Judge orders Trump not to disclose evidence in classified documents case
Source: ABC News
A federal judge on Monday approved a protective order sought by special counsel Jack Smith to keep former President Donald Trump from disclosing sensitive information in his classified documents case.
The protective order said Trump and Nauta "shall not disclose the Discovery Materials or their contents directly or indirectly to any person or entity other than persons employed to assist in the defense, persons who are interviewed as potential witnesses, counsel for potential witnesses, and other persons to whom the Court may authorize disclosure."
Notably, the special counsel also said the materials include "information pertaining to ongoing investigations, the disclosure of which could compromise those investigations and identify uncharged individuals."
Violations of the protective order "may result in contempt of court or other civil or criminal sanctions," the judge's order said.
Read more: https://abcnews.go.com/US/judge-orders-trump-disclose-evidence-classified-documents-case/story?id=100193266
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
marble falls
(71,919 posts)
Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin
(135,697 posts)Count on it
greatauntoftriplets
(179,005 posts)
catrose
(5,365 posts)Traildogbob
(13,018 posts)😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂👏😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
GreenWave
(12,641 posts)which I doubt, but did not observe the name, it could be lights out in his prison cell.
Alexander Of Assyria
(7,839 posts)repeatedly.
It wasn’t Cannon or corporate news would be all over the name..see, she’s sort of fair!
CaptainTruth
(8,200 posts)I swear I read that Cannon referred the decision on the motion/order to Judge Bruce Reinhart, the other judge associated with the case.
cbabe
(6,647 posts)
Kablooie
(19,107 posts)And what are they gonna do about it?
Sue him?
onenote
(46,140 posts)It applies to "Discovery Materials" as defined below. And since there has been no discovery yet, he can't very well violate it yet.
Definition of Discovery Materials. All non-classified discovery produced by the United States to the Defendants in preparation for, or in connection with, any stage of this case (collectively, “the Discovery Materials”) are subject to this protective order (“the Order”) and may be used by the Defendants and Defense Counsel (defined as counsel of record in this case) solely in connection with the defense of this case, and for no other purpose, and in connection with no other proceeding, without further order of this Court
Novara
(6,115 posts)You know he'll intimidate them, out them publicly, and hope for a mistrial.
Alexander Of Assyria
(7,839 posts)
Autumn
(48,962 posts)
I'm so looking forward to this. 
Alexander Of Assyria
(7,839 posts)Justice is grand, though not instant, it’s progressive.
alterfurz
(2,681 posts)
twodogsbarking
(18,779 posts)
Blue Owl
(59,099 posts)He can't control what spews out of his sphincter mouth...
twodogsbarking
(18,779 posts)
Tennessee Hillbilly
(693 posts)Quote From The Hill:
“Defendants shall only have access to Discovery Materials under the direct supervision of Defense Counsel or a member of Defense Counsel’s staff. Defendants shall not retain copies of Discovery Material,” Judge Bruce Reinhart, who approved the warrant to search Mar-a-Lago, wrote in the order.
Link:
https://thehill.com/homenews/4056871-judge-orders-trump-not-to-disclose-evidence-in-documents-case/
33taw
(3,343 posts)he made the ruling. It insulates her from decisions she doesn’t want to make.
onenote
(46,140 posts)under the criminal procedure rules. And given that Trumps attorneys had agreed to it in advance (also fairly typical for a protective order) the fact that it would be signed off on by the court was a forgone conclusion
33taw
(3,343 posts)Hopefully, does better than the first time.
ashredux
(2,928 posts)Seriously, the man is not well. Any person who was somewhat rational, would understand the gravity of what he is facing. I do not think he understands what is happening, what the process can do, and how he cannot bluster his way out.
DallasNE
(8,008 posts)Trump could still disclose it to a friendly witness who then disclosed it to Newsmax and others.
onenote
(46,140 posts)Either Trump or the witness would be subject to be held in contempt
SunSeeker
(58,283 posts)That's what would have happened to anyone else who did what Trump did. Hell, that's what happened to someone who took a lot less sensitive documents than what Trump took. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/national-security/us-officials-identify-leaked-classified-documents-suspect-21-year-old-rcna79577
But obviously, Trump's feelings are more important than our national security.
onenote
(46,140 posts)The reason that Texeiria is held without bond is that the prosecution successfully argued that he is a serious flight risk - which he undoubtedly is, particularly since he was charged with having disseminated national security information. The reason that Trump isn't being held without bond is that the prosecution agreed that he is not a serious flight risk and at this point the government either doesn't have the evidence to or is otherwise unwilling to charge him with dissemination of national security information.
The classified information referenced in the indictment isn't covered by the protective order signed by Magistrate Judge Reinhart (and written by DOJ). Those documents will be addressed by the CIPA procedures.
SunSeeker
(58,283 posts)This case is in Florida, hence no dissemination charges in Florida ...yet. But there is plenty of evidence of dissemination by Trump, like that Bedminster tape, so please do not post right wing talking points here, onenote.
And bullshit that Trump isn't a flight risk. He has properties all over the globe and is friends with various right wing dictators. And he is certainly a dissemination risk, as that Bedminster tape showed.
onenote
(46,140 posts)That's not a right-wing talking point, that's the law, SunSeeker. And Jack Smith knows the law and the facts and I'm going to go with his assessment of the risk that Trump is a flight risk over yours, SunSeeker, if that's okay with you, SunSeeker.
SunSeeker
(58,283 posts)He doesn't need to be charged with dissemination to be deemed a dissemination risk, if they have concrete evidence of dissemination, which they do. Just like he doesn't need to be charged with fleeing to be deemed a flight risk.
DOJ and the Trump judges have been overly deferential to Trump, and that's not "okay" with me.
onenote
(46,140 posts)Respectfully disagree.
