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

[fskimospy]

I kept telling folks on here that Trump hasn't even been charged yet. Just because some bumbling pundits and really bad news writers mix up civil and criminal allegations does not mean Trump is facing criminal charges.

But when I wrote that, people went nuts with rage.

Trump has not been criminally charged and a civil lawsuits will not put him in prison. I think he should be charged and imprisoned. But losing your mind in a tantrum is not the same as convincing a jury or a judge a person you really don't like should go to prison.

Making a criminal case against Trump will be difficult because of the way he operates. Trump does not directly spell out his intentions. He suggests it and unless insiders come forward and testify to this, it will be nearly impossible to nail him.

All of this is explained by Paul Rosenzweig, a principal at Red Branch Consulting, who once oversaw the U.S. Secret Service. He predicts Trump will never go to jail, no matter how much people believe he should. He covers all this in this article, but alas, it's behind a paywall.

Stop Waiting for Trump to Get Convicted

The chances that the criminal cases against the former president will be successful are slim to none, and that will only embolden him and his followers.

www.theatlantic.com

Why do you keep repeating the same false claims about what people here believe?

 

[VRAMdemon]

That Cannon ruling. She is basically rewriting the burden of proof in civil suits.

This ....This is not a criminal matter at this time, it is a civil case brought by Donald Trump against the DoJ to argue that the items taken from Mar a Lago are his property. As the Plaintiff in this civil case, he does indeed bear the burden of proof. The United States is the defendant. If Trump was genuinely worried about preserving his defense strategies in a criminal trial – as yet unfiled – all he had to do was… not file this civil lawsuit at all.

This is HIS lawsuit. HIS choice of special master. HIS case to prove. But so far, he seems to only want the cachet of saying that he’s fighting in court (Witch hunt! Donate to the fight!) without the petty detail of actually presenting any evidence whatsoever. If he wants to save all of his arguments for a potential future indictment then he shouldn’t have picked this fight in the first place. That’s his business model. He knows nothing else. He is finding out that the US Government has deeper pockets than some contractor that he wants to sue until they give up and walk away.

Why is there even a special master if she’s overruling him ever time the baby whines that it’s not fair to make him do things he doesn’t want to do? If she thought she’d be chastened by all of the negative press she got for her ludicrous ruling after she was spanked by the DoJ and the 11th Circuit. Apparently not. Once again, she asks, “How high do you want me to jump, sir?”

 

[fskimospy]

The issue you're facing is that here in P&N hearsay about Trump is accepted as fact, so long as it's on the criminal side of things. That's never going to change because it's an emotion based conclusion with "facts" that are accusations and speculation from others that share Trump hate.

I'll now have at least half a dozen angry responses proving beyond a doubt that Trump is guilty of crime X, and that I'm an ignorant Trump humper.

As Zorba mentioned the charges here have nothing to do with hearsay.

I asked you this before and you didn’t answer, I suspect because you have no answer:

1) presumably we all agree Trump was in fact in possession of those documents.

2) if that’s the case then he has one of a few defenses - either he didn’t know he had them in his possession, he didn’t know they were US property, or he was lawfully able to possess them.

Which is it?

If none of the above, what is your theory of innocence here?

 

[ivwshane]

As Zorba mentioned the charges here have nothing to do with hearsay.

I asked you this before and you didn’t answer, I suspect because you have no answer:

1) presumably we all agree Trump was in fact in possession of those documents.

2) if that’s the case then he has one of a few defenses - either he didn’t know he had them in his possession, he didn’t know they were US property, or he was lawfully able to possess them.

Which is it?

If none of the above, what is your theory of innocence here?

I’m pretty sure greenman just doesn’t know what hearsay means.

 

[MrSquished]

I’m pretty sure greenman just doesn’t know what hearsay means.

No he'll just say whatever it takes to mislead and put forward ignorance as a stance like most Republicans and conservatives though.

 

[Lezunto]

Muse,

I admire you. But I also quoted legal experts.

They don't agree with the stances of those holding their breath for Trump to be imprisoned.

The experts I quoted have warned Trump may never spend a night in jail. I tend to pay more attention to them mostly because of all the angst, exaggeration and outright misrepresentation of what some claim about Trump. The former President is so high-profile that any trial would dominate news cycles, so prosecutors want to make sure they could obtain a conviction.

It does not matter who makes a video or speaks in one. It does not matter if they swear all the evidence is there. It also does not matter whom hurl they insults at. People have a right to express their opinion and disagree.

