Mega-Thread: Trump Focused Discussion

[Breccia]

The WSJ authors argument is, in essence, that the PRA supersedes national security.

So...I'm just going to say, if this somehow holds up, it's an excuse for Biden to take a copy of literally everything.

[cubby]

So...I'm just going to say, if this somehow holds up, it's an excuse for Biden to take a copy of literally everything.

Lol, exactly. Copy it all, put it up on the walls at his home.

The Morton ruling basically said that one statute cannot be implicitly repealed by the creation of another. The WSJ "scholars" misinterpret that law in this case. Because the FBI Warrant didn't repeal the PRA, it simply said that other statutes and rules supersede it in this situation. Which is 100% correct.

Garland had to have Red Team'd this before he set it in motion. I'm not sure his Red Team would be stupid enough to bring the Morton argument up, I sure wouldn't have.

[Breccia]

And so, it has come to this.

"You can say that about anyth--"

Shh. In an overdue filing, DWAC says under oath in public that the investigations causing Trump's popularity to go down would negatively impact the deal, suggesting they could file the legal form equivalent to "OH SHIT IT'S THE COPS, CHEEZ IT".

*ahem*

CyberTrump 2077 has actually gotten more busy, not less. So DWAC is lying -- they just don't want to deal with Trump. "We have enough investigations and subpoena's here already, thanks."

To be fair, DWAC's stock price is down from this time a month ago, but, it is up from the time of the raid. Both changes are minor, one-point-something percent. The platform is basically bottomed out until Trump is arrested or announces he's running. (Also, the rabid fanbase have forgotten Trump was basically forced to admit under oath he's not running it)

So, unlike Musk with Twitter, I don't think DWAC announced a firm buy offer amount? If I'm reading this correctly, and I doubt it, but if I am, there are 30 million shares making DWAC's current value about $900M. That is less than Trump claimed his platform was worth, but of course, very likely more than it's actually worth (Forbes said it was worth half that) hence the reluctance. They were backing away even before the FBI came for the stuff Trump stole.

DWAC is likely neither the first nor the largest company that is now refusing to do business with Trump, because of the investigations into Trump. They're the largest and first to announce it so publicly and so under oathingly. We've discussed this before, but I am under the impression that "our contract is null and void because you're a felon now" is probably in the standard clauses for most mergers and related issues. DWAC has to refund the money if they cancel the sale, but that's better than intentionally spending money you know you're going to lose.

There is a current Sept 8 deadline. If DWAC doesn't buy by then, it dissolves, as it's a SPAC and by law they have to do that. They filed an extension, but (a) they might not get it and (b) right now they probably don't want it anymore. And just so everyone knows, DWAC is under investigation for talking to Trump while setting up the deal, by law, you can't do that either. Which is yet another investigation Trump is facing.

[Edge-]

Mitch McConnel, asked if he has any comment regarding Trump's latest criticisms of himself and his wife, Trump's former Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao, had this to say.

No

Continuing the long line of Republicans who have happily allowed their family and spouses to be publicly attacked/criticized by Trump without a response. If I didn't know better, I'd think they were into the public humiliation. Sexually.

[cubby]

Mitch McConnel, asked if he has any comment regarding Trump's latest criticisms of himself and his wife, Trump's former Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao, had this to say.



Continuing the long line of Republicans who have happily allowed their family and spouses to be publicly attacked/criticized by Trump without a response. If I didn't know better, I'd think they were into the public humiliation. Sexually.

It's a small price to pay for having your wife's business make literally billions because Trump made her the Transportation Secretary.

During her tenure as Transportation Secretary in the Trump administration, the Transportation Department's inspector general found numerous instances where Chao used her office to promote her family's shipping business.

[Edge-]

It's a small price to pay for having your wife's business make literally billions because Trump made her the Transportation Secretary.

Is there no loyalty or honor amongst grifters?!

[cubby]

Those that have continued to follow the stories of Trump, from candidacy to dethronement and beyond, always wondering "how could it get worse" and then seeing that it can, in fact, always get worse, should read this article.

A radical plan for Trump’s second term

This is the stuff of nightmares.

