Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

jberryhill

(62,444 posts)

12. No, not really

Reply to NightWatcher (Reply #5)

Fri Apr 13, 2018, 01:13 PM

Apr 2018

While headline writers aren't the greatest legal analysts, it is Trump's right to assert the privilege claim as to any particular item in question. That claim can certainly be argued over on a piecemeal basis.

So, it's not a question of Trump being asked to "vet" the documents, but, yes, he can certainly raise objections in relation to them.

Believe it or not, even if a person is a real asshole, they get the same rights as anyone else in legal proceedings.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

19 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Fox in the Henhouse UPDATE: Cohen asks judge to let Trump VET THE DOCUMENTS seized by the fBI [View all] Miles Archer Apr 2018 OP

Yeah, let the suspect decide. dalton99a Apr 2018 #1

Kimba Wood was the AG appointee by Bill Clinton who withdrew because of a nanny problem. DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2018 #2

I thought that was Zoe Baird not Kimba Wood nt iwillalwayswonderwhy Apr 2018 #8

They both had nanny problems DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2018 #11

At least they weren't having kids with them. n/t rzemanfl Apr 2018 #15

She is one hell of a good judge. raven mad Apr 2018 #19

I think this is the first time the criminals are attempting to run the legal democratisphere Apr 2018 #3

No that's what criminal defense lawyers do HopeAgain Apr 2018 #10

Not for ongoing criminal acts. Freethinker65 Apr 2018 #4

He's going to get laughed out of the courtroom. NightWatcher Apr 2018 #5

No, not really jberryhill Apr 2018 #12

DOJ should argue that the court can appoint a magistrate and HopeAgain Apr 2018 #6

In other words, the FBI hit the motherlode. C_U_L8R Apr 2018 #7

I think it safely answers the question regarding "Trump content." Miles Archer Apr 2018 #18

Fat freakin chance YessirAtsaFact Apr 2018 #9

Somebody at the FBI doing some speed reading today. Shrike47 Apr 2018 #13

I dont think that is how it works Tiggeroshii Apr 2018 #14

That's like a pedo saying, "Hey, let me vet my photos and files before you have a go at it!" TheBlackAdder Apr 2018 #16

Maybe provide transcripts? brooklynite Apr 2018 #17