Mega-Thread: Trump Focused Discussion

[tehdang]

So Trump prevails on his claim for special master, and the government is punished for failing to screen for documents potentially protected by executive privilege, and mishaps in the filter review process ("at least two instances in which members of the Investigative Team were exposed to material ... designated as potentially privileged material"). I expected the citation of Nixon ever since the government made the absurd claim that nothing was potentially subject to executive privilege. She cites it here.

The DoJ better slow down and not overreach in future. Trump is entitled to make executive privilege claims, which isn't the same as eventually succeeding on those claims. The DoJ made unforced errors on passports and attorney-client privileged documents. Time to pay the piper on that one.

DoJ: Judge, we already screened this shit. We have 520 pages of potentially privileged material. This is unneccessary.
Judge: You already admitted to two times you screwed up, so don't tell me the process was adequate. We're interested in an impartial review of all that got swept up in the raid, not least of which is the public perception. And you dummies, you didn't follow court precedent on executive privilege, so there must be a second review for that reason as well.

https://d3i6fh83elv35t.cloudfront.ne...asterOrder.pdf

[Ripster42]

I don't see a big problem with appointing a special master. DoJ is still going to get all relevant material. This isn't the only evidence they've got. I expect the people from the DoJ who are working on the case are going to spend the time war gaming different scenarios and will have blocked out briefs waiting to fill in the blanks, while all the while gathering more info through whatever investigative sources weren't disclosed when the judge had them release the redacted affidavit (as well as hoovering up all his fake tweets for more evidence of consciousness of guilt).

- - - Updated - - -

The DoJ better slow down and not overreach in future. Trump is entitled to make executive privilege claims, which isn't the same as eventually succeeding on those claims. The DoJ made unforced errors on passports and attorney-client privileged documents. Time to pay the piper on that one.
]

I can make executive privilege claims. Doesn't matter as the current executive is the one who has to actually enforce it. Trump claiming executive privilege means jack shit.

[Breccia]

the government made the absurd claim that nothing was potentially subject to executive privilege.

If it is covered by Executive Privilege, then it's WH property, not Trump's, and if Trump had it in his basement he's guilty of a crime.

Thank you for admitting Trump is guilty of stealing WH property. I'm legit surprised you came around so quickly, considering he hasn't officially been charged yet. I thought you'd hold out at least until the cuffs clinked closed.

[tehdang]

I can make executive privilege claims. Doesn't matter as the current executive is the one who has to actually enforce it. Trump claiming executive privilege means jack shit.

I expected the citation of Nixon ever since the government made the absurd claim that nothing was potentially subject to executive privilege. She cites it here.

It's in past Supreme Court precedent, cited in her order. It's also common sense that advisors would not give the president their real advice, if they knew a rival administration could seize and publish it afterwards if it were embarrassing in some policy areas.

Also, maybe your real issue is executive privilege in itself. You may not think the president's advisors should have confidentiality in their advice to him, in office or immediately after office.

If it is covered by Executive Privilege, then it's WH property, not Trump's, and if Trump had it in his basement he's guilty of a crime.

The Supreme Court refused to rule out one president asserting executive privilege over an incumbent president. Because, do you really want Republicans sifting through everything someone told Biden just because they took control of the White House (hence DoJ) and seized it in a raid? Those are privileged communications, and ought to be tested in court to the situations where that privilege may be overridden.

Thank you for admitting Trump is guilty of stealing WH property. I'm legit surprised you came around so quickly, considering he hasn't officially been charged yet. I thought you'd hold out at least until the cuffs clinked closed.

I have adopted a wait-and-see attitude, in view of the selective DoJ leaks and recent history, and you can review my past posts on the subject if you're confused.

[Breccia]

Trump claiming executive privilege means jack shit.

Well not, it's admission of guilt. Trump saying items were covered by privilege means they belong to the WH, not to Trump. It's just like tehdang admitted oddly out of character.

[Edge-]

It's also common sense that advisors would not give the president their real advice, if they knew a rival administration could seize and publish it afterwards if it were embarrassing in some policy areas.

This is absolutely unhinged thinking and not the type of thing that presidents have ever, or would ever traditionally do. Not even as partisanship increased.

This requires such a level of hyperpartisanship to the point where you're willing to put the entire nation at risk over petty politics that I'm struggling to believe you view this as common sense. There is no history of this that I'm aware of, nor any evidence to view this as anything more than the position of a deeply paranoid and untrustworthy hyperpartisan.

