Trump Legal Troubles: White Power Nap

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Trump Legal Troubles: White Power Nap

Deteriorata: Feb 6, 2005

William Bear posted:

This?

https://twitter.com/lawfareblog/status/1546930106429480960?t=X6XhslLrzDmOy7vbncQHLg&s=19

"We're going to attack Congress and burn it down and kill a bunch of people, but don't tell anyone because we don't want to get in trouble with the National Park Service."

# ¿ Jul 12, 2022 22:11

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 19, 2024 00:20

Deteriorata: Feb 6, 2005

Edward Mass posted:

They have to organize and edit all the new information they�re getting.

Congress is also in recess in August.

# ¿ Jul 22, 2022 01:15

Deteriorata: Feb 6, 2005

Arsenic Lupin posted:

It was made explicit. Multiple bits of footage of rioters saying "He told us to go home".

Also that he only told them to go home when it was clear the coup attempt had failed. He wanted it to keep going as long as there was a chance they might actually kill Mike Pence and a bunch of Congress people.

# ¿ Jul 22, 2022 15:35

Deteriorata: Feb 6, 2005

Morroque posted:

Isn't Judicial Watch a front organization for Larry Klayman? That would be their interest in this? They've acted as a conservation culture war front organization in the past.

Their obvious goal would be to ridicule it and make it look trivial and politically motivated, regardless of reality.

# ¿ Aug 10, 2022 20:50

Deteriorata: Feb 6, 2005

Main Paineframe posted:

Well, in this case, the far right has been claiming that this was a frame-up by the FBI making up reasons to politically persecute Trump. They've been pointing to the secrecy shrouding the raid as evidence that it's not all on the up-and-up, and some of them have insisted that the DoJ must make the warrant public if they don't have anything to hide.

Of course, Trump has a copy of the warrant and could have made it public at any time. But he's refused, saying that it's up to the DoJ to decide to be transparent. Which isn't surprising, because the ambiguity is good for Trump, who most likely doesn't really want the media getting their hands on a detailed report laying out exactly why the FBI thought they had to raid him.

So the DoJ is calling his bluff here. Either Trump lets the documents go public and they make very clear the FBI has a case against him, or he opposes it and can no longer accuse the DoJ of being the ones hiding info and covering things up. At least in theory.

But Barack Obama got to keep 30 million documents for his library, so this is all just a setup to pick on Trump.

yes, this is the actual argument Fox and Trump are now spouting

# ¿ Aug 12, 2022 00:07

Deteriorata: Feb 6, 2005

HonorableTB posted:

How do presidential libraries work? Can I just walk into Obama's library in Chicago and start reading documents or is there a special process I would have to follow?

There's public areas and less public research areas. You can just wander in and read a bunch of stuff. More esoteric requests generally need an appointment as the librarians may have to dig it out of storage somewhere. There may be some stuff restricted to people with proper credentials, but I don't know about that.

The point of it is to be a single source for all documents related to the president, so it's all available one way or another.

# ¿ Aug 12, 2022 17:24

Deteriorata: Feb 6, 2005

Re: Document classification status

NYT Live Feed

quote:

The search warrant for Trump�s residence cited three criminal laws, all from Title 18 of the United States Code. Section 793, better known as the Espionage Act, which covers the unlawful retention of defense-related information that could harm the United States or aid a foreign adversary; Section 1519, which covers destroying or concealing documents to obstruct government investigations or administrative proceedings; and Section 2071, which covers the unlawful removal of government records. Notably, none of those laws turn on whether information was deemed to be unclassified.

# ¿ Aug 12, 2022 20:47

Deteriorata: Feb 6, 2005

Murgos posted:

Trumps saying the documents were just automatically declassified when he took them (except the ones that were planted I guess?). There may be some weird little indeterminate time period where he had them legally but IMO if he didn�t notify the controlling agency that the documents were declassified while he had the authority to do so then the moment Biden took office those documents reverted back to the classification status designated by the controlling agency.

Stuff that�s not classified becomes classified all the time as determined by the OCA who is the president and his designees. So, even if Trump had officially declassified some of the documents they could still have become classified again since then.

