DOJ Appeals Trump Judges Special Master Ruling

[BWK]

A true American would have wanted the 2020 election investigated and Dominion's source codes.

60 judges did, and they found nothing. No one has. Keep investigating your fantasy with the pillow guy. lol!

 

[BWK]

How?
The machines were whisked away.
Are you so mentally ill you have to lie?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/2022/09/06/coffee-county-georgia-breach-logan/ You may have a point.

 

[BWK]

Exactly

It was investigated;

 

[BWK]

The DOJ is corrupt.

Link?

 

[BWK]

Naw, never investigated. You be messed up. You truly believe everything the demofks say. Never a question

Non-argument! Try again.

 

[Leviticus]

When Democrats do it, it's a protest.

Republicans usually "protest" by shooting up churches and running down crowds of peiople in their cars.

 

[WEATHER53]

A federal judge in Florida appointed by Trump interjected herself into a national security matter, halting the DOJ's investigation of the classified documents stolen by Trump.

This is dangerous, very dangerous.

It seems apparent the overwhelmed judge did it for political reasons because her legal opinions for doing so were flawed. Trump's attorney general indicated that was the case (see above).

The DOJ intends to stop her.

The Post reports, "The Justice Department said it would appeal a federal judge’s decision to appoint a special master to sift through thousands of documents the FBI seized from Donald Trump’s Florida residence on Aug. 8, according to a Thursday court filing.

"The notice of appeal arrived three days after Judge Aileen M. Cannon ruled in favor of Trump and said she would appoint a special master, slowing — at least temporarily — an investigation into the possible mishandling of extremely sensitive classified information, as well as possible hiding, tampering or destruction of government records.

"In a separate, simultaneous court filing, prosecutors asked Cannon to stay her Sept. 5 decision on two key points: her order to temporarily halt a significant portion of the FBI investigation into the potential mishandling of classified information, and to allow a special master to review the classified material that is among the documents seized as part of a court-authorized search at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago club on Aug. 8.

"Ultimately, the Justice Department said that a special master could be appointed, but argued that the judge should prohibit the special master from reviewing classified documents. The special master would be still able to sort through personal documents and other items the FBI also seized, setting aside materials as necessary, the filing says."

As further proof that Trump's judge had no idea what she was doing, the prosecutors were forced to point out to the judge "that allowing a special master to review the classified material would “cause the most immediate and serious harms to the government and the public,” noting that those documents have already been moved to a secure facility, separate from the rest of the seized Trump papers.

Put a different way, Trump's judge is a threat to our national security.

As can be readily seen, Trump is no stranger to providing threats to our national security.

The Jan. 6 committee hearings investigating Trump's attempt to overthrow our elected government will resume shortly.

It is no surprise to see that Trump's grassroots Republicans and Republican lawmakers are avoiding these issues entirely. The last one to speak out was a Republican Senator who threatened riots in the streets if Trump is indicted.

Go to any length to keep truth hidden

 

[toobfreak]

Judge Cannon's ruling would stall and impede the Federal investigation of Trump.

DEAD WRONG. It will only make sure the investigation is done right mindful of Trump's rights. And legitimate investigations are not lied about and conducted such a way leaking faked information to the leftwing media because you don't break into a president's home ransacking every room just to do an "investigation!" That can only be condoned when you already have the case sealed against someone and all you need to do now is catch them in the act red handed with the goods, yet Trump was caught with nothing, many things were taken clearly personal and not within even this ridiculously broad warrant, and it has now been a MONTH since the break-in and STILL no charges! Not even a rustle.

Pure crickets.

 

[BWK]

Go to any length to keep truth hidden

Stupid post!

 

[scruffy]

What remains of the Republican Party is insane

The crazy people are going to steamroll over YOUR worthless ass in three short months.

 

[scruffy]

Yes we do

Yes you do.

Fucking Stalinist asswipe

 

[kyzr]

There was no illegal search warrant. What is your legal argument that it is illegal?

Here are two articles that explain why the search warrant was illegal.

The Illegal Search of Mar-a-Lago

The FBI raid at Mar-a-Lago was an abuse of prosecutorial discretion and a violation of the Fourth Amendment. It reveals political bias. Under the Fourth Amendment, a search warrant may

townhall.com

Opinion | The Trump Warrant Had No Legal Basis

A former president’s rights under the Presidential Records Act trump the statutes the FBI cited to justify the Mar-a-Lago raid.

www.wsj.com

 

[berg80]

Everything Wrong With Judge Cannon’s Ruling​

Error #1: The court has no jurisdiction over this matter.

Judge Cannon describes her jurisdiction in the case as rooted both in the court’s “equitable jurisdiction” and in Rule 41(g) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. The court’s jurisdictional assertion is a bit odd given Trump’s statement that he has “not yet filed a Rule 41(g) motion, and the standard for relief under that rule is not relevant to the issue of whether the Court should appoint a Special Master.” Continued.....

