Trump Indictment ( includes NY AG and Fed documents case ) (3 Viewers)

Thread Attachment browser

Users who are viewing this thread

    Total: 4 (members: 0, guests: 4)
    SteveSBrickNJ

    SteveSBrickNJ

    Well-known member
    Joined
    Jan 7, 2022
    Messages
    1,657
    Reaction score
    776
    Age
    62
    Location
    New Jersey
    Offline
    Former President D. Trump has been indicted by a New York Grand Jury. There will be much to talk about on this topic because this is just the first step in a lengthy process.
    Possibly it is worthy of its own thread here rather than posting about Trump's indictment in already existing threads? :unsure:
    *
    This 3/31/23 story might get the ball rolling....
    *
    www.yahoo.com

    Manhattan’s DA wanted a Friday Trump arrest. Trump’s team said no.

    Secret Service needed more time to prepare, according to the ex-president’s legal team.
    www.yahoo.com www.yahoo.com
     
    MT15 said:
    As every sane person is saying:



    Will SFL acknowledge his error? Will he admit he used a source that is batshirt crazy?
    …


    magic eight ball says….doubtful.
    Click to expand...

    The interesting part about that...This is from an actual court filing. This is something that lawyers put in front of a judge. They put quotation marks around "Law enforcement officers of the Department of Justice may use deadly force when necessary...." which means that they are directly quoting from what the policy statement says. However, what the ACTUAL quote is "Law enforcement officers of the Department of Justice may use deadly force ONLY when necessary, that is, when the officer has a reasonable belief that the subject of such force poses an imminent danger of death or serious physical injury to the officer or another person." Followed by almost a half page of other information making it very clear when an officer can and cannot use such force.

    Any competent judge would immediately dismiss such a motion that makes such a blatantly false claim about something so simple.
     
    One story that has not gotten near enough coverage, I think, is the recently unsealed information regarding the issuance of the search warrant.

    The judge who issued the warrant describes a 9 minute phone call to Walt Nauta where Trump directed him to move some boxes before the lawyers arrived, and specifically instructed Nauta to try and avoid the security cameras when moving the boxes.

    edited to add: The more I think about it, the more I wonder if this isn't why Trump made such a big deal about "JOE BIDEN IS TRYING TO KILL ME!!!" He doesn't want people talking about why did he tell his aide to avoid security cameras when moving boxes before the lawyers showed up to start searching.
     
    Last edited:
    Dueling motions this weekend. Smith asks Cannon to gag Trump from telling lies about law enforcement and the search of Mar-A-Lago, and Trump’s defense asks her to sanction the special prosecutor. This should be interesting, if she actually responds before next Christmas. 🙄

     
    Yeah, I read she denied it without prejudice which means he can refile it but also means it cannot be appealed. So just more delay.

     
    MT15 said:
    Yeah, I read she denied it without prejudice which means he can refile it but also means it cannot be appealed. So just more delay.

    Click to expand...

    Jack really needs to make a move on having her removed if he can. It's apparent she's delaying to please Trump. Take forever to rule on every other motion, but get these out of the way ASAP?
     
    GrandAdmiral said:
    Jack really needs to make a move on having her removed if he can. It's apparent she's delaying to please Trump. Take forever to rule on every other motion, but get these out of the way ASAP?
    Click to expand...
    Yeah, it seems to me that she is being advised by someone how to maximize the delay without doing anything that could be actually used to get her off the case. I don’t know what he can do with the way she is ruling with what they call “paperless” orders and dismissing without prejudice.
     
    MT15 said:
    Yeah, it seems to me that she is being advised by someone how to maximize the delay without doing anything that could be actually used to get her off the case. I don’t know what he can do with the way she is ruling with what they call “paperless” orders and dismissing without prejudice.
    Click to expand...
    I've kinda written off this case because it not gonna finish before the election, so it's ultimately inconsequential.
     
    Judge Aileen Cannon has been criticized for letting unresolved legal issues pile up in Donald Trump's classified documents case, but the Trump appointee has herself bristled at the notion that she is delaying justice. While "it may not appear on the surface that anything is happening," Cannon recently snapped at a prosecutor on special counsel Jack Smith's team, "there is a ton of work being done."

    According to a New York Times report, while plenty of legal work is done behind the curtain, prosecutors and legal experts are annoyed over what is plain to see: that Cannon has granted full hearings on even the most far-fetched issues that Trump's legal team has raised — and then declined to rule decisively on those issues, consciously or not playing into the former president's strategy of delaying the trial until after the 2024 election.

    Trump, who is charged with stealing classified national security documents, including nuclear secrets, and hiding them at his Mar-a-Lago estate, could have the case dropped altogether if he's elected president again.

