Mega-Thread: Trump Focused Discussion

[Kaleredar]

TLDR for this seems to be: DoJ can continue using classified documents as part of their criminal investigation. Cannon had previously ruled they could not.

And just for nothing: 2 of the 3 judges that ruled on this are Trump appointees.

Seeing as I'm pretty sure Trump just rubber-stamped whomever the Republicans suggested to him meaning they likely have little to no fealty to Trump or Trumpism, having these judges actually do their jobs and rule in favor of the law (and by consequence, against Trump) is actually the GOP's single best avenue to rid themselves of Trump in the way they can most detach themselves from the process of doing so.

[beanman12345]

11th circuit grants DOJ its stay. Link to the full decision that forecloses numerous specious arguments that have been raised in this very thread: https://twitter.com/kyledcheney/stat...gVEDPe54iiakCg

ETA: Even so, the 11th circuit still sucks.

Man they really take a dump on this privilege argument, lol. Damn.

[Xyonai]

Man they really take a dump on this privilege argument, lol. Damn.

it's almost like that argument was a load of disingenuous smooth brained bullshit lmao.

[Levelfive]

Man they really take a dump on this privilege argument, lol. Damn.

Yes, and took a dump all over Cannon's reasoning generally--pretty gratifying read.

- - - Updated - - -

it's almost like that argument was a load of disingenuous smooth brained bullshit lmao.

Yep!

/10chars

[Breccia]

Lindell, on his quest to try and make a copy of everything else that someone else has made

Oh, man.

DOJ investigating Mike Lindell over potential identity theft

Some days, the jokes write themselves.

The warrant for the search, which was filed by Lindell’s team on Wednesday as part of his lawsuit to the United States District Court in Minnesota, showed that the DOJ is investigating Lindell for identity theft, intentional damage to a protected computer and conspiracy to commit identity theft or intentionally damage a protected computer.

Agents searched for records or information connected to Mesa County election clerk Tina Peters’s alleged scheme to breach voting machines during the 2020 election.

Peters was indicted on state criminal charges in March.

Officials first became aware of the breach after passwords and hard drive copies from Mesa County voting machines were presented at an event hosted by Lindell.

- - - Updated - - -

I haven't read every word of the ruling yet, but I have read this:

On that date, Plaintiff asked for another extension of time and informed the National Archives that, if it declined to grant the
extension, he would make a protective assertion of executive privilege over the documents. Doc. No. 48 at 6. On May 10, the National Archives informed Plaintiff’s representatives that it had decided not to honor Plaintiff’s protective claim of executive privilege, and that it would provide the FBI access to the records as early as May 12, 2022. That letter noted that President Biden had deferred to the National Archives’s determination that executive privilege did not apply. Despite this advance warning, Plaintiff made no effort to block the FBI’s access to the documents at that time.

and

Second, as to the appointment of a special master, the United States contended that (1) appointment of a special master
was the exception, not the rule; (2) a special master was neither necessary nor appropriate to address whether certain documents
were subject to executive privilege because Plaintiff could not assert executive privilege against the Executive Branch; (3) even if
he could, the privilege would yield to the United States’s need to investigate a possible crime and the United States’s compelling interest in sensitive and highly classified documents; (4) appointment of a special master would be inconsistent with equitable principles
given that Plaintiff had not, as required, turned the records over to
Archives in the first instance; and (5) the case did not involve complex or voluminous records, so a privilege filter team was appropriate.

EDIT: and

Third, as to injunctive relief, the United States argued that (1) Plaintiff had waited too long to seek relief, and the Department’s review of the documents, which Plaintiff sought to avoid, had already occurred; (2) Plaintiff was not likely to succeed on the
merits of his claims of executive privilege because he did not have any cognizable claim of executive privilege over the documents;
and (3) the harm to the United States—in the delay in its investigation—far outweighed any injury to Plaintiff because of the risk to
national security.

EDIT EDIT: Jeez. And!

