FBI search warrant executed at Mar-a-Lago (Update: Trump Indicted!)

[Torie]

What is he on the ballot for in November?

Agree.

Why should the election have any bearing here? Trump isn’t on the ballot.

Garland is doing his best to avoid the appearance of a politically motivated investigation.  That won't sway any of Trump's core supporters, but it's still the right move.

It is also DOJ policy. Who is on the ballot is irrelevant if it has political implications, particularly of this import. I doubt that the indictment would be in shape to file in any event before the midterms. This case if filed needs to be utterly airtight. That "trumps" the calendar.

[Torie]

What is he on the ballot for in November?

Agree.

Why should the election have any bearing here? Trump isn’t on the ballot.

Garland is doing his best to avoid the appearance of a politically motivated investigation.  That won't sway any of Trump's core supporters, but it's still the right move.

Trump and his MAGA enablers will always cry foul and accuse the Justice Department of a political motives, no matter when they announce something or how much hard evidence they gathered. Garland should really not be intimitated by their lazy talkingpoints.

If they wait until after the midterms, the presidential cycle is about to start, so the argument will then change from "politicall motivated for swing the midterms" to "politically motivated to stop Trump from running again." There's no perfect point in time unless you want to let him off the hook and send a signal that cult leaders and/or former presidents are above the law.

60 days for that to be in play. So after the midterms two years less 60 days to file an indictment - a 22 month window.

[Torie]

https://twitter.com/kyledcheney/status/1565129293247684608

The filing by Trump's lawyers still fantasizes that Trump can assert executive privilege, does not address the issue that Trump had the case of the slows in asking for a special master, seems to suggest that attorney client privileged documents were in the storage room rather than just the office, so the special master should look at everything, and then suggests that the documents should be run by Trump's lawyers so that their beady little eyes can look at the documents.

One thing that puzzles me, is that information in attorney client privileged documents can't be used to prosecute Trump unless subject to the crime fraud exception, so what is the big deal? I am not sure who has the right to possess such documents, if the privileged documents concern advice involving Trump's duties as President, rather than something entirely personal.

In contradistinction to the DOJ filing, I found this one somewhat discursive and disorganized, and light on legal authority, including sometimes misstating it. He is just not getting the best lawyers. So sad.

Finally, other than Trump's lawyers being desperate to know what the government has (they will know soon enough if he is indicted), what do they accomplish by delaying matters for a month or whatever?  Trump isn't going to be indicted until Christmas at the earliest if Garland chooses to go there.

[Torie]

https://twitter.com/Acyn/status/1565437736345079816
When this is the new talking point, it's pretty obvious where they think it's going.

At this point the best reason to not prosecute Trump is to avoid dirtying Eugene Debs' good name by having Trump be the second prominent candidate to run for president while imprisoned.

Yes we know. 

https://talkelections.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=517947.msg8734631#msg8734631

[Torie]

https://twitter.com/Acyn/status/1565437736345079816
When this is the new talking point, it's pretty obvious where they think it's going.

“The Democrats may decide they prefer a wounded Trump with an indictment hanging over his head to an indicted defendant.” More projection from the Republicans, conflating enforcing the law with their own political goals.

Actually Andrew McCarthy, the lawyer columnist for the National Review, is pretty much a never Trumper, and wishes the House had taken its time impeaching Trump past the time he left office, and then with what we know now about Jan 6 and now out of the blue, the purloined documents, maximized the chances of getting a conviction from the Senate, with the punishment being not removal of office (he'd already be out of office), but being banned from running for federal office ever again. The House and Senate porked the pooch by its pointless rush to non-judgement during Trump's end days in office for that very reason. He also believes that Trump has no right to the documents, and the claim of executive privilege is bogus.

I wish Andrew were in fact the Pub leader in the House in lieu of Kevin. The country would be far the better for it.

[Torie]

https://twitter.com/RonFilipkowski/status/1565357420108455938
The new completely deranged Trump line is "I think they were looking for Hillary Clinton emails". Because, you know, that's something that would be at Trump's house.

F***ing mental.

Trump took the Hillary emails that Comey reviewed, or the emails that Hillary said were erased were really given to Trump? I am unclear on that point.

For those like myself with memory issues, here is a good summary of Hillary's conduct regarding emails, and Trump's regarding documents:

https://www.politifact.com/article/2022/aug/09/comparing-hillary-clintons-emails-and-donald-trump/

[Torie]

Is the judge who's deciding on the special master a Trump judge?

Yup.

Yes, but to be fair her resume is top flight (I just checked it already knowing she was a Trump judge and expecting the worst). Whatever she does, I doubt she will make a hash of the law, e.g. go off the deep end on executive privilege.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aileen_Cannon

[Torie]

Just having read the more detailed inventory, the most significant takeaway is that there 7 documents in trump's office marked "Top Secret," and several more marked "Secret."