Prosecutors have to get it right. And any conviction of Trump must withstand the appeals process. Trump is no ordinary criminal defendant. If posters want to lose their minds over these sentences, they can go right ahead.

I did not want to violate The Atlantic magazine's copyright to their published material so I kept the quotes to a minimum. But I was able to read the entire piece in the Atlantic for free and go back and grab some quotes. I'm just sick and tired of rage - it's everywhere. Few want to have normal discourse, they just want to scream.

The only group that benefits from that type of behavior are psychiatrists.

The courts will not accept hearsay in a criminal trial. Which is what I consider most of the venomous nonsense on here to be. So, what may happen is that a couple of judges may weaken any prosecution of Trump by making rulings that may take a time to overturn or negate.

And that is Trump's plan. Run out the clock, by obfuscating, lying and then appealing any adverse ruling. This has worked wonders for him thus far and many are betting this will continue.

Cue the vitriol.

 

[Pens1566]

The "legal experts" saying it's a slam dunk are also basing that opinion on the assumption that historic legal norms are upheld/followed. If recent events have taught us anything, that is simply not the case anymore with the large influx of ABA not qualified judges that have been placed and now were in full on calvinball silly season.

As an example, I'm sure some of these experts were also sure it was a slam dunk that Trump's suit against DoJ for his docs seized from MAL would get thrown out. How did that work out?

 

[ImpulsE69]

Yeah, I think some are assuming team trump are playing fair ball....they are not. They don't give a damn about laws or legal precedence. Look at what the SCOTUS alone has done and the outlandish jump the shark reasoning they've given for their decisions. And they are supposed to be the most non corrupt court in the land. It's going to require some genius level legal speak to get this guy. If this were a horror movie series, we'd be in the sequel that takes place in space.

 

[pete6032]

Yeah, I think some are assuming team trump are playing fair ball....they are not. They don't give a damn about laws or legal precedence. Look at what the SCOTUS alone has done and the outlandish jump the shark reasoning they've given for their decisions. And they are supposed to be the most non corrupt court in the land. It's going to require some genius level legal speak to get this guy. If this were a horror movie series, we'd be in the sequel that takes place in space.

Or how Judge Cannon appointed a special master at Trump's request but has now proceeded to micromanage every element of the special master's conduct in the matter at hand.

 

[rommelrommel]

Trump is so corrupt that even Nixon is rolling in his grave.

Only over the fact that he had to resign.

 

[Pohemi]

... all the angst, exaggeration and outright misrepresentation of what some claim about Trump ...
... If posters want to lose their minds over these sentences, they can go right ahead. ....
... Few want to have normal discourse, they just want to scream.
... Which is what I consider most of the venomous nonsense on here to be. ...

Cue the vitriol.

LOL. You just really want to be that victim soooo badly, don't you?

 

[amenx]

Say hello to the next Supreme nominee.

Pretty sure its in the back of her mind if or when some MAGAt is ever elected pres at some future point.

 

[fskimospy]

The "legal experts" saying it's a slam dunk are also basing that opinion on the assumption that historic legal norms are upheld/followed. If recent events have taught us anything, that is simply not the case anymore with the large influx of ABA not qualified judges that have been placed and now were in full on calvinball silly season.

As an example, I'm sure some of these experts were also sure it was a slam dunk that Trump's suit against DoJ for his docs seized from MAL would get thrown out. How did that work out?

It, uh…got thrown out.

 

[VRAMdemon]

The DOJ has filed a motion before the 11th Circuit to expedite its appeal asking that the entire Judge Cannon fiasco be ruled as a wrongful assumption of jurisdiction. Good, because it is.

https://t.co/Hi4Gk1uXvX

This is his "special master" delay tactics fiasco in a nutshell:

Trump: I am suing the government because they took my personal property! With hunt! Over reach!

Judge Dearie: Ok, Please explain how classified government documents are your personal property.

Trump: Well, I could have declassified some of them. You don’t know. I have the power, and I coulda.

Judge Dearie: OK, fair enough. Please point out which documents specifically you declassified, when they were declassified, how they were declassified, why they were declassified, and any supporting evidence you have to back that up.

Trumps mind: I plead the (garble, mumble) because I might need to change my story later if I’m indicted and don’t want to go on the record right now.

Trump: This is so unfair! The FBI planted documents and won’t even let me see the inventory because they’re hiding things! Witch hunt!

Dearie: Ok, fair enough. DoJ, give him a copy of the complete inventory along with a sworn statement that it’s true and complete. Mr. Trump, let me know if anything on that inventory looks fishy to you in a sworn affidavit, just to make things official all around.

