you did not have, you can't claim executive privilege of documents you said you don't have (dickhead).

The "dickhead" is my editorial addition.

 

[ImpulsE69]

I like this part.

As to executive privilege, the United States noted, Plaintiff
had not asserted executive privilege in response to the May sub-
poena; instead, he had produced documents and his custodian had
certified that he had produced all responsive documents, which
meant that he could not assert executive privilege over documents
that he was supposed to have already produced (but did not).

In other words, the government asked for the documents back. You gave back some of them. They asked again, you gave some more back and said you did not have anymore. Now that they found more documents you said you did not have, you can't claim executive privilege of documents you said you don't have (dickhead).

The "dickhead" is my editorial addition.

One thing I haven't been clear on is how they knew there were more? Did they ever state that they knew what was 'missing'? I didn't see where that got called out. I would have thought the subpoena, but for that to hold water, there had to be some very good probable cause and something to back it up besides 'he gave us some already'.