Oh, I missed the "empty" bit. We will need to await Georgia Moderate to tell us how sensitive the "Classified" category is.

[Torie]

https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1565756415209361409

Barr was shameless in his protection of Trump from legal consequences during his term as Attorney General, but at least he is a man with no personal loyalty to Trump. His loyalty only went as far as his paycheck, and that sort of mercenary attitude isn't the worst thing in the world now that Trump is out of office.

That is a rather uncharitable assessment of Barr, but hey, in this clip he "owned" not only Trump, but the Fox News hacks. I hope they invite back early and often.

[Torie]

I struggle to understand how there could be an executive privilege claim when the legislature isn't involved in this case.  Both the DOJ and NARA are part of the executive branch.

Well the privilege extends to everyone outside the executive branch I would think, but that aside, what is untenable is that it extends to ex Presidents when the current President waives it. That really is an unworkable standard. But there is no on point case on the matter. The judge seems to think that there is no downside to delaying the investigation over a claim of law that is most unlikely to prevail, but I disagree, so I would have ruled otherwise. And who is the injured party if there is executive privilege? Not Trump. He still does not have a right to the records.

The Judge sort of implied that she thinks it is all BS, but why not for the untamed masses out there, throw them a bone to make it all look fair to them, or afford Trump less of a basis to hawk his persecution complex.

[Torie]

I struggle to understand how there could be an executive privilege claim when the legislature isn't involved in this case.  Both the DOJ and NARA are part of the executive branch.

Well the privilege extends to everyone outside the executive branch I would think, but that aside, what is untenable is that it extends to ex Presidents when the current Presidents waives it. That really is an unworkable standard. But there is no on point case on the matter. The judge seems to think that there is no downside to delaying the investigation over a claim of law that is most unlikely to prevail, but I disagree, so I would have ruled otherwise. And who is the injured party if there is executive privilege? Not Trump. He still does not have a right to the records.

The Judge sort of implied that she thinks it is all BS, but why not for the untamed masses out there, and throw them a bone to make it all look fair to them, or afford Trump less of a basis to hawk his persecution complex.

Yes, but DOJ and NARA aren't outside the executive branch -- they're part of it! 

Who knew? 

[Torie]

DOJ should absolutely appeal after the nuclear docs revelation. That judge is making a mockery of this now.

While I do agree the DOJ should appeal, I don't see the connection you have drawn. Perhaps you could help the old man out.

[Torie]

DOJ should absolutely appeal after the nuclear docs revelation. That judge is making a mockery of this now.

While I do agree the DOJ should appeal, I don't see the connection you have drawn. Perhaps you could help the old man out.

The situation got worse. The nuclear secrets of another country, possibly a close ally, were confirmed to be in the possession of someone who peruses them with cheeto dust covered fingers and sells it to the Saudis.

This + the fact that the judges remarks in her ruling make her look like even more of a hack now trying to protect him, given what we know about the types of docs he had.

I don't see what that has to do with the special master. Are positing that it will entail a substantial delay, and that justice delayed is justice denied?

In that regard, I might note that the real danger to Trump is the obstruction charge, and that really does not turn much on the specifics of the documents beyond what we know. That is about who knew what when and how.

"“I don’t think the appointment of a special master is going to hold up, but even if it does I don’t see it fundamentally changing the trajectory,” Mr. Barr said, adding: “Documents were taken, classified information was taken and not handled appropriately, and they are looking into — and there is some evidence to suggest — that they were deceived. And none of that really relates to the content of documents. It relates to the fact that there were documents there.”

[Torie]

Can a Former President Assert Executive Privilege in an Impeachment Trial?

https://www.lawfareblog.com/can-former-president-assert-executive-privilege-impeachment-trial

This article was written in a different context, but it is by far the best article that I have read on the topic. It persuades me that Judge Cannon was right that the issue is not fully resolved as a legal matter, although by far the most compelling resolution is that where an ex President’s claim of executive privilege is not supported by the current President, the claim should fail.

[Torie]

Update:

Yikes.

[Torie]

Looks like a whole new crop of people to interview. But with the news story, Trump knows about the interest in the boxes. The coincidence of dates is disturbing.

[Torie]

LOL my (very tongue-in-cheek) post in reaction to the news about the boxes of documents being taken to NJ got moderated. Republicans routinely call for worse punishments for far less serious crimes. Next time anyone asks me why I treat republicans like they are completely undeserving of respect my answer is going to be, "b/c we are held to different standards."

Understatement with a sufficiently subtle lacing of otherwise most appropriate acid to escape the claws of the vice principals who may not share your brand of dry humor has its virtues my dear lad. Carry on.

