Just another bad day for Trump

[scottw]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Silly troll
Presidential papers didn’t and don’t belong to Trump
He stole them
He knew it
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I thought this was about nuclear secrets?

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by scottw

I thought this was about nuclear secrets?

Then you’re obviously not paying attention
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by scottw

I thought this was about nuclear secrets?

Trump's espionage case just went from Victoria's Secret to Nuclear Secret.

Details about nuclear capabilities of a foreign government were in records seized at trump's Mar-a-Lago in early August. As well as details of US programs so secret that seniormost natsec officials didn't know they existed.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Nebe]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Trump's espionage case just went from Victoria's Secret to Nuclear Secret.

Details about nuclear capabilities of a foreign government were in records seized at trump's Mar-a-Lago in early August. As well as details of US programs so secret that seniormost natsec officials didn't know they existed.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

My money is on Israeli nuclear capabilities .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Nebe

My money is on Israeli nuclear capabilities .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Operation Act of God?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

Wonder what happened to the contents of the empty folders?

NEW: Unsealed detailed inventory of what FBI seized from Trump’s office includes:
— 7 TOP SECRET marked docs
— 43 Empty CLASSIFIED folders
— 28 Empty Return to Staff Sec/Mil. Aid folders
— 26 Magazines/Press Articles 1/2020-11/2020
— 99 Magazines/Press Articles 1/2017-10/2018
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

Per government source: if there is an empty folder that was originally used to properly store classified records, there will be documentation indicating who put the records in that folder, why they were placed there, and what the records were.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Per government source: if there is an empty folder that was originally used to properly store classified records, there will be documentation indicating who put the records in that folder, why they were placed there, and what the records were.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

it's hard to believe there have been no arrests...

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by scottw

it's hard to believe there have been no arrests...

You watch too much television
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

You watch too much television
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I actually watch almost no television....

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by scottw

I actually watch almost no television....

Just get your info from drumbeats?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by scottw

it's hard to believe there have been no arrests...

Any day now
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

Bill Barr on Fox: "People say the search was unprecedented, well it’s also unprecedented for a president to take classified information and put them in a county club. How long (do they) wait? They asked, were deceived, issued a subpoena, deceived, they were being jerked around.“
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

Here’s one

After learning today that Trump had 43 EMPTY folders in his office that should have contained classified documents, the FBI and DHS are now searching, and seizing boxes from, the NY and FLA properties of Russian oligarch Victor Vekselberg. Coincidence?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

Judge Cannon says she has to ignore SCOTUS EP and 4A precedent to, "ensure at least the appearance of fairness and integrity."

This is why, traditionally, we don’t allow criminals to appoint more than a fourth of the federal judiciary and a third of the Supreme Court.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[wdmso]

The producer warned: Fox cannot let host Jeanine Pirro back on the air. She is pulling conspiracy theories from dark corners of the Web to justify then-President Donald Trump's lies that the election had been stolen from him. The existence of the email, confirmed by two people with direct knowledge of it, is first publicly disclosed by NPR in this story. Fox News declined comment.


But but hunters laptop
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Got Stripers]

Doesn’t every president take those special keepsakes home with them when they leave office?

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by Got Stripers

Doesn’t every president take those special keepsakes home with them when they leave office?

Republicans don’t care about past statements just pure partisanship 24x7

We are a nation of laws, and those laws should be applied equally to all Americans, regardless of their political connections," said Rep. Steve Scalise, R-La., after the FBI reopened its investigation into Clinton's use of a private email server.

"Today's decision by the FBI to reopen this case is a critical step toward ensuring that elites like Secretary Clinton are held accountable by the same laws that apply to every other American," Scalise said in a statement in 2016.

Trump

July 6, 2016:

Trump tweeted, "Crooked Hillary Clinton and her team 'were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.' Not fit!"


Aug. 16, 2016:

At a campaign event in West Bend, Wisconsin, Trump said, "We've seen a former secretary of state lie to Congress about her illegal email scheme, risk innocent American lives and bring dishonor onto our government, great, great dishonor."