After the district court issued its order, the United States
moved for a partial stay of that order pending appeal as to the limited set of documents (just over one hundred) that were marked as
classified. The United States argued that (1) Plaintiff did not have
a possessory interest in the classified documents (because they belonged to the United States, not to him); (2) such documents could
not possibly contain attorney-client privileged information; and (3)
even if Plaintiff could exert executive privilege over some of the
records, that privilege would be overcome by the United States’s
demonstrated, specific need to review the classified documents to
see if and how much of a risk to national security existed.

This reads a lot like "Trump hadn't asserted privilege yet" as of April 2022. Which means that everyone except one poster was right.

[Edge-]

There doesn’t have to be a process, as I understand it. You’re the president of the United States, you can declassify just by saying it’s declassified, even by thinking about it.

Guess who just said this on Sean Hannity?

Also, guess who doesn't know that a declassification process even exists?

[Breccia]

Guess who just said this on Sean Hannity?

Well, for one, not the court that just ruled he's as full of shit as he's full of nacho cheese.

Again, until Trump says under oath that he declassified them, the things he says in public not under oath are irrelevant. I didn't bother posting anything about the classification status from the ruling, but the judges were lighter on that part, and it still boiled down to "lol no".

I'm not great at reading legal-ese, but the court also seemed to take specific issue with "Plaintiff says we lack standing". I don't know if there was any wiggle room for that to affect their ruling, it was pretty much textbook already, but I can't imagine a stupider thing to do when you're objectively guilty than to piss off the judge(s).

[cubby]

There doesn’t have to be a process, as I understand it. You’re the president of the United States, you can declassify just by saying it’s declassified, even by thinking about it.

Guess who just said this on Sean Hannity?

Also, guess who doesn't know that a declassification process even exists?

And, because Donnie Dipshit is an absolute fucking moron, that statement can be used against him in a court of law. Literally.

- - - Updated - - -

Well, for one, not the court that just ruled he's as full of shit as he's full of nacho cheese.

Again, until Trump says under oath that he declassified them, the things he says in public not under oath are irrelevant. I didn't bother posting anything about the classification status from the ruling, but the judges were lighter on that part, and it still boiled down to "lol no".

I'm not great at reading legal-ese, but the court also seemed to take specific issue with "Plaintiff says we lack standing". I don't know if there was any wiggle room for that to affect their ruling, it was pretty much textbook already, but I can't imagine a stupider thing to do when you're objectively guilty than to piss off the judge(s).

Unfortunately for Trump, the statements he makes in public can be used against him. And would fall under an exception to the FRCP's hearsay rule, "statements against ones own interest". The trap continues to close.

[Breccia]

Unfortunately for Trump, the statements he makes in public can be used against him.

...wait, for realsies? Does....does he know that?

[Kaleredar]

...wait, for realsies? Does....does he know that?

I mean, if you say "I totally killed that guy" in public I think the prosecution would be able to bring it up at the murder trial.


I hope Trump's lawyers all did a collective facepalm when they heard him say that.

This is why getting Trump on the stand is so imperative. He basically can't not incriminate himself. And he's such a fragile snowflake I think a simple matter of requisite media talking heads saying "Trump is a coward for not taking the stand, only guilty people plead the fifth, why doesn't he speak?" would be enough to goad him into doing it, despite what I'm sure are constant reminders from his lawyers that "the one thing you do not do is take the stand."

Because they know as well as the rest of us that if he does, it's game over for him.

[Breccia]

"the one thing you do not do is take the stand."

And, quite frankly, even not taking the stand, is hurting him. In about 24 hours, we saw both the "special master" saying Trump had not actually said anything meaningful about classification status, and the bitchslap of that appeals ruling saying "he hasn't cited XXX" like six times.

Not that this part matters, because neither Executive Privilege nor classification has any effect here, actually wait hold on.

We also doubt that Plaintiff risks irreparable injury in the form of disclosure of privileged information; he has not, for example, asserted attorney-client privilege over any of the classified documents.

I knew it was in there somewhere. Anyhow not that this part matters, but, Trump could try to throw yet more people under the bus and try to exploit a loophole along the lines of "I told XXX that they were declassified but he didn't fill out the paperwork, it's not my fault". As his lawyers said, maybe he could have done that or a related defense at trial. He hasn't yet.

