Mega-Thread: Trump Focused Discussion

[Breccia]

I mean, even if trump didn’t knowingly lie… that would have to mean he didn’t know how the documents were stored.

And if he didn’t know how they were stored, isn’t that proof that he mishandled top secret documents?

Yes.

It could be argued that it would be worse for Trump, that he willingly took documents with him...and then forgot where they were. Because that would imply there were options, and one of the options would be "not in a secure place" or even "not in Mar-a-Lago" or even "not in my possession anymore".

The only reason the deed to my house and my will wouldn't be in my safe, is if someone snuck in and stole them. But I know they're not in my office, my bathroom, or posted on my Twitter account. If I still have them, they're only in the one place. If Trump stole documents, but at least had them safe and secure where nobody could see them, that'd narrow down the bad things that happen when WH records get loose. If Trump stole documents, but has no idea where they are, that's mishandling.

And as we've covered, losing them by accident is still a crime.

[Gorsameth]

I mean, even if trump didn’t knowingly lie… that would have to mean he didn’t know how the documents were stored.

And if he didn’t know how they were stored, isn’t that proof that he mishandled top secret documents?

Trump should be screwed. He is tied to this 6 ways from Sunday. My point was that the lawyer who filed an official document saying everything had been returned, when that wasn't true, can make a reasonable case to not having knowingly lied.

[Breccia]

My point was that the lawyer who filed an official document saying everything had been returned, when that wasn't true, can make a reasonable case to not having knowingly lied.

Yes, but hopefully even that won't save Trump.

Articles are left and right, har har FOX News joke, but seriously this one's from NPR.

Another Trump ally, described in the court papers as the custodian of the records, signed a letter to authorities certifying that Trump had conducted a "diligent search" for other materials sought by the National Archives and prosecutors. The letter said "all responsive documents" were included and that Trump had kept "no copy, written notation or reproduction."

Based on the boxes of top secret and even more highly classified papers the FBI extracted during its search Aug. 8, that too, proved false. The Justice Department said during its June visit, Trump's representatives barred them from looking through boxes in the storage room, giving them no chance to substantiate the claims. By August, they were armed with a court-approved search warrant.

"That the FBI, in a matter of hours, recovered twice as many documents with classification markings as the 'diligent search' that the former President's counsel and other representatives had weeks to perform calls into serious question the representations made in the June 3 certification and casts doubt on the extent of cooperation in this matter," authorities wrote.

So, that custodian's fucked.

But if Trump told people he looked and found nothing, and those people told the cops, then that's obstruction on Trump's part. "Obstruction of justice" is pretty broad, and not just lying to the cops.

Plus, of course, the underlying crime: Trump stole documents and still had them. He doesn't need to perjure himself to be objectively guilty of that crime.

EDIT: And we still don't know what's still missing.

[masterhorus8]

Plus, of course, the underlying crime: Trump stole documents and still had them. He doesn't need to perjure himself to be objectively guilty of that crime.

This is my favorite part of all of this, tbh.

[Skjaldborg]

I know this is so obvious that it's almost trivial, but I think it bears repeating that after everything since 2015...

1) The Mueller Report (and everything leading up to it)
2) Blackmailing Ukraine to pull up dirt on Biden (impeachment #1)
3) Fomenting January 6 (impeachment #2)

*There's just so much nested in - and in addition to - those three points...enough to fuel a 4000-page mega-thread for 7 years...*

What really might end up bringing this guy down is that he brought a piece of paper "home from work" and lied about having it. We might need to redefine "anticlimax" after this.

[beanman12345]

https://twitter.com/hugolowell/statu...fs3QrhRpdMqY2w

Interesting. So when they took Trump's passports it wasn't just standard procedure, it was gathered and marked as relevant evidence, that because the passports and the Documents were in the same drawer, it's evidence Trump himself was reviewing it and he can't just pass the blame to whomever and try the plausible deniability crap.