"In my administration, I'm going to enforce all laws concerning the protection of classified information,

Aug. 18, 2016:

At a campaign event in Charlotte, North Carolina, Trump said, "On political corruption, we are going to restore honor to our government. In my administration, I'm going to enforce all laws concerning the protection of classified information. No one will be above the law."

Sept. 7, 2016:

At a campaign event in Philadelphia, Trump said, "One of the first things we must do is to enforce all classification rules and to enforce all laws relating to the handling of classified information."


Sept. 19, 2016:

At a campaign event in Fort Meyers, Florida, Trump said, “We also need the best protection of classified information. That is the worst situation. Hillary's private email scandal, which put our classified information in the reach of our enemies, disqualifies her from the presidency. Totally."

Oct. 17, 2016:

Trump tweeted, "Wikileaks proves even the Clinton campaign knew Crooked, mishandled classified info, but no one gets charged? RIGGED!"

But the faithful just ignore such statements ! seeing he’s the victim of the deep state

[scottw]

classic....

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by scottw

classic....

Classic what about
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[wdmso]

Judge dismisses Trump lawsuit against Hillary Clinton over 2016 election
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

When you lose Judge Napolitano…..

It gives me no joy to write this piece.

Even a cursory review of the redacted version of the affidavit submitted in support of the government’s application for a search warrant at the home of former President Donald Trump reveals that he will soon be indicted by a federal grand jury for three crimes: Removing and concealing national defense information (NDI), giving NDI to those not legally entitled to possess it, and obstruction of justice by failing to return NDI to those who are legally entitled to retrieve it.

When he learned from a phone call that 30 FBI agents were at the front door of his Florida residence with a search warrant and he decided to reveal this publicly, Mr. Trump assumed that the agents were looking for classified top-secret materials that they’d allege he criminally possessed. His assumptions were apparently based on his gut instinct and not on a sophisticated analysis of the law. Hence, his public boast that he declassified all the formerly classified documents he took with him.

Unbeknownst to him, the feds had anticipated such a defense and are not preparing to indict him for possessing classified materials, even though he did possess hundreds of voluntarily surrendered materials marked “top secret.” It is irrelevant if the documents were declassified, as the feds will charge crimes that do not require proof of classification. They told the federal judge who signed the search warrant that Mr. Trump still had NDI in his home. It appears they were correct.

Under the law, it doesn’t matter if the documents on which NDI is contained are classified or not, as it is simply and always criminal to have NDI in a non-federal facility, to have those without security clearances move it from one place to another, and to keep it from the feds when they are seeking it. Stated differently, the absence of classification — for whatever reason — is not a defense to the charges that are likely to be filed against Mr. Trump.

Yet, misreading and underestimating the feds, Mr. Trump actually did them a favor. One of the elements that they must prove for any of the three crimes is that Mr. Trump knew that he had the documents. The favor he did was admit to that when he boasted that they were no longer classified. He committed a mortal sin in the criminal defense world by denying something for which he had not been accused.

The second element that the feds must prove is that the documents actually do contain national defense information. And the third element they must prove is that Mr. Trump put these documents into the hands of those not authorized to hold them and stored them in a non-federally secured place. Intelligence community experts have already examined the documents taken from Mr. Trump’s home and are prepared to tell a jury that they contain the names of foreign agents secretly working for the U.S. This is the crown jewel of government secrets. Moreover, Mr. Trump’s Florida home is not a secure federal facility designated for the deposit of NDI.

The newest aspect of the case against Mr. Trump that we learned from the redacted affidavit is the obstruction allegation. This is not the obstruction that Robert Mueller claimed he found Mr. Trump committed during the Russia investigation. This is a newer obstruction statute, signed by President George W. Bush in 2002, that places far fewer burdens on the feds to prove. The older statute is the one Mr. Mueller alleged. It characterizes any material interference with a judicial function as criminal. Thus, one who lies to a grand jury or prevents a witness from testifying commits this variant of obstruction.

