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

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

There is gonna be an automatic stay on any IMPRISONMENT if Trump is Convicted, so I wouldn't be so obsessed with these corruption Trials of Trump, the only one that would be fast tracked is NY, because he is likely to be Convicted before an all female jury sympathetic to Stormy Daniels and it's a misdemeanor anyways the other Crts are in solid R states GA has an R CRT system and so does FLORIDA

It's good to keep up with them but Trump will appeal his Sentence all the way to SCOTUS, SCOTUS is unlikely to overturn his Conviction, because this is the same CRT that denied him being Prez,  but it can take up to 2+ yrs unless it's NY to go to jail

Look at Bannon he hasn't been in jail on a 4 mnth sentence

[Badger]

I pity his lawyers having to try argue a case from this.

Is it possible to for a plea bargain to be worked out without the consent of the defendant (not the prosecution really should be offering one, but I think the defense should be trying to get one, with or without Trump's consent)?

No, lawyers don't have that kind of power.

This. One can float trial balloons with a prosecutor that haven't been explicitly authorized by one's client as long as one advises the prosecutor that any such trial balloon is just that, and does not have authorization of a plea offer from one's client, but accepting or refusing a plea bargain is always the client's choice, not the lawyers.

That said, if a client is believed to be incompetent, then a lawyer not only can but arguably must seek a competency evaluation even over their clients objections, as there is presumably good reason to believe that such objections are of course not being made by a legally competent individual.

[Torie]

I pity his lawyers having to try argue a case from this.

Is it possible to for a plea bargain to be worked out without the consent of the defendant (not the prosecution really should be offering one, but I think the defense should be trying to get one, with or without Trump's consent)?

No, lawyers don't have that kind of power.

This. One can float trial balloons with a prosecutor that haven't been explicitly authorized by one's client as long as one advises the prosecutor that any such trial balloon is just that, and does not have authorization of a plea offer from one's client, but accepting or refusing a plea bargain is always the client's choice, not the lawyers.

That said, if a client is believed to be incompetent, then a lawyer not only can but arguably must seek a competency evaluation even over their clients objections, as there is presumably good reason to believe that such objections are of course not being made by a legally competent individual.

Trump without question has been and remains totally legally competent in the choices he makes in life, and arguably his "business plan" is quite rational given his needs and wants, so this speculation is nothing other than a frolic and detour.  I suspect most posters, and certainly you, are well aware of that.

If Trump were not Trump, given his resume, would he ever, ever, have been elected POTUS? At one time, I would have thought, and did think, absolutely not. How wrong I was. And thus into the pit we as a civil society society we went. Not sure it will ever recover while I am still here, but keep hope alive.

[Badger]

I pity his lawyers having to try argue a case from this.

Is it possible to for a plea bargain to be worked out without the consent of the defendant (not the prosecution really should be offering one, but I think the defense should be trying to get one, with or without Trump's consent)?

No, lawyers don't have that kind of power.

This. One can float trial balloons with a prosecutor that haven't been explicitly authorized by one's client as long as one advises the prosecutor that any such trial balloon is just that, and does not have authorization of a plea offer from one's client, but accepting or refusing a plea bargain is always the client's choice, not the lawyers.

That said, if a client is believed to be incompetent, then a lawyer not only can but arguably must seek a competency evaluation even over their clients objections, as there is presumably good reason to believe that such objections are of course not being made by a legally competent individual.

Trump without question has been and remains totally legally competent in the choices he makes in life, and arguably his "business plan" is quite rational given his needs and wants, so this speculation is nothing other than a frolic and detour.  I suspect most posters, and certainly you, are well aware of that.

If Trump were not Trump, given his resume, would he ever, ever, have been elected POTUS? At one time, I would have thought, and did think, absolutely not. How wrong I was. And thus into the pit we as a civil society society we went. Not sure it will ever recover will I am still here, but keep hope alive.

This. Trump is the textbook definition of narcissist personality disorder and is thus definitely not entirely right in the head. But he is fully capable of understanding the nature of the proceedings against him and at least theoretically participating in his own defense, even if he's too Stubborn and lacking decision making skills - not insane- to do so as well as he should.

[emailking]

Trump judge’s thin criminal trial resume comes with a twist
The Trump-appointed judge, preparing to oversee his documents case, is about to undertake a massive and complex health fraud trial.

Aileen Cannon, the federal judge overseeing Donald Trump’s latest criminal case, has run just four, relatively routine criminal trials in her short tenure on the bench — a stark contrast to the historic and complex proceedings she’s about to undertake related to the former president.

...