[Torie]

I take it that despite Cannon's importunings, the two sides were not able to work out a deal regarding the classified documents that she requested happen by Friday.

[Torie]

https://twitter.com/ZoeTillman/status/1570883371806658560

Hey that is but 30 minutes away by Path and subway. Maybe I should show up as an "Atlas reporter"). But alas in a couple of days it's  time to return to Hudson before the holdings are claimed by virtue of adverse possession. Otherwise, I might call the court to ask if therapy dogs are allowed in the courtroom. Otherwise, the balance of the pack would have to forage to  their own for pizza slices left on the sidewalk. Lots of pizza in this set of zip codes.

[Torie]

Trump’s lawyers want to look at the documents themselves that they claim that Trump may have declassified, but won’t provide any evidence because it would expose their legal strategy to the DOJ. Why have a special master if Trump’s lawyers can look at it? Trump seems to have a phobia about providing any evidence.  His thing is unsubstantiated claims. Who knew?

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/20/us/politics/trump-declassification-documents.html

"But apparently undercutting that argument, Mr. Trusty told Judge Dearie at the hearing that he wanted some of his legal partners to get expedited top secret security clearances so that they, too, could view the documents. Mr. Trusty said he already had a top-secret clearance from another case.

'Complicating the matter even further, Julie Edelstein, a lawyer for the Justice Department, told Judge Dearie that a handful of the documents at issue were so secret that even Mr. Trusty’s clearance might not be enough.

'Mr. Trusty responded that “it was kind of astounding” that the government would seek to keep Mr. Trump’s legal team from seeing some of the classified material in the case. They needed to see it all, he said, to determine whether the government had acted properly by removing it during the search of Mar-a-Lago."

[Torie]

Yeah I feel Garland has given a few soliloquies now in which, if you read between the lines, he's basically indicating that he's, at the very least, seriously considering indicting Trump.

I honest to god do not understand why people think there’s even a chance that Garland will decline to indict Trump. Why bother going to all this trouble?

Because they want the documents. My take is that Trump will be indicted if there is an airtight case that he hid sensitive documents and lied about it. That remains to be seen.

[Torie]

If Trump had declassified some of that extremely sensitive material, that is an impeachable offense. So if he claims he did that, he can be impeached and convicted now, the penalty being that he is barred from holding any federal office.

I am surprised no one to my knowledge out there on the fruited plain has picked up on this take.

Yes I know, the two thirds thing in the Senate. That's OK. Make the Pubs there sweat, and defend his conduct putting lives at risk, or his perjury. That is the thing. He needs to make the claim under oath. Bring it Trump.

[Torie]

If Trump had declassified some of that extremely sensitive material, that is an impeachable offense. So if he claims he did that, he can be impeached and convicted now, the penalty being that he is barred from holding any federal office.

I am surprised no one to my knowledge out there on the fruited plain has picked up on this take.

Yes I know, the two thirds thing in the Senate. That's OK. Make the Pubs there sweat, and defend his conduct putting lives at risk, or his perjury. That is the thing. He needs to make the claim under oath. Bring it Trump.

I think Barr said (on Fox no less) if he just waved his hand over a bunch of boxes without knowing what's in them and said everything in here is declassified, that's worse than taking them in the first place.

Yes of course, but everybody knows he's lying. If there is a God, Trump will lie under oath, but his lawyers won't let him. Sad!

[Torie]

One of the few things that Trump said that at the time seemed to be hyperbole now seems to have been quite accurate - his claim that he could shoot people dead on the streets and still be loved. You see, Trump's poll ratings are as stable as the speed of light. 44% still support him at this very moment. Lawsuits, lies, insurrection enablement, Q'anon derangement, none of that matters. It is sobering that 45% of the country have basically been seduced into a cult as it were. Their lives are really that miserable for them. This place on the planet has just gone bat sh**t crazy. Pity that this post is not itself infractable for gross hyperbole. Damn!

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/22/upshot/donald-trump-approval-poll.html

[Torie]

I think a key part of the Hannity interview was this quote from Trump:

If you’re the President of the US, you can declassify just by saying, it’s declassified, even by thinking about it. Because you’re sending it to MAL, or to wherever you’re sending it.

I expect that affidavits are even now being prepared to get search warrants for other Trump properties.  There was already the suspicious video of the plane from MAL to Bedminster with Trump personally helping load boxes.

I just looked at it, and while I see Trump, I didn't see any boxes in his hands. Not that that matters obviously. Presumably the DOJ knew about this some time ago, and I am kind of shocked that warrants were not immediately issued. Now it is probably too late. If some stuff is in them that Trump really should not have, he most certainly will have destroyed those documents now. For him to have rushed documents out of MAL to avoid seizure is a smoking gun felony. So he has no choice but to destroy them.