M

Mr._Clark

Audioholic Samurai
An interesting tidbit that Trump was not charged with something that was in the search warrant, and could have him disqualified from running for President.

>>>…There are other indications that Mr. Smith, who sat a few feet behind Mr. Harbach in the courtroom on Tuesday, intently following the back-and-forth with the judge, seems intent on avoiding unnecessary confrontation.
Conspicuously absent from the indictment was a potential charge that had been listed in the affidavit the Justice Department filed to obtain a search warrant
It was the only crime on the sheet that might have directly affected Mr. Trump’s 2024 presidential bid, requiring that anyone convicted of it “shall forfeit his office and be disqualified from holding any office under the United States.”

Many legal scholars believe that the provision is unconstitutional and would have ultimately been struck down if it were imposed on Mr. Trump. But Mr. Smith’s team sidestepped the issue altogether, leaving it out of their 37-count indictment on a section of the Espionage Act that imposes a prison term but no restrictions on holding office. …<<<

No one knows for sure if the Supreme Court would rule that Section 2071 is unconstitutional in this context.

Having said that, a "thug" engaging in "political hit jobs" (Trump's version of events) wouldn't pull his punches. He would indict Trump under Section 2071.

On a somewhat related topic, Trusty has asked the court to let him discontinue representing Trump in the CNN civil lawsuit:

>>>Attorney Jim Trusty requested he be allowed to withdraw from representing former President Trump in his defamation suit against CNN, days after Trusty stopped representing Trump in his criminal classified documents case. . . . “Mr. Trusty’s withdrawal is based upon irreconcilable differences between Counsel and Plaintiff and Counsel can no longer effectively and properly represent Plaintiff,” Trusty wrote.<<<

https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/4053605-trump-attorney-who-left-classified-documents-defense-departs-another-trump-case/

I don't want to read too much into this, but it suggests that Trusty is seriously fed up with Trump (Trump could have fired Trusty, so Trusty is the one who wants out).
 
D

Dude#1279435

Audioholic Spartan
What the Trump apologist Hugh Hewitt thinks is just another example of the lows that GOP has sunk to, and that has been the case since Trump was president. Just go read his latest op-ed in Washington Post.
Link? Though I'm sure you're right. Yesterday he was holding water for Trump. Today he's talking about how we don't want him. It's MAGAs fault. :rolleyes:
 
D

Dude#1279435

Audioholic Spartan
M

Mr._Clark

Audioholic Samurai
yes it's FOX news and the liberal faithful will poo-hoo it for sure but regardless, another perspective.........

From the opinion piece:

>>>District Judge Amy Berman Jackson ruled that control over presidential records rests squarely in the hands of a former president. She wrote, in relevant part, "The National Archives does not have the authority to designate materials as ‘presidential records.’ It lacks any right, duty, or means to seize control of them."<<<

So about that, it might help to read the case in question.

>>>In the Armstrong decisions, the D.C. Circuit did not consider the question of whether an individual decision to exclude private materials from the set of Presidential records transmitted to the Archivist could be subject to review. In fact, Armstrong II was addressing a concern that too many records were being classified as Presidential, not too few: “[T]he courts may review guidelines outlining what is, and what is not, a “presidential record” to ensure that materials that are not subject to the PRA are not treated as presidential records.Id. at 1294 (emphasis added).

The thrust of the Armstrong II opinion was the differentiation between agency records and Presidential records—not, as in this case, between personal records and Presidential records. Id. at 1292.<<<(emphasis added)


It's ridiculous to assert that the Judicial Watch case means that a president can convert agency records (property of the federal government) into personal records and walk away with them as his own private property.

Don't believe me? Read the law:

>>>The term “Presidential records” . . . does not include any documentary materials that are (i) official records of an agency (as defined in section 552(e)[1] of title 5, United States Code) . . ."


If you don't believe the law, how about common sense?

Assume Trump had said to Nauta "Hey, go get the original copy of the Declaration of Independence from the National Archives. I'm going put it on the wall at Mar-a-Lago, it would look really cool! It's a personal record, and I have complete control over personal records!"

Restated, could Trump just walk away with the original copy of the Declaration of Independence and declare that it now belongs to him?

How about top secret designs for the latest spy satellite? Could Trump have said "Yeah, this spy satellite design cost the taxpayers about a billion dollars, but I've decided it's my personal property so I'm going to declassify the design and take it with me and auction it off to the highest bidder once I'm a private citizen!"

Could Trump legally clear billions of dollars in personal income by auctioning off designs for spy satellites, nuclear missiles, military aircraft, etc.? Are these now the personal property of Trump?