There’s one exception, however, to Cannon’s judicial history that has largely escaped scrutiny. For nearly one-and-a-half years, she’s shepherded a complex, 10-defendant health care fraud case to the verge of trial, and in the course has litigated tangled and fraught issues of attorney-client privilege and motions to suppress — some of which could be precursors to battles in the upcoming Trump case.

...

Cannon has actively navigated the latest rounds of pretrial motions even as the Trump case landed in her court, including complicated decisions related to efforts by prosecutors to pierce attorney-client privilege, a near exact parallel to issues that have arisen in Trump’s long-running case.

...

If the case goes to trial this year, it’s likely to be the most significant criminal trial experience Cannon has had to date — and the protracted pretrial phase is a notable comparator for what may be to come in the Trump litigation.

https://www.politico.com/news/2023/06/15/aileen-cannon-criminal-trial-record-00102135

[Progressive Pessimist]

I haven't commented here since this second indictment happened, and don't really have much to add outside of noting that, once again, Trump's hubris has bit him in his grossly tan-lined ass once again. That always seems to be the case, and it's good to see that what goes around does come around sometimes.

I have little faith in the trial happening successfully in Florida, but if it does convict Trump without anything go wrong...it still won't make up for everything else that Florida ruined for the country this century, but it would be appreciated.

[emailking]

Judge bars Trump from disclosing — or keeping — evidence in documents case
Magistrate Judge Bruce Reinhart held that evidence Trump's team is set to receive from the government shall not be "disseminated on any news or social media platform."

A federal judge issued a protective order Monday barring former President Donald Trump from disclosing on social media — or keeping — evidence set to be turned over to him by the government in the classified documents case.

The order against Trump and Walt Nauta, his co-defendant in the criminal case alleging he mishandled national security information, prohibits them from sharing evidence federal investigators are set to begin turning over to their lawyers as part of the discovery process in the case.

...

It bars them from disclosing information about the government's evidence to people not directly involved in the case without explicit permission from a judge, and warns they could face criminal contempt charges if they violate the order.

It also puts limits on Trump's access to the material.

"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," the ruling said.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/judge-bars-trump-disclosing-evidence-documents-case-rcna90016

[Pres Mike]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/2023/06/19/fbi-resisted-opening-probe-into-trumps-role-jan-6-more-than-year/

AG Garland slow walked any potential Trump investigations for a year. No one in his office was allowed to use the "T word". This was done to avoid looking partisan. Garland wanted the process to play out naturally.

I respect this. It builds an ironclad case.

[GeorgiaModerate]

Did any of you watch Trump's interview with Bret Baier?  From the reaction on Twitter, it sounds like Trump managed to completely incriminate himself.

[emailking]

No but I guess this is the problematic part.

In the clip, Baier noted to Trump that the National Archives and Records Administration asked for the return of the documents.

“No. And I gave them some,” Trump said.

“Baier responded, “And then they said they went to DOJ to subpoena you to get it.”

Trump responded, “Which they’ve never done before.”

Baier then asked, “Why not just hand them over then?”

“Because I had boxes. I want to go through the boxes and get all my personal things out. I don’t want to hand that over to NARA yet. And I was very busy as you have sort of seen.”

Baier added, “Yeah, but according to the indictment, you then tell this aide to move to other locations after telling your lawyers to say you’d fully complied with the subpoena when you hadn’t.”

Trump responded, “Before I send boxes over, I have to take all my things out. These boxes were interspersed with all sorts of things.”

https://deadline.com/2023/06/donald-trump-fox-news-bret-baier-1235420347/

[brucejoel99]

No but I guess this is the problematic part.

In the clip, Baier noted to Trump that the National Archives and Records Administration asked for the return of the documents.

“No. And I gave them some,” Trump said.

“Baier responded, “And then they said they went to DOJ to subpoena you to get it.”

Trump responded, “Which they’ve never done before.”

Baier then asked, “Why not just hand them over then?”

“Because I had boxes. I want to go through the boxes and get all my personal things out. I don’t want to hand that over to NARA yet. And I was very busy as you have sort of seen.”

Baier added, “Yeah, but according to the indictment, you then tell this aide to move to other locations after telling your lawyers to say you’d fully complied with the subpoena when you hadn’t.”

Trump responded, “Before I send boxes over, I have to take all my things out. These boxes were interspersed with all sorts of things.”

https://deadline.com/2023/06/donald-trump-fox-news-bret-baier-1235420347/

All else aside, "being busy" isn't even a valid excuse to violate a subpoena, jesus; when you get a subpoena, everything else should go to the side & you become "busy" with complying with the subpoena.

[emailking]

https://twitter.com/Acyn/status/1670919463837769729

Asked about the recording, Trump says there was no document.