This is, "Government fundamentally cannot function this way." levels of thinking. Privilege isn't required for this, it's simply being a god-damned professional. Your job is to run the country, not abuse your position for petty partisan gain. I guess this kind of behavior has been normalized a lot more by Republicans than I'd thought.

Also, maybe your real issue is executive privilege in itself. You may not think the president's advisors should have confidentiality in their advice to him, in office or immediately after office.

I mean sure, but I'm not sure why there's concern the FBI would be leaking this unless you're on team #DefundTheFBI or something. Thus far the only complaints of their behavior largely rests on, "They executed a lawful search warranted signed off on by a judge, and a Trump-nominated judge at that. Following both a voluntary request for documents return as well as a subsequent subpoena for their return." which I'd argue is fairly suspect if you put literally anybody else as the subject of said raid in that circumstance.

Reportedly they've already reviewed it and I haven't seen any news about leaks. Almost as if they are professionals or something.

[Breccia]

I mean sure, but I'm not sure why there's concern the FBI would be leaking this unless you're on team #DefundTheFBI or something

Indeed, it's more projection. The only person worried about the FBI leaking top secret and SCI is the person who stole it himself.

[tehdang]

This is absolutely unhinged thinking

This is why such documents are protected by executive privilege as a concept. As a bulwark against rival administrations, or Congress, or ordinary litigants, compelling testimony that might make presidential advisors think twice about offering their real advice.

Your assertion that professionals wouldn't do such a thing is a cute concept, but not rooted in anything solid.

I mean sure, but I'm not sure why there's concern the FBI would be leaking this unless you're on team #DefundTheFBI or something. Thus far the only complaints of their behavior largely rests on, "They executed a lawful search warranted signed off on by a judge, and a Trump-nominated judge at that. Following both a voluntary request for documents return as well as a subsequent subpoena for their return." which I'd argue is fairly suspect if you put literally anybody else as the subject of said raid in that circumstance.

Reportedly they've already reviewed it and I haven't seen any news about leaks. Almost as if they are professionals or something.

That operation has published photos, has leaked to news organizations about what was sought and the classification levels involved, amongst a host of other issues. The executive should maintain some level of privacy in communications with his advisors from when he was president, and such documents should be preserved against any investigative team seizing troves of documents and reading them. When the DoJ somehow forgot the Nixon decision, and failed to identify and sequester potentially protected documents, they were begging a judge to put them back in their place.

It's like attorney-client privilege; sure, someone like you might see Sainted FBI Agents as being above using attorney-client communications to aid their prosecutions of attorney or client, or leak to the media to win the PR battle, but I prefer legal protections. I would've thought the examples of J Edgar Hoover and James Comey (office of the inspector general report on Comey leaking memos, and taking copies of classified documents) would've been enough of a history of misconduct in the DoJ.

I thought the roughshod manner they neglected exec privilege showed they had no desire to indict him. Why else jeopardize an investigation with materials subject to exclusion and contamination of the case? Neglect or no intent to actually charge. They're aware of supreme court precedent regarding both executive privilege and attorney client privilege. And oopsie.

[Jastall]

This is why such documents are protected by executive privilege as a concept. As a bulwark against rival administrations, or Congress, or ordinary litigants, compelling testimony that might make presidential advisors think twice about offering their real advice.

Your assertion that professionals wouldn't do such a thing is a cute concept, but not rooted in anything solid.

That operation has published photos, has leaked to news organizations about what was sought and the classification levels involved, amongst a host of other issues. The executive should maintain some level of privacy in communications with his advisors from when he was president, and such documents should be preserved against any investigative team seizing troves of documents and reading them. When the DoJ somehow forgot the Nixon decision, and failed to identify and sequester potentially protected documents, they were begging a judge to put them back in their place.

It's like attorney-client privilege; sure, someone like you might see Sainted FBI Agents as being above using attorney-client communications to aid their prosecutions of attorney or client, or leak to the media to win the PR battle, but I prefer legal protections. I would've thought the examples of J Edgar Hoover and James Comey (office of the inspector general report on Comey leaking memos, and taking copies of classified documents) would've been enough of a history of misconduct in the DoJ.

I thought the roughshod manner they neglected exec privilege showed they had no desire to indict him. Why else jeopardize an investigation with materials subject to exclusion and contamination of the case? Neglect or no intent to actually charge. They're aware of supreme court precedent regarding both executive privilege and attorney client privilege. And oopsie.