- - - Updated - - -

Is there no loyalty or honor amongst grifters?!

You know, it's interesting. It's almost like McConnell and Chao are the "normal" U.S. political grifters, taking a lifetime of privilege and banking it for themselves and the next generation. Chao was a previous Secretary of Labor under Bush, and has held several other political appointments. McConnell obviously married smartly and well, and he's also benefited from the lifetime of white privilege and political pork barreling. These are the normal things we see in U.S. and other country's politics.

The Trumps are like the Idiot Grifters.

[Breccia]

Taking the CNN points to replenish my stock, judge orders Trump's crack legal team to explain what the hell this filing means.

U.S. District Court Judge for the Southern District of Florida Aileen Cannon posted an online order Tuesday afternoon, requesting Trump's lawyers clarify specific legal claims being made in their motion — and the effect their demands will have on the case being heard by Magistrate Judge Bruce Reinhart over whether to unseal the affidavit that led to the warrant for the search.

Cannon’s order requests Trump's legal team file a supplement to its motion elaborating on "the asserted basis for the exercise of this Court’s jurisdiction," the "framework applicable to the exercise of such jurisdiction," the "precise relief sought, including any request for injunctive relief pending resolution of the motion," "the effect, if any, of the proceeding" before Reinhart, and the "status of Plaintiff’s efforts to perfect service on Defendant."

That's as close as FOX News is going to get to what everyone else has said and I also posted: the legal standing of his challenge is, well, questionable. Even they can't sugarcoat it enough to sell to their audience.

"Well yes, but FOX News probably left out the part where it was standard to review the collected evidence the way Trump demanded!"

No, they mentioned it.

"Um, but FOX News probably left out that this very specific case, it was being reviewed right now!"

They mentioned that too. Even have a link to their own story. This story right here. Boom. Second CNN point.

Not even FOX News thinks Trump has solid ground here. What you read? That's their best attempt. And see how half-assed it is.

UPDATE: Judge orders Trump to clarify by Friday. Far more generous than he deserves.

The judge also asked if Team Trump actually served the FBI/DoJ or just opened the window and screamed really loud. I really don't think that Trump is representing himself, but at this point, I don't know if I could tell the difference by results.

- - - Fifty First Updates - - -

The Washington Times -- almost as good as FOX News but I had to be specific didn't I -- has another typically GOPian story.

Namely, the Party of Trump isn't angry at the FBI for their corruption, they're upset we know about it.

Republicans, who are poised to take the majority in the lower chamber in November, say they will use their oversight power on the House Judiciary panel to hold accountable those responsible for the failings in the bureau first described in an exclusive report in Monday’s editions of The Washington Times.

“These new allegations are appalling, and continue to demonstrate that the FBI‘s culture has gone off the rails,” Rep. Dan Bishop, North Carolina Republican, told The Washington Times. “New FBI whistleblowers are coming forward at a rapid pace, and my Republican colleagues and I on the Judiciary committee will leave no stone unturned.”

Somehow I get the feeling that, if such an investigation happens, they'll conveniently forget when the corruption started.

- - - I'm Running Out Of These - - -

So GTeam Trump released the letter from the National Archives asking for their stuff back.

"Why?"

Nobody has any idea.

The executive branch here is seeking access to records belonging to, and in the custody of, the federal government itself, not only in order to investigate whether those records were handled in an unlawful manner but also, as the National Security Division explained, to 'conduct an assessment of the potential damage resulting from the apparent manner in which these materials were stored and transported and take any necessary remedial steps.

That's right: Trump (via a close ally John Solomon) released a letter in which the National Archives told him how badly he screwed up handling the government secrets he stole. Which, in turn, means Trump didn't declassify a damned thing. The rest of the letter plus the timeline also shows, in detail, how much the National Archives was following the rules to the letter, in particular, with respect to Executive Privilege -- it cites the laws that explain why it doesn't apply here, at all. And also, that Biden ordered nothing, instead deferring to their judgement. In fact, the National Archives were apparently being hounded by the FBI for all that stuff Trump stole, and held off a ful fucking month before pointing them at the first group of boxes Trump returned. Not the Mar-a-Lago basement, not Melania's closet, the stuff Trump had already returned. NARA was doing Trump a solid.

