Smith's patience has expired.

[Seymour Flops]

Please explain how the highly classified DoD documents could be considered personal documents.

There‘s nothing personal about them.

It has no basis in law or fact.

Post # 311. It's on this same page, just scroll up.

And until Trump attempts to raise this as a defense, Cannon shouldnt be trying to make it for him. Doing so raises questions of her impartiality. It’s not the first time Cannon appeared to be trying to make arguments on behalf of Trump.

I think that Cannon sees raising this as a defense as so obvious that Smith must be losing his mind not to anticipate it. I anticipated it and mentioned it several times prior to this coming up. I'm not even a lawyer and Smith has plenty of people to look up case law for him, so he definitely would know.

Or maybe Smith really is that bad at the law.

 

[Marener]

Post # 311. It's on this same page, just scroll up.

I think that Cannon sees raising this as a defense as so obvious that Smith must be losing his mind not to anticipate it. I anticipated it and mentioned it several times prior to this coming up. I'm not even a lawyer and Smith has plenty of people to look up case law for him, so he definitely would know.

Or maybe Smith really is that bad at the law.

It is not Cannon’s job to brainstorm defenses for Trump.

Post 311 does not explain how a highly classified DoD document could be personal.

The reason you cant explain it is because it is an absurdity. There’s nothing personal about military documents. There is no basis for this in law or fact.

 

[Seymour Flops]

It is not Cannon’s job to brainstorm defenses for Trump.

That's a different matter than whether the defense is valid.

I explained in post # 321 why I think she did that.

But I actually realize that the real reason is due to Smith's request that he not have to show any of the evidence to the jury.

Post 311 does not explain how a highly classified DoD document could be personal.

The reason you cant explain it is because it is an absurdity. There’s nothing personal about military documents. There is no basis for this in law or fact.

It doesn't matter whether you or I or anyone else thinks a highly classified DoD document could be personal. The president has the sole authority to determine that. That's why Clinton could make his own tapes, similar to Nixon's and keep them.

You may disagree, but that was the ruling, and your cult did not complain about it when it helped Clinton to keep his highly classified personal tapes.

 

[Marener]

That's a different matter than whether the defense is valid.

I explained in post # 321 why I think she did that.

But I actually realize that the real reason is due to Smith's request that he not have to show any of the evidence to the jury.

It doesn't matter whether you or I or anyone else thinks a highly classified DoD document could be personal. The president has the sole authority to determine that. That's why Clinton could make his own tapes, similar to Nixon's and keep them.

You may disagree, but that was the ruling, and your cult did not complain about it when it helped Clinton to keep his highly classified personal tapes.

Clinton making his own tapes is lightyears different than Trump taking documents made by the DoD.

Here are the definitions from the PRA:
The term "Presidential records" means documentary materials, or any reasonably segregable portion thereof, created or received by the President, the President’s immediate staff, or a unit or individual of the Executive Office of the President whose function is to advise or assist the President, in the course of conducting activities which relate to or have an effect upon the carrying out of the constitutional, statutory, or other official or ceremonial duties of the President.

The term "personal records" means all documentary materials, or any reasonably segregable portion thereof, of a purely private or nonpublic character which do not relate to or have an effect upon the carrying out of the constitutional, statutory, or other official or ceremonial duties of the President.

Tell me what category highly classified DoD documents would be included in.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Clinton making his own tapes is lightyears different than Trump taking documents made by the DoD.

Of course. And that's why Clinton's case is irrelevant.

The only defense presented here is that any President can take home anything he wants and then keep it forever.

And that's it.

The letter of the law explicitly states that this is not the case. The Clinton ruling itself explicitly stated this.

 

[Seymour Flops]

Clinton making his own tapes is lightyears different than Trump taking documents made by the DoD.

Here are the definitions from the PRA:
The term "Presidential records" means documentary materials, or any reasonably segregable portion thereof, created or received by the President, the President’s immediate staff, or a unit or individual of the Executive Office of the President whose function is to advise or assist the President, in the course of conducting activities which relate to or have an effect upon the carrying out of the constitutional, statutory, or other official or ceremonial duties of the President.

The term "personal records" means all documentary materials, or any reasonably segregable portion thereof, of a purely private or nonpublic character which do not relate to or have an effect upon the carrying out of the constitutional, statutory, or other official or ceremonial duties of the President.

The PRA is not a criminal statute.

Tell me what category highly classified DoD documents would be included in.

Whatever category the president put them in, according to the relevant case law.

You can disagree with it all you want, but Smith wants to try Trump in a court of law, not a court of opinion.

 

[Seymour Flops]

Clinton making his own tapes is lightyears different than Trump taking documents made by the DoD.