The items cannot be both covered by executive privilege and attorney client privilege at once, unless you believe the AG is the President's personal law counsellor for some reason. Leaving of course aside the fact that if it IS protected by executive privilege, it more than likely belongs to whoever holds the office, not everyone who once held the office.

[masterhorus8]

This is why such documents are protected by executive privilege as a concept. As a bulwark against rival administrations, or Congress, or ordinary litigants, compelling testimony that might make presidential advisors think twice about offering their real advice.

Your assertion that professionals wouldn't do such a thing is a cute concept, but not rooted in anything solid.

That operation has published photos, has leaked to news organizations about what was sought and the classification levels involved, amongst a host of other issues. The executive should maintain some level of privacy in communications with his advisors from when he was president, and such documents should be preserved against any investigative team seizing troves of documents and reading them. When the DoJ somehow forgot the Nixon decision, and failed to identify and sequester potentially protected documents, they were begging a judge to put them back in their place.

It's like attorney-client privilege; sure, someone like you might see Sainted FBI Agents as being above using attorney-client communications to aid their prosecutions of attorney or client, or leak to the media to win the PR battle, but I prefer legal protections. I would've thought the examples of J Edgar Hoover and James Comey (office of the inspector general report on Comey leaking memos, and taking copies of classified documents) would've been enough of a history of misconduct in the DoJ.

I thought the roughshod manner they neglected exec privilege showed they had no desire to indict him. Why else jeopardize an investigation with materials subject to exclusion and contamination of the case? Neglect or no intent to actually charge. They're aware of supreme court precedent regarding both executive privilege and attorney client privilege. And oopsie.

News flash: he isn't president. He lost. Get over it.

[Breccia]

The items cannot be both covered by executive privilege and attorney client privilege at once

This statement is objectively, factually correct.

Trump is most likely claiming privilege because he doesn't have any actual defense. Anything covered by Executive Privilege, Trump shouldn't have taken, and the FBI should have taken back. Anything covered by lawyer-client isn't evidence of any crimes and has already been separated out by the FBI who has no need of it.

[Draco-Onis]

News flash: he isn't president. He lost. Get over it.

I think that's the giant size hole in this whole executive privilege bullshit Trump is claiming, only the executive aka Biden the current president can use it. He cannot call executive privilege retroactively after being president.

[postman1782]

So Trump prevails on his claim for special master, and the government is punished for failing to screen for documents potentially protected by executive privilege, and mishaps in the filter review process ("at least two instances in which members of the Investigative Team were exposed to material ... designated as potentially privileged material"). I expected the citation of Nixon ever since the government made the absurd claim that nothing was potentially subject to executive privilege. She cites it here.

The DoJ better slow down and not overreach in future. Trump is entitled to make executive privilege claims, which isn't the same as eventually succeeding on those claims. The DoJ made unforced errors on passports and attorney-client privileged documents. Time to pay the piper on that one.

DoJ: Judge, we already screened this shit. We have 520 pages of potentially privileged material. This is unneccessary.
Judge: You already admitted to two times you screwed up, so don't tell me the process was adequate. We're interested in an impartial review of all that got swept up in the raid, not least of which is the public perception. And you dummies, you didn't follow court precedent on executive privilege, so there must be a second review for that reason as well.

https://d3i6fh83elv35t.cloudfront.ne...asterOrder.pdf

It has already been ordered that he cannot claim executive privilege, he isn't the fucking president. This will be appealed and should be overturned.

[Endus]

Because, do you really want Republicans sifting through everything someone told Biden just because they took control of the White House (hence DoJ) and seized it in a raid?

Yes.

If they're doing so out of malice, they'll just make shit up anyway.

If there's an actual issue of misconduct, that should come out.

It shouldn't matter who's in the White House, or when.

The moment a President leaves office, there is no purpose for their having any form of "Executive Privilege" that cannot be countermanded trivially by the sitting President. They're no longer the head of the Executive. They no longer have that privilege, and the current President should have full access. It's absolutely fucking baffling that anyone would argue otherwise.

For people who supposedly hated kings, you sure did everything you could to make sure the President acted exactly like one, rather than just a normal democratic head of state.

[Dontrike]

The DoJ better slow down and not overreach in future.

Going after criminals is now "overreach." I learn something new and stupid everyday.

- - - Updated - - -

This is why such documents are protected by executive privilege as a concept.

They're not protected from the government getting them the fuck back from the criminal that stole them. Again, why did Trump steal nuclear secrets? You never answered this.