[Kathandira]

I know this is so obvious that it's almost trivial, but I think it bears repeating that after everything since 2015...

1) The Mueller Report (and everything leading up to it)
2) Blackmailing Ukraine to pull up dirt on Biden (impeachment #1)
3) Fomenting January 6 (impeachment #2)

*there's just so much nested in those three points...enough to fuel a 4000-page mega-thread for 7 years...*

What really might end up bringing this guy down is that he brought a piece of paper "home from work" and lied about having it. We might need to redefine "anticlimax" after this.

If everything isn't tied together, and he is only guilty of mishandling classified documents, he will likely get what most would consider a slap on the wrist.

It would not increase my faith in our justice system.

[Endus]

If everything isn't tied together, and he is only guilty of mishandling classified documents, he will likely get what most would consider a slap on the wrist.

It would not increase my faith in our justice system.

As a counterpoint to uphold your lack of faith; a man was just released and exonerated after spending 36 years in prison for a rape he didn't commit. https://thehill.com/changing-america...er-exonerated/
He was 17 when he was arrested; a minor.
His trial lasted a whole single day.
The police analyst lied about the blood and semen analysis, which confirmed he couldn't be the attacker.
His defense lawyer was too overloaded/incompetent to catch this at trial, given the whole day they had to go over stuff.
The only witness was the victim, and clearly, she got it wrong.

Go on, guess what color Sullivan Walter's skin is.

The American legal system is a joke. A truly awful one that no one finds funny. Anyone expecting justice out of it hasn't been paying attention, and there seems little interest in properly reforming it.

[Breccia]

Interesting. So when they took Trump's passports it wasn't just standard procedure, it was gathered and marked as relevant evidence, that because the passports and the Documents were in the same drawer, it's evidence Trump himself was reviewing it and he can't just pass the blame to whomever and try the plausible deniability crap.

Let's assume this is true.

What else do we know was taken? A framed picture of...a TIME 2019 article about all the Democrats coming to unseat him in 2020. Which, well, they did. I don't know why Trump would keep and frame this, I mean yeah it's worth fifty bucks, but it's a monument to his loserdom.

*ahem*

But.

If the FBI took Trump's passports because they were in the same desk...and also took framed pictures...does that mean Trump framed WH documents and hung them on his wall?

[Kaleredar]

Let's assume this is true.

What else do we know was taken? A framed picture of...a TIME 2019 article about all the Democrats coming to unseat him in 2020. Which, well, they did. I don't know why Trump would keep and frame this, I mean yeah it's worth fifty bucks, but it's a monument to his loserdom.

*ahem*

But.

If the FBI took Trump's passports because they were in the same desk...and also took framed pictures...does that mean Trump framed WH documents and hung them on his wall?

I mean, they could have been pulling things apart to see that no documents were hidden as well.

[solinari6]

What is crazy to me is, as Micheal Cohan tweeted, there's a SUPER high probability that Trump has copies of this stuff and other confidential stuff at his other residences. For National Security reasons, the government should be able to just ransack every home Trump has now. Legally though, I'm guessing they would need probably cause to KNOW that there is something at another residence to get a warrant. But if they can't prove to a judge they know he's got more, Trump gets to just keep it?

[Gorsameth]

What is crazy to me is, as Micheal Cohan tweeted, there's a SUPER high probability that Trump has copies of this stuff and other confidential stuff at his other residences. For National Security reasons, the government should be able to just ransack every home Trump has now. Legally though, I'm guessing they would need probably cause to KNOW that there is something at another residence to get a warrant. But if they can't prove to a judge they know he's got more, Trump gets to just keep it?

If it was an ordinary citizen I have little doubt that every place where you could possibly have stored a possibly copy would have already been completely ransacked, and the mere chance that you could have possibly have made copies is all the 'probable cause' that a judge would need.