And obviously Trump couldn�t unilaterally declassify some documents anyway.

Classification status is irrelevant to the Espionage Act, anyway. It was enacted 40 years before classification started, so it has its own definitions that can't be changed by executive action.

# ¿ Aug 13, 2022 19:52

Deteriorata: Feb 6, 2005

cr0y posted:

I don't understand what this means? Like I know we don't know details but can you give an example of what it MIGHT be? I'm confused

According to the NYT,

quote:

The Justice Department also subpoenaed surveillance footage from Mar-a-Lago, including views from outside the storage room. According to a person briefed on the matter, the footage prompted concern among investigators about the handling of the material. It is not clear what time period that footage was from.

So the DoJ saw something they didn't like on the tapes, which lit a fire under them to get the stuff out ASAP.

# ¿ Aug 13, 2022 20:43

Deteriorata: Feb 6, 2005

Red posted:

https://twitter.com/Ring_Sheryl/status/1557923240877690883

Are we that broken?

This is completely apropos nothing, it's just a "Dems bad :hurr:

"

It's totally irrelevant to anything currently happening.

# ¿ Aug 13, 2022 21:16

Deteriorata: Feb 6, 2005

Charlz Guybon posted:

Link to that story? I missed it.

The CIA has an annual ceremony in May where they acknowledge agents killed in the line of duty. This year they added two stars to the memorial, without releasing any names or details of when or where they died.

There is no evident link to Mar-A-Lago.

# ¿ Aug 14, 2022 04:44

Deteriorata: Feb 6, 2005

Uglycat posted:

I'm not asking how the courts would handle a legal argument that he remains president;
I'm asking what prosecutors might do with an active campaign outside of court where he openly claims to still be president, coupled with a social media campaign designed to reinforce and exploit the belief among the qanon-j6-chud-maga camp that donny is still commander in chief.

Nothing? Unless he's inciting violence, just being a crackpot is not illegal.

# ¿ Aug 16, 2022 21:57

Deteriorata: Feb 6, 2005

Murgos posted:

Eh, there�s armed people assaulting FBI offices.

Yeah, but unless you have proof that Trump is telling them to do it, there's nothing to prosecute (at least with regards to Trump). Obviously, whoever actually is organizing and inciting them is liable.

# ¿ Aug 16, 2022 22:07

Deteriorata: Feb 6, 2005

It's been obvious she was going to lose for months. They've already made and executed whatever plans they had for that.

# ¿ Aug 17, 2022 03:22

Deteriorata: Feb 6, 2005

Cimber posted:

Ok, so then you ask them "when exactly did Trump declasify those documents that the FBI took from him two weeks ago, can I see them, and did he follow the process to declassify them? Because no one else in the government seemed to know they were declassified."

Classification is irrelevant to the Espionage Act anyway. It doesn't matter if he declassified them.

# ¿ Aug 21, 2022 22:51

Deteriorata: Feb 6, 2005

PhantomOfTheCopier posted:

Bleh. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2022/08/21/lindsey-graham-georgia-subpoena-blocked-appeal/7859963001/

Fine upstanding public servant.

My take on was that the original judge just said, "Lol, GTFO" and the appeals judge said, "However vacuous his arguments, you have to address them and explain why they don't apply. Do that and we can proceed."

# ¿ Aug 22, 2022 01:36

Deteriorata: Feb 6, 2005

The Question IRL posted:

Does Trump still get to be called President in official documents?

Like I know in his head he is still President and probably tells his goons to refer to him as such. But can his legal briefings really give him a title he doesn�t currently have?

Yes, that is standard protocol. People get called by the highest office they have held in the past. Trump will be "Mr. President" for good.

# ¿ Aug 23, 2022 00:09

Deteriorata: Feb 6, 2005

Fuschia tude posted:

You mean besides the article two posts up detailing how the US wanted the materials back from Trump because they put spies at risk?

There is nothing in the article that suggests someone leaked a bunch of names and now they're all dying. There is no apparent connection to Trump's documents.