But the Bush-era statute, the one the feds contemplate charging Mr. Trump with having violated, makes it a crime of obstruction by failing to return government property or by sending the FBI on a wild goose chase looking for something that belongs to the government and that you know that you have. This statute does not require the preexistence of a judicial proceeding. It only requires that the defendant has the government’s property, knows that he has it and baselessly resists efforts by the government to get it back.

Where does all this leave Mr. Trump? The short answer is: in hot water. The longer answer is: He is confronting yet again the federal law enforcement and intelligence communities for which he has rightly expressed such public disdain. He had valid points of expression during the Russia investigation. He has little ground upon which to stand today.

I have often argued that many of these statutes that the feds have enacted to protect themselves are morally unjust and not grounded in the Constitution. One of my intellectual heroes, the great Murray Rothbard, taught that the government protects itself far more aggressively than it protects our natural rights.

In a monumental irony, both Julian Assange, the WikiLeaks journalist who exposed American war crimes during the Afghanistan and Iraq wars, and Edward Snowden, the former National Security Agency employee who exposed criminal mass government surveillance upon the American public, stand charged with the very same crimes that are likely to be brought against Mr. Trump. On both Mr. Assange and Mr. Snowden, Mr. Trump argued that they should be executed. Fortunately for all three, these statutes do not provide for capital punishment.

Mr. Rothbard warned that the feds aggressively protect themselves. Yet, both Mr. Assange and Mr. Snowden are heroic defenders of liberty with valid moral and legal defenses. Mr. Assange is protected by the Pentagon Papers case, which insulates the media from criminal or civil liability for revealing stolen matters of interest to the public, so long as the revealer is not the thief. Mr. Snowden is protected by the Constitution, which expressly prohibits the warrantless surveillance he revealed, which was the most massive peacetime abuse of government power.

What will Mr. Trump say in his defense to taking national defense information? I cannot think of a legally viable one.

• Andrew P. Napolitano is a former professor of law and judge of the Superior Court of New Jersey who has published nine books on the U.S. Constitution.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

When you lose Judge Napolitano…..

It gives me no joy to write this piece.

Even a cursory review of the redacted version of the affidavit submitted in support of the government’s application for a search warrant at the home of former President Donald Trump reveals that he will soon be indicted by a federal grand jury for three crimes: Removing and concealing national defense information (NDI), giving NDI to those not legally entitled to possess it, and obstruction of justice by failing to return NDI to those who are legally entitled to retrieve it.

When he learned from a phone call that 30 FBI agents were at the front door of his Florida residence with a search warrant and he decided to reveal this publicly, Mr. Trump assumed that the agents were looking for classified top-secret materials that they’d allege he criminally possessed. His assumptions were apparently based on his gut instinct and not on a sophisticated analysis of the law. Hence, his public boast that he declassified all the formerly classified documents he took with him.

Unbeknownst to him, the feds had anticipated such a defense and are not preparing to indict him for possessing classified materials, even though he did possess hundreds of voluntarily surrendered materials marked “top secret.” It is irrelevant if the documents were declassified, as the feds will charge crimes that do not require proof of classification. They told the federal judge who signed the search warrant that Mr. Trump still had NDI in his home. It appears they were correct.

Under the law, it doesn’t matter if the documents on which NDI is contained are classified or not, as it is simply and always criminal to have NDI in a non-federal facility, to have those without security clearances move it from one place to another, and to keep it from the feds when they are seeking it. Stated differently, the absence of classification — for whatever reason — is not a defense to the charges that are likely to be filed against Mr. Trump.

Yet, misreading and underestimating the feds, Mr. Trump actually did them a favor. One of the elements that they must prove for any of the three crimes is that Mr. Trump knew that he had the documents. The favor he did was admit to that when he boasted that they were no longer classified. He committed a mortal sin in the criminal defense world by denying something for which he had not been accused.

The second element that the feds must prove is that the documents actually do contain national defense information. And the third element they must prove is that Mr. Trump put these documents into the hands of those not authorized to hold them and stored them in a non-federally secured place. Intelligence community experts have already examined the documents taken from Mr. Trump’s home and are prepared to tell a jury that they contain the names of foreign agents secretly working for the U.S. This is the crown jewel of government secrets. Moreover, Mr. Trump’s Florida home is not a secure federal facility designated for the deposit of NDI.

