Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
1. We will see. Not my decision.
2. There’s no such thing as personal presidential records. There’s personal records. There’s presidential records. Trump was keeping presidential records that he had no legal right to retain.
3. It’s just indicating his bias. It doesn’t make him right. Unbiased legal experts come to far different conclusions.
www.washingtontimes.com
2. The idea that these highly classified documents could be personal records is clearly absurd. It’s so absurd that Trump has not claimed any such thing despite having opportunity to do so.2. Read the fucking link...Judge Jackson says there certainly are:
Judge Jackson ruled that the tapes belonged to Mr. Clinton, even though the discussions included a broad range of presidential matters. The court ruled that the National Archives and Records Administration had no power to “seize control of them” because Mr. Clinton had used his authority under the Presidential Records Act to declare the recordings part of his personal records.Presidential records found right in Clinton’s drawer
A 2012 court case denying access to White House audiotapes kept in former President Bill Clinton’s sock drawer after he left office could help the Trump legal team in its battle to retrieve records that the FBI seized from Mar-a-Lago this month.
3. THEN APPEAL IT!!!!
2. The idea that these highly classified documents could be personal records is clearly absurd. It’s so absurd that Trump has not claimed any such thing despite having opportunity to do so.
Personal presidential records is an oxymoron. The decision differentiates personal records and presidential records.
3. Just pointing out that relying on Alan and only Alan is foolish.
Trump hasn’t asserted that any of these are personal. He hasn’t asserted that any of these are declassified. You only have hypotheticals. I’m talking reality.2. You're assuming than none of the classified documents were declassified. I'm not assuming that. For example, I know that Trump declassified all documents relating to FBI Operation Crossfire-Hurricane, Operation Crossfire-Razor, and to the Mueller Investigation. So the claim that ALL classified documents are government secrets is flat WRONG. What if Biden wanted those documents destroyed to protect the Obama administration's illegalities?
So IMHO some classified documents can be personal records, especially since Trump used a memo to declassify them, and they contain no government secrets, just government wrongdoing. (but the classified markings were not removed)
Trump could call certain documents "personal" even though the NA might consider them "presidential". I agree its an oxymoron to combine the terms. I just wanted to distinguish between obvious "personal" and disputed personal/presidential records, like Clinton's tapes. The Judge said they were presidential records, but Clinton's personal property.
3. Stop with Alan. APPEAL IT OR STFU.
1. So you're a communist, my bad.
Your politics still sucks.
2. LIAR. You didn't post ANY real constitutional expert opinions, you just type lies.
3. Alan D was a Harvard LAW Professor, a real "legal constitutional expert", not the unnamed liars in the MSM.
4. The judge's order stands, sucks to whine about it, maybe the DOJ should just appeal it?
5. LOL! You can't keep having bullshit "DC Grand Juries" made up of low-IQ democrats who do whatever they're told.
Trump can appeal all the way up to the USSC if he needs to. That should take a good long time.
Way past when the GOP takes the House back.
6. Donny skates again! LOL!!
Her unprecedented decision to stop the investigation over a small number of documents the DoJ team has already tagged for segregation, while courts have consistently ruled Trump has no legit EP claims as a former prez, EP claims being the purview of the current prez, makes her ruling transparently biased and outside the law.
A Ruling Untethered to the Law
By appointing a special master to review the Mar-a-Lago documents, Judge Aileen Cannon gave Trump the special treatment he asked for—and undermined the values of her profession.www.theatlantic.com
1. You didn't answer the question as to what harm could happen if the "special master" reviews the documents and separates them legally?
2. What specific documents was the warrant supposed to collect? There were zero specific documents described as "evidence" of a crime. The FBI was to collect all documents. If you don't believe me, tell me which documents were excluded from the warrant.
3. Yes it makes Alan right. Protecting our rights from a partisan DOJ/FBI, who already confessed to falsifying evidence in FISA warrant applications, "essential".
1. The special master ruling is completely legal, period.
2. If you think its illegal appeal it.
3. see #2 about "reputational harm".
2. You're assuming than none of the classified documents were declassified. I'm not assuming that. For example, I know that Trump declassified all documents relating to FBI Operation Crossfire-Hurricane, Operation Crossfire-Razor, and to the Mueller Investigation. So the claim that ALL classified documents are government secrets is flat WRONG. What if Biden wanted those documents destroyed to protect the Obama administration's illegalities?
So IMHO some classified documents can be personal records, especially since Trump used a memo to declassify them, and they contain no government secrets, just government wrongdoing. (but the classified markings were not removed)
Trump could call certain documents "personal" even though the NA might consider them "presidential". I agree its an oxymoron to combine the terms. I just wanted to distinguish between obvious "personal" and disputed personal/presidential records, like Clinton's tapes. The Judge said they were presidential records, but Clinton's personal property.