# ¿ Aug 27, 2022 17:12

Deteriorata: Feb 6, 2005

Xiahou Dun posted:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burdick_v._United_States

quote:

Although the Supreme Court's opinion stated that a pardon carries "an imputation of guilt and acceptance of a confession of it,"[1] this was part of the Court's dictum for the case.[2] Whether the acceptance of a pardon constitutes an admission of guilt by the recipient is not clear and has never been a question presented for argument or decision.

# ¿ Aug 28, 2022 04:15

Deteriorata: Feb 6, 2005

Tibalt posted:

I wonder if Trump is going to dig his heels in on the executive privilege argument, considering the DOJ seems to be dismissing it completely without acknowledgment. Which, yeah, they probably decided that executive privilege doesn't exist for a former president, but will Trump accept that?

So what if he does? The judge just says, "lol, try again." He can make any argument he likes. He's dealing with laws now, and his opinion is irrelevant.

It's not like they don't have tools to deal with him.

# ¿ Aug 29, 2022 17:44

Deteriorata: Feb 6, 2005

The Question IRL posted:

So where do the right wing Christians draw the line between Hooker and Sex Worker? Is it less immoral if the acts points to a woman who has a stage name and a long career in the porn industry?
Or do some politicians get forgiven because they are an imperfect vessel doing the Lords work? (AKA if they are bringing about a Christian theocracy doctrine, they are allowed break all manner of Christian ethics.)

Like I know the answer to these questions. I am just trying to highlight how if you think about the Hunter Biden Laptop situation for any great length of time you realize it's a nothing story, but it's latched onto by Conservatives who want it to be a rallying cry.

The main point of it is to devalue the general idea of a presidential scandal and excuse the behavior of Trump and other Republicans by pretending that it's all politically driven nonsense.

# ¿ Aug 31, 2022 00:04

Deteriorata: Feb 6, 2005

slurm posted:

DOJ won't touch him once he declares an intent to run, right? That's the end of investigations etc.

Why? There's no reason they have to. Trump may think they will stop, but the DoJ has made no claims to that effect.

# ¿ Aug 31, 2022 17:15

Deteriorata: Feb 6, 2005

mdemone posted:

Jesus loving Christ.

Over 10,000 docs/photos without classified markings, dozens of empty Classified folders, dozens of actual TS/SCI docs.

Holy loving poo poo.

I assume some or most of the folders go with the documents that were found loose. I doubt they'll tell us about which folders had no matching docs or vice versa.

# ¿ Sep 2, 2022 16:25

Deteriorata: Feb 6, 2005

BiggerBoat posted:

The further along we get with this and the more I learn about it, it's becoming harder and harder for me to convince myself of anything other than that Trump straight up grabbed all those documents to sell them to the highest bidder. I've looked at it from the carelessness and narcissist angles and considered that as a possibility but the more I think about it and consider everything I know about Trump, this is some straight up Art of the Deal poo poo and he was going to sell out the United States because someone somewhere would pay for the things he stole. Why else would he bother? He never cared much about the demands and responsibilities of the office when he served so what's so important in those boxes?

In his mind, Trump IS the United States anyway and in many ways he's actually right.

He's practically the living embodiment of what we've become and a rather perfect totem of what we stand for, value and strive to be in all its obese, orange, ugly, greedy glory. Some horrible golem that symbolizes the final manifestation of selling out America's promise and the perfect symbol of a country built on slavery that worships Kardashians. Same with Reagan to some extent as long as I'm thinking about it. One could say similar things about Obama I suppose, in terms of symbolism anyway, who represents a different element of the possibilities of the American Dream and also Clinton, who stands for the sleazier third rail centrism of whatever passes for leftism in this country anymore but Trump has that greasy, shallow, superficial used car salesman vibe going on - along with the TV/celebrity worship that's just so god damned perfectly ugly in a world where someone like Nixon almost seems trite, the lessons of Vietnam and Iraq are long forgotten and no one cares to remember any more how god awful W was.

Hunter Thompson once asked around 2000 I think it was "God drat. How low does a person have to sink to become president in this loving country?" and we certainly have our answer it seems.

...

I honestly think Trump's plan was to sell those loving secrets. I really do. And for that matter, he may already have. He thought they were worth money, period.