Trump might be claiming that this letter shows how Biden is weaponizing law enforcement...but it says no such thing. The only people who would agree with that are the rabid cultists who accept Trump's word on everything and, of course, didn't read the letter. To be fair, Trump has also said

The White House stated strongly that they were NOT INVOLVED, and knew absolutely nothing about, the political Witch Hunt going on with me, & that they didn’t know anything at all about the Break-In of Mar-a-Lago,

Yes, the WH did know. It's the Executive Branch. They cover the DOJ, the FBI, and NARA, plus of course all things President-related. It would be odd if they ddin't. They should have known, their job is to enforce the laws. Like theft. Trump's statement is meaningless in any useful context. Again, he's implying Biden knew, and the letter he released demonstrates the opposite.

The letter in its entirety is here. No excuses from the local Trump defenders. Yes, it's long, but any attempt to handwave it without reading it will be admission of Trump's guilt, and quoted as such.

I went through a few articles on this very letter. Most, of course, say "what the fuck, who in their right mind would publish evidence of their own guilt?"

Bradley P. Moss, a national security attorney, said that publication of the letter had backfired.

"Does @jsolomonReports realize how bad that letter is for Trump?" he asked.

"Trump not only had classified records at Mar-a-Lago, not only had TS/SCI classified records, he had Special Access Program classified information. Those are our most sensitive secrets. They were sitting in a damn basement."

University of Texas law professor Steve Vladeck described the release "as both a self-inflicted wound and further proof of how the government has been playing by the rules."

Other terms like "extraordinarily damning" "wait, why the hell" and "blows up in his face".

FOX News of course gave it their best shot by leaning on "Biden signed off" which, again, Biden deferred to NARA's judgement and the letter spels this out. And even FOX News is forced to point out the National Archives had been asking Trump for monts before the letter, which in turn was months before the warrant. FOX News then goes on to mention they broke the story that the FBI took lawyer-client items, which is yet to be proven, and very likely irrelevant. But FOX gotta FOX yo, and I'll take the points for later.

I could not find a credible source defending Trump's actions on this one. Sites like the Washington Examiner, at best, said that it happened but not that it was a spectacular own goal. I saw no reason to check known peddlers of falsehoods like OAN or Breitbart. Maybe someone else will find an OP ED or the like in the next few days, one which shows any plausible reason Trump would reveal this evidence against him on purpose.

Now some of you and maybe even some of y'all will say "Trump did this to rile up his base" but that won't save him in court. In addition to the "special master" thing he has three whole days to figure out what that's about, he's broadcasting that he knew he had top secret info that the FBI wanted back and the National Archives wanted back, and he knew it was illegal for him to keep them, months before the unPresidented raid.

I mean...seriously, what the hell was the goal here? To get arrested fatter?

Normally this is where I @cubby to get his opinion, but I don't know that anything he says will overrule the dozen or so experts answering questions in articles or interviews so far. So instead:

Hey cubby, what's "constructive possession" and why is it important here?

And also, how do you feel about leading questions?

[Kaleredar]

The letter in its entirety is here. No excuses from the local Trump defenders. Yes, it's long, but any attempt to handwave it without reading it will be admission of Trump's guilt, and quoted as such.

Here's the thing on that.

They wont admit they saw or heard of any of this.

Like, seriously, call them up. Hell, I'll do it. (I'm not sure how many of these people are actually Americans and how many are just foreign concern trolls pretending to be Americans, but I figure it's a good start)

@PC2
@tehdang
@Zeth Hawkins
@Spectral
@lockybalboa


What are your thoughts on Trump's complete and potentially malicious mishandling of top-secret government documents, potentially endangering American interests around the world, for no discernible good reason, the proceedings of which have had him lie and shift his position at every possible step of this investigation?

