I cannot help it. I consider this Judge Dearie nothing more than another Trump stooge. I will

[Atticus]

be very happy to be proven totally wrong, but that's where I'm at.

When I hear people---many of them Democrats---saying that Dearie is a decent "straight down the middle" judge who was respected by lawyers of all stripes for years, I hear echoes; echoes of all the alarmingly similar assurances I heard about a guy named Barr.

We will soon know if Dearie is willing to "decide" whether documents stamped "CLASSIFIED" are classified and whether Judge Cannon's invention of "residual executive privilege" will survive.

Trump has "touched" Judge Dearie and I fear he will---well, you know what happens to such people.

[Ferrets are Cool]

1. I'm right there with you.

Unfortunately, the rule of law is dead to them.

[Diamond_Dog]

2. That's my first thought, as well.

We’ve certainly heard this before.

[kentuck]

3. Perhaps you are right?

I cannot imagine Donald Trump choosing someone for such a position that was not already in his pocket.

[Arazi]

4. As I understand it, Trump can dispute Dearie's decisions, then Cannon ultimately decides

The way Loose Cannon has structured her order, she’ll be the ultimate arbiter anyway.

Furthermore, her order mandates that Dearie gets possession of the stolen classified documents for review.

Which mean that WHEN they’re disputed, Loose Cannon gets them.

I harbor no illusions that she won’t share them with her leige lord #Traitor.

[gab13by13]

6. She wants Trump's lawyer to have access to the classified documents.

What a joke. DOJ couldn't indict Mark Meadows for ignoring a subpoena because of discovery, having to turn over evidence to meadow's lawyer. Now they want the evidence before an indictment, and they will probably get it.

Merrick Garland would have made a fantastic SC justice, his deliberate approach would have served him well, there.

[hamsterjill]

18. Exactly.

Garland would have done very well in a position where he was given time without deadlines to accomplish his work.

He’s not very impressive in my opinion in the present arena with the clock ticking.

Trump is kicking his ass whether some want to admit it or not. Why do I say that? Because Trump isn’t under indictment, and he has been successful at bending the rules to his favor. Garland wants to play by the rules and that does not work against an adversary such as Trump. Garland hasn’t anticipated this behavior like he should be doing. To beat Trump, you’re going to have to be a bigger asshole than Trump himself is, and that is NOT Garland.

[emulatorloo]

20. You forget that Garland convicted Tim McVeigh and The Unibomber.

Good prosecutors are always deliberate. That’s how you get convictions.

[magicarpet]

5. Everything that tRUMP touches,...

..... turns into a bucket of shit.

It is hard to believe this special-master judge he picked could be any different.

Soon enough we will know.

[JohnSJ]

7. The DOJ will appeal this decision on classified document. They have to. It sets up very

dangerous precedent.

[jcgoldie]

8. He's a straight shooter...

...like Mueller.

[lark]

9. I agree, tfg would not have put his name forward without assurances of traitorousness.

Same with so-called Judge (unjudicious) Loose Cannon.

[Marcus IM]

10. Yep. Remember that ALL the media said Bill Barr was a straight shooter.

Even our favorites said the same (with a smattering of exceptions).

[emulatorloo]

12. No, I don't remember that.

[Marcus IM]

22. Right after Jeff sessions was fired and Barr was the announced replacement.

I do remember the round-robin of praise for him being a strict by-the-book kinda guy all over by NPR, CNN, MSNBC folks.

[emulatorloo]

26. Thanks!

FWIW I personally thought it was clear Trump fired Sessions for recusing himself from Russia investigation. Seemed to me Trump picked Barr to cover it up.

[Marcus IM]

27. Same here.

It didn't take long for his historical record to become clear in the more liberal media circles. MSM took a long while.

[Scrivener7]

11. He was doing mob prosecutions at the same time and in the same place as Rudy.

I trust him as far as I trust Rudy.

[emulatorloo]

14. Rudy changed and went to the dark side. Zero evidence Dearie is anything like that.

DOJ trusts Dearie. And they clearly have Rudy’s number.

[Scrivener7]

16. People trusted Rudy till they didn't. People said Barr was fine.

Do you believe tfg, at this late date, would do something reasonable for the first time in his life? I don't.

There is a pitfall in this. We just don't know yet what it is. Yet.

[emulatorloo]

19. No, I think TFG lawyers fucked up by putting Dearie on the list. They tend to be huge fuck-ups.

No one has ever thought Trump’s lawyers were competent.

Two of his lawyers are already in trouble for possible obstruction of justice.

If you have concrete factual evidence that Dearie is a psychotic MAGA liar like Rudy I’d love to see it.

[Scrivener7]

21. If history is not concrete factual proof enough for you that everyone tfg

hires or appoints is corrupt and/or corrupted, I don't know what to tell you.

But sure. Let's take a running start to kick that football.

[emulatorloo]

23. So give me CONCRETE FACTUAL PROOF on Dearie. Apparently you're unable to provide any.

[Scrivener7]

24. *sigh* Whatever, dear. Have a nice day.

[emulatorloo]

25. Sadly Your 'feelings' aren't facts. You're a great poster, but if you can't provide proof

then you can’t successfully back up your wild assertions.

You have a nice day too and I mean that sincerely.