Error #2: A district court has no authority to block a criminal investigation.

In the wake of the ruling, Fourth Amendment scholar and Lawfare contributing editor Orin Kerr posed the following question: “[D]oes a federal court have authority to enjoin executive branch ‘use’ of seized materials for ‘investigative purposes’”?

Judge Cannon did not just order that a special master review the seized material. She went a lot further and determined “that a temporary injunction on the Government’s use of the seized material for investigative purposes—but not ODNI’s national security assessment—is appropriate and equitable to uphold the value of the special master review.” This injunction is one of the most striking things about the opinion—particularly as it was not specifically sought by the Trump legal team. (Trump’s complaint did seek a protective order under Rule 26(b)(5) and Rule 26(c)(1), but Cannon did not rule on that.) Continued.........

Error #3: The ruling is simply incoherent with respect to executive privilege.

Judge Cannon does not just rule that a special master should review the material in question for information covered by attorney-client privilege. She also rules that the special master should review it for executive privilege. Specifically, she finds that “even if any assertion of executive privilege by [Trump] ultimately fails in this context, that possibility, even if likely, does not negate a former President’s ability to raise the privilege as an initial matter.”

Her analysis of executive privilege reflects a deep ignorance of the subject. Discussing Cannon’s ruling on Twitter Spaces, Lawfare’s Jonathan Shaub—an expert on executive privilege issues—described the judge’s reasoning on the subject as expressing “a complete misunderstanding of the nature of executive privilege.” Continued.......

Error #4: Normal people don’t get special masters when the FBI executes search warrants against them.

The idea of having a special master review seized material for attorney-client privilege is less controversial than either having one review for executive privilege or having a judge enjoin use of seized documents. It has some precedent, after all, and the standards are at least manageable, meaning that one can infer with reasonable accuracy what the special master would actually do. Continued........

Everything Wrong With Judge Cannon’s Ruling

Judge Aileen Cannon’s opinion in the Mar-a-Lago matter actually defies defense.

www.lawfareblog.com

 

[kyzr]

Everything Wrong With Judge Cannon’s Ruling​

Error #1: The court has no jurisdiction over this matter.

Judge Cannon describes her jurisdiction in the case as rooted both in the court’s “equitable jurisdiction” and in Rule 41(g) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. The court’s jurisdictional assertion is a bit odd given Trump’s statement that he has “not yet filed a Rule 41(g) motion, and the standard for relief under that rule is not relevant to the issue of whether the Court should appoint a Special Master.” Continued.....

Error #2: A district court has no authority to block a criminal investigation.

In the wake of the ruling, Fourth Amendment scholar and Lawfare contributing editor Orin Kerr posed the following question: “[D]oes a federal court have authority to enjoin executive branch ‘use’ of seized materials for ‘investigative purposes’”?

Judge Cannon did not just order that a special master review the seized material. She went a lot further and determined “that a temporary injunction on the Government’s use of the seized material for investigative purposes—but not ODNI’s national security assessment—is appropriate and equitable to uphold the value of the special master review.” This injunction is one of the most striking things about the opinion—particularly as it was not specifically sought by the Trump legal team. (Trump’s complaint did seek a protective order under Rule 26(b)(5) and Rule 26(c)(1), but Cannon did not rule on that.) Continued.........

Error #3: The ruling is simply incoherent with respect to executive privilege.

Judge Cannon does not just rule that a special master should review the material in question for information covered by attorney-client privilege. She also rules that the special master should review it for executive privilege. Specifically, she finds that “even if any assertion of executive privilege by [Trump] ultimately fails in this context, that possibility, even if likely, does not negate a former President’s ability to raise the privilege as an initial matter.”

Her analysis of executive privilege reflects a deep ignorance of the subject. Discussing Cannon’s ruling on Twitter Spaces, Lawfare’s Jonathan Shaub—an expert on executive privilege issues—described the judge’s reasoning on the subject as expressing “a complete misunderstanding of the nature of executive privilege.” Continued.......

Error #4: Normal people don’t get special masters when the FBI executes search warrants against them.

The idea of having a special master review seized material for attorney-client privilege is less controversial than either having one review for executive privilege or having a judge enjoin use of seized documents. It has some precedent, after all, and the standards are at least manageable, meaning that one can infer with reasonable accuracy what the special master would actually do. Continued........

1. Jurisdiction? Cannon is the supervisor of the biased magistrate who illegally approved the illegal search warrant. Its her turf to protect our rights from an overreaching DOJ/FBI.

2. Block an "investigation"? If there was an illegal search & seizure she can stop the "investigation", she did in-fact stop the "investigation". If the DOJ wants to proceed, file an appeal, see who wins.

