Judge Cannon has blown it.

[Rigby5]

in that case my question becpmes

"is a man wise enough to use that authority (and responsibility) wisely?"

do you think trump treated our secrets responsibly?

No, I do not like anything about Trump or his values.
But that is not the point.
The point is presidents do and MUST have that authority, so those attempting to subvert it are actually attacking the entire republic.
It they succeed in imprisoning Trump, armed civil war is totally inevitable, and I would be forced to be on the side against Jack Smith.

Presidents do bad things all the time, like the Spanish American war, Vietnam, Desert Storm, the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan, etc.
Those mistakes have to be accepted since it is better to maintain the whole system.
Attempting to prosecute Trump after the fact is infinitely worse, since Trump not only was acting within the law, but the prosecution of Trump clearly is ONLY to prevent fair elections, nothing else.
And that does require armed conflict.
That can never be allowed for a second.

 

[rampart]

Wrong.
Jack Smith will get disbarred.
The charges are ridiculously illegal, contrary to the law, which is EO 13526, and should never have been allowed.
Presidents are the absolute arbitrary source of all classified doc authority.

And while we are at it:
Clearly is it asking for hush money that is illegal, not paying it.
Banks cannot use evaluations from loan applicants.
There is no way to create or use fake electors.

if all that is true , does it not indicate that the system is corrupt and that elite trumpist goal is to exploit that corruption for personal (and in the trump case, dynastic) advantage?

 

[Rigby5]

Sorry, your comment is a cop out,

and cop outs are not arguments, either.

Wrong.
You are the one who is has to prove that Trump or judge Cannon did something wrong. And you have provided nothing.
The law is clear that presidents can do whatever they want with classified docs, including keep copies forever.

 

[Rigby5]

if all that is true , does it not indicate that the system is corrupt and that elite trumpist goal is to exploit that corruption for personal (and in the trump case, dynastic) advantage?

Wrong.
There is no other possible way to run classified docs.
The current law on classified docs, EO 13526, was by Obama in 2009.
There is nothing remotely partisan or changeable about these classified doc laws.
What is to be classified or protected or disseminated will always have to be arbitrary choices.
Unlike all other laws, they are totally arbitrary and not based on intrinsic principles like defense of inherent individual rights.
It is totally up to the voters as to who shall have utter control over all classified doc decisions.

 

[ThisIsMe]

#1 He hasn't filed a motion yet, it's pending action by Judge Cannon.

#2 If she errs in a Question of Law it's not a "exclusion of evidence" it's presenting correct law to the jury. The Judge is supposed to decide Questions of Law prior to trial, the juries job is to decide on Questions of Fact.

WW

The motion OP suggested that smith would file was one that suggest excluding evidence or arguments. I’m just asking why he would do that.

Smith: your honor, I request this evidence be dismissed

Judge: why?

Smith: because it’s devastating to my case!

 

[ThisIsMe]

And he has more than explained the arguments under attack by smith. You ignored that because you are a bad faith poster.

His op made literally no reference to what he was talking about.

 

[WorldWatcher]

The motion OP suggested that smith would file was one that suggest excluding evidence or arguments. I’m just asking why he would do that.

Smith: your honor, I request this evidence be dismissed

Judge: why?

Smith: because it’s devastating to my case!

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flsd.648653/gov.uscourts.flsd.648653.428.0_1.pdf

Not because it's devistating to the case, because it's irrelevant to the case and has no bearing. FPOTOUS#45 is trying to deflect from the actual case by raising the PRA as CYA.

Smith's reasonings are set out in the motion regarding the jury instructions.

WW

 

[rampart]

Wrong.
There is no other possible way to run classified docs.
The current law on classified docs, EO 13526, was by Obama in 2009.
There is nothing remotely partisan or changeable about these classified doc laws.
What is to be classified or protected or disseminated will always have to be arbitrary choices.
Unlike all other laws, they are totally arbitrary and not based on intrinsic principles like defense of inherent individual rights.
It is totally up to the voters as to who shall have utter control over all classified doc decisions.

up to the voters? of course, but the voters must be informed of the lax attitude towards their secrets, shouldn't they?

the grooming of intelligence assets is a long and expensive process. we can't afford to lose many koshoggis, even for cheaper oil or the $2 billion to roll the "trump social" scam.

i retired before the 2009 law, but i am confident that the "intent of congress" was to protect classified information rather than sell it to the highest bidder.

 

[jc456]

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flsd.648653/gov.uscourts.flsd.648653.428.0_1.pdf

Not because it's devistating to the case, because it's irrelevant to the case and has no bearing. FPOTOUS#45 is trying to deflect from the actual case by raising the PRA as CYA.

Smith's reasonings are set out in the motion regarding the jury instructions.

WW

there is no case since there is no law that addresses this rouge. post #364.

 

[WorldWatcher]

there is no case since there is no law that addresses this rouge. post #364.

Sure there is. 18 USC 793(e) for starters. Then you get to obstruction after that.

WW

 

[ThisIsMe]

Okay, I see what you are asking, (in the future, you should be more complete in your question, because you didn't mention the MIL in your last comment, you made an assumption about 'evidence', well an MIL doesn't have to necessarily be about evidence) the MIL (in this circumstance) would be merely a cautionary step, because one shouldn't petition to the 11th circuit for a writ of mandamus until ALL options have been exhausted. Some argue the MIL is unnecessary because she has already made clear she isn't going to correct the issue of her bogus jury instruction, or admit she made a mistake, and the MIL would be one more attempt to achieve what he already tried to do before in his response to her unusual order for a jury instruction that was out of bounds as a matter of law.