Again, these are agency records, not the personal property of a private citizen.
 
mtrycrafts

mtrycrafts

Seriously, I have no life.
The Oklahoma governor said on Fox he's supporting DeSantis, not Trump. Also Hugh Hewitt said 75% of the party doesn't want Trump but the other 25% do. Otherwise the only candidate I've heard recently is Christie. Overall though most are not willing to rub feathers with Trump's base.

On the other side, Newsom just endorsed Biden. The only other is Kennedy.
And, that other moron, D...... wants to reshape the FBI and DOJ to his image.
Hello Putin when do you want to visit and express your congratulation in person. :eek:
 
cpp

cpp

Audioholic Ninja
The judge in this case, Judge Aileen M. Cannon which Trump gave a life time appointment needs to step down. Plus if some MAGA juror is setting in the jury and has the vote of nope, nada, its a hung jury. This thing is going to be complicated the more it drags out.
 
Trell

Trell

Audioholic Spartan
>>>Even when he was president, Donald Trump lacked the legal authority to declassify a U.S. nuclear weapons-related document that he is charged with illegally possessing, security experts said, contrary to the former U.S. president’s claim.

The secret document, listed as No. 19 in the indictment charging Trump with endangering national security, can under the Atomic Energy Act only be declassified through a process that by the statute involves the Department of Energy and the Department of Defense.

For that reason, the experts said, the nuclear document is unique among the 31 in the indictment because the declassification of the others is governed by executive order.

“The claim that he (Trump) could have declassified it is not relevant in the case of the nuclear weapons information because it was not classified by executive order but by law,” said Steven Aftergood, a government secrecy expert with the Federation of Atomic Scientists.

The special status of nuclear-related information further erodes what many legal experts say is a weak defense centered around declassification. Without providing evidence, Trump has claimed he declassified the documents before removing them from the White House. …<<<

 
Trell

Trell

Audioholic Spartan
Trump trial date set for August for the document case.

>>>The judge presiding over the Justice Department’s criminal case against former president Donald Trumpsaid Tuesday that the trial could begin as early as Aug. 14 — a timetable that is likely to be pushed back as lawyers navigate the complexities of an unprecedented case that hinges on highly sensitive classified documents.

Judge Aileen M. Cannon, a federal judge in Florida, wrote in a court filing Tuesday morning that hearings in the case would be held in her Fort Pierce courthouse, though she noted that location could change as the criminal proceedings get underway.

The government filed its 38-count indictment against Trump and his valet, Walt Nauta, in the West Palm Beach courthouse, about an hour south of Fort Pierce. Cannon has the authority to decide in which of the five divisions within the Southern District of Florida the trial will take place.

“This case is hereby set for a Criminal Jury Trial during the two-week period commencing August 14, 2023, or as soon thereafter as the case may be called. A Calendar Call will be held at 1:45 p.m. on August 8, 2023,” Cannon wrote.

She asked lawyers on both sides to file any pretrial motions by July 24.

The fast timetable set by Cannon suggests that she does not want Trump’s trial proceedings to drag on. But legal experts say the case could face numerous delays because of the complexities of dealing with classified information, and is likely to take longer than most to reach a jury. …<<<

 
Last edited:
M

Mr._Clark

Audioholic Samurai
Trump trial date set for August for the document case.

>>>The fast timetable set by Cannon suggests that she does not want Trump’s trial proceedings to drag on. . . . <<<
Sorry, but I have to pick a nit with the wording in the WaPo article. The initial trial schedule appears to be perfectly normal (albeit unrealistic). It doesn't really matter what the judge wants or doesn't want. The Speedy Trial Act and the 6th Amendment require a speedy trial.


This is more accurate:

>>>But the August trial date at least suggests that Cannon, at this early stage in the matter, is sticking to normal procedures. . . . Under the Speedy Trial Act of 1974, trials have to begin within 70 days from the date of indictment or arraignment, though that’s subject to exceptions.<<<


Everything the court has done so far in this case appears to be perfectly normal.
 
M

Mr._Clark

Audioholic Samurai
I'm assuming people saw this in the news.

>>>An ex-intelligence analyst for the FBI in Kansas [Kendra Kingsbury] who pleaded guilty to two counts of violating 18 U.S.C. § 793(e), the same charged offense former President Donald Trump faces in his Mar-a-Lago federal prosecution, was sentenced Wednesday to nearly four years in prison.<<<


Some of the facts of the Kingsbury case are obviously similar to Trump's case. However, before jumping on that bandwagon, there appear to be differences as well. From the government's sentencing memorandum:

>>>A review of the toll records revealed that the defendant contacted phone numbers associated to subjects of counterterrorism investigations in the Western District of Missouri and other parts of the United States. . . .<

The memorandum lists a great deal of highly suspicious activity that likely influenced the outcome of the case, even though the government was not able to prove the Kingsbury alerted the subjects of counterterrorism investigations.
 
