Breaking! DOJ mistakenly (Yea Right!) exposes list of Trump files from Mar-a-Lago being vetted for privilege including medical records

[Seymour Flops]

The problem is that those lawyers are not honest.

No, especially when it comes to anything regarding Trump.

The establishment's rage at an "outsider" having the audacity to be president just because a bunch of stinky Walmart shoppers happened to be able to vote has not abated in the slightest even though they won the next election.

 

[WorldWatcher]

If that's true, then every president before Trump needs to be prosecuted first.

Again, precedent counts, even if you really hate the latest former president.

IF there are any Presidents that took classified or national defense information when their term of office expired and failed to return it upon official notification by U.S. Government officials able to receive such information and/or were in illegal possession of government property that falls under the Presidential Act of 1978.

By all means go ahead and provide probable cause, get a subpoena and/or search warrant and have at it.

WW

 

[Seymour Flops]

IF there are any Presidents that took classified or national defense information when their term of office expired and failed to return it upon official notification by U.S. Government officials able to receive such information and/or were in illegal possession of government property that falls under the Presidential Act of 1978.

That sounds like you're inventing a new crime for Trump, which has been the hallmark of the Crossfire Hurricane Operation and the investigations it gave birth do.

Don't forget that the main excuse for not prosecuting Hillary Clinton for storing classified information in her and her husband's home was that no one had been prosecuted before for that.

I don't know whether the documents taken by presidents Washington through Obama were classifed or national defense. I would assume that many of them were, but if you have proof they were not, I'm willing to look at it.

No one questioned it before Trump, because this is just more frustration on the part the DNC/DOJ/FBI that Trump won't go away and instead exercises his first amendment rights as well as he can given his denied access to social media.

The Clintons failed to return a large amount of White House property after being informed that it legally belonged to the government and nothing happened to them. No one demanded they return any documents taken by Clinton because that would have been as absurd as demanding Trump return his. So no past president had the opportunity to refuse such a demand.

Clinton and Obama are both hiding documents right now in their presidential libraries, which the people are entitled to see. I'm not sure I see the difference betweent that and Trump keeping them at his Mar-a-Lago office.

By all means go ahead and provide probable cause, get a subpoena and/or search warrant and have at it.

WW

Unlike the DNC/DOJ/FBI, I don't have the ability to abuse that power, because I don't have that power.

Just out of curiousity, what was Trump's criminal intent in keeping the documents? What crime did he intend to further by having them?

 

[WorldWatcher]

Clinton and Obama are both hiding documents right now in their presidential libraries, which the people are entitled to see. I'm not sure I see the difference betweent that and Trump keeping them at his Mar-a-Lago office.

I think most of that was typed to just fill space. But I will comment on the above.

Presidential library documents are administered by the National Archive and Records Administration (NARA) and so those documents are not under the private control of either Clinton or Obama, they were turned over to the government. The NARA administered the documents, the individual Presidential Library Non-Profit administers the physical facilities.

WW

 

[WorldWatcher]

Just out of curiousity, what was Trump's criminal intent in keeping the documents? What crime did he intend to further by having them?

Criminal intent isn't a condition under 18 USC 793(e), unlike some other laws. The standard cited by the DOJ in court documents is "willfully retained".

WW

 

[ThisIsMe]

Maybe he should have given back all the government documents when asked and not stored personal documents, legal correspondence, medical file, etc, in that basement office with government documents, classified, secret and top secret government documents, instead of holding back and having his lawyers lie to the government, about what was still there, claiming incorrectly that all had been returned. Sometime, deny, deny, deny, does not help you in the long run. Go figure.

That in no way excuses the doj, or anyone leaking information that might be privileged, or part of an investigation.

Of course, it hurts trump, so you are all for it....go figure...

 

[Nostra]

You copied the wrong section. I said item a.

Any physical documents with classification markings, along with any containers/boxes (including any other contents) in which such documents are located, as well as any other containers/boxes that are collectively stored or found together with the aforementioned documents and containers/boxes

Try reading more carefully next time.

Item a is a subsection of what I quoted, Simp.