And . . . you have no idea what was on Clinton's tapes, nor what was in the documents Trump sent to Mar-a-Lago, so you have no way to compare or contrast them.

 

[Marener]

The PRA is not a criminal statute.

Whatever category the president put them in, according to the relevant case law.

You can disagree with it all you want, but Smith wants to try Trump in a court of law, not a court of opinion.

The PRA is a law and the law defines presidential and personal documents.

Yet you want to allow Trump’s opinion to hold more weight?

 

[kyzr]

It is not Cannon’s job to brainstorm defenses for Trump. Post 311 does not explain how a highly classified DoD document could be personal.

The reason you cant explain it is because it is an absurdity. There’s nothing personal about military documents. There is no basis for this in law or fact.

How about when Trump found out that highly classified documents proved that Obama, Biden, the FBI and other agencies illegally spied on Trump and setup the "Russia Collusion" hoax to fuck with Trump's presidency?

Some highly classified docs are fair game.

 

[kyzr]

The PRA is a law and the law defines presidential and personal documents.

Yet you want to allow Trump’s opinion to hold more weight?

Lets just say that Trump has more of a right to classified documents than Joe Biden had, and Biden is not indicted for having them.

 

[Marener]

And . . . you have no idea what was on Clinton's tapes, nor what was in the documents Trump sent to Mar-a-Lago, so you have no way to compare or contrast them.

We know the documents were prepared for Trump
by the government for his use.

We know the tapes were made by Clinton for his own use.

We know the government considers Trump’s documents to be classified government secrets and presidential records.

We know the government considered Clinton‘s tapes to be personal.

We know more than you think.

 

[Marener]

Lets just say that Trump has more of a right to classified documents than Joe Biden had, and Biden is not indicted for having them.

He had no right whatsoever.

 

[Marener]

How about when Trump found out that highly classified documents proved that Obama, Biden, the FBI and other agencies illegally spied on Trump and setup the "Russia Collusion" hoax to fuck with Trump's presidency?

Some highly classified docs are fair game.

Fringe conspiracies won’t get you very far.

 

[Seymour Flops]

The PRA is a law and the law defines presidential and personal documents.

Yet you want to allow Trump’s opinion to hold more weight?

The law allows it, according to the ruling that I cited.

We know the documents were prepared for Trump
by the government for his use.

We know the tapes were made by Clinton for his own use.

We know the government considers Trump’s documents to be classified government secrets and presidential records.

We know the government considered Clinton‘s tapes to be personal.

We know more than you think.

"The government" is not some sentient entity that "considers" things. The government is a group of men and women, which included Donald Trump at the time he decided that the documents that he sent to Mar-a-Lago were personal.

Those people can be right or wrong. The decisions of higher courts, right or wrong in anyone else's opinion, are binding as law.

 

[cnm]

Where else would he keep documents that he deemed personal?

By the shitter.

 

[cnm]

The law allows it, according to the ruling that I cited.

Mind repeating it? I must have missed it.

 

[Seymour Flops]

He’s never stated anywhere he deemed them personal and even if he tried, its an absurdity that has no basis in law or fact.

Where is the law or case that says he has to "state anywhere" that documents he sent to his home were personal? The PRA names the president as the person to make the determination of whether a record is personal or presidential and it doesn't specify how he has to state that.

 

[Marener]

The law allows it, according to the ruling that I cited.


"The government" is not some sentient entity that "considers" things. The government is a group of men and women, which included Donald Trump at the time he decided that the documents that he sent to Mar-a-Lago were personal.

Those people can be right or wrong. The decisions of higher courts, right or wrong in anyone else's opinion, are binding as law.

Trump is no longer part of the government and the current government’s opinion is that those are government documents, not personal documents.

You didn’t read the entirety of the ruling because it never said that decisions about what is personal (if Trump did make such a determination, which we do not know at this time), is not subject to judicial review.

The law does not say that personal records are whatever the president says they are. In fact, the law defines what is and isn’t a personal record.

Even you must admit that by the definitions provided by the law, it’s absurd to think highly classified DoD documents could be considered personal.

 

[Marener]

Where is the law or case that says he has to "state anywhere" that documents he sent to his home were personal? The PRA names the president as the person to make the determination of whether a record is personal or presidential and it doesn't specify how he has to state that.

He has to say it if he wants to use it as a legal defense.

Of course, he somehow has a judge making his defense for him, which is bizarre.

 

[cnm]

The ruling depending on this circumstance?

The Court will grant the motion to dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1) because plaintiff's claim is not redressable. NARA does not have the authority to designate materials as “Presidential records,” NARA does not have the tapes in question, and NARA lacks any right, duty, or means to seize control of them.​

But where NARA has the documents in question and had the right, duty and means to seize control of them?