Trump Indictment ( includes NY AG and Fed documents case ) (2 Viewers)

[SteveSBrickNJ]

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?
*
This 3/31/23 story might get the ball rolling....
*

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

 

[LA - L.A.]

Sendai appears to routinely ignore points that they can't address.

Same way they ignore the meaning of the qualifying statement, "within the scope of his or her jurisdiction", as well as the preceding statement they omit entirely, "Subject to the limitations in the following paragraphs", when they're quoting 28 C.F.R. § 600.6.

Fact is, and I'll just quote from the essay linked previously to save typing it out myself:

The Attorney General had statutory authority to hire Jack Smith to work in the Department of Justice pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 3101 (affording each Executive agency the power to hire employees, defined to include officers, id. § 2105(a)). See also 28 U.S.C. §§ 503, 509 (designating the Attorney General “the head of the Department of Justice” and vesting the Attorney General with the authority to perform virtually all DOJ functions, which includes hiring)​

That covers hiring. And for delegation of authority:

Section 509 provides that, with discrete exceptions not relevant here, “[a]ll” DOJ functions “are vested in the Attorney General,” even where another statute specifically assigns a particular function to other DOJ officials (such as 28 U.S.C. § 547(1), which authorizes U.S. Attorneys to prosecute offenses against the United States). Therefore, the Attorney General himself may supervise a criminal investigation and prosecution. ...​

​

Section 510, in turn, provides the Attorney General a virtually unlimited power to delegate those authorities. It provides that the Attorney General “may from time to time make such provisions as he considers appropriate authorizing the performance by any other officer, employee, or agency of the Department of Justice of any function of the Attorney General.” (Congress has vested the Attorney General with such a broad delegation power since at least 1950. See Reorganization Plan No. 2 of 1950, § 2, 64 Stat. 1261, 1261.) This means that the Attorney General may assign the functions of criminal investigation and prosecution of a particular case—powers he may personally exercise, per Section 509—to any other officer, employee, or agency of DOJ.​

​

So the AG can, unsurprisingly, hire someone and delegate the necessary authority to them.

​

And the multiple problems with the argument that the AG can't create an office include the fact that:

... as the Supreme Court reiterated in Lucia v. SEC (2018), such an individual occupies an “office,” and is thus an Appointments Clause “officer,” only if two conditions are met:​

​

(i) The individual is empowered to “exercise[] significant authority pursuant to the laws of the United States”; and​

​

(ii) She occupies “a ‘continuing’ position established by law” within the U.S. government.​

But it's not a "continuing position established by law"; Smith is hired only for a specific task, and there is no formal DoJ role that would be filled if he resigned, there's no "Office of Mar-a-Lago Investigating", there's no such language in his appointment. So it's, at the very least, questionable whether the Appointments Clause is relevant at all.

But, even if we assume that's not the case, the AG has the authority to create DoJ positions that meet the conditions for an Appointments Clause office anyway:

In any event, the Attorney General does have statutory authority to create a new DOJ position that meets the conditions for an Appointments Clause “office.” Once again, the primary source of that authority is 28 U.S.C. § 510, which provides that the Attorney General “may from time to time make such provisions as he considers appropriate authorizing the performance by any other officer, employee, or agency of the Department of Justice of any function of the Attorney General.” This broad delegation authority, together with the general authority of the head of every Executive Department “to prescribe regulations for the government of his department [and] the distribution and performance of its business,” 5 U.S.C. § 301 (emphasis added), not only empowers the Attorney General to delegate the exercise of his authorities to another DOJ officer, employee, or agency in a discrete, particular case (“from time to time” in the usual DOJ parlance), but also to create continuing positions in DOJ that are to be filled by individuals whose duties are to exercise such delegated functions.​