3. Stop with Alan. APPEAL IT OR STFU.
Thanks Q BreathIt doesn't matter what the FBI really found. The raid was just show. It gives the excuse to leak a bunch of made up bullshit. Hundreds of documents were found. Leak hundreds of documents, consisting of 40 years of Trump medical records. They might lead to something else to leak.
The nonsense
Legal but highly unusual in a case like this1. The special master ruling is completely legal, period.
Nonsense2. If you think its illegal appeal it.
Every person subject to an investigation can suffer reputational harm. Nonsensical claim3. see #2 about "reputational harm".
Ad hominems are not valid rebuttals.Another low-IQ post from a low-IQ democrat.
I posted a link from a Harvard Law Professor explaining the LAW, and you prove how stupid you are.
Maybe you should post in the rubber room, or the flame zone? Its more your level.
I already have.Then get on the blower with your state representative and tell them you want a flat tax!
Apparently, for Trumpleton's, all one needs to do to prove a point is add an emoji. It's often used as a substitute for the kind of thoughtful rebuttal they are incapable of making.Like most Liberals you have no sense of humor, but you are unintentionally hilarious at times.
1. Okay, so Alan says a special master is "essential" and Tribe says its "laughably bad". So to break the tie I'm putting up Jonathan Turley, Georgetown Law Professor, who supports the special master.i never said i did. what i SAID was THEY SAID it's a whacked move on the judge's part.
Aileen Cannon Decision to Give Trump Special Master 'Utterly Lawless'—Tribe
BY EWAN PALMER ON 9/6/22 AT 5:10 AM EDT
Laurence Tribe, professor emeritus of constitutional law at Harvard University, tweeted that Cannon's decision was "utterly lawless" and that she has "disgraced her position as an Article III judge."
Tribe's post was in response to a tweet from Andrew Weissmann, a former DOJ prosecutor. It read that Cannon's decision now puts the DOJ in an "untenable position" of appealing a "plainly wrong decision and enduring the unknown delay that entails OR just trying to speed though the Spec Master process."
A number of other legal experts have condemned Cannon for intervening in the criminal investigation while citing disputed reasoning of executive privilege.
Aileen Cannon decision to grant Trump special master "utterly lawless"—Tribe
perhaps they will. nobody said anything about a grand jury, jr.
2. not as long as you might think. tell me, jr - why did the corrupted judge pause the DOJ's investigation until a special master is appointed ( names are coming tomorrow ) whilst allowing the DNI to continue their assessment of just how dangerous donny's theft is? you do know BOTH the DOJ & the DNI fall under the executive branch .... right? so answer how come.
lol ... good luck with that & even more luck with the senate.
donny couldn't bend over to tie any skates; let alone actually get on the ice.
www.bizpacreview.com
There is no comparison between tapes of a conversation with a historian and classified documents.2. Read the fucking link...Judge Jackson says there certainly are:
Judge Jackson ruled that the tapes belonged to Mr. Clinton, even though the discussions included a broad range of presidential matters. The court ruled that the National Archives and Records Administration had no power to “seize control of them” because Mr. Clinton had used his authority under the Presidential Records Act to declare the recordings part of his personal records.Presidential records found right in Clinton’s drawer
A 2012 court case denying access to White House audiotapes kept in former President Bill Clinton’s sock drawer after he left office could help the Trump legal team in its battle to retrieve records that the FBI seized from Mar-a-Lago this month.
3. THEN APPEAL IT!!!!
the receipt detailing what was found is the evidence. along with pics of the evidence that donny was not suppose be in possession of. & surveillance footage.
why did team trump lie & say that's all there was & signed off on that declaration when it was a lie?
why did donny first say it was a hoax?
then the feds planted it?
then everything that was seized belonged to him?
then it was all declassified?
& the latest was along the lines of how he thought biden was gonna destroy it?
LOL!!!! can you answer any of that?
www.cbsnews.com
I agree. You have proof he did have any of those? Leaks by "people that know" don't count.he is not allowed BY LAW to be in any possession of TS/SCI intel relating to anything of the nuclear nature; let alone 'declassify'. it simply cannot be done.
I think you'll find both location of search and items to be seized in the warrant are specific.But they searched everywhere.....and the warrant wasn't specific to what could be taken....only saying that anything and everything Trump had in his possession...including his medical records, tax returns, and passports....none of which they had the right to take.
It’s not even binding precedent.There is no comparison between tapes of a conversation with a historian and classified documents.
The 10-year-old court ruling, issued by U.S. District Court Judge Amy Berman Jackson, rejected arguments by a conservative watchdog group that sought access to dozens of tapes recorded by Mr. Clinton and historian Taylor Branch during his administration.
Don't be such a transparently desperate clown.