Until Trump actually asserts privilege and/or declassification under oath, his public statements are meaningless his public statements can apparently be used against him in court. The pile of evidence just got ten feet higher.

- - - Updated - - -

Also, guess who doesn't know that a declassification process even exists?

Oh, about that:

Plaintiff suggests that he may have declassified these documents when he was President. But the record contains no evidence that any of these records were declassified. And before the special master, Plaintiff resisted providing any evidence that he had declassified any of these documents. See Doc. No. 97 at 2–3., Sept. 19, 2022, letter from James M. Trusty, et al., to Special Master Raymond J. Dearie, at 2–3. In any event, at least for these purposes, the declassification argument is a red herring because declassifying an official document would not change its content or render it personal. So even if we assumed that Plaintiff did declassify some or all of the documents, that would not explain why he has a personal interest in them

Resisted. The ruling points out, not only is there no evidence of declassification, but also, Trump was asked to provide it and refused. Because Trump taking the stand is suicide.

- - - Updated - - -

Actually, if Trump and family, especially his family, take financial hit, I'm all for it.

It's been a busy day, but this part needs to be clarified before it gets lost: NYState is not suing Trump Org, they are suing Trump directly.

[cubby]

...wait, for realsies? Does....does he know that?

Yes, public statements, excited utterances, statements against ones own interest, and a number of other niche exceptions to the hearsay law are possible admissions of evidence by the DoJ. If Trump is saying he declassified the documents in a sworn statement, and the DoJ proves Trump lied with contrary statements, he could face perjury charges.

Trump doesn't know much when it comes to the law.

[postman1782]

Lindell, on his quest to try and make a copy of everything else that someone else has made and call it My something, cannot find or retain people to sell stuff on his new platform, MyStore. At least he cannot use MySpace, that was already taken and was a precursor to Facebook.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/comp...edcb1283a521c9

Did you see who he allied with to get pillows sold? He gave a discount code to Vincent James. If people don't remember who that fucker is, he is the dumbass that posed with Tim Pool hiding in a corner after a Nazi rally in 2017.



The people in the picture, of course, Tim Pool is the dumbass in the corner trying to hide, Vincent James is the moron in the middle straight back, off to the left is literal Nazi bitch Brittany Pettibone Sellner, she married a literal Nazi that was kicked out of the UK Martin Sellner, directly behind her is one of the organizers of the Unite the Right rally James Allsup, oh and don't forget the moron in the beard and blonde dyed hair on the right is Baked Alaska, currently waiting sentencing I believe still for his part in the J6 insurrection.


FYI NSFW speech from the Nazi, but here is the video of him trying to get Vincent James to sell his dumbass pillows:

[Mekh]

Oh, man.

DOJ investigating Mike Lindell over potential identity theft

Not even Mike Lindell wants to be Mike Lindell.

[Breccia]

If Trump is saying he declassified the documents in a sworn statement, and the DoJ proves Trump lied with contrary statements, he could face perjury charges.

So, he'd have to admit he lied to the American people to avoid jail time.

- - - Updated - - -

As expected: Trump says the war in Ukraine wouldn't have happened if he was still in the WH.

"It's simple," he didn't say but would have if he was telling the truth, "I would have blackmailed Ukraine into surrendering. You heard the phone call, you saw me buddy up to Putin, it's 100% in character I would have done exactly that."

He also claims Putin isn't bluffing about using nukes, but I think that's just sociopathic projection.

[Flarelaine]

So, he'd have to admit he lied to the American people to avoid jail time.

- - - Updated - - -

As expected: Trump says the war in Ukraine wouldn't have happened if he was still in the WH.

"It's simple," he didn't say but would have if he was telling the truth, "I would have blackmailed Ukraine into surrendering. You heard the phone call, you saw me buddy up to Putin, it's 100% in character I would have done exactly that."

He also claims Putin isn't bluffing about using nukes, but I think that's just sociopathic projection.

I just thought a bit about that. You know, Ukraine would be doomed anyway but after the past half year I'm not sure he could have blackmailed them into surrendering. He could have helped Putin by withholding aid, to be sure, but I don't see Zelensky going down without a fight.