A. Do you say "it's an FBI conspiracy?"

B. Do you say it's "no big deal" and is being "blown out of proportion by the Biden administration?"

C. Do you say "if Trump did it, it was right?"

Because I think, fundamentally, it's D) you just don't care. Deep, at the very heart of yourself, you just don't give a fuck what Trump did. If he ran again in 2024, I think you'd still vote for him. Not just "not vote for Biden and vote for no one," I think you would genuinely look at Donald Trump, acknowledge that he broke the law in ways that endangered National Security, and say to yourself "well at least he's not a democrat" and then vote for him and for republican politicians echoing those exact same thoughts.


And then you wonder what the problem in the United States is, and think of how you can pin it on women getting abortions or on minorities or on gay and trans people.


Feel free to refute any of that.


I'd have highlighted more users who were obviously pro-trumpers, but most of them seem to have either been banned or gone utterly silent in the last year. I think D3athr@y or whatever his name was also skulks around still but I couldn't remember how exactly to spell his name to adequately mention him.

[Dontrike]

Like, seriously, call them up. Hell, I'll do it. (I'm not sure how many of these people are actually Americans and how many are just foreign concern trolls pretending to be Americans, but I figure it's a good start)

@PC2
@tehdang
@Zeth Hawkins
@Spectral
@lockybalboa

I'm amazed there isn't more names, gotta wonder what some of those old permabanned ones are doing with this info or any of the recent Trump shit.

With that said they'll either use one of Trump's random ass excuses to hand wave it away, come up with their own bit of insanity, or you'll hear more from the crickets than you will them.

[lockybalboa]

Here's the thing on that.

They wont admit they saw or heard of any of this.

Like, seriously, call them up. Hell, I'll do it. (I'm not sure how many of these people are actually Americans and how many are just foreign concern trolls pretending to be Americans, but I figure it's a good start)

@PC2
@tehdang
@Zeth Hawkins
@Spectral
@lockybalboa


What are your thoughts on Trump's complete and potentially malicious mishandling of top-secret government documents, potentially endangering American interests around the world, for no discernible good reason, the proceedings of which have had him lie and shift his position at every possible step of this investigation?

A. Do you say "it's an FBI conspiracy?"

B. Do you say it's "no big deal" and is being "blown out of proportion by the Biden administration?"

C. Do you say "if Trump did it, it was right?"

Because I think, fundamentally, it's D) you just don't care. Deep, at the very heart of yourself, you just don't give a fuck what Trump did. If he ran again in 2024, I think you'd still vote for him. Not just "not vote for Biden and vote for no one," I think you would genuinely look at Donald Trump, acknowledge that he broke the law in ways that endangered National Security, and say to yourself "well at least he's not a democrat" and then vote for him and for republican politicians echoing those exact same thoughts.


And then you wonder what the problem in the United States is, and think of how you can pin it on women getting abortions or on minorities or on gay and trans people.


Feel free to refute any of that.


I'd have highlighted more users who were obviously pro-trumpers, but most of them seem to have either been banned or gone utterly silent in the last year. I think D3athr@y or whatever his name was also skulks around still but I couldn't remember how exactly to spell his name to adequately mention him.

What the hell are you on about? I'm 100% American and even voted for Joe despite my previous doubts about him just to oust Trump out. People like the guy in my sig are the ones you should be flaming, not poor old me. As for your question I'd leave it up to the authorities to investigate and come out with a conclusion. They failed to convict Trump on previous charges somehow and I hope they won't fuck up again.

[gondrin]

Well, now Trump is trying to find another fixer. Too bad nobody is taking him up on it except for his current lawyers. He wants ALL those documents back, not just the ones that are presidential correspondence and the like, laws be damned. This is behind a paywall that has a free article limit.

https://www.rollingstone.com/politic...ck-1234580501/

Trump Tells His Lawyers: Get ‘My’ Top Secret Documents Back

The ex-president is desperate to recover the classified trove taken from Mar-a-Lago — and is pushing his legal team on a long-shot maneuver to return them

IN THE WEEKS after the FBI’s Mar-a-Lago raid, former President Donald Trump repeatedly made a simple-sounding but extraordinary ask: he wanted his lawyers to get “my documents” back from federal law enforcement.