    There is no indication that Cannon is ready to have the case go to trial, despite handling it since last June. At seven public hearings, the Times reported that Cannon has raised eyebrows by repeatedly asked the same questions and not appearing to grasp the answers she received.

    For example, when Stanley Woodward Jr., a lawyer for Trump co-defendant Walt Nauta, asked Cannon to make prosecutors turn over their internal messages so he could better argue that the charges were brought vindictively, Cannon asked him what he actually wanted from the government. Woodward responded that he wanted anything that mentioned him by name, before Cannon asked him to say it again, but more "slowly."

    “All right,” she said, looking through her notes. “So I understand your request. It’s, quote, ‘All documents, communications concerning Mr. Woodward.’”

    Prosecutor David Harbach then argued that the claims were "fantasy" — Woodward asserts that a Justice Department official threatened his career during a meeting about the case — and that the law prohibits defense counsel from sniffing around government communications. But Cannon seemed to miss the point, asking Harbach repeatedly about whether or not he had the messages that Woodward wanted, even as Harbach impressed upon her that Woodward had no evidence that could justify the surrender of any messages.

    Exasperated, Harbach all but shouted that Woodward's request had no legal or factual standing. "That is what I'm trying to tell you," he said. Cannon responded by telling Harbach that he needed to "calm down."

    The contentious exchanges Cannon has had with prosecutors stand in contrast to her more gentle treatment of Trump's lawyers, prompting critics to accuse her of bias.

    "Regardless of her motives," the Times noted, "Judge Cannon has effectively imperiled the future of a criminal prosecution that once seemed the most straightforward of the four Mr. Trump is facing."...............

    www.salon.com

    "That's what I'm trying to tell you": Cannon confused by legal questions in Trump documents case

    Judge Aileen Cannon, a Trump appointee, has frustrated prosecutors by appearing confused on basic legal points
    www.salon.com www.salon.com
     
    And the latest from Cannon...

    Judge Aileen Cannon is planning on holding a sprawling hearing on Donald Trump’s request to declare Jack Smith’s appointment as special counsel invalid, signaling the judge could be more willing than any other trial judge to veto the special prosecutor’s authority.

    The planned hearing also adds a new, unusual twist in the federal criminal national security case against the former president: Cannon on Tuesday said that a variety of political partisans and constitutional scholars not otherwise involved with the case can join in the oral arguments on June 21.

    It’s an extraordinary elevation of arguments in a criminal case first filed a year ago this week that likely won’t see trial until next year, if at all.

    Similar challenges from Trump and other high-level targets of special counsel probes have flopped from coast to coast in recent years: Hunter Biden’s attorney didn’t get anywhere with judges in Los Angeles and Delaware; Paul Manafort’s arguments fell flat when the former Trump campaign chairman challenged special counsel Robert Mueller’s authority; and Andrew Miller, a former associate of Roger Stone, also lost his challenge to Mueller’s authority.

    Even with other federal trial-level judges allowing special counsels’ criminal prosecutions, Cannon could rule differently.

    Cannon’s signal of willingness to entertain challenges to the special counsel comes in the same week Republicans are bearing down on Attorney General Merrick Garland for his use of special counsels.
    Click to expand...


    www.cnn.com

    Judge Cannon expands hearing on Trump’s request to declare special counsel’s appointment invalid | CNN Politics

    Judge Aileen Cannon is planning on holding a sprawling hearing on Donald Trump’s request to declare Jack Smith’s appointment as special counsel invalid, signaling the judge could be more willing than any other trial judge to veto the special prosecutor’s authority.
    www.cnn.com www.cnn.com
     
    GrandAdmiral said:
    And the latest from Cannon...




    www.cnn.com

    Judge Cannon expands hearing on Trump’s request to declare special counsel’s appointment invalid | CNN Politics

    Judge Aileen Cannon is planning on holding a sprawling hearing on Donald Trump’s request to declare Jack Smith’s appointment as special counsel invalid, signaling the judge could be more willing than any other trial judge to veto the special prosecutor’s authority.
    www.cnn.com www.cnn.com
    Click to expand...

    🤡🤡🤡

    She is so ridiculously unqualified and ignorant and partisan. This is what right wingers hold up as a model... a true MAGA turd.
     
    Some of her colleagues are speaking out (off the record, of course). They say she is overwhelmed by mundane trials, messy and disorganized. In over her head. And they also say she is notoriously hard on the defense, which makes her deference to the defense in this case stand out like a sore thumb.

     

    Create an account or login to comment

    You must be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create account

    Create an account on our community. It's easy!

    Register

    Log in

    Already have an account? Log in here.

    Share this page

    General News Feed

    Fact Checkers News Feed

    Back
    Top Bottom