Trumps mind: I plead the (garble, mumble) because I might need to change my story later if I’m indicted and don’t want to go on the record right now.

Trump: This is so unfair! There were privileged things in there. Bigly privileged! The most privileged things ever!

Judge Dearie: OK, fair enough. Please rate each document with whether or not it’s privileged and, if so, the exact privilege you’re claiming along with a statement of why you believe that privilege applies. Executive? Medical? Attorney-client? Break it down for me so I can make a decision.

Trumps mind: I plead the (garble, mumble) because I might need to change my story later if I’m indicted and don’t want to go on the record right now.

It’s like his very own twisted version of the 5th Amendment. This idiot is a threat to national security. There’s no circumstance in which this guy should get another intelligence briefing, not now, not anytime in the future. That Trump cannot be trusted with intelligence … it just writes itself. Lacking intelligence of his own - he can’t be trusted with the intelligence of others and this nation. Those documents belong to the US government and the American people.

 

[eelw]

Speaking of his medical records, wonder if those have already been returned or those will get scanned in by 3rd party for master review? Like oops if company got hacked and those records got leaked.

 

[Pens1566]

It, uh…got thrown out.

Except it didn't. That's why we have a SM and the ongoing Cannon fiasco. If it had been thrown out, we'd be in a cycle of appeals from the plaintiff's side. We're seeing the opposite which is the DoJ having to fight up the appellate route on everything. That's not "thrown out".

 

[fskimospy]

Except it didn't. That's why we have a SM and the ongoing Cannon fiasco. If it had been thrown out, we'd be in a cycle of appeals from the plaintiff's side. We're seeing the opposite which is the DoJ having to fight up the appellate route on everything. That's not "thrown out".

For all meaningful purposes related to a criminal case against Trump it was thrown out.

The 11th circuit threw out everything the DOJ asked for and signaled it was very excited to throw out the remaining parts of the order.

 

[woolfe9998]

Muse,

I admire you. But I also quoted legal experts.

They don't agree with the stances of those holding their breath for Trump to be imprisoned.

The experts I quoted have warned Trump may never spend a night in jail. I tend to pay more attention to them mostly because of all the angst, exaggeration and outright misrepresentation of what some claim about Trump. The former President is so high-profile that any trial would dominate news cycles, so prosecutors want to make sure they could obtain a conviction.

Which experts beyond Paul Rosenzweig who wrote that Atlantic editorial? Because that article was written in March, and hence does not address the document case which is the easiest to prove, and also does not address even half the publicly known evidence relating to Trump and 1/6. There are some other things wrong with that article, but for now I'm intersted in the other experts you refer to.

 

[Pens1566]

For all meaningful purposes related to a criminal case against Trump it was thrown out.

The 11th circuit threw out everything the DOJ asked for and signaled it was very excited to throw out the remaining parts of the order.

If that were true, then DoJ would have complete access to all the relevant docs they seized during the search. They don't. They're still limited in what they have available, and will be for what appears to be quite some time.

 

[Lezunto]

I'm not the only one who believes it may prove next to impossible to get Trump behind bars. I think a couple of Trump insiders need to be turned.

But many legal folks who want to discuss Trump appear in feature articles on Websites that have erected pay walls. Personally, I am hoping enough calm and measured Democrats simply oppose Trump's return to the Oval Office through their votes.

To me, this obsession over Trump is ridiculous. Some of you become so enraged you act as if you'd murder billions to get your way. Why don't folks use some that rage to fight the Russians? Or world hunger? Or do what the most kind hearted POTUS did - spend time building homes for those who need one.

The time to stop Trump was in 2016. If you didn't vote for Hillary back then, then you bear some responsibility for this guy because it's not like you weren't warned.

Elections have consequences.

 

[zinfamous]

I'm not the only one who believes it may prove next to impossible to get Trump behind bars. I think a couple of Trump insiders need to be turned.

Wow, what a hot take!

But many legal folks who want to discuss Trump appear in feature articles on Websites that have erected pay walls. Personally, I am hoping enough calm and measured Democrats simply oppose Trump's return to the Oval Office through their votes.

To me, this obsession over Trump is ridiculous. Some of you become so enraged you act as if you'd murder billions to get your way. Why don't folks use some that rage to fight the Russians? Or world hunger? Or do what the most kind hearted POTUS did - spend time building homes for those who need one.

The time to stop Trump was in 2016. If you didn't vote for Hillary back then, then you bear some responsibility for this guy because it's not like you weren't warned.

Elections have consequences.

Your brain is weird.

