Judge Cannon has blown it.

[Seymour Flops]

A part of any criminal case deals with pretrial motions. Many of those motions have to do with what evidence will be allowed in, what witnesses can testify to what, and experts and their qualifications being screened by the court.

Part of the decision is based on the relevance of the information to the question before the court/jury.

The questions before the court hinge on questions of law and question of fact. Questions of law are decided by the Judge outside the presence of the jury as it is not the juries job to determine questions of law, it is there job to determine questions of fact based on the evidence.



Yes it's fair. First, The PRA of 1978 clearly does not say or even imply what FPOTUS#45 is trying to twist it into saying. That is a question of law for the Judge to decide pretrial. Secondly, 18 USC 793(e) is a criminal statute dealing with willful retention of national defense information and the PRA of 1978 is civil law pertaining to the handling of presidential records by the President.

FPOTUS#45 was not the President when the alleged crime occurred and therefore has no Presidential protections pertaining to national defense information.

His use of the PRA is an attempt at CYA.



Not in the least, if he takes it to the 11th Circuit it will be because Judge Cannon got a "Question of Law" wrong which HAS to be corrected prior to trial for a "fair" trial to occur.

Why?

Because if the Judge gets a question of law wrong, it goes to the jury and if the jury acquits then Double Jeopardy attaches. After the fact the prosecution cannot appeal an error in question of law. However if a Judge gets a questio of law wrong against the defense, goes to the jury, and is convicted - the Defense CAN appeal the verdict.

That is the difference.

WW

I appreciate all of those opinions and they are well-stated as to facts and conclusions. But you need to explain one of your conclusions.

You say that she got a question of law wrong. But you never stated the guiding law or court case which states that a judge must decide what the jury instructions will be prior to the trial beginning or a jury even being seated. That would be the key to the hope that Cannon will be over-ruled and then removed from the case.

That removal seems to be a pipe dream, frankly. We found out recently that no matter how odious a person may be, they will not be disqualified from a Trump case. In fact, it almost seems that the Democrat strategy has been to pick the worst possible people to go after Trump.

If Trump is so guilty, why can't they find any clean prosecutors to take the cases?

 

[Billo_Really]

Most of you on the right probably haven't figured this out, judging from some of your comments which clearly indicate you do not understand the forces that are in play, i.e.,, what the actual dynamics are, (it's way in Smith's favor, FYI) because they right wing echo chamber isn't telling you, but Judge Cannon fucked up on the law, royally. Jack will file a motion in limine, and if she ignores it, he'll have grounds for a petition for writ of mandamus, and he'll either get the 11th circuit to straighten her out on the law (which she has turned on it's head), or get her ass off the case. She's bitten off far more than she can chew.

Let's see if I'm right. We'll know in a day or two. One thing is certain, Jack's not going to let the last 2 page order where she wrote 'unprecedented and unjust', he's not going to let that slide.

This is really an interesting case, particularly because we have an extremely wet behind the ears judge handling a case who is in way way way over her head. But, that's the system, whoever is next on the rotation, regardless of experience matching, is the one assigned, and she got it. Clearly, the system is ripe for reform.

God, I hate that woman! It is more than obvious she is pro-Trump. She needs to be recused.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Smith now has the Judge in the palm of his hand.

 

[Rumpole]

So, what is your objection to Cannon's statement that Smith's request is "unprecedented and unjust?"

I explained this to you. "unprecedented and unjust' reveals that she doesn't understand that the PRA is irrelevant.

Is it precedented? I'm no lawyer, but I've read a lot of true crime books and in every one in which the case was given to a jury, the jury instructions were given after the presentation of evidence. Do you know of cases in which the instructions were deceded by the judge before there was even a jury seated? If not, there are not precedents. So then Smith's request is indeed "unprecedented."

No, her failure to understand that thee PRA is irrelevant in an espionage case is 'unprecedented'. It's rare that a judge gets the law so wrong as she has (the point being she has failed to understand that the Gov has final authority over documents, not the prez), but she's a novice judge, wet behind ears as in in way over her head, so let us not forget that fact.

Is it unjust? I believe it is, but that is an opinion. Smith wants to take away a likely key part of Trump's defense before the trial is even close to starting. How is that fair?

See above.