​

For example, in 1973, before Congress had created the U.S. Marshals Service, Attorney General Richard Kleindienst established an office of the “U.S. Marshals Service” within DOJ. Kleindienst appropriately cited, inter alia, Section 510 and Section 301, as the basis for the creation of that office because the persons occupying the office were assigned to perform functions delegated from (and by) the Attorney General. See 38 Fed. Reg. 12,917 (1973). Several years later, in referring to this Attorney General creation of the “Marshals Service,” the Office of Legal Counsel cited Section 510 in explaining that “Congress has by statute vested the Attorney General with the authority to take certain measures, including the creation of inferior offices within the Department of Justice, to carry out the functions of his office.” Applicability of Appointment Provisions of the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988 to Incumbent Officeholders, 12 Op. O.L.C. 286, 288 n.5 (1988) (emphasis added).​

​

There are other examples of this given, for example, including the establishment of "the Office of Watergate Special Prosecution Force" in 1973, the "Office of Independent Counsel: Iran/Contra" in 1987, and more.

But really none of this should be necessary; the premise we're being asked to consider here is, to boil it down, that the AG hasn't had the authority to hire and delegate power to employees such as special counsels for decades and literally no-one noticed this until now despite multiple rulings considering such appointments. In ordinary circumstances, I would suggest that Cannon's ruling has pretty much zero chance of holding up on appeal.

Trump violated the Espionage Act by taking, keeping and hiding national security documents that belong only to the US government and obstructed justice to try to hide and perpetuate his crimes. Trump betrayed the trust of we the people of the United States and he put our national security at risk because he's a selfish, thuggish criminal.

Sendai will either ignore what you said in your post or just repeat the same false statements they keep regurgitating. Even Sendai knows they're not fooling anyone, but fooling people isn't their goal. Their goal is to keep everyone from talking about the actual crimes that Trump committed.

Let's not give Sendai what they want. Every time we refute their nonsense. Let's lead off with repeating the crimes that Jack Smith has dead to right's evidence that Trump committed.

Trump violated the Espionage Act by taking, keeping and hiding national security documents that belong only to the US government and obstructed justice to try to hide and perpetuate his crimes. Trump betrayed the trust of we the people of the United States and he put our national security at risk because he's a selfish, thuggish criminal.

 

[Sendai]

Every time you try to deflect the conversation away from the fact that the evidence has Trump dead to rights on violating the Espionage Act and obstruction of justice, you actually remind everyone that Trump definitely broke the law by taking, keeping and hiding documents that belonged to the US government.

Even you can't bring yourself to try to be deceptive about the fact that the evidence clearly shows Trump broke the law. Now let's address the false claims you keep deceptively making.


It's misleading and you know it's misleading which is why I know you are intentionally being deceptive. You cherry pick and quote things out of context all the time. You're not honest and it's intentional.


That's not the entirety of what you are quoting and you know it's not. You know that entirety of what you are deceptively quoting makes it very clear that the Special Counsel only has investigative and prosecutorial functions on a temporary and one issue/case basis.

They can only be created to investigate and prosecute a single issue, case and/or trial. Once they have concluded the investigation and prosecution of that one issue, they no longer have any functions at all of a US Attorney. That's why they are not a US Attorney.

You know that's true and you pretend like it's not. You keep repeating these things you know to be false, because you are desperately trying to keep people from talking about the fact that everyone knows the evidence irrefutably shows that Trump broke the law.

You're doing on this board what every defense attorney does in court when they know the evidence has their client dead to rights, they start trying to confuse the jury and bog the trial down with nonsense procedural motions.

The AG has the power to assign any current United States Attorney the role of Special Counsel to prosecute the case. So just do it and be done. Easy.

Congress by legislation created the office of the office of United States Attorney. They own the role. In order for there to be a Special Counsel with the power of a United States Attorney, as specified in the DOJ regulation, it needs to be an individual appointed by the president and approved by the senate or the position defined is specifically by legislation such as the Independent Counsel statute and that doesn’t exist.

 

[LA - L.A.]

Trump violated the Espionage Act by taking, keeping and hiding national security documents that belong only to the US government and obstructed justice to try to hide and perpetuate his crimes. Trump betrayed the trust of we the people of the United States and he put our national security at risk because he's a selfish, thuggish criminal.