My money's on extortion - "If you try to prosecute me for all the poo poo I did, I'll release all this secret stuff."

# ¿ Sep 3, 2022 22:28

Deteriorata: Feb 6, 2005

Gort posted:

A mandatory retirement age would be great, though. It's already in place for many jobs, just not the supposedly most important ones in the land.

That's what elections are for. If people aren't happy with the job they're doing, they get voted out.

"Voters don't know what's good for them" has a rather undemocratic vibe to it.

# ¿ Sep 5, 2022 23:35

Deteriorata: Feb 6, 2005

StumblyWumbly posted:

I mostly agree with what you're saying but the issue is that old politicians tend to wield a lot of power, especially inside the party. So any Republican who could have credibly challenged Strom Thurmond would have found an easier path to office doing pretty much anything else, and no Democrat would win in SC.

Maybe the best option would be a public pressure campaign with people publicly saying "If you haven't done what you want by 65, you aren't able to and you won't get my vote." Definitely going to be popular because parties love

Yeah, measures designed to limit the power of incumbency would sit better with me than ones designed to limit the choices of voters

# ¿ Sep 6, 2022 00:17

Deteriorata: Feb 6, 2005

Simplex posted:

Aileen Cannon has made her decision; now let her enforce it

We're supposed to be fighting authoritarianism, not encouraging it.

# ¿ Sep 7, 2022 15:49

Deteriorata: Feb 6, 2005

Justice Department to appeal judge's ruling on special master in Trump search

quote:

The Justice Department will appeal a judge's ruling for a special master to look at the documents seized during the search of former President Donald Trump's Mar-a-Lago home, according to a notification filed Thursday.

The Justice Department will file their appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, the filing said.

The Justice Department also asked for a partial stay of the judge's ruling while the appeal is pending, saying "the government and the public are irreparably injured when a criminal investigation of matters involving risks to national security is enjoined."

U.S. District Court Judge Aileen Cannon, a 41-year-old Trump appointee who was confirmed to the Southern District of Florida at the tail-end of the Trump administration, granted Trump's request for a special master on Monday. Her ruling was widely panned by the legal community, especially given her unprecedented decision to give a special master authority not only over documents protected by attorney-client privilege but over Trump's purported claims of executive privilege.

"The classification markings establish on the face of the documents that they are government records, not Plaintiff�s personal records," the government wrote Thursday. "The government�s review of those records does not raise any plausible attorney-client privilege claims because such classified records do not contain communications between Plaintiff and his private attorneys. And for several reasons, no potential assertion of executive privilege could justify restricting the Executive Branch�s review and use of the classified records at issue here."

When the FBI executed a search warrant at Mar-a-Lago one month ago, the Justice Department says it found more than 11,000 pages of government documents that � under the Presidential Records Act � belonged in the custody of the National Archives. They also found hundreds of pages on documents with classified markings, despite the fact that a Trump lawyer attested that the former president no longer possessed classified records after turning over 38 classified documents in June in response to a grand jury subpoena. Earlier in the year, Trump turned over boxes of documents to the National Archives that contained more than 700 pages of classified records.

The government argued that there was evidence that the Trump team "concealed and removed" additional classified documents that had been stored at Mar-a-Lago before the FBI's August search took place.

A federal magistrate judge found probable cause that evidence of crimes would be found at Trump's Mar-a-Lago estate and signed off on the FBI's warrant to search the property. In fact, the FBI found more than 100 classified records that Trump was not supposed to have, DOJ said in a court filing last week, along with the more than 11,000 government documents that properly belonged in the National Archives.

# ¿ Sep 8, 2022 21:28

Deteriorata: Feb 6, 2005

StumblyWumbly posted:

Is it true that despite Trump saying "I declassified these" that has not been brought up in a legal filing (because it is an obviously false claim)?

It's an irrelevant claim. The Espionage Act was enacted before classification existed, so it has its own definitions of what's covered. Classification status does not enter into it.

# ¿ Sep 9, 2022 03:27

Deteriorata: Feb 6, 2005

BigBallChunkyTime posted:

Are there still supposed to be hearings this month?

I've heard the 28th suggested as a date. I don't think they're sure yet.