I know that Democrats would want that. Y'all obviously find this whole "fair trial" aspect of the Trump prosecutions to be distasteful and time-wasting. Sorry! That's how America works. The people operating Biden have been working hard to change America into something else, but they haven't done it yet. Not completely.

Is Smith really going to go to a higher court and complain that Cannon said "something mean" about his argument, at the same time as ruling the way he wanted her to?

No, her failure to follow the law is so egregious that a writ of mandamus might be warranted. It's nothing about 'being mean'. It's not a matter of how "Smith wanted her to" it's a matter of following the law. She can't ignore it.

Wait, what?

Trump is not charged with merely possession of classified documents. That's not a crime, I possessed classified documents many times when I was in the military. He is charged with unauthorized possession of classified documents (which I must remember to remind you, H. Clinton, Pence, and J. Biden were not, and never will be, charged with). If his lawyers can convince the jury - or any number of members of the jury - that the PRA authorized him to possess them, he will be acquitted or there will be a mistrial due to a hung jury.

How many times do Republicans have to be told that the DOJ policy, given the commonality of exec branch staff, VP and prez, and members of the senate, to come across, and into possession of TS docs, though it is against the law to take them, the DOJ does not generally prosecute for mere possession alone, for if they did, too many persons in the halls of congress and the exec branch would be in jail, so no, they don't merely prosecute for possession, there has to be aggravating circumstances. And, there most certainly are with respect to Trump, but not Biden and Pence.

From COPILOT:
The circumstances leading to Donald Trump's indictment, which were not present in the cases involving Joe Biden or Mike Pence, revolve mainly around the alleged willful retention and obstruction related to classified documents. Here's a summary of the key differences:

• Willful Retention and Obstruction: Trump is accused of willfully retaining classified documents despite repeated government efforts to retrieve them and obstructing the investigation into their recovery. This includes conspiring with aides to hide and keep classified documents and lying about their existence to both the government and his own attorneys (Independent).
• Ignoring Subpoenas and Misleading Authorities: Trump allegedly ignored a grand jury subpoena demanding the return of all classified materials and misled the DOJ during their visit to Mar-a-Lago, which was corroborated by security footage and witness testimony (GZero Media).
• Volume and Sensitivity of Documents: Trump had a significant number of classified documents (over 300) in his possession, including highly sensitive material about foreign countries' military and nuclear capabilities, some of which were marked top secret (GZero Media).

Comparatively, in the cases of Biden and Pence:

• Immediate Reporting and Compliance: Upon discovery, both Biden and Pence's teams immediately reported the found classified documents to the authorities and complied with the investigations. In Pence's case, the documents were secured in a locked safe and promptly collected by the FBI, leading the DOJ to close the investigation without charges (Voice of America) (VerifyThis).
• Lack of Willful Retention or Obstruction: Neither Biden nor Pence were accused of willfully retaining the classified documents or obstructing justice. Their prompt and cooperative actions were significant factors in the decisions not to charge them (Voice of America).
• Volume and Handling of Documents: The volume of classified documents found with Biden and Pence was much lower compared to Trump's case, and there was no evidence suggesting intentional misconduct or obstruction in their handling of those documents (Voice of America) (VerifyThis).

These differences highlight the aggravated circumstances in Trump's case that led to his indictment, primarily centered around the alleged willful retention of national defense information and attempts to obstruct justice, which were not present in the situations involving Biden or Pence.

Are there any cases to support your claim that criminal procedures "take precedence" over civil statutes? In otherwords, when a person is charged with a crime, their lawyers are not allowed to cite a civil statute in their clients' defense? What are the cases?

My research tells me that in a criminal trial, where civil procedures may conflict, criminal law takes precedent, that is the generally accepted legal standard. Besides, Trump's claim of the PRA is inaccurate, anyway, which is the reason why the PRA is moot, it does not give him the authority to choose which are his and which are the govs. He can start the process but he has to coordinate it with the NARA, and they have final authority, it says so right in the PRA. This was the whole point of why the PRA was enacted in the first place. the point is, the PRA is moot in this espionage case, just based on the PRA, anyway.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Public Records Act does not compute in this case.