Easy.

Too easy.

 

[Sendai]

Sendai appears to routinely ignore points that they can't address.

Same way they ignore the meaning of the qualifying statement, "within the scope of his or her jurisdiction", as well as the preceding statement they omit entirely, "Subject to the limitations in the following paragraphs", when they're quoting 28 C.F.R. § 600.6.

Fact is, and I'll just quote from the essay linked previously to save typing it out myself:

The Attorney General had statutory authority to hire Jack Smith to work in the Department of Justice pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 3101 (affording each Executive agency the power to hire employees, defined to include officers, id. § 2105(a)). See also 28 U.S.C. §§ 503, 509 (designating the Attorney General “the head of the Department of Justice” and vesting the Attorney General with the authority to perform virtually all DOJ functions, which includes hiring)​

That covers hiring. And for delegation of authority:

Section 509 provides that, with discrete exceptions not relevant here, “[a]ll” DOJ functions “are vested in the Attorney General,” even where another statute specifically assigns a particular function to other DOJ officials (such as 28 U.S.C. § 547(1), which authorizes U.S. Attorneys to prosecute offenses against the United States). Therefore, the Attorney General himself may supervise a criminal investigation and prosecution. ...​

​

Section 510, in turn, provides the Attorney General a virtually unlimited power to delegate those authorities. It provides that the Attorney General “may from time to time make such provisions as he considers appropriate authorizing the performance by any other officer, employee, or agency of the Department of Justice of any function of the Attorney General.” (Congress has vested the Attorney General with such a broad delegation power since at least 1950. See Reorganization Plan No. 2 of 1950, § 2, 64 Stat. 1261, 1261.) This means that the Attorney General may assign the functions of criminal investigation and prosecution of a particular case—powers he may personally exercise, per Section 509—to any other officer, employee, or agency of DOJ.​

​

So the AG can, unsurprisingly, hire someone and delegate the necessary authority to them.

​

And the multiple problems with the argument that the AG can't create an office include the fact that:

... as the Supreme Court reiterated in Lucia v. SEC (2018), such an individual occupies an “office,” and is thus an Appointments Clause “officer,” only if two conditions are met:​

​

(i) The individual is empowered to “exercise[] significant authority pursuant to the laws of the United States”; and​

​

(ii) She occupies “a ‘continuing’ position established by law” within the U.S. government.​

But it's not a "continuing position established by law"; Smith is hired only for a specific task, and there is no formal DoJ role that would be filled if he resigned, there's no "Office of Mar-a-Lago Investigating", there's no such language in his appointment. So it's, at the very least, questionable whether the Appointments Clause is relevant at all.

But, even if we assume that's not the case, the AG has the authority to create DoJ positions that meet the conditions for an Appointments Clause office anyway:

In any event, the Attorney General does have statutory authority to create a new DOJ position that meets the conditions for an Appointments Clause “office.” Once again, the primary source of that authority is 28 U.S.C. § 510, which provides that the Attorney General “may from time to time make such provisions as he considers appropriate authorizing the performance by any other officer, employee, or agency of the Department of Justice of any function of the Attorney General.” This broad delegation authority, together with the general authority of the head of every Executive Department “to prescribe regulations for the government of his department [and] the distribution and performance of its business,” 5 U.S.C. § 301 (emphasis added), not only empowers the Attorney General to delegate the exercise of his authorities to another DOJ officer, employee, or agency in a discrete, particular case (“from time to time” in the usual DOJ parlance), but also to create continuing positions in DOJ that are to be filled by individuals whose duties are to exercise such delegated functions.​