[Atticus]

29. Your patience with nitpicking is admirable. Hang in there. nt

[Scrivener7]

30. I just can't do this argument anymore with people

who think it's going to be different this time.

[inthewind21]

31. Does that history

Apply to all the Trump appointed judges that Dismissed his 60 "the election was stolen" cases?

[Atticus]

36. Were all 60 of those judges appointed by Trump? nt

[tinrobot]

13. My first thought is - What dirt do they have on Dearie?

They don't pick people they can't control.

Time will tell.

[emulatorloo]

15. DOJ knows and apparently trusts Dearie. I think Trump lawyers fucked up again and accidentally

put Dearie on the list.

[maxrandb]

28. Does DOJ "know and trust" Dearie?

Or, did they say he would be acceptable so the judge didn't pick the other Federalist Society fuckstick Donnie Short Fingers recommended?

Because, if they couldn't agree jointly, she gets to pick one.

It was a pretty nice justice system we pretended to have, you know, with all the bloviating about "fairness and impartiality" and "no one above the law" and other such shit, but it has been destroyed.

I don't see how our Judicial Branch ever comes back from this shit, but I will tell you one thing for sure...

The next person that tells us "our institutions have held" needs a punch in the neck.

[H2O Man]

34. Threaten an old man,

now will ya? You'll have to get through my son, the three-time NYS Golden Gloves champion in order to punch this old man in the throat. Light heavyweight, heavyweight, and current cruiserweight champion, my boy is.

The institutions have always been a combination of good and bad. That includes the judicial, just as much as the other two. Sometimes great, sometimes awful. And they have held that status up for as long as we've been a nation. Thus, the question about the "special master" is simply is he an "institutionalist," or a "new institutionalist"? In other words, in this case, is he of the old republican party, or is he more likely to be of the Trump party?

Time will tell. We know that Reagan promoted his career in 1982, and Roberts in 2012. NYS's infamous "pothole" Senator Alfonse D'Amato had backed his being promoted. One might question if the D'Amato tie implies a connection to the organized crime rings that Trump worked with. Not that Reagan or Roberts could be mistaken for decent human beings.

Perhaps the most important thing -- at least in my opinion, though it puts me at risk of a punch to my neck -- is that Dearie has srved on the FISA court, dealing with foreign intelligence issues. I think it is safe to say that some of the mar-a-lago documents involve the investigation of members of Trump's 2016 campaign with Russia -- especially those from before Trump took office -- that Dearie will recognize they include "methods and sources, and do not belong to Trump.

[Scrivener7]

17. Exactly.

[inthewind21]

33. Well

There were all those Trump appointed judges that dismissed or denied his 60 bogus "the election was stolen" cases. Then there was that hand picked Supreme Court that denied his right to exert executive privilege.

[Scrivener7]

40. This is not the great argument you seem to think it is.

[Mr. Ected]

32. Mueller was supposed to be the right man for the job

He was. For Trump.

I think it's time for the hammer to drop. Enough playing games with these folks. Let's get J6 going, start processing the indictments, one at a time, nabbing henchman and on up the chain and nail Trump right after the mid-terms.

[Jose Garcia]

35. Do you have some information that the Justice Department doesn't?

The Justice Department actually approved him.

[Atticus]

37. In your view, does that mean he is a good choice or just the lesser of two evils? I don't know. I

have merely expressed my opinion and my hope that I am proven wrong.

[Jose Garcia]

38. If the DOJ didn't want him they could have objected and proposed other candidates

[Atticus]

39. They proposed two other candidates. Trump objected to both. The other candidate Trump proposed

was an unabashed "stop the steal" Trumpie. Dearie is, so far as we know, not.

If there was no candidate acceptable to both, Cannon was going to name her choice and could have chosen anyone.

[Jose Garcia]

41. Politico: Special Master expresses skepticism with Trump team's assertions

NEW YORK — The senior federal judge tasked with reviewing the materials seized by the FBI from Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate sharply questioned the former president’s attorneys Tuesday during their first hearing before his courtroom.

Judge Raymond Dearie pushed Trump’s lawyers repeatedly for refusing to back up the former president’s claim that he declassified the highly sensitive national security-related records discovered in his residence.


Former President Donald Trump's attorneys James Trusty and Evan Corcoran arrive at Brooklyn Federal Court on Tuesday, Sept. 20, 2022, in New York. | Brittainy Newman/AP Photo

By JOSH GERSTEIN and KYLE CHENEY

09/20/2022 03:05 PM EDT

Updated: 09/20/2022 03:29 PM EDT

NEW YORK — The senior federal judge tasked with reviewing the materials seized by the FBI from Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate sharply questioned the former president’s attorneys Tuesday during their first hearing before his courtroom.

Judge Raymond Dearie pushed Trump’s lawyers repeatedly for refusing to back up the former president’s claim that he declassified the highly sensitive national security-related records discovered in his residence.

“You can’t have your cake and eat it,” said Dearie, the “special master” picked by U.S. District Court Judge Aileen Cannon to vet Trump’s effort to reclaim the materials taken by federal investigators.

Trump has argued that the 11,000 documents taken from Mar-a-Lago were rightfully in his possession, including about 100 bearing classification markings that suggest they contain some of the nation’s most closely guarded intelligence.

more: https://www.politico.com/news/2022/09/20/trump-special-master-judge-mar-a-lago-00057805