Squishman

Squishman

Audioholic General
Trouble is that idiot McCarthy is carrying Trump's water and some others as well. This is a very dangerous game. What they ought to be doing is suspending Trump's membership in the Republican party pending the outcome of his legal issues.
That'd be extremely dangerous and would likely get Slow Joe re-elected. Trumpsters say he loves the country. I have my doubts about that. Trump loves Trump more than anything in the world, I think more than he loves the country. So I think he would run 3rd party if he was snubbed like that by the GOP.
 
Trell

Trell

Audioholic Spartan
That'd be extremely dangerous and would likely get Slow Joe re-elected. Trumpsters say he loves the country. I have my doubts about that. Trump loves Trump more than anything in the world, I think more than he loves the country. So I think he would run 3rd party if he was snubbed like that by the GOP.
You misunderstood what he wrote.
 
M

Mr._Clark

Audioholic Samurai
That'd be extremely dangerous and would likely get Slow Joe re-elected. Trumpsters say he loves the country. I have my doubts about that. Trump loves Trump more than anything in the world, I think more than he loves the country. So I think he would run 3rd party if he was snubbed like that by the GOP.
Possibly, but even Trump would know that his odds of winning as a 3rd party candidate are extremely low. I'm not sure he'd want to run just to take the loss. But, who knows? Maybe it would be worth it to him just for the revenge on the GOP.

I tend to agree with TLS Guy. For the greater good of the country the GOP needs to stop enabling Trump's plethora of pathologies.
 
Trell

Trell

Audioholic Spartan
I tend to agree with TLS Guy. For the greater good of the country the GOP needs to stop enabling Trump's plethora of pathologies.
They don't and support him fully, except for a few with their moral integrity intact for the most part. The Senate GOP is mostly silent while the House GOP has a fascist faction running it. Most of the Republicans running for a nomination for US President is busy talking about a Trump pardon they'll most likely do (and that even before the indictment was public).

They quite simply don't care about the "greater good", or governance (never mind a good one) or what pain and suffering they inflict on the US population.
 
Last edited:
davidscott

davidscott

Audioholic Spartan
I can only imagine what history will say about 45. It won't be pretty.:(
 
M

Mr._Clark

Audioholic Samurai
They don't and support him fully, except for a few with their moral integrity intact for the most part. The Senate GOP is mostly silent while the House GOP has a fascist faction running it. Most of the Republicans running for a nomination for US President is busy talking about a Trump pardon they'll most likely do (and that even before the indictment was public).

They quite simply don't care about the "greater good", or governance (never mind a good one) or what pain and suffering they inflict on the US population.
The GOP is now running against the rule of law and the constitution. Luttig is one of the few conservatives who is willing to call it like it is.

>>>Conservative retired federal judge J. Michael Luttig has called the Republican Party base “spineless” for its continued support of former President Donald Trump and submitted that the GOP is destroying itself. . . .

“No assemblage of politicians except the Republicans would ever conceive of running for the American presidency by running against the Constitution and the rule of law. But that’s exactly what they’re planning,” Luttig wrote. . . .

The retired judge ended the op-ed with a solemn plea, for his party to put the country first and “pull back from the brink – for the good of the party, as well as the nation.” <<<


From the NYT piece by Luttig:

>>>From his distant second place, Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida denounced the Biden administration’s “weaponization of federal law enforcement” against Mr. Trump and the Republicans. Mike Pence dutifully pronounced the indictment political. And both Governor DeSantis and Mr. Pence pledged — in a new Republican litmus test — that on their first day in office they would fire the director of the F.B.I., the Trump appointee Christopher Wray, obviously for his turpitude in investigating Mr. Trump. It fell to Kevin McCarthy, the House speaker, to articulate the treacherous overarching Republican strategy: “I, and every American who believes in the rule of law, stand with President Trump against this grave injustice. House Republicans will hold this brazen weaponization of power accountable.”<<<


When it comes to McCarthy, Kinzinger might have said it best:

>>>Kinzinger called McCarthy a "piece of sh*t" . . . Kinzinger called it "just a fact" that McCarthy would "say whatever he needs to say to stay in power."<<<

 

Latest posts

newsletter

  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
Top