[Kaleredar]

What is crazy to me is, as Micheal Cohan tweeted, there's a SUPER high probability that Trump has copies of this stuff and other confidential stuff at his other residences. For National Security reasons, the government should be able to just ransack every home Trump has now. Legally though, I'm guessing they would need probably cause to KNOW that there is something at another residence to get a warrant. But if they can't prove to a judge they know he's got more, Trump gets to just keep it?

I don’t imagine they would need much more than having found copies that were made of the documents they were looking for at mar-a-lago.

[Breccia]

I mean, they could have been pulling things apart to see that no documents were hidden as well.

Maybe, but, based on the passport discussion earlier, if they looked behind a non-classified picture and found nothing classified, there was no reason to take the picture. If, by contrast, Trump had a framed picture of him and Kim getting busy in a DKRP knock-off Burger King bathroom, and that picture itself was on top of a classified document, it could be used as evidence that Trump knew about the document. Those look like wall-hanging frames to me.

Or, if there were documents behind them, concealing them is a crime.

---

I am by no means obligated or honor-bound to discuss dissenting opinions, but sometimes they bring up a point that needs to be addressed. I refer to you this article in the National Review in their attempt to defend Donald Trump.

The Trump legal team’s inexplicable delay in seeking court intervention, in the form of a so-called special master, has had the predictable consequence: Even before the court could rule on the belated request, the Justice Department completed its review of the documents and made unilateral determinations about what was potentially privileged.

The DOJ’s “privilege-review team” has presumably--

"Paywall, and no way am I signing up for that shit."

Uh, okay, the punchline is, basically, that the FBI went through looking for only attorney-client privilege, not Executive Privilege. And they'd only be so aggressive if they didn't care if the search was tossed, because they were never going to file charges anyhow.

"But Biden waived privilege."

The NR says Biden only waived Jan 6th document privilege, not everything Trump ever read.

"Executive Privilege is a specific thing, like classified. You can't just say something and it becomes privileged."

The NR seems to disagree.

"Also, if it's Executive Privilege it still doesn't belong to him. In fact, if it's Executive Privilege, it's WH owned and illegal for him to take it."

Oddly enough the NR never mentions that part.

"Why did you even post this?"

Because the defenses of Trump's supporters are crumbling faster than if Trump was standing on them. There really is nothing left. Even the NR does point out that the FBI only had this ability because Team Trump didn't file anything when they had the chance.

In other news:

1) Sen. Graham has a new defense to why he shouldn't testify: he has absolute immunity.

Senator Graham was duty bound to actually vote as to whether to certify the election, and so he had to run those allegations down — and he therefore called….the one person who would know best: Secretary Raffensperger

-- his lawyer

He...he does know that call was probably recorded, right? And that he's being subpoena'd because, no, he wasn't calling to ask how he could help, he was calling to tell them what to do. As a Senator, and from the wrong state, he can't do that.

Besides, if that was his concern, we should have calls from Graham to other states. Um, ignore the calls to NYState, that's, um, something else.

2) A Trump lawyer, no not that one, filed in court that

The attorney, Alina Habba, told a New York State court that on May 5, she conducted a search of Trump’s private residence and office at Mar-a-Lago that was so “diligent” it included “all desks, drawers, nightstands, dressers, closets, etc.” She was looking for records in response to a subpoena issued by New York Attorney General Letitia James, who is investigating matters related to the Trump Organization.

The same filing also includes an affidavit from Trump himself, indicating that he “authorized Alina Habba to search my private residence and personal office located at The Mar-a-Lago Club in Palm Beach, Florida for any and all documents responsive to the Subpoena.” Habba indicated she conducted similar searches at Trump’s residences and office at his Bedminster estate.

The filing submitted to the New York AG’s office raises key questions in relation to the separate Mar-a-Lago probe, chiefly, whether Habba ended up handling any of the documents that DOJ later discovered at Trump’s club; and, if so, whether she has the clearance to have done so. In her sworn affidavit, Habba said that she searched many of the locations that would later be scrutinized by the FBI during its Aug. 8 search of Mar-a-Lago — and where investigators say they uncovered a significant volume of highly classified government secrets. The documents, those investigators stated, “had colored cover sheets indicating their classification status” making clear their significance.