​

For example, in 1973, before Congress had created the U.S. Marshals Service, Attorney General Richard Kleindienst established an office of the “U.S. Marshals Service” within DOJ. Kleindienst appropriately cited, inter alia, Section 510 and Section 301, as the basis for the creation of that office because the persons occupying the office were assigned to perform functions delegated from (and by) the Attorney General. See 38 Fed. Reg. 12,917 (1973). Several years later, in referring to this Attorney General creation of the “Marshals Service,” the Office of Legal Counsel cited Section 510 in explaining that “Congress has by statute vested the Attorney General with the authority to take certain measures, including the creation of inferior offices within the Department of Justice, to carry out the functions of his office.” Applicability of Appointment Provisions of the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988 to Incumbent Officeholders, 12 Op. O.L.C. 286, 288 n.5 (1988) (emphasis added).​

​

There are other examples of this given, for example, including the establishment of "the Office of Watergate Special Prosecution Force" in 1973, the "Office of Independent Counsel: Iran/Contra" in 1987, and more.

But really none of this should be necessary; the premise we're being asked to consider here is, to boil it down, that the AG hasn't had the authority to hire and delegate power to employees such as special counsels for decades and literally no-one noticed this until now despite multiple rulings considering such appointments. In ordinary circumstances, I would suggest that Cannon's ruling has pretty much zero chance of holding up on appeal.

Nothing here gives the AG the authority to hire a private individual and provide them a role with the power of a United States Attorney which requires presidential appointment and senate approval.

The AG can, however, assign any current United States Attorney the role of Special Prosecutor.

 

[efil4]

The AG has the power to assign any current United States Attorney the role of Special Counsel to prosecute the case. So just do it and be done. Easy.

Congress by legislation created the office of the office of United States Attorney. They own the role. In order for there to be a Special Counsel with the power of a United States Attorney, as specified in the DOJ regulation, it needs to be an individual appointed by the president and approved by the senate or the position defined is specifically by legislation such as the Independent Counsel statute and that doesn’t exist.

the Judiciary act of 1789 created the US Attorney Office.

did you know that act also created the office of US Marshal? Did you also know that the US Marshal office has the power to "deputize" without having to get consent from Congress?

So how does the US Marshal office, created from the same Congressional Legislation, get the ability to deputize, yet the Attorney General cannot?

 

[RobF]

Nothing here gives the AG the authority to hire a private individual and provide them a role with the power of a United States Attorney which requires presidential appointment and senate approval.

The post you just quoted addresses that. Just repeating yourself as if it doesn't really isn't going to work, given that other people can, and have, read it. Maybe you should try that?

Or are you, as @LA - L.A. says, just throwing whatever you can out there to try to obfuscate from the fact that Trump blatantly violated the Espionage Act by taking, keeping and hiding national security documents that belong only to the US government, and obstructed justice to try to hide and perpetuate his crimes?

The AG can, however, assign any current United States Attorney the role of Special Prosecutor.

Why do you think a special counsel is appointed in the first place? Or do you not actually know?

 

[FullMonte]

Nothing here gives the AG the authority to hire a private individual and provide them a role with the power of a United States Attorney which requires presidential appointment and senate approval.

The AG can, however, assign any current United States Attorney the role of Special Prosecutor.

Actually, a CFR specifically gives the AG that power. Almost every special counsel that has been appointed has been challenged in court, and the courts have upheld the appointment every time. Are you saying that all of those courts were wrong?

And why do you keep ignoring the question I asked you?

 

[Bigdaddysaints]

Actually, a CFR specifically gives the AG that power. Almost every special counsel that has been appointed has been challenged in court, and the courts have upheld the appointment every time. Are you saying that all of those courts were wrong?

And why do you keep ignoring the question I asked you?

nope, just the one thats against Trump

 

[Bigdaddysaints]

Actually, a CFR specifically gives the AG that power. Almost every special counsel that has been appointed has been challenged in court, and the courts have upheld the appointment every time. Are you saying that all of those courts were wrong?

And why do you keep ignoring the question I asked you?

nope just the one that's being used against Trump..

 

[DaveXA]

Actually, a CFR specifically gives the AG that power. Almost every special counsel that has been appointed has been challenged in court, and the courts have upheld the appointment every time. Are you saying that all of those courts were wrong?

And why do you keep ignoring the question I asked you?

He can't admit he's actually