Some legal analysts in the media claim he should do it anyway, to play it safe with the circuit court judges. The MIL would be another attempt to get her to get to exclude the PRA in the jury instruction and apply the law correctly, which she clearly did not (and that she didn't, is amazing), since it is irrelevant to the case. If she fails to respond to the MIL or still continues with her nonsense, he'd then have all the ammunition he would need for the mandamus.

Thanks for explaining that, I understand now what you mean.

For all the others who started responding before the OP, to whom I asked the question, this is all it took. Asked and answered. You all started flying off the handle making assumptions etc…

 

[Rumpole]

Wrong.
You are the one who is has to prove that Trump or judge Cannon did something wrong. And you have provided nothing.
The law is clear that presidents can do whatever they want with classified docs, including keep copies forever.

Read Smith's response to Cannon, it clearly explains it in nitty gritty detail. ( see #327)
No, the law says the opposite (PRA gives gov final oversight authority over prez paper / gov paper selections).
Moreover The charge of espionage does not depend on any classification regime. If found guilty, DNI damage assessments will probably be considered at sentencing. (See, Trump could conceivably declassify something the classifying source [or the DNI] deems as damaging to US national security. The point is, 'declassification', per se, does not necessarily get the prez out of legal jeopardy, particularly because declassification, even if he could prove it, which he can't, but even if he could, the NDI docs still belong to the gov and thus the espionage charge has not been cured, not to mention there was at least one nuke doc, which, per the ETA, he does NOT have any unilateral declassification authority. That doc will get you 5 years in prison for possession).

 

[rampart]

Read Smith's response to Cannon, it clearly explains it in nitty gritty detail.
No, the law says the opposite.
Moreover The charge of espionage does not depend on any classification regime. If found guilty, DNI damage assessments will probably be considered at sentencing. (See, Trump could conceivably declassify something the classifying source [or the DNI] deems as damaging to US national security. The point is, 'declassification', per se, does not necessarily get the prez out of legal jeopardy, particularly because declassification, even if he could prove it, which he can't, but even if he could, the NDI docs still belong to the gov and thus the espionage charge has not been cured, not to mention there was at least one nuke doc, which, per the ETA, he does NOT have any unilateral declassification authority. That doc will get you 5 years in prison for possession).

doesn't a president, like any brigade level military commander, have aides who are expert in national security law? why use these civilians who have never held a clearance and have no conceivable "need to know?"

this trial should hae been held on a military facility b, judged by advocate generals who understand exactly what this guy had and did.

 

[jc456]

Sure there is. 18 USC 793(e) for starters. Then you get to obstruction after that.

WW

post #364 over rules all.

 

[Rumpole]

doesn't a president, like any brigade level military commander, have aides who are expert in national security law? why use these civilians who have never held a clearance and have no conceivable "need to know?"

this trial should hae been held on a military facility b, judged by advocate generals who understand exactly what this guy had and did.

I think, historically speaking, civilian courts have a much better record of exacting fairness in justice than the military tribunal.

If you ever were in the military, and were about to be tried on some charge, if they ever give you the option for a civilian court, take it.

Now, that opinion is subjective, but I was in the military, long ago, and one particular JAG told me this. So, I dunno. You're mileage may vary.

 

[WorldWatcher]

post #364 over rules all.

No it doesn't, but keep wishing.

WW

 

[jc456]

No it doesn't, but keep wishing.

WW

sorry, I gave you John Fitzpatrick telling you it is. Your TDS is not my problem.

 

[Rumpole]

there is no case since there is no law that addresses this rouge. post #364.

PRA grants the gov final authority on prez/gov paper selections. Prez is empowered with the responsibility, (same for VP) but he must run it by the gov for final approval. But, it's as moot point, as the charge of espionage does not depend on any classification regime.

 

[WorldWatcher]

sorry, I gave you John Fitzpatrick telling you it is. Your TDS is not my problem.

John Fitzpatrick isn't submitting briefings to the court concerning whether FPOTUS#45 declassified documents or nor.

As a matter of fact is the video you posted were to be shown to the jury it would actually hurt FPOTUS#45's case as he said it had to be done according to a process so that documents could be updated.

So ya, please FPOTUS#45 defense team. Claim he declassified the documents so the prosecution can call Fitzpatrick as an expert witness to testify how the declassification process is supposed to work.

WW

 

[jc456]

John Fitzpatrick isn't submitting briefings to the court concerning whether FPOTUS#45 declassified documents or nor.

Correct, he knows the law and there isn't any law violated. Seems really simple. Your TDS is awesome.

As a matter of fact is the video you posted were to be shown to the jury it would actually hurt FPOTUS#45's case as he said it had to be done according to a process so that documents could be updated.

Mr. Fitzpatrick was asked and answered Trump was right. TDS my man.

So ya, please FPOTUS#45 defense team. Claim he declassified the documents so the prosecution can call Fitzpatrick as an expert witness to testify how the declassification process is supposed to work.

yep, when he says that in court, it will be fact.