SunSeeker
(58,283 posts)You're welcome to disagree, I can live with that.
onenote
(46,140 posts)And he's the one that decided that Trump wasn't a flight risk and instructed his team to expressly make that clear during the arraignment. So if anyone is being deferential, it would be Smith.
You can try to deflect this onto "DOJ and Trump judges" but it was Smith that made the decision about whether or not to seek bond and what conditions would attach.
SunSeeker
(58,283 posts)I'm not "deflecting," I'm just not letting the rest of DOJ off the hook. As the Washington Post reported today, DOJ needlessly waited over a year to even start investigating the fake electors scheme. Nor should we let Trump judges off the hook, like Cannon herself, who created a months-long delay with her earlier rulings holding Trump above the law in this particular matter.
onenote
(46,140 posts)You're changing the subject, which sort of is deflecting.
And not that it has anything to do with Smith's decision (not DOJ's) to allow Trump to remain free on personal recognizance, in the interest of accuracy, note that Cannon's order stopping DOJ from continuing its investigation and review of the seized classified materials was in entered on September 5 and vacated on September 22 -- thus it didn't cause a "months long delay".
Finally, doesn't the aggressive push back DOJ made against Cannon's order stopping the investigation -- DOJ filed its request that the district court lift its order three days after it was entered and then went to the appeals court the day after the District Court refused that request undermine your claim that the DOJ was deferential to Trump in the documents case.
In any event, you've acknowledged that you think Smith intentionally is being deferential (another way of saying weak) in his dealings with Trump in the documents case, thereby (in your estimation ) endangering the US.
Like I said, I disagree.
SunSeeker
(58,283 posts)I have from my first post in this thread. I consider it a related issue to what is discussed in the OP. If you don't want to talk about it or think it's irrelevant, fine, stop discussing it with me, but I'm not deflecting, I'm just talking about something you disagree with. So be it.
And Cannon did indeed cause a months long delay, starting with her ridiculous decision to appoint a special master at Trump's request and all the stupid hearings in August that went with it. She should have summarily dismissed his insane request, but no, she agreed with him that ex-presidents are above the law. Trump knew she would. He ran to her court for interference right after the Aug. 8 search and she was happy to ablige him. As Laurence Tribe pointed out, she interfered with the documents investigation. Tribe told Newsweek that her actions "caused a long delay that was so clearly unjustified that her pro-Trump interventions were reversed twice by the very conservative Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals." https://www.newsweek.com/harvard-law-expert-concerned-about-judge-cannons-pro-trump-history-1805772
You only bring up Cannon's September 5 order stopping DOJ from continuing its investigation (overturned September 22) as the only bit of delay, claiming you're doing it in the "interest of accuracy." That's rich. There was another apeal, about Cannon's ridiculous appointment of a special master. And it was not until December 1, 2022, that the 11th Circuit overturned that decision, which had required a special master review the records to decide if some should be kept from investigators. https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-appeals-court-reverses-appointment-special-master-trump-documents-probe-2022-12-01/
So it was NOT just one reversal. It is stunning that you are downplaying Cannon's lawless efforts to help Trump and claiming she only caused a 17-day delay, onenote. Again, please stop with the right wing talking points.
And those appeals do not "undermine" my point. Jack Smith was not appointed until November 18, 2022, so he had nothing to do with those appeals. And DOJ had no choice but to appeal Cannon's lawless rulings; such precedent (even if it was only at the district court level) could harm their other cases, not just their case against Trump. It was hardly a retreat on their deferential treatment of Trump.
And no, being deferential to Trump is not being weak, but it is being wrong. Smith is a great prosecutor, but he has never prosecuted an ex-president, and he appears to be making the same mistake Garland made with regard to Trump: bending over backwards for Trump so as to not appear political (unlike Cannon, who is doing it to help Trump get back in office, and doesn't give a shit if she looks political). And yes, that is endangering the US. Now, legal experts on MSNBC are saying it looks like the delays will result in Trump not getting tried until after the 2024 election. That is really bad for our country. Again, you can disagree. I can live with that. But please take your right wing talking points elsewhere.
onenote
(46,140 posts)That post was specifically, and exclusively, about the fact Trump was not incarcerated pending trial in the documents case and how that decision was due to the government and Trump judges being more sensitive to Trump's feelings than national security:
https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=3089953
But the decision not to seek Trump's incarceration pending trial wasn't made by a Trump judge. It was made by a magistrate judge who essentially carried out a ministerial act since Smith made the decision that Trump was not a flight risk and, presumably, not such a threat to the community that he needed to be incarcerated.
By the way, incarcerating Trump pending trial inevitably would have given the defense more ammunition to seek delays since meeting with defense counsel and, in particular, reviewing the classified documents at the heart of the case, would have been complicated if Trump was in jail.
It's really hard following exactly what you think. One moment its DOJ and the Trump courts endangering national security by being deferential. Then when its pointed out that DOJ immediately challenged Cannon's order, you pivot to distinguishing Smith from the DOJ. So I guess that means you are admitting that it was Smith that, in your view, endangered national security by deciding that Trump wasn't a flight risk or a risk to the community.
Finally, and I say this with all the respect you have earned, take your assertions that I'm spouting right-wing talking points and stick where the SunSeeker don't shine.
SunSeeker
(58,283 posts)If you can't follow that, not my problem.
I pointed out how wrong you were when you repeated a right wing talking point that Cannon only delayed matters by 17 days and you respond with lame personal insults. Stay classy, onenote.
intrepidity
(8,582 posts)onenote
(46,140 posts)From the protective order: A knowing violation of this Order by Defendants, Defense Counsel, and Authorized Persons may result in contempt of court or other civil or criminal sanctions.
