Trump indicted in classified documents probe

L

lrick

6.5 Creedmoor
Messages
2,402
Reaction score
5,478
Location
NY
www.foxnews.com

Trump's indictment is not the slam dunk case liberal media believes it is

The case against former President Donald Trump over his handling of classified documents is not open and shut. The Presidential Records Act is at the heart of Trump's potential defense.
www.foxnews.com www.foxnews.com

"...Moreover, the special counsel and Judge Howell refused to allow the defense to even examine the sealed evidence on which the matter was being argued. That deprived them of presenting a fair counter-argument, which was the prosecution’s intent all along. The adverse decision was preordained."

This would be like charging Schrödinger with killing his cat without first opening the box.
 
V

Victor18

9mm
Messages
84
Reaction score
36
Location
Albany
lrick said:
www.foxnews.com

Trump's indictment is not the slam dunk case liberal media believes it is

The case against former President Donald Trump over his handling of classified documents is not open and shut. The Presidential Records Act is at the heart of Trump's potential defense.
www.foxnews.com www.foxnews.com

"...Moreover, the special counsel and Judge Howell refused to allow the defense to even examine the sealed evidence on which the matter was being argued. That deprived them of presenting a fair counter-argument, which was the prosecution’s intent all along. The adverse decision was preordained."

This would be like charging Schrödinger with killing his cat without first opening the box.
Click to expand...
Trump's team will now be able to view all the evidence against him.
 
V

Victor18

9mm
Messages
84
Reaction score
36
Location
Albany
lrick said:
Yes, it is. I especially liked this passage:

"Trump’s principal defense rests with the Presidential Records Act (PRA). It is not "farcical" as former Attorney General William Barr claims. It was a law passed by Congress in 1978 that granted an exclusive right of former presidents to maintain custody and control of presidential papers accrued during their terms in office. Arguably, it includes classified documents.

It is a fundamental precept of law that specific statutes prevail over general statutes. The PRA is a specially crafted law that applies to a narrow group of people. That is, presidents. By contrast, the Espionage Act enacted in 1917 is a general statute that applies broadly to all citizens. Hence, the defense will argue that PRA takes precedence over the Espionage Act, which accounts for most of the charges against Trump."

In a sense it is a bit like "all thumbs are fingers but not all fingers are thumbs". Especially this one
View attachment 203167
Click to expand...
The PRA, among other things:

"Establishes that Presidential records automatically transfer into the legal custody of the Archivist as soon as the President leaves office."

en.wikipedia.org

Presidential Records Act - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
 
L

lrick

6.5 Creedmoor
Messages
2,402
Reaction score
5,478
Location
NY
Victor18 said:
The PRA, among other things:

"Establishes that Presidential records automatically transfer into the legal custody of the Archivist as soon as the President leaves office."

en.wikipedia.org

Presidential Records Act - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
Click to expand...
That might be significant if NARA hadn't refused to participate in collection of any documents from the White House during the transition.

From a NARA press statement issued October 11, 2022:
The National Archives and Records Administration (NARA), in accordance
with the Presidential Records Act, assumed physical and legal custody of the
Presidential records from the administrations of Barack Obama, George W.
Bush, Bill Clinton, George H.W. Bush, and Ronald Reagan, when those
Presidents left office. NARA securely moved these records to temporary
facilities that NARA leased from the General Services Administration
(GSA), near the locations of the future Presidential Libraries that former
Presidents built for NARA. All such temporary facilities met strict archival
and security standards, and have been managed and staffed exclusively by
NARA employees.

There's a name missing from that list of presidents.



Amy Berman Jackson's prior ruling will come into play also.

As far as Wikipedia goes -
 
Last edited:
SonOfSun

SonOfSun

.308 Win
Messages
4,703
Reaction score
5,772
Location
WNY
tirwin1 said:

Why Donald Trump can't get a top-tier lawyer

hotair.com hotair.com
Click to expand...
Thats actually not what the 65 project is about. The group takes its name from a count of lawsuits that sought to invalidate the 2020 results.

The 65 Project is targeting 111 attorneys in 26 states who were involved to some degree in efforts to challenge or reverse 2020 election results. They will spend millions this year to expose and try to disbar more than 100 lawyers who worked on Donald Trump’s post-election lawsuits, people involved with the effort tell Axios.

