General Discussion

CanonRay

(16,109 posts)

45. Is it tear stained?

Reply to kpete (Original post)

Mon Aug 7, 2023, 05:50 PM

Aug 2023

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

63 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

JUST IN: Trump has filed his response to the special counsel's motion for a protective order. [View all] kpete Aug 2023 OP

I refuse to join xwitter. Can someone summarize? lindysalsagal Aug 2023 #1

here: kpete Aug 2023 #3

Oh, dam. I'm not attempting that. lindysalsagal Aug 2023 #7

You're not going to....read the filing? brooklynite Aug 2023 #19

No, you're supposed to read it for them and provide an executive summary. /s emulatorloo Aug 2023 #37

"Once upon a time...." brooklynite Aug 2023 #47

I tried! Alliepoo Aug 2023 #55

That is where the document is publicly filed for all to read. Bev54 Aug 2023 #22

I have to get in front of a monitor. Conjuay Aug 2023 #31

Here's an article about it. emulatorloo Aug 2023 #38

You're not attempting...words? Tarc Aug 2023 #59

When I click on the document it goes to Document Cloud and not Twitter. chowder66 Aug 2023 #4

You don't have to join X Jilly_in_VA Aug 2023 #5

Forget X - Hit the second link for the entire 29 page document Brother Buzz Aug 2023 #13

Sharpie or Crayon? Kennah Aug 2023 #2

Ketchup dweller Aug 2023 #29

Thank You RB77 Aug 2023 #36

Ba-Dum-TISHhh! electric_blue68 Aug 2023 #63

Who is this "President" Trump referred to in the response? YDogg Aug 2023 #6

I hope the answer to this reads Jilly_in_VA Aug 2023 #8

Trump was never obliged to show up for this pre-trial hearing. brooklynite Aug 2023 #20

Yep dalton99a Aug 2023 #9

All these motions and responses, all emails, have nothing to do with jailing anyone. Alexander Of Assyria Aug 2023 #12

No the protective order is standard but Trump lawyers are trying to get a hearing Bev54 Aug 2023 #24

Wasn't the point of that particular post ExWhoDoesntCare Aug 2023 #60

For those of us who have trouble processing/understanding stuff.... usedtobedemgurl Aug 2023 #10

Main issue is defining sensitive materials and how to deal with them. Alexander Of Assyria Aug 2023 #14

Thank you. usedtobedemgurl Aug 2023 #15

This response is a joke. triron Aug 2023 #11

1st amendment BS and claims false allegations and didn't figure worth reading on at that point! Brainfodder Aug 2023 #16

LOL, they're being ballsy. Jirel Aug 2023 #17

As a non-laywer can the judge say "screw you" (in legalize) to drumphf & co? electric_blue68 Aug 2023 #18

Happens all the time ExWhoDoesntCare Aug 2023 #61

Ok, good! Ty. electric_blue68 Aug 2023 #62

Thanks but, Disaffected Aug 2023 #21

Federal rules of criminal procedure. n/t Ms. Toad Aug 2023 #26

Disaffected make joke, Disaffected Aug 2023 #43

OK. Ms. Toad Aug 2023 #46

Won't argue (or joke) Disaffected Aug 2023 #48

It's actually pretty funny, now that I know what Fed R. Crim means! ShazzieB Aug 2023 #49

Ah, I guess my foray into comedy Disaffected Aug 2023 #50

It's Fed. R. Crim. P. . . . markpkessinger Aug 2023 #30

Isn't he a reporter on Ted Lasso? Generic Brad Aug 2023 #51

Djt's allies and defenders keep referring to him as "President". Only Biden is now President. Jrose Aug 2023 #23

Favorable views? Brainfodder Aug 2023 #27

If that's what they're trying to do, it's really obnoxious and offensive. ShazzieB Aug 2023 #52

"In a trial about First Amendment rights..." choie Aug 2023 #25

Well that's their horse Conjuay Aug 2023 #28

That was Lauro's go to comment in his CNN interview. honest.abe Aug 2023 #33

so Trump's asshole lawyer is schooling the judge? agingdem Aug 2023 #34

They mistake the judge for Judge Cannon I guess. emulatorloo Aug 2023 #39

So when does the judge start lecturing Trump and his attorneys? Irish_Dem Aug 2023 #40

waiting..waiting agingdem Aug 2023 #42

Dark Brandon really got in their heads...... getagrip_already Aug 2023 #32

That was the dumbest part of their filing. Couldn't beleive how stupid the 'argument' was emulatorloo Aug 2023 #35

They are made that Jack Smith included a copy of Trump's internet threats in his filing. Irish_Dem Aug 2023 #44

Eh, Jack Smith is going to rip this to shreds. First of all this is not a First Amendment issue and cayugafalls Aug 2023 #41

Is it tear stained? CanonRay Aug 2023 #45

Rights, schmights. ShazzieB Aug 2023 #53

"President" orangecrush Aug 2023 #54

Question for prospective jurors (and unfortunately, lawyers): usonian Aug 2023 #56

Djt wasn't a great fan of 1st Amendment rights when peaceful protesters were beaten... Jrose Aug 2023 #57

Trump's interpretation of the 1st Amendment Sessuch Aug 2023 #58