# ¿ Sep 9, 2022 17:34

Deteriorata: Feb 6, 2005

Charliegrs posted:

Why would someone know a random plane landing in DC would have Trump in it?

There are apps devoted to tracking celebrities. Bots track flights and the registered owners of them. There's a whole industry out there dedicated to tracking the movements of famous people.

# ¿ Sep 12, 2022 05:04

Deteriorata: Feb 6, 2005

The hits just keep coming:

My Pillow CEO, Trump ally faces probe for plot to target 2020 election computers

quote:

Mike Lindell, the My Pillow Inc chief executive and ally to former President Donald Trump, is under U.S. federal investigation for identity theft and for conspiring to damage a protected computer connected to a suspected voting equipment security breach in Colorado.

The new details about the focus of the investigation were confirmed on Wednesday after Lindell's attorneys uploaded a copy of a search and seizure warrant approved by U.S. Magistrate Judge Tony Leung for Minnesota federal court on Sept. 7.

Leung approved the warrant based on probable cause that Lindell and other possible co-conspirators may have violated federal laws prohibiting identity fraud, conspiracy to defraud the United States and causing intentional damage a protected computer.

Lindell's attorneys uploaded the warrant as part of their lawsuit against the Justice Department to demand the return of Lindell's cell phone, which FBI agents seized on Sept. 13 while he was ordering fast food at a drive-through window. read more

Lindell is the latest person to be swept into federal criminal investigations surrounding Trump and his allies over their failed efforts to overturn the 2020 election results based on false claims of voter fraud.

INVESTIGATIONS INTO ELECTION CLAIMS

The FBI in August 2021 confirmed it had opened a criminal investigation into a suspected security breach of voting equipment in the western Colorado county of Mesa.

The investigation came on the heels of a parallel state investigation, after election-equipment passwords were discovered on a right-wing internet blog.

The equipment at issue in the election security breach investigation were furnished by Dominion Voting Systems, which has sued Trump allies and conservative television networks over baseless claims the company's products were used to rig the election against Trump.

The suspected breach led Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold to decertify the county's 41 devices, and she accused Mesa County Clerk and Recorder Tina Peters, a Republican and Trump supporter, of assisting with the breach.

Peters, her deputy Belinda Knisley and former elections manager Sandra Brown were indicted on state criminal charges this year in connection with the election security breach.

Knisley has since plead guilty and will testify against Peters, who has maintained she is not guilty of the charges.

Peters, Knisley and Brown are all named as subjects in the Justice Department's criminal investigation, according to the warrant, along with several others.

The warrant indicates the FBI is looking for "all records and information related to damage to any Dominion computerized voting system" and other related data.

# ¿ Sep 22, 2022 05:18

Deteriorata: Feb 6, 2005

Judge Schnoopy posted:

Does "pay your own court fees" really means the vendor bills Trump directly?? That seems insane, why wouldn't the court pay for the service and include that in Trump's penalties and fees when the case is over?

Trump is suing for the right to have a SM, which he is paying for himself. The SM wants some help on the classified documents, which Trump would also have to pay for since it's part of the SM operation.

# ¿ Sep 28, 2022 00:39

Deteriorata: Feb 6, 2005

PhantomOfTheCopier posted:

DOJ, "the petition should be denied". https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22A283/242851/20221011154717435_22A283%20USA%20stay%20opp.pdf

The summary is only the first few pages. Everything after that is a review of facts.

Ultimately, T claims irreparable harm but does not indicate what that harm is, district courts have no power over federal investigations and issues are resolved when charges are filed, the petition doesn't offer any explanations against the reasoning of the appeals court, and doesn't show that the appeals court erred. Plus several reasons why the petition is confused about what the appeals court can do (ie rule on the special master).

Impressive that they write content instead of just saying, "Applicant whines loudly but offers no substantive arguments".

# ¿ Oct 11, 2022 23:19

Deteriorata: Feb 6, 2005

Quorum posted:

Perhaps some sort of system in which prosecutions and trials can only take a maximum of three days? Just to spitball.

That would be a huge boon to conmen and white-collar criminals whose crimes are complicated and take a long time to present and clarify to a jury. People like Donald Trump.