While nefarious, it's not explicitly targeting Trump lawyers as claimed in the linked article, though many of then worked with Trump. It's targeting any lawyer that tried to overturn election results.



Here are many reasons it's hard for him to find a lawyer:
  • He has a history of not paying his lawyers. USA TODAY exclusive: Hundreds allege Donald Trump doesn’t pay his bills
  • Trump is a notoriously terrible client. He ignores his lawyers advice, and then blows up at them when things go poorly for him.
  • The former president appears to have bumbled into dozens of felonies by ignoring his lawyers and heeding the counsel of Judicial Watch’s Tom Fitton, who advised him to keep the documents and tell the National Archives to get bent.
  • Trump’s attorneys will need to have a security clearance due to the nature of the charges and evidence that will be presented. This really limits the pool.

What lawyer that has secret clearance wants to represent a client that won't listen to his advice, will whine on TV about the results after he ignores the advice - and blames the laywer.. oh and after all that he might not pay him.

Yeah, I'm not a lawyer, but I wouldn't even consider that client. If I was a top lawyer why would I bother? Top lawyers pick their cases, not the other way around.
 
Defilade

Defilade

.700 Nitro Express
Messages
25,640
Reaction score
37,026
Location
Elsewhere
SonOfSun said:
Thats actually not what the 65 project is about. The group takes its name from a count of lawsuits that sought to invalidate the 2020 results.

The 65 Project is targeting 111 attorneys in 26 states who were involved to some degree in efforts to challenge or reverse 2020 election results. They will spend millions this year to expose and try to disbar more than 100 lawyers who worked on Donald Trump’s post-election lawsuits, people involved with the effort tell Axios.

While nefarious, it's not explicitly targeting Trump lawyers as claimed in the linked article, though many of then worked with Trump. It's targeting any lawyer that tried to overturn election results.



Here are many reasons it's hard for him to find a lawyer:
  • He has a history of not paying his lawyers. USA TODAY exclusive: Hundreds allege Donald Trump doesn’t pay his bills
  • Trump is a notoriously terrible client. He ignores his lawyers advice, and then blows up at them when things go poorly for him.
  • The former president appears to have bumbled into dozens of felonies by ignoring his lawyers and heeding the counsel of Judicial Watch’s Tom Fitton, who advised him to keep the documents and tell the National Archives to get bent.
  • Trump’s attorneys will need to have a security clearance due to the nature of the charges and evidence that will be presented. This really limits the pool.

What lawyer that has secret clearance wants to represent a client that won't listen to his advice, will whine on TV about the results after he ignores the advice - and blames the laywer.. oh and after all that he might not pay him.

Yeah, I'm not a lawyer, but I wouldn't even consider that client. If I was a top lawyer why would I bother? Top lawyers pick their cases, not the other way around.
Click to expand...
That's funny. Here chock on this!


 
Dr. Evil

Dr. Evil

20×102mm Vulcan
Messages
37,512
Reaction score
80,702
Location
My Underground Lair
They want to charge him for sedition in DC for Jan. 6th. They are more desperate. Trump is letting them do what they want. They are setting precedent so it can be turned around on them.
 
V

Victor18

9mm
Messages
84
Reaction score
36
Location
Albany
Dr. Evil said:
They want to charge him for sedition in DC for Jan. 6th. They are more desperate. Trump is letting them do what they want. They are setting precedent so it can be turned around on them.
Click to expand...
I don't expect Trump to face any charges related to 1/6. He never specifically called for violence and he never specifically told them to disrupt the certification of the electoral votes. If I was the one to make the decision I would say do not indict, even though I think Trump is corrupt and a terrible person.
 
V

Victor18

9mm
Messages
84
Reaction score
36
Location
Albany

"It gives me no joy to write about prosecuting former President Donald J. Trump.

He and I have been friends for nearly 40 years. We spoke many times during his presidency on a wide array of matters. Knowing him as I do and knowledgeable of the law and federal criminal procedure, I can state that he is his own worst enemy, and the feds — of whom I am often highly critical — had no choice but to indict him"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top