Trump wasn’t merely referring to the alleged trove of attorney-client material that he insists was scooped up by the feds during the raid, two people familiar with the matter tell Rolling Stone. The ex-president has been demanding that his team find a way to recover “all” of the official documents that Trump has long referred to as “mine” — including the highly sensitive and top secret ones.

Sources close to Trump agree with outside legal experts that such a sweeping legal maneuver would be a long-shot, at best. “I hate to break it to the [former] president, but I do not think he is going to get all [the] top-secret documents back,” says one Trump adviser. “That ship has probably sailed.”

Further, several longtime Trump advisers say they want absolutely nothing to do with the now-infamous boxes of documents, fearing that any knowledge of them could invite an unwanted knock on the door from the feds. “Who would want any of that back? … If it is what they say it is, keep them the hell away,” a second adviser says.

Still, the former president’s legal team appears to be working to retrieve at least some of the papers seized during the Aug. 8 federal search. In recent days, the Trump team — led by former federal prosecutor Evan Corcoran — has been quietly prepping additional legal arguments and strategies to try to pry back material that the feds removed from the ex-president’s Florida abode and club, the sources say. Those measures include drafting a so-called “Rule 41(g) motion,” which allows “a person aggrieved by an unlawful search and seizure of property” to “move for the property’s return,” according to the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.

This would be a follow-up measure to the lawsuit, filed Monday by Trump and his attorneys, calling for the appointment of a special master to review the Mar-a-Lago materials for potentially privileged materials. It is unclear when the ex-president’s lawyers plan to file a subsequent motion, which people close to Trump expect to be more narrowly tailored than what the former president apparently wants.

“The motion he already filed is so absolutely terrible, that it’s hard to contemplate him filing something even more aggressive and even more unlikely to succeed,” says Ken White, a criminal defense attorney and former federal prosecutor.

“However,” White added, Trump is “basically trying to litigate the ultimate issue in the case, which is whether he had the right to possess and keep those things, even after he was asked to return them. It’s very unlikely that the court would accept that invitation to litigate that…He would have to prove that those things were illegally taken, and — based on what we know — that is going to be very difficult to prove…He’s going to have to make some very unusual legal arguments, which, if they’re anything like the motion that was just filed, is going to be a very uphill climb.”

In the suit filed on Monday seeking the appointment of a special master, Trump’s attorneys signaled that a 41(g) motion could be forthcoming. A special master should, they argued, should provide Trump’s attorneys with a more detailed inventory of the items taken from Mar-a-Lago so that “the President can properly evaluate and avail himself of the important protections of Rule 41.”

The Trump legal team also asked Judge Aileen Cannon to appoint a special master with a “fair-minded approach to providing defense counsel with information needed to support any Rule 41(g) filing.”

Judge Cannon has yet to rule on those requests but suggested she had some questions about it. In an order posted Tuesday afternoon, Cannon instructed Trump’s attorneys to respond to questions about whether she even had jurisdiction to offer the kind of relief they seek and whether granting their demands would affect Trump’s ongoing litigation in another case seeking to unseal the Justice Department’s evidence supporting the search warrant application.

The potential Rule 41(g) motion comes amidst a series of odd and, at times, seemingly self-defeating moves by Trump allies seeking to defend the former president’s conduct.

The former president’s office claimed recently that Trump had issued a so-called “standing order” to automatically declassify any materials taken from the West Wing in order to facilitate a flexible work schedule for the then-president. Thus far, no Trump administration veterans have come forward to attest to the existence of the legally questionable order. But it has prompted, as Rolling Stone reported last week, FBI agents to begin questioning former members of the Trump National Security Council about whether they have any recollection of such an order.

And in a May 10 letter, Justice Department officials revealed that Trump took 15 boxes of classified materials to his Mar-a-Lago residence with documents classified “up to the level of Top Secret and including Sensitive Compartmented Information and Special Access Program,” in addition to those documents seized by the FBI. Special Access Programs are among the most closely-held secrets in the federal government covering sensitive intelligence, operations, and technologies and are strictly limited to smaller numbers of individuals on a “need to know” basis.