# ¿ Oct 13, 2022 02:29

Deteriorata: Feb 6, 2005

Charliegrs posted:

Trump is definitely not going to comply with the subpoena and this will get dragged out probably up to the supreme court where it will be squashed.

Bannon's wasn't quashed. "Trump is special" isn't much of a defense.

# ¿ Oct 13, 2022 19:46

Deteriorata: Feb 6, 2005

Class3KillStorm posted:

So, they're gonna do one more of these, but dragging Trump in to answer questions himself... why? What could they possibly gain by that? Are they going to do it behind closed doors/off camera, so he can't dogwhistle and grandstand to his loyal followers, especially right before the midterms?

Facing your accusers in court is a fundamental right*. Going on for months on all this without giving Trump a chance to answer the charges being made is an injustice.

Trump won't see it that way, but giving him the opportunity matters.

*Yes, I know it's not a legal court, but it's a court-like proceeding so it's in the same ballpark.

# ¿ Oct 13, 2022 20:51

Deteriorata: Feb 6, 2005

Fart Amplifier posted:

It's so infuriating. Every 2 years is an election year. Just investigate crimes when they happen!

Two months out of every 24 isn't that much of a burden.

# ¿ Oct 20, 2022 02:24

Deteriorata: Feb 6, 2005

Bannon sentenced to four months prison for contempt of Congress in Jan. 6 probe

quote:

Stephen K. Bannon, a right-wing podcaster and longtime adviser to former president Donald Trump, was sentenced Friday to four months in prison and fined $6,500 for refusing to cooperate with a Congressional investigation into the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol.

Bannon is set to become the first person incarcerated for defying a congressional subpoena in more than half a century under a statute that is rarely prosecuted. The judge said he would stay imposition of the penalty pending Bannon�s expected appeal.

Bannon�s case is likely not to be the final clash involving the work of the House select committee investigating the 2021 Capitol riot and preceding events, as lawmakers voted last week to issue a subpoena for testimony and documents from Trump himself.

�Flaunting Congressional subpoenas betrays a lack of respect for the legislative branch, which exercises the will of the people of the United States,� U.S. District Judge Carl J. Nichols said. Bannon �has expressed no remorse� and �has not taken responsibility for his refusal to comply with his subpoena.�

Bannon was convicted at trial in July on two counts of contempt of Congress for refusing to respond to requests for testimony or documents to the committee. Both misdemeanors are punishable by up to one year in jail. But Bannon has said he plans to appeal his conviction because Nichols ruled that Bannon could not argue at trial that he relied on his lawyer�s advice or believed his cooperation was barred by Trump�s claim of executive privilege.

Prosecutors asked for six months in jail and the maximum $200,000 fine, saying in a court filing that Bannon showed �a total disregard for government processes and the law� in ignoring the congressional subpoena while smearing the House investigation and the justice system with �rhetoric that risks inspiring violence.� Bannon asked for probation, saying that a mandatory-minimum jail sentence is unlawful because his intent was not criminal or �willful,� and that if one is imposed he should remain free pending appeal.

At his sentencing Friday, Bannon declined to speak in his own defense, telling the judge, �My lawyers have spoken for me, your honor.�

The committee had wanted to ask Bannon about his role in efforts to pressure Vice President Mike Pence and Republican lawmakers into refusing to affirm the 2020 election results, culminating in the mob assault on the Capitol. Lawmakers in their subpoena noted that Bannon was involved in Trump supporters� strategy meetings the day before the riot; predicted �all hell is going to break loose tomorrow�; and, according to the book �Peril,� by Washington Post writers Bob Woodward and Robert Costa, Bannon told Trump a few days earlier that they were �going to bury Biden on January 6th.�

There's the first one, anyway.

# ¿ Oct 21, 2022 16:27

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 19, 2024 00:20

Deteriorata: Feb 6, 2005

Automatic Slim posted:

Is Bannon going to serve the whole four months get out in two for good behavior?

Bannon would be personally insulted if he got credited with good behavior.

# ¿ Oct 21, 2022 20:28

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Trump Legal Troubles: White Power Nap

«‹›8 »