The newest aspect of the case against Mr. Trump that we learned from the redacted affidavit is the obstruction allegation. This is not the obstruction that Robert Mueller claimed he found Mr. Trump committed during the Russia investigation. This is a newer obstruction statute, signed by President George W. Bush in 2002, that places far fewer burdens on the feds to prove. The older statute is the one Mr. Mueller alleged. It characterizes any material interference with a judicial function as criminal. Thus, one who lies to a grand jury or prevents a witness from testifying commits this variant of obstruction.

But the Bush-era statute, the one the feds contemplate charging Mr. Trump with having violated, makes it a crime of obstruction by failing to return government property or by sending the FBI on a wild goose chase looking for something that belongs to the government and that you know that you have. This statute does not require the preexistence of a judicial proceeding. It only requires that the defendant has the government’s property, knows that he has it and baselessly resists efforts by the government to get it back.

Where does all this leave Mr. Trump? The short answer is: in hot water. The longer answer is: He is confronting yet again the federal law enforcement and intelligence communities for which he has rightly expressed such public disdain. He had valid points of expression during the Russia investigation. He has little ground upon which to stand today.

I have often argued that many of these statutes that the feds have enacted to protect themselves are morally unjust and not grounded in the Constitution. One of my intellectual heroes, the great Murray Rothbard, taught that the government protects itself far more aggressively than it protects our natural rights.

In a monumental irony, both Julian Assange, the WikiLeaks journalist who exposed American war crimes during the Afghanistan and Iraq wars, and Edward Snowden, the former National Security Agency employee who exposed criminal mass government surveillance upon the American public, stand charged with the very same crimes that are likely to be brought against Mr. Trump. On both Mr. Assange and Mr. Snowden, Mr. Trump argued that they should be executed. Fortunately for all three, these statutes do not provide for capital punishment.

Mr. Rothbard warned that the feds aggressively protect themselves. Yet, both Mr. Assange and Mr. Snowden are heroic defenders of liberty with valid moral and legal defenses. Mr. Assange is protected by the Pentagon Papers case, which insulates the media from criminal or civil liability for revealing stolen matters of interest to the public, so long as the revealer is not the thief. Mr. Snowden is protected by the Constitution, which expressly prohibits the warrantless surveillance he revealed, which was the most massive peacetime abuse of government power.

What will Mr. Trump say in his defense to taking national defense information? I cannot think of a legally viable one.

• Andrew P. Napolitano is a former professor of law and judge of the Superior Court of New Jersey who has published nine books on the U.S. Constitution.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

No republicans or conservatives will read this . Or even consider the source

They only believe Rudy and Alan Dershowitz or their latest hero #^&#^&#^&#^& Morris no other legal views are required
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

Today marks the 21 year anniversary of Donald Trump boasting on tape that he now has the tallest building in lower Manhattan.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[wdmso]

Seems MAGA meaning has changed again

to “making attorneys get attorneys.”

[Nebe]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Today marks the 21 year anniversary of Donald Trump boasting on tape that he now has the tallest building in lower Manhattan.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Which was a lie of course.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Today marks the 21 year anniversary of Donald Trump boasting on tape that he now has the tallest building in lower Manhattan.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

As if anyone need a reminder what a vile person he is.

[Pete F.]

One thing is now abundantly clear: Trump is the target of multiple DOJ investigations.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

The Special Master has asked Trump's team for declarations re: *any actions* he's taken to declassify material that was recovered from MAL. Trump's team stated in a filing tonight that it is *resisting* that request because it could expose Trump to criminal liability. LMFAO
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

Trump wanted a Special Master. Thanks to corrupt Judge Cannon, he got it. Trump’s team suggested Dearie. They got him. Now Dearie is asking Trump to back up his claims. By end of week Scott, Trump & GOP will attack Dearie and claim it’s all rigged. Media will parrot the talking points. Jim will find a whatabout……
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device