[Landslide Lyndon]

https://twitter.com/Acyn/status/1670919463837769729

Asked about the recording, Trump says there was no document.

"Who are you going to believe, me or your lying ears?"

[Inmate Trump]

Anyone who can listen to Trump speak - about anything - and walk away thinking he should be president is an idiot.

[Pericles]

That interview just goes to show how Trump's words really have no value. He just lies and lies so much. Looking at how Boris is now disgraced in the UK for his lying, Americans really need to stop tolerating and rewarding dishonesty and have some standards for honesty from their leaders. I'm such an idealist, I know.

[GeorgiaModerate]

https://twitter.com/MacFarlaneNews/status/1671133905263505408

That is an extremely ambitious schedule.  The actual start date will very likely be delayed significantly.

[Torie]

Fake recording! It is possible that Trump didn't have the document he described and was just jiving. Despite what Brett said, I don't recall anyone saying that Trump showed a document marked classified to them that was about Iran, as opposed to claiming he had it in his hands/pile that he was rustling through for show.

I wonder if it is typical that a warp speed trial date is set in criminal cases, and then due to claimed discovery needs, ends up being moved out a year or two. (Some legal types on TV have said they don't expect that trial to occur before the election.) Perhaps Badger can help us with that. How much can a defense counsel delay matters for strategic reasons?

[emailking]

Yeah I don't think it will happen in August. Since this deals with class there can be certain interlocutory appeals that Trump's team can use to drag it out. (Also makes it less likely a possible conviction will be overturned on appeal.) But I'm glad she wants to get moving.

[Sir Mohamed]

https://twitter.com/axios/status/1671140242525503488

[Illiniwek]

I'm stunned. Maybe it will be delayed, but this is could be a huge win to get this trial in before the election.

[Redban]

I just saw CNN say August ... I had assumed they meant August of 2024. They're aiming for August 2023? I doubt they can pull it off

[GeorgiaModerate]

I just saw CNN say August ... I had assumed they meant August of 2024. They're aiming for August 2023? I doubt they can pull it off

Right, it will never happen in August of this year; even August of next year is a reach for the actual start date IMO.  There will be delays such as pretrial motions and appeals, plus the time it takes for one or more of the defense attorneys to get the needed security clearance.   But setting such an early date should get the process moving in a timely fashion.

[Torie]

I just saw CNN say August ... I had assumed they meant August of 2024. They're aiming for August 2023? I doubt they can pull it off

Right, it will never happen in August of this year; even August of next year is a reach for the actual start date IMO.  There will be delays such as pretrial motions and appeals, plus the time it takes for one or more of the defense attorneys to get the needed security clearance.   But setting such an early date should get the process moving in a timely fashion.

I plucked the two items below from the NYT that seem to have the most potential for significant delay - security clearances and pre-trial appellate proceedings.  That said, I would think the security clearance people and the appellate courts understand the desirability of getting this trial done this year if at all possible, that is consistent with justice.

"Secret litigation" is a term that I have not heard before. That will sound very "deep state" to MAGA ears.

For one thing, following Judge Cannon’s orders, Mr. Trump’s lawyers started the process of obtaining the security clearances needed to deal with the significant classified evidence issues in the case only last week. The background check process to obtain the clearances can take months.
…

Beyond the array of legal tactics that Mr. Trump’s lawyers may use to attack the validity of the charges against him, the parties in the case will also have to engage in significant closed-door litigation over how to handle the classified evidence at the heart of the government’s prosecution. Mr. Trump has been accused of illegally holding on to 31 individual national defense documents, many of which were marked as top secret.

Much of the secret litigation will take place under the aegis of the Classified Information Procedures Act. If the government does not agree with any of Judge Cannon’s rulings involving the act, it can pause pretrial proceedings and appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit, in Atlanta. (The defense would have to wait until after any conviction to appeal an evidentiary issue under the act.)

[Ferguson97]

That’s a ridiculously short discovery period. What is Cannon’s aim here?

[OSR stands with Israel]

I just saw CNN say August ... I had assumed they meant August of 2024. They're aiming for August 2023? I doubt they can pull it off

Right, it will never happen in August of this year; even August of next year is a reach for the actual start date IMO.  There will be delays such as pretrial motions and appeals, plus the time it takes for one or more of the defense attorneys to get the needed security clearance.   But setting such an early date should get the process moving in a timely fashion.

I mean don’t cases usually get delayed cause the government wants time to prep for them . I am sure in this regard they will keep the fact that they basically only have till Nov 2024 to complete this in mind and bring this case to trial as quickly as possible