General Discussion

Response to FBaggins (Reply #10)

John Fante This message was self-deleted by its author.

Edit history

Cannot view edit history for self-deleted messages.

Recommendations

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

76 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Trumps lawyers are telling us they have no defense in the secret document investigation. [View all] fightforfreedom Sep 2022 OP

Yep. The desk is decisive but they simply were on his property underpants Sep 2022 #1

TFG's life's work... RevBrotherThomas Sep 2022 #21

The courts' life work is also keeping TFG entangled in them until he croaks. Ocelot II Sep 2022 #30

Ok he is guilty. The Jungle 1 Sep 2022 #2

You get a break when you are part of the cabal. multigraincracker Sep 2022 #3

Its 50/50 in the Supreme Court. They have ruled against Trump in prior cases. 3Hotdogs Sep 2022 #4

There's no honor among thieves. Meadowoak Sep 2022 #5

There is no honor in endangering the National Security of the US of A. Justice matters. Sep 2022 #29

I think it's worse than that. Johonny Sep 2022 #35

How do you figure a 6/3 or with Roberts, a 5/4 split is 50/50? Bev54 Sep 2022 #68

Maga math Ray Bruns Sep 2022 #76

That makes it frivolous. no_hypocrisy Sep 2022 #6

That's why so many Trump lawyers get in trouble. fightforfreedom Sep 2022 #7

This message was self-deleted by its author fightforfreedom Sep 2022 #8

Even Dershowitz conceded they had probable cause for the warrant and enough to indict Jarqui Sep 2022 #9

+1, uponit7771 Sep 2022 #16

TY for this recap. Duppers Sep 2022 #20

good summation. Thank you Evolve Dammit Sep 2022 #26

Thanks. Excellent recap. n/t ms liberty Sep 2022 #69

That isn't what they're telling us FBaggins Sep 2022 #10

Wow, according to you the criminal case should be thrown out. fightforfreedom Sep 2022 #12

Strawman much? FBaggins Sep 2022 #18

This message was self-deleted by its author wnylib Sep 2022 #28

Huh inthewind21 Sep 2022 #42

Wishful thinking FBaggins Sep 2022 #44

It's not necessary to call someone a "person of interest" VMA131Marine Sep 2022 #55

You have it exactly backwards VMA131Marine Sep 2022 #17

That's an argument that hasn't been challenged and upheld in court in similar circumstances FBaggins Sep 2022 #23

Regarding the hypothetical example, wnylib Sep 2022 #36

How credible is it? Not very FBaggins Sep 2022 #39

Re: Your second paragraph. wnylib Sep 2022 #58

I think that's somewhat circular FBaggins Sep 2022 #63

Your first paragraph argument does not wnylib Sep 2022 #65

re: "prosecution's job to prove that they had not been. And, legally, they have a point." thesquanderer Sep 2022 #46

There is indeed plenty of precedent... but you aren't going to like it FBaggins Sep 2022 #51

Your analogy is inappropriate VMA131Marine Sep 2022 #53

Not really FBaggins Sep 2022 #56

You're ignoring that the documents themselves VMA131Marine Sep 2022 #61

Documents that have proper and correct classification markings VMA131Marine Sep 2022 #52

That's always been the case before... but it is the question here FBaggins Sep 2022 #54

Again, properly marked documents are presumptively VMA131Marine Sep 2022 #57

Sounds like a perfect Catch-22 intrepidity Sep 2022 #66

The PRA isn't written so ambiguous as to make any document TFG can think of a "personal record" ... uponit7771 Sep 2022 #24

That's why is absolutely matters whether some of the documents are classified FBaggins Sep 2022 #31

Under PRA (link) "Personal records" are defined and not willy nilly anything a president claims. uponit7771 Sep 2022 #38

The definition and Congress' legislative intent seem pretty clear to me FBaggins Sep 2022 #41

Jackson's ruling in regards to Clinton tapes in "sock drawer" case Clinton's tapes were CLEARLY ... uponit7771 Sep 2022 #48

No it didn't. FBaggins Sep 2022 #62

We agree that NARA doesn't have authority to designated records but that's not ... uponit7771 Sep 2022 #64

But, as Dearie reminds us, this is a civil case, not criminal intrepidity Sep 2022 #67

I believe you are mistaken. EndlessWire Sep 2022 #71

This message was self-deleted by its author John Fante Sep 2022 #75

Their only defense will be to pardon all the convicted in the future Mr. Ected Sep 2022 #11

Indeed! Duppers Sep 2022 #22

Why does everyone keep forgetting Donald Trump has an army of judges on his side? Heather MC Sep 2022 #13

According to some people would should just surrender, it's hopeless. fightforfreedom Sep 2022 #15

Why inthewind21 Sep 2022 #45

We definitely got lucky however Heather MC Sep 2022 #59

Cannon WILL be removed from the bench Obvious85 Sep 2022 #14

Not a chance FBaggins Sep 2022 #32

Judge Cannon will find him not guilty. Turbineguy Sep 2022 #19

And then she'll ask "where's my Mercedes?" peppertree Sep 2022 #25

Um... Cannon isn't presiding over a criminal case FBaggins Sep 2022 #33

Not quilty inthewind21 Sep 2022 #47

America has had 3 people @ the level of espionage that Trump might have been at and they were: Botany Sep 2022 #27

"All Trump and his lawyers can do is delay, create chaos in the justice system." progressoid Sep 2022 #34

I think when Cannon brought up a defense they didn't ask for Johonny Sep 2022 #37

I have had the thought that Cannon doesn't believe what she says, but rather... thesquanderer Sep 2022 #50

I think that is right. kentuck Sep 2022 #40

This analysis seems top notch as usual by Emptywheel Jarqui Sep 2022 #43

re: "irrelevant when it comes to the possible charges listed in the warrant. It is not a defense" thesquanderer Sep 2022 #49

In the meantime, Babyshit Yellow will see if he can whip up some violence. jeffreyi Sep 2022 #60

If it doesn't go to trial by Jan 2025, DeSantis will pardon him. carpetbagger Sep 2022 #70

Desantis the Dork may need a pardon by 2024. fightforfreedom Sep 2022 #72

You'd almost think they're just wanting to delay, delay, and milk the rubes. Beartracks Sep 2022 #73

Judge Dearie is not going to let him delay this issue. Hamlette Sep 2022 #74