And I'd also bet that even though fatso could have decided to withhold all the intel Biden laid on the table in the weeks before the invasion, intel that made sure everyone knew what's up (and even more intel that was simply shown to Ukraine), somehow that stuff would have ended up on a fancy desk in Kyiv.

[Poopymonster]

Man they really take a dump on this privilege argument, lol. Damn.

It's almost like they were asked ARE YOU INVOKING PRIVILEGE and replied "Maybe, maybe not. Bigly."

[Breccia]

Once again, it's time for Guess the Speaker!

When she mentioned my name, I was obviously quite elated, to be honest, because I’m finally getting the recognition for what I’ve been sitting on the mountain tops yelling for three and a half, four years, which is that the Trump Organization is a criminal enterprise and that I got thrown under the bus by dear old Donald

The answer, of course, is seriously you didn't instantly know it's Cohen?.

In an interview on MSNBC, very likely laughing hysterically, he said the $250 million figure was the minimum asked penalty and would likely triple once the facts were known. Meaning, Trump would have to personally pay $750 million...if the source was correct, of course. Oh, and then step down in leadership of his most famous company.

Others have also pointed out that the NY AG is talking with the IRS. Anything NYState learns, they'll gleefully give directly to Biden. It is very difficult to cheat on only your state and somehow not your federal taxes, considering the majority of those numbers are the same, and while it is possible I don't see anyone doing that on purpose. "Now remember, only lie on the state-only relevant lines, because I only want to be guilty of a crime that can't be pardoned." Oh also Trump forgot to pardon himself for lying to the IRS, so, that'll be fun.

We've all seen the Forbes net worth values for Trump. They dropped during his Residency, his properties are still dropping, CyberTrump 2077 has no realistic prospects but does currently have a stock price above water, so his value is now about $3 billion, a lot of which is property with loans coming due soon. Trump does not have $750 million to spare. I don't know that he has $250 million to spare, either. Maybe Trump running for office will slow down a federal investigation, but I no longer believe it will slow down NYState going for the throat.

And then there's Deutsche Bank, known Russian money launderer who owns more of Trump than Trump does. They've given him more leeway than he's proven he's earned, but is now facing not just the attack on his company and this new attack on him because of his company, but also the federal felonies of having stolen government property plus whatever Jan 6th issues are found (in and out of those folders and Lindell's phone). Giving Trump a loan after his sixth bankruptcy was already a bad risk. Giving him a new loan or extending an old one now isn't just bad business, it's monetary suicide.

How much would you loan a businessman who was unable to run a business?

Now I am not a legal expert, and don't know the answer to this highly nonstandard question. The NY AG is trying to prevent Trump from running a business in New York. Okay, fine. What about a national business? Trump is not listed on the board of CyberTrump 2077, but what if he was? Would such an injunction get in the way, or not in this case because CyberTrump 2077 is based out of a state that isn't New York?

[Kaleredar]

I just thought a bit about that. You know, Ukraine would be doomed anyway but after the past half year I'm not sure he could have blackmailed them into surrendering. He could have helped Putin by withholding aid, to be sure, but I don't see Zelensky going down without a fight.

And I'd also bet that even though fatso could have decided to withhold all the intel Biden laid on the table in the weeks before the invasion, intel that made sure everyone knew what's up (and even more intel that was simply shown to Ukraine), somehow that stuff would have ended up on a fancy desk in Kyiv.

Trump likely would have refused supplying any military aid. Seeing as the US is the single largest supplier of arms to Ukraine by a sizable margin, that probably would have set Ukraine back pretty heavily.

[Breccia]

A new poll says that one in three Americans, and about six in ten Republicans, do not believe that Trump had classified documents at Mar-a-Lago.

Which means they either believe that Trump declassified them but somehow the record of that doesn't exist; that Trump declassified them by thinking hard; or that the FBI is just flat-out lying.

Now, I at least would understand the idea in that first option, even though I don't believe such. "We haven't found the records yet" is a fair thing to say. The other two? Pure fantasy bullshit only believed by cultists.