If they do not meet the criteria of what I quoted your section doesn't come into play.

Too bad you have zero critical thinking skills.

 

[Seymour Flops]

Criminal intent isn't a condition under 18 USC 793(e), unlike some other laws. The standard cited by the DOJ in court documents is "willfully retained".

WW

Then a new standard was invented for Hillary who certainly willfully retained the documents but DNC/DOJ/FBI declined prosecution due to no intent.

 

[Marener]

Item a is a subsection of what I quoted, Simp.

If they do not meet the criteria of what I quoted your section doesn't come into play.

Too bad you have zero critical thinking skills

Everything listed in subsection a meets the criteria of what you quoted. That’s why it’s a subsection.

 

[Marener]

So, it is section (e), not section (f) as you said in the other post. For (e) to apply, Trump would have to have unauthorized possession of documents. He was authorized by himself as president, and by representatives of the next president who inspected his storage of those documents.

EDIT: Sorry, it was Marener who said section (f), not you.

Sounds like you're both guessing, though.

(f) would require that he gave the documents to a bad actor or had them stolen and not reported the theft.

The lawyers at the DoJ know this, which is why they are not going to indict him, ever.

Sorry. It’s not (f). It (d).

Donald Trump and the Espionage Act

As president, Trump used the Espionage Act aggressively to prosecute leaks of information to the media. Now, Trump may be caught up in the act himself.

www.lawfareblog.com

 

[Marener]

I would assume it would be, I haven't seen the statute.

If it is illegal and Trump did that, where's the indictment? That seems pretty cut-and-dried, the way you put it.

What exactly did Trump say that was a lie? Do you have the link?

Page 52. Trump’s lawyers said they turned over everything for the subpoena.

They didn’t.

https://int.nyt.com/data/documenttools/doj-response-to-trump-request-for-special-master/1b30feb331082a68/full.pdf

 

[Seymour Flops]

Page 52. Trump’s lawyers said they turned over everything for the subpoena.

They didn’t.

https://int.nyt.com/data/documenttools/doj-response-to-trump-request-for-special-master/1b30feb331082a68/full.pdf

Sounds like Trump's lawyers might be in trouble then. Assuming the bogus warrant doesn't get tossed out and all evidence supressed, which is the most likely outcome.

Sadly for the TDS folk, the very messy filing system, or non-filing system, that Trump used to store his declassified documents, mean that no criminal intent could every be proved by his not knowing what documents he had and didn't have.

But, it did allow the DOJ to get off some really clever snark about it. Hopefully that is enough for them, since that is all they ever get for their efforts.

Sorry, I rattled off all those comments without even looking at the document you linked. One moment . . .

Here's is what the "Trump's Lawyer" in your linked document said:

So, no one is in trouble. Whoever wrote that hedged it twice, to avoid being legally responsible in case it turned out to not be correct. That's what I mean about Trump being able to afford much smarter lawyers than the DOJ could ever hope to hire.

But suppose the DOJ decides to go after the signer of this document. Who they gonna call?

Oh yeah! Mr. Redacted has got some 'splainin' to do!

Y'alls willingness to rely on heavily redacted documents is probably the most humorous part of this entire Mar-a-Lago debacle, aside from the numerous memes about the FBI agents and Melania's clothes. You get that they redact what they don't want you to know, right? I mean at least that much is clear to you?

 

[Marener]

Sounds like Trump's lawyers might be in trouble then. Assuming the bogus warrant doesn't get tossed out and all evidence supressed, which is the most likely outcome.

Sadly for the TDS folk, the very messy filing system, or non-filing system, that Trump used to store his declassified documents, mean that no criminal intent could every be proved by his not knowing what documents he had and didn't have.

But, it did allow the DOJ to get off some really clever snark about it. Hopefully that is enough for them, since that is all they ever get for their efforts.

Sorry, I rattled off all those comments without even looking at the document you linked. One moment . . .

Here's is what the "Trump's Lawyer" in your linked document said:

View attachment 707850

So, no one is in trouble. Whoever wrote that hedged it twice, to avoid being legally responsible in case it turned out to not be correct. That's what I mean about Trump being able to afford much smarter lawyers than the DOJ could ever hope to hire.

