Mar-a-Lago raided
-
wrote on 24 Aug 2022, 11:48 last edited by
-
wrote on 24 Aug 2022, 12:42 last edited by
You weren't a happy baby?
-
wrote on 24 Aug 2022, 14:15 last edited by
-
wrote on 24 Aug 2022, 14:16 last edited by
Nice ears on the hat.
-
@Axtremus said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
Lots of criticism on the supposed unprofessionalism of Trump’s court filing alleging violation of his 4th Amendment rights.
But this one thing piqued my interest, concerning Trump’s demand to have a “special master” to sift through the seized material:
Weissmann, the former federal prosecutor, said Trump's filing has a "fatal flaw" because it doesn't reckon with the fact that the documents legally belong to the National Archives, not the president.
"Nothing needs to be sifted because none of the documents are actually the former president's. These all belong, whether classified or not classified, to the national archives," …
Weissman is a Nazi. A Jewish Nazi, the worst kind.
wrote on 25 Aug 2022, 01:08 last edited by RenaudaWeissman is a Nazi. A Jewish Nazi, the worst kind..
Odd juxtaposition. I assume though it wasn’t intentional but rather, just spilled out all over the forum.
In any case, you can be comforted in knowing that Mr Putin has almost identical sentiments about Mr. Zelenskyi.
You are indeed in good company
-
Weissman is a Nazi. A Jewish Nazi, the worst kind..
Odd juxtaposition. I assume though it wasn’t intentional but rather, just spilled out all over the forum.
In any case, you can be comforted in knowing that Mr Putin has almost identical sentiments about Mr. Zelenskyi.
You are indeed in good company
wrote on 25 Aug 2022, 01:11 last edited by@Renauda said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
Odd juxtaposition. I assume it wasn’t intentional but rather, just spilled out.
In any case, you can no comforted in knowing that Mr Putin has almost identical sentiments about Mr. Zelenskyi.
You are indeed in good company
Weissman?
Very intentional. Has all the worst attributes of a prosecutor.
-
@Renauda said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
Odd juxtaposition. I assume it wasn’t intentional but rather, just spilled out.
In any case, you can no comforted in knowing that Mr Putin has almost identical sentiments about Mr. Zelenskyi.
You are indeed in good company
Weissman?
Very intentional. Has all the worst attributes of a prosecutor.
wrote on 25 Aug 2022, 01:18 last edited by RenaudaAm sure it was indeed intentional. I would have thought though bureaucrat and fanatic to be more appropriate. Reynard Heydrich being the prime example. Maybe Adolf Eichmann. Looking for a prosecutor? May I offer, Andrei Vyshinsky. Banality at its finest or, should I say, at its most despicable?
But to each their own I suppose although as I say, you are in good company out there.
-
Am sure it was indeed intentional. I would have thought though bureaucrat and fanatic to be more appropriate. Reynard Heydrich being the prime example. Maybe Adolf Eichmann. Looking for a prosecutor? May I offer, Andrei Vyshinsky. Banality at its finest or, should I say, at its most despicable?
But to each their own I suppose although as I say, you are in good company out there.
wrote on 25 Aug 2022, 11:14 last edited by Doctor Phibes@Renauda said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
Am sure it was indeed intentional. I would have thought though bureaucrat and fanatic to be more appropriate. Reynard Heydrich being the prime example. Maybe Adolf Eichmann. Looking for a prosecutor? May I offer, Andrei Vyshinsky. Banality at its finest or, should I say, at its most despicable?
But to each their own I suppose although as I say, you are in good company out there.
Mr. Trump's former lawyer, Roy Cohn, was quite a stand-out as a prosecutor, I seem to think...
-
wrote on 25 Aug 2022, 22:19 last edited by George K
-
wrote on 25 Aug 2022, 22:22 last edited by
Epstein's lawyer granted half of a loaf...
-
wrote on 25 Aug 2022, 23:43 last edited by jon-nyc
Ken White’s new podcast covers the latest trump motion (requesting a ‘Special Master’) as well as this.
Worth a listen, they put this episode in front of the paywall. Podcast is called ‘Serious Trouble’.
-
wrote on 28 Aug 2022, 17:01 last edited by
Judge says she has ‘preliminary intent’ to appoint special master
A federal judge scheduled a hearing for Thursday to consider former President Donald Trump’s request for a “special master” to oversee the FBI’s review of evidence seized at Mar-a-Lago.
In doing so, the court put the parties on notice that she had a “preliminary intent” to appoint the special master, a third-party attorney who would filter out privileged material seized in the search.
Trump re-ups request for 'special master' but glosses over some questions from the judge
Ahead of the hearing, the government faces a Tuesday deadline to respond to Trump’s request in writing, according to the scheduling order from the court.
US District Judge Aileen Cannon, who was nominated to the bench by Trump in 2020, is asking the Department of Justice to file a public response, and additionally file under seal records going into greater detail about what was seized from the search as well as a notice laying out the status of the review of the seized materials, including the process of filtering out privileged information.
Trump’s reply to DOJ’s response is due Wednesday.
The hearing will be at 1 p.m. ET Thursday at the courthouse in West Palm Beach.
Cannon said at the end of the order that it should not be construed as her final decision on the matter.
-
wrote on 28 Aug 2022, 17:16 last edited by
I figure that will happen.
-
wrote on 28 Aug 2022, 17:24 last edited by jon-nyc
Funny the judge asked the Trump team to rewrite their submission. Commentators have said it didn’t really contain much legal content, and it read more like an op-ed. The general conclusion was this was just PR, especially since they waited 10 days to file it, long enough for investigators to have combed through everything already.
-
wrote on 28 Aug 2022, 18:35 last edited by
Maybe it goes along with how long Garland sat on doing the raid.
-
Funny the judge asked the Trump team to rewrite their submission. Commentators have said it didn’t really contain much legal content, and it read more like an op-ed. The general conclusion was this was just PR, especially since they waited 10 days to file it, long enough for investigators to have combed through everything already.
wrote on 28 Aug 2022, 19:23 last edited by@jon-nyc said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
, long enough for investigators to have combed through everything already.
True. But if the special master says this is privileged information, it's not admissible to a court. Perhaps not to a grand jury, either.
(aside, does a grand jury get to see evidence, or just the state's case?)
-
wrote on 28 Aug 2022, 20:29 last edited by
I’m not sure what they do if the evidence is top secret.
-
wrote on 28 Aug 2022, 23:31 last edited by
@jon-nyc said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
I’m not sure what they do if the evidence is top secret.
Surely it’s all declassified?
-
@jon-nyc said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
I’m not sure what they do if the evidence is top secret.
Surely it’s all declassified?
wrote on 29 Aug 2022, 00:03 last edited by@Doctor-Phibes said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
@jon-nyc said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
I’m not sure what they do if the evidence is top secret.
Surely it’s all declassified?
Apparently so, either by having it in his possession or by, Lord knows, magic. Let’s let the courts decide and set a precedent. After all, that how Common Law works.
-
@jon-nyc said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
I’m not sure what they do if the evidence is top secret.
Surely it’s all declassified?
wrote on 29 Aug 2022, 00:16 last edited by@Doctor-Phibes said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
Surely it’s all declassified?
Either that or it was wedding plans and recipes.