[Breccia]

He cannot call executive privilege retroactively after being president.

And, just like that magical declassifying telepathy bullshit he tried earlier, simply saying "privilege" doesn't make it so during his tenure, either.

Of course, that's of limited context anyhow. Trump is trying to classify what kind of documents he stole. But he still stole them. Whether or not the FBI reads them doesn't really matter at this point.

[tehdang]

The items cannot be both covered by executive privilege and attorney client privilege at once, unless you believe the AG is the President's personal law counsellor for some reason. Leaving of course aside the fact that if it IS protected by executive privilege, it more than likely belongs to whoever holds the office, not everyone who once held the office.

For us both understanding each other, you know what the judge meant when she crossed from attorney-client privilege to executive privilege? When she said "the Court is notconvinced that similar concerns with respect to executive privilege should be disregarded in themanner suggested by the Government?"

News flash: he isn't president. He lost. Get over it.

It would be hard for any president to receive unfiltered advice if their advisers are subject to exposure the second the president leaves. This is an obvious abrogation of executive privilege as a concept.

It has already been ordered that he cannot claim executive privilege, he isn't the fucking president. This will be appealed and should be overturned.

No such order exists.

Going after criminals is now "overreach." I learn something new and stupid everyday.

DoJ running roughshod over separation of powers doctrine isn't new. Claiming this is identical to "going after criminals" is kinda new, I guess.

They're not protected from the government getting them the fuck back from the criminal that stole them. Again, why did Trump steal nuclear secrets? You never answered this.

The FBI has to observe the law when inspecting seized documents. Now, a special master will do the job they failed to do. I think you should save your energy for when these process contentions are over.

[Breccia]

The FBI has to observe the law when inspecting seized documents.

Funny story: they did. Remember, they were looking for things Trump stole from the WH. Their filter team already removed the rest. Executive Privileged documents don't belong to Trump, so even if the FBI said "hey, let's read every single word of every single page" it would not change the fact that Trump stole documents, and the FBI found them.

In other words, you keep admitting Trump is a criminal. We agree.

[Kaleredar]

For us both understanding each other, you know what the judge meant when she crossed from attorney-client privilege to executive privilege? When she said "the Court is notconvinced that similar concerns with respect to executive privilege should be disregarded in themanner suggested by the Government?"

It would be hard for any president to receive unfiltered advice if their advisers are subject to exposure the second the president leaves. This is an obvious abrogation of executive privilege as a concept.

No such order exists.

DoJ running roughshod over separation of powers doctrine isn't new. Claiming this is identical to "going after criminals" is kinda new, I guess.

The FBI has to observe the law when inspecting seized documents. Now, a special master will do the job they failed to do. I think you should save your energy for when these process contentions are over.

Your contention here seems to be that you assume that the contents of those folders included things that were basically "for Trump's eyes only" and that, because he was the executive at the time he saw them, he can still lay some sort of "executive privileged" to owning them, because Biden might "use them nefariously" or some partisan drek.

That's not how this works.


Here's a fucking news flash: The transition of Presidential power isn't supposed to be some "team sport victory" where you're not supposed to "see the other side's secrets for the next round." The office of the presidency is SUPPOSED to flow seamlessly between presidents. That Trump DIDN'T do that for Biden because Trump is a spiteful fuck does not mean that is the norm, and the transition of presidential power and the flow of who lays ownership to presidential documents is not going to suddenly be reinterpreted because Trump is a sore loser with paranoid supporters such as yourself.

Every president before Trump managed to do this flawlessly, and national security was not "compromised" because of it.

When Trump is uniquely the subject of all of these "unprecedented actions" taken against a former president, maybe it's because he's an unprecedentedly bad actor in the office of the presidency in all of these things, and not that some great conspiracy has come to weigh on uniquely him.

[Dontrike]

DoJ running roughshod over separation of powers doctrine isn't new. Claiming this is identical to "going after criminals" is kinda new, I guess.

For someone that claims to hate bias so much you sure do have a ton of it for Trump, almost like you're a hypocrite, especially if you believe he's not a criminal. Why would he steal classified and top secret documents again? You've never explained it.

The FBI has to observe the law when inspecting seized documents. Now, a special master will do the job they failed to do. I think you should save your energy for when these process contentions are over.

Yeah yeah, the FBI is only bad when it goes after your Trumpy bear. Shouldn't you be using Truth Social right now? At least there everyone believes the lies you spew.