 

[SMOGZINN]

I'm not the only one who believes it may prove next to impossible to get Trump behind bars. I think a couple of Trump insiders need to be turned.

I agree with you, I don't think he will ever spend even a night behind bars. Oh, I think he is guilty of all sorts of things, but he is simply too powerful to go to jail.

To me, this obsession over Trump is ridiculous.

Trump is a symbol of some of the major problems in America. He has made himself that symbol on purpose.
He very clearly believes himself above the law, and so far has been right. Yes, it makes us angry that not only can someone like that just ignore the law and suffer basically no consequences, but can be loved by millions for it. Our entire belief in our system of government is being undermined.
The truth is we have known, or at least suspected, that our system of government has been failing for decades now. We all knew that if you were rich enough you could ignore much of the law. That the best legal defense is immense wealth. But Trump is forcing us to face it head on. We can't ignore it now because he is not keeping it quiet and under the table, he is not keeping it small and effecting only a few. So, yes we are mad. Because many of us see this for a fight for the very future of our country.

Put it quite frankly, if Trump is allowed to get away with all he has done then we are all just accepting that we are done with any pretense of equality in our society and that we have an elite aristocracy that are above the law in truth. Then when the rest of the aristocracy see that there is no penalty for breaking the law, they will simple end democracy altogether and we will be a corporate feudal state in truth.

Why don't folks use some that rage to fight the Russians? Or world hunger? Or do what the most kind hearted POTUS did - spend time building homes for those who need one.

What makes you think we don't? We can be outraged at this and still do other things. What a weird argument. Do you really believe that all we do is sit around being mad at Trump? That we do literally nothing else?

 

[eelw]

What makes you think we don't? We can be outraged at this and still do other things. What a weird argument. Do you really believe that all we do is sit around being mad at Trump? That we do literally nothing else?

Hehe yeah. When his supporters scream we have TDS and he’s living rent free in our heads. Like he’s barely an afterthought outside reading a few orange monkey posts here or when news segment comes on.

 

[fskimospy]

I'm not the only one who believes it may prove next to impossible to get Trump behind bars. I think a couple of Trump insiders need to be turned.

But many legal folks who want to discuss Trump appear in feature articles on Websites that have erected pay walls. Personally, I am hoping enough calm and measured Democrats simply oppose Trump's return to the Oval Office through their votes.

To me, this obsession over Trump is ridiculous. Some of you become so enraged you act as if you'd murder billions to get your way. Why don't folks use some that rage to fight the Russians? Or world hunger? Or do what the most kind hearted POTUS did - spend time building homes for those who need one.

The time to stop Trump was in 2016. If you didn't vote for Hillary back then, then you bear some responsibility for this guy because it's not like you weren't warned.

Elections have consequences.

You're once again just repeating yourself and not engaging with any of the arguments against your position.

First, I think most reasonable people expect Trump to be indicted sometime soon. Probably before the end of the year but if not then early next year. This has nothing to do with liking or hating him, it's just that the case against him is a slam dunk and the DOJ will be compelled to act.

Second, indicting and prosecuting him is necessary for the continued health of our country so it's a good thing for people to spend their time and energy on. If former presidents are above the law then it's only a matter of time until one of them decides to govern while in office that way, and that means the end of democracy in the US. I imagine you would agree that's a worthy thing to focus on, right?

 

[Stokely]

I don't believe anything will happen to Trump. Not because he's Trump, but he is the head (in all ways that matter) of the GOP (aka the Trump party). At a certain point, enforcing rules depends on willingness to follow them. Small example, McConnell stalling to put in Obama's choice of Supreme Court justice, which was his job (to timely replace the justice). He simply said, with no attempt at hiding, that he wasn't going to do it. At that point, the rules and norms were out the window. There was no way to compel him to do his job, sure he shit all over tradition and norms but nobody on the GOP gave a crap because it was helping their team.

Some people are above the law. Trump is one of them. He even said he could shoot someone on 5th avenue and nothing would happen to him, and he's 100% right.

Caveat: if Trump suddenly gets replaced in the hearts and minds of GOP supporters--and this could easily happen, the dude is getting old, and I watched it happen when he himself took the hearts and minds from all the Jeb/Cruz supporters--then sure he could face consequences. But not as long as he's head of the Trump party.

And I also agreed that the idiots who said "Bernie or bust, let it all bern down" had a lot to do with Trump coming to power. I know a number of people like that. Gee, instead of burning down and starting over like the garden of eden, the party most opposed to your principles took over. Who knew!? Bunch of children.