The letter, posted by MAGA reporter John Solomon, appeared in an article by Solomon insinuating that President Biden had intervened in the efforts to retrieve the documents. But the correspondence — sent to Solomon, who Trump designated as his liaison with the National Archives — confirmed that Trump had taken Special Access Program materials — among the most sensitive secrets held by the government — to his private residence after leaving office

[Fugus]

Well, now Trump is trying to find another fixer. Too bad nobody is taking him up on it except for his current lawyers. He wants ALL those documents back, not just the ones that are presidential correspondence and the like, laws be damned. This is behind a paywall that has a free article limit.

Have to wonder exactly why he wants them back so bad.

Does it have incriminating stuff against him that he scrubbed from the government on his way out but doesn’t want to destroy because it is also blackmail material for others?

Was he selling the stuff and this was “product” he had yet to sell or deliver?

Is he just this deluded and petty to this that he actually owned this?

None of these would surprise me if true. But wonder which it is.

[DarkTZeratul]

Is he just this deluded and petty to this that he actually owned this?

I honestly suspect it's mostly just this. He's important, and he feels they're his, so he wants them and doesn't think people are allowed to tell him no. He's lived his entire life used to bullying people who don't give him what he wants, and now he's finally in a situation where he can't do that and he's throwing a hissy fit.

[Gorsameth]

Yeah, just the egomaniac narcissist that can't accept that something he took isn't his and that someone else rightfully took it away from him.

[KayossZero]

@Spectral

Just want to clarify that @Specialka is the right winger; @Spectral is nothing of the sort.

[tehdang]

@PC2
@tehdang
@Zeth Hawkins
@Spectral
@lockybalboa


What are your thoughts on Trump's complete and potentially malicious mishandling of top-secret government documents

Mishandling of classified documents is one of the most clear examples of rampant prosecutorial discretion. If you disagree, tell me which you would apply to Hillary's alleged violations of the same exact statute at play in the Trump raid: "potentially malicious mishandling of top-secret government documents", "potentially endangering American interests around the world," "had [her] lie and shift [her] position at every possible step of this investigation."

Come off this insane bluster in your post. State for the record that you think Trump's handling of classified documents will be pinned (quoting you here) "on minorities or on gay and trans people." Seriously. Refute yourself first. Show you are capable of rationality in the face of an issue you are obviously very passionate about. I'm waiting. Seriously, this post comes across as your intention to browbeat people you know are guilty, and only using questions are means of advancing that aim. I'll need to see a little proof that you can look at unhinged portions of your post in retrospect, and recognize that readers will conclude you are not operating in good faith, and try restating or rescinding some to actually get at answers you seek. Lacking all that, I'm happy to wait for the judge ordering the unsealing of the probable-cause affadavit, and ruling on multiple motions from Trump lawyers, and see how well the AG can continue to speak publicly on an investigation that is selectively leaking information while claiming information must be kept from the public to protect the integrity of the investigation.

[Belize]

Just want to clarify that @Specialka is the right winger; @Spectral is nothing of the sort.

No, Spectral was supporting the GOP decision to block the bill to help burn pit victims.

Let's call a duck a duck here.

[Draco-Onis]

Mishandling of classified documents is one of the most clear examples of rampant prosecutorial discretion. If you disagree, tell me which you would apply to Hillary's alleged violations of the same exact statute at play in the Trump raid: "potentially malicious mishandling of top-secret government documents", "potentially endangering American interests around the world," "had [her] lie and shift [her] position at every possible step of this investigation."

Hillary handed over the information, she wasn't the president of the United States so not as high of access. She also didn't lie and say she totes didn't have anymore classified docs while hiding tons more in her basement. Lastly I can't help but laugh that you now want us to apply Hillary as the standard for Trump okay let's investigate every single part of his life for the next 10+ years.

[Breccia]

Well, now Trump is trying to find another fixer.

I really don't see who would look at current events, pick this specific moment in time, and say "this is the perfect opportunity for me to tie my career to Trump". Not only is he damn near objectively guilty and likely to lose most of his lawsuits, the lawyers who join now won't be paid.

Let's also add that Trump is looking to get "his" documents back from the WH. I don't even know how many lawyers would represent Obama to do that.