 

[Dragonlady]

The better question would be who shouldn’t they go after. They could go to any bank and get their list of clients from previously paid jumbo loans and look over the paperwork. It would be a financial windfall for the city to fine all those businesses and individuals who over-stated the value of their assets, fining them plus interest from the time they took out the loans.

You play dumb, but you aren’t this dumb. They aren’t interested in doing this because it would cause an uproar the likes they have never seen. Getting Trump will suffice.

Your post assumes that all business people are corrupt and dishonest and that's just not the case. NOBODY with half a brain, pulls this stupid shit that Donald Trump has done all of his life.

Trump has been insulated from the consequences of his illegal behaviour all of his life, for two reasons: his wealth, and the fact that he has always been shielded from from public exposure of his finances by working through a private owned and closely held private corporation.

A third factor has been that Trump's properties are all owned in different jurisdictions, so the pattern of over-valuing the properties for loan purposes and under-valuing them for tax purposes, hasn't been apparent.

With the bright hot spotlight been shone on all of Trump's private business practices, since he became President, these practices have been exposed. The lies, the fraud, and dragging out the legal appeals processes for YEARS, while refusing to pay municipal taxes. It's bad enough for a big city like New York, but for smaller, rural counties where his golf properties are located, or where he's signed away value to get a big tax break, replacing the lost tax revenues falls on everyone in the county.

How many people knew Trump was fighting a fraud trial until he announced his run for President? Trump has tried to explain away all of his failures, many of which he's hidden for decades.

He said that the $1 billion he lost in the in 1980's were "paper losses" because of "depreciation". Bullshit baffles brains. His father covered those losses. Seven bankruptcies??? Everybody goes bankrupt. 200+ companies and only 7 bankrupycies. No they don't, and those who do, don't do it more than once. They learn from their mistakes.

Trump learned how to scam the bankruptcy system. Part of his bankrtupcy scam was to overvalue the asset (casino/resorts) they were buying into, and his developement work to the point of the IPO.

Have you seen them? How would you know what they are?

Nostra DumbAss strikes again!!! It's not up to US to prove anything, and since Trump has already confessed to ALL of it, but says he says all of these documents are his personal documents, because he said so, which Trump knows is bullshit.

You look like a complete idiot trying to deny his crimes, when he's confessing to them FuckBoi.

 

[struth]

That's not what is going on.

What is going on then…

 

[WorldWatcher]

We shall see. This is bound to end up at SCOTUS…

Whether he declassified the documents can’t end up at the SCOTUS until he - you know - makes at part of the court record. Something he has so far refused to do.

WW

 

[j-mac]

Whether he declassified the documents can’t end up at the SCOTUS until he - you know - makes at part of the court record. Something he has so far refused to do.

WW

Long way to go friend…

 

[jc456]

Wow, another gaslighting thread

 

[WorldWatcher]

Long way to go friend…

True, but he will have to make the claim prior to trial under reciprocal discovery. Witness list, evidence to be presented, that sort of thing.

If he doesn't, and fails to make the claim to the trial court, then he forgoes that avenue for appeal. He can't appeal for known information that he choose not to present.

WW

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Long way to go friend…

It's in Trump bailwick. If he won't introduce them, then it is no go.

 

[jc456]

It's in Trump bailwick. If he won't introduce them, then it is no go.

Your love

 

[struth]

Whether he declassified the documents can’t end up at the SCOTUS until he - you know - makes at part of the court record. Something he has so far refused to do.

WW

He hasn’t been to trial let to make it part of the court record…what the f are you talking about?

And didn’t xiden’s boy, smith, just appeal something again? More delay tactics by Xiden so trump can’t make it past of the record

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

It's Trump who delays, little buddy.

 

[jc456]

It's Trump who delays, little buddy.

 

[struth]

It's Trump who delays, little buddy.

Pretty sure Smith just appealed

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Smith is forcing Cannon's hand now, so she cannot delay later.

Very smart.

 

[struth]

Smith is forcing Cannon's hand now, so she cannot delay later.

Very smart.

So he’s delaying because he thinks she might delay later?


Do you honestly think before you type?

 

[Hutch Starskey]

This DIRT-BAG Smith thinks he can appeal the case that didn't even START yet........HAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAA

He’s already appealed it twice and twice Cannon was overturned. Third time’s the charm.