But suppose the DOJ decides to go after the signer of this document. Who they gonna call?

View attachment 707853

Oh yeah! Mr. Redacted has got some 'splainin' to do!

Y'alls willingness to rely on heavily redacted documents is probably the most humorous part of this entire Mar-a-Lago debacle, aside from the numerous memes about the FBI agents and Melania's clothes. You get that they redact what they don't want you to know, right? I mean at least that much is clear to you?

The reporting coming out indicates that Trump knew what he had. The lawyer who signed that document is indeed in serious trouble, which is why they may be very interested in telling investigators what was going on.

There’s a lot we don’t know here. The defense of Trump relies on increasingly hard to believe claims.

 

[Seymour Flops]

The reporting coming out indicates that Trump knew what he had.

Who does that reporting come from that knows what Trump knew? Please name names and position.

The lawyer who signed that document is indeed in serious trouble, which is why they may be very interested in telling investigators what was going on.

How, if they hedge their statement twice, could they be in trouble?

You mean that they might leverage a threat of a charge against the lawyer to get him to testify against Trump, which should be instant disbarrment? They might do that, or they might threaten the lawyer's kid like they did with General Flynn.

Who was this man and how do you know it was Trump's lawyer?

There’s a lot we don’t know here. The defense of Trump relies on increasingly hard to believe claims.

Actually the attacks of Trump rely increasingly on a lot we don't know.

 

[White 6]

I think Donny may be way ahead of you.

Remember the headline a couple of days ago that said "there's more"?

Well.... there's more.

Which immediately leads me (as a security type) to wonder, why didn't Donny keep the "more" in the same place as the "rest"?

Hm...

Yes. I saw that also, and like you thought Hmmmm. They mentioned a few of what was not recovered, but as a security man, more interested in what they did not mention. Could be some cool stuff and could be anywhere.

 

[White 6]

That in no way excuses the doj, or anyone leaking information that might be privileged, or part of an investigation.

Of course, it hurts trump, so you are all for it....go figure...

DOJ has leaked off and on in every administration back as far as I can remember or been accused of it, just like the FBI, various white house staff (Donny's making the book of the month club) and other agencies. Does not make it right, but does not shock anybody that has been around.

 

[jbrownson0831]

Maybe he should have given back all the government documents when asked and not stored personal documents, legal correspondence, medical file, etc, in that basement office with government documents, classified, secret and top secret government documents, instead of holding back and having his lawyers lie to the government, about what was still there, claiming incorrectly that all had been returned. Sometime, deny, deny, deny, does not help you in the long run. Go figure.

And maybe the DOJ needs to worry about actual problems plaguing Americans as Rome continues to burn to the ground.

 

[White 6]

And maybe the DOJ needs to worry about actual problems plaguing Americans as Rome continues to burn to the ground.

Maybe they have time for both. They have about 35,000 people. Most tied up on other things, than Donny stealing documents and getting lawyers to lie about it.
He did you see where his $3 Million / Dollar$ retained lawyer has been mostly sideline, as he refuses to go against ethic and the law? Smartest lawyer he ever hired.

 

[Nostra]

Everything listed in subsection a meets the criteria of what you quoted. That’s why it’s a subsection.

No, it doesn't. You are a moron.

Here is a refresher for ya, Simp.

Sorry Simp, you reference a subsection of this:

All physical documents and records constituting evidence, contraband, fruits of crime, or other items illegally possessed in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 793, 2071 , or 1519, including the following

Now, tell us how Trump's medical records and passports constitute evidence of a crime, or are illegally possessed.

You lose again.

 

[Nostra]

The reporting coming out indicates that Trump knew what he had. The lawyer who signed that document is indeed in serious trouble, which is why they may be very interested in telling investigators what was going on.

There’s a lot we don’t know here. The defense of Trump relies on increasingly hard to believe claims.

The reporting coming out indicates that Trump knew what he had.

What reporting? Gotta link?

Something tells me it will be that Madcow dude on MSDNC.