3. Exec Privilege is only applicable to the sitting president. Biden won't allow Trump to use it.

4. Agreed that the "Special master" is legitimate, as affirmed by Alan Dershowitz and Jonathan Turley.

 

[berg80]

1. Jurisdiction? Cannon is the supervisor of the biased magistrate who illegally approved the illegal search warrant. Its her turf to protect our rights from an overreaching DOJ/FBI.

2. Block an "investigation"? If there was an illegal search & seizure she can stop the "investigation", she did in-fact stop the "investigation". If the DOJ wants to proceed, file an appeal, see who wins.

3. Exec Privilege is only applicable to the sitting president. Biden won't allow Trump to use it.

4. Agreed that the "Special master" is legitimate, as affirmed by Alan Dershowitz and Jonathan Turley.

Each one of your objections is obliterated in the article if you'd just read it.

Cannon acknowledges that the court should exercise such jurisdiction only in “‘exceptional’ circumstances.” And she purports to be following guidance from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit from a case called Richey v. Smith. Here is how the court in Richey described the factors that should determine whether a district court should entertain such a motion:

First, and perhaps foremost, is the question whether the motion for return of property accurately alleges that government agents ... in seizing the property displayed “a callous disregard for the constitutional rights of the taxpayer.” ... Other factors to be considered are: whether the plaintiff has an individual interest in and need for the material whose return he seeks; whether the plaintiff would be irreparably injured by denial of the return of the property; and whether the plaintiff has an adequate remedy at law for the redress of his grievance.

Cannon acknowledges that the first factor does not favor her assertion of jurisdiction concerning a motion Trump denies having filed: “With respect to the first factor, the Court agrees with the Government that, at least based on the record to date, there has not been a compelling showing of callous disregard for Plaintiff’s constitutional rights. This factor cuts against the exercise of equitable jurisdiction.”

It actually does a bit more than that. The Fifth Circuit called this the “perhaps foremost” factor for a reason. Rule 41(g) states that “a person aggrieved by an unlawful search and seizure of property or by the deprivation of property may move for the property's return” (emphasis added). It also states that the “court must receive evidence on any factual issue necessary to decide the motion.” The rule is not a general authority for a district court to supervise an ongoing criminal investigation pre-indictment. It presupposes that there has been or could be some compelling showing of a Fourth Amendment violation—the remedy for which is the return of property seized.

 

[kyzr]

Each one of your objections is obliterated in the article if you'd just read it.

Cannon acknowledges that the court should exercise such jurisdiction only in “‘exceptional’ circumstances.” And she purports to be following guidance from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit from a case called Richey v. Smith. Here is how the court in Richey described the factors that should determine whether a district court should entertain such a motion:

Cannon acknowledges that the first factor does not favor her assertion of jurisdiction concerning a motion Trump denies having filed: “With respect to the first factor, the Court agrees with the Government that, at least based on the record to date, there has not been a compelling showing of callous disregard for Plaintiff’s constitutional rights. This factor cuts against the exercise of equitable jurisdiction.”

It actually does a bit more than that. The Fifth Circuit called this the “perhaps foremost” factor for a reason. Rule 41(g) states that “a person aggrieved by an unlawful search and seizure of property or by the deprivation of property may move for the property's return” (emphasis added). It also states that the “court must receive evidence on any factual issue necessary to decide the motion.” The rule is not a general authority for a district court to supervise an ongoing criminal investigation pre-indictment. It presupposes that there has been or could be some compelling showing of a Fourth Amendment violation—the remedy for which is the return of property seized.

Your "article" is nothing but "opinions", it is NOT a court of appeal decision.

We'll see how the appeal process works out.
If Cannon gets overturned it may get appealed again.
If Cannon gets upheld, it may get appealed again.

Your recent post supports the Trump position that if the search warrant was illegal (see my post-174 above), the seizure was illegal, and the property needs to be returned, i.e. Trump's Constitutional rights were violated.

 

[Marener]

Your recent post supports the Trump position that if the search warrant was illegal (see my post-174 above), the seizure was illegal, and the property needs to be returned, i.e. Trump's Constitutional rights were violated.

Of course the property gets returned if the search warrant was illegal, but there’s nothing indicating it was illegal at this time.

 

[Lesh]

The crazy people are going to steamroll over YOUR worthless ass in three short months.

Hopefully not...but thanks for pointing out the stakes.

The last thing this country needs is to be run by the crazy GOP

 

[Lesh]

Of course the property gets returned if the search warrant was illegal, but there’s nothing indicating it was illegal at this time.

And any property that actually IS personal or protected will be returned ...without voiding the warrant

 

[kyzr]

Of course the property gets returned if the search warrant was illegal, but there’s nothing indicating it was illegal at this time.

Please read the articles in my post-174 above. There are issues with the search warrant.