So...here we have yet another potential issue. One, she might have read, touched, or even taken WH records without permission. Which is why you don't leave them in random-ass desks, for fuck's sake. Two, what did NYState ask for that Trump didn't know which fucking state it was in? Three, did Trump send a different lawyer as a "cleaner" behind Bobb's back, who could then feign ignorance?

"That sounds like a conspiracy theory."

No, it sounds like me considering someone accused of violating the Espionage Act as acting like a spy.

3) Bannon and Giuliani discussed in public the idea of a contingent election, to put Trump in the WH.

"Is that a thing?"

It is, if neither candidates gets to 270 votes. Trump was short, but Biden wasn't. What he's suggesting is impossible and literally treason. But Giuliani's desperate and Bannon's insane, so, they might as well try at this point.

If this sounds familiar, it shouldn't, because it would mean you're following Steve Bannon. But he has brought up the topic before.

This is far from over. This is far from over. And remember, the only date that's hardwired into the Constitution is high-noon on the 20th of January. And the worst-case there, if one of the two individuals that have gotten electoral votes are not selected by that time either through the electoral college or a contingent election which is still a big possibility, YouTube.

It's still a big possibility to have a contingent election. If that's not done, the worst case is that Nancy Pelosi, the Speaker of the House, or if she selected a Speaker of the House on the 5th, she becomes acting president. Until that time that one of the two that got electoral votes are selected by the House of Representatives voting by state delegation. So, we have a long way to go on this thing.

"YouTube?"

He was raging about his channel being politely warned about broadcasting misinformation, for saying Trump won. The above quote is from December 9, 2020. He was kicked off YouTube one month later because he got three strikes of such in 90 (well, fewer) days. It remains down to this day.

I look forward to their filing in federal court the paperwork to have a contingent election. Even judges should have something entertaining to watch.

4) Politico reports that frustrations continue to build in the Party of Trump, because its members have to keep shifting stances every time Trump's lies are Will Smith'd in public.

“Republicans should focus on defeating Democrats, and every Democrat should have the word Biden in front of their name,” said Trump ally and former Republican Speaker Newt Gingrich. “The Republican focus should be to win the election in November. Trump will do a fine job defending himself. He’ll be fine.”

Some top Republicans acknowledge the growing angst and concern, as it’s become clearer that Trump may have been warehousing some of America’s most sensitive secrets in an unsecured basement — and even refused to turn them over when the National Archives and Justice Department tried to recover them. One top Republican fundraiser asked to describe the mood among donors, said, “There is enormous frustration.”

“The question is, is there willingness to express that frustration,” the fundraiser added. “I don’t know the answer to that. But there is real frustration, and with the exception of people who are too stupid to understand the need to be frustrated, it is nearly universal.”

Gee, wonder what he means by that. /SARCASM

“After five years of this,” he said, “I think a lot of these Republican members are sick of it all and just punch back. It’s Pavlovian at this point. They punch back at the media who they think is always unfair to Trump and none of these things are as bad as they’re made out to be in the press. They’re not going to frog march him out of Mar-a-Lago.”

But the current issues facing Trump are also different in critical ways. For starters, he doesn’t have the powers of the presidency anymore. And, more uncharacteristically, he’s so far avoided the spotlight.

In the weeks since the search of Mar-a-Lago, the former president has been off the airwaves, even eschewing appearances on friendly shows. Instead, he’s blasted out self-defenses on his social media site Truth Social and through his Save America super PAC.

The more he speaks for himself, however, the more political headaches he creates for Republicans. On Monday, he bluntly proposed that he be crowned the “rightful winner” of a 2020 election fairly won by Biden, or that a determination be made that the ballot was “irreparably compromised.” He suggested a do-over of the election in the case of the latter.

Trump is expected to address the FBI search at his first public appearance for a Saturday Save America rally in support of endorsed candidates in Scranton, Pa. this coming weekend.

“I think people would expect him to go on Fox, go on radio shows, go on primetime shows, Newsmax, OAN, one on one interviews, and do a media blitz,” said one person close to the Trump operation. “He’s not doing media, but the surrogates are out there, the lawyers are out there, which is smart from a legal standpoint.”

Trump is a slow learner, but he is learning. By not even going on FOX News, which may be turning against him as I continue posting with boundless enthusiasm, he removes the chance someone will ask him a question he has no reasonable answer for. That won't happen at a rally.

5) Trump accidentally quoted a fake Ivanka Trump message on his own social media platform.

Fake Ivanka called the vaccine a hoax. Yes, the one Trump took credit for.

And I end--

"Promise?"

Shut up, you. I end, of course, with the NYTimes.

Trump’s Lawyers May Become Witnesses or Targets in Documents Investigation

Hoo boy, they are not going to like reading that one.

Two lawyers for Trump are likely to become witnesses or targets in the investigation into how he hoarded documents marked as classified at Mar-a-Lago, his Florida estate — and secretly held onto some even after the lawyers claimed all sensitive materials had been returned, legal specialists said.

The lawyers, M. Evan Corcoran and Christina Bobb, handled Mr. Trump’s interactions with the government over a subpoena in May seeking additional material marked as classified. In a court filing late Tuesday, the Justice Department strongly suggested that people in Mr. Trump’s circle concealed documents in defiance of that subpoena, putting a spotlight on the lawyers’ actions.

Quick aside here: this came out before the Habba article I posted earlier. She might also be on the list.

“They are potentially witnesses — if not defendants,” Barbara McQuade, a University of Michigan law professor and former U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Michigan from 2010 to 2017, said of the two lawyers.

The filing did not identify which lawyers for Mr. Trump took the key actions. But The New York Times has reported that after receiving the subpoena, Mr. Corcoran searched through boxes kept in a storage area in Mar-a-Lago’s basement for files with classified markings.

In its filing late Tuesday, the Justice Department pointedly noted that Mr. Trump’s lawyers had not been as cooperative and open as they could have been at the June 3 meeting.

“Critically, however, Trump’s counsel explicitly prohibited government personnel from opening or looking inside any of the boxes that remained in the storage room, giving no opportunity for the government to confirm that no documents with classification markings remained,” the filing said.

The Justice Department’s account clashes with that of Mr. Trump’s legal team. In a complaint filed on Aug. 22 and signed by Mr. Corcoran and two other lawyers, they describe Mr. Trump and his team as providing “complete cooperation.” After Mr. Bratt asked to inspect the storage room, investigators were escorted there and once their inspection was completed, the complaint states, an F.B.I. agent said: “Thank you. You did not need to show us the storage room, but we appreciate it. Now it all makes sense.”

All this has increased scrutiny on whether the lawyers knowingly misled the government in coordination with Mr. Trump as their client, knowingly misled both the government and Mr. Trump, or were themselves left in the dark by Mr. Trump or others and so lacked any criminal intent.

I'm sure enough on this one that I don't need to call in MMO-C's favorite lawyer. Normally, you can't ask someone's lawyer about them. That's privileged information.

*ahem*

Unless they're co-conspirators in a crime. Like obstruction of justice.

So, that custodian's fucked.

I believe Corcoran is that custodian. He dealt with the FBI first and most.

"If they're targets, couldn't they plead the Fifth?"

Let them. We already know what happens when your lawyer pleads the Fifth. Also, while pleading the Fifth isn't admission of a crime, it's begging to be treated as such by a lied-to FBI who already found the evidence of guilt. Charging them both/all with conspiring to obstruct seems fairly obvious to me, but then, I am a vindictive motherfucker. But, again, we know the FBI were lied to. They were told "you got all 38 documents" and then they found hundreds more. Either they lied in parallel, or lied in series. Either way, it's time to up the voltage and see whose resistance is lowest. They get to go ohm. Everyone else fries.

- - - Updated - - -

as Micheal Cohen tweeted

I have been saying this since the FBI raid…I believe #Trump has copies, potentially other documents as well, at other locations including his children’s homes, Weisselberg’s florida home, Bedminster, NJ golf course, Fifth Avenue apartment, etc…

Just so we're all on the same page.

[Gorsameth]

The lawyer who signed off on everything having been turned over saying they searched every drawer is going to come back to haunt them.

You can claim the documents were not in the storage room at the time and Trump lied to you saying he got everything. But if you say you did a very thorough search and then they find this much stuff, apparently all over the place it becomes a lot harder to convince a judge you didn't actually find anything when writing a sworn statement that turned out to be untruthfull.

[cubby]

The only thing that doesn't change with you is accusing me of just repeating talking points that have been given to me, repeated by you in a post this week in fact. If you want to start allowing people their own opinions on politics, stated honestly, this would be a departure for you ... but a welcome one. State it for the record so we're actually talking to each other.

Fine, then answer my question.

Why didn't Trump's DoJ prosecute Hillary if she did something wrong?

- - - Updated - - -

To the best of my knowledge, lying to your lawyer is not a crime. It's not perjury when you're not under oath.

*ahem*

But.

According to this criminal lawyer website I know nothing else about:



This is what I need @cubby for. Is this true? If you lie to your lawyer, and that lawyer puts your lie into an affidavit or other legal form and submits it, does that count as you lying?

Because while this case isn't perjury, it is obstruction. And lying to the cops is obstruction.

Did Trump just do that via his lawyer?

Lying to your lawyer is not perjury, nor a crime. If you sign something that is submitted to the court, i.e. an affidavit, then it is perjury.

This is just getting worse and worse for Trump. He's objectively committed several felonies, plus all the other subjective crimes. DoJ might just indict with the tidal wave of objective evidence they have now.

[Paranoid Android]

Scoop: Federal prosecutors likely to wait until after Nov election to announce any action against Trump, if they determine he broke any laws, sources tell
@cstrohm
. Under DOJ policy, no investigative steps 60 days before election. This year, that's Sept. 10.

Wait is Trump running for House or Senate this mid term? Dog Catcher maybe in a local election. I don't know how if there is enough to prosecute to hold on after an election.

[Breccia]

Wait is Trump running for House or Senate this mid term?

If Trump is arrested, red voters will turn out in force. This might have been taken as a nonpartisan step, but it's actually a win for logic and reason.

[Poopymonster]

Scoop: Federal prosecutors likely to wait until after Nov election to announce any action against Trump, if they determine he broke any laws, sources tell
@cstrohm
. Under DOJ policy, no investigative steps 60 days before election. This year, that's Sept. 10.

Wait is Trump running for House or Senate this mid term? Dog Catcher maybe in a local election. I don't know how if there is enough to prosecute to hold on after an election.

How many people running in an election would get swept up in it would be a good question.

[cubby]

Scoop: Federal prosecutors likely to wait until after Nov election to announce any action against Trump, if they determine he broke any laws, sources tell
@cstrohm
. Under DOJ policy, no investigative steps 60 days before election. This year, that's Sept. 10.

Wait is Trump running for House or Senate this mid term? Dog Catcher maybe in a local election. I don't know how if there is enough to prosecute to hold on after an election.

Actually, this makes a lot of sense. We're in completely new territory here, and we should be cautious. Frankly, waiting to announce until after the Nov elections will probably help the Democrats.

- - - Updated - - -

If Trump is arrested, red voters will turn out in force. This might have been taken as a nonpartisan step, but it's actually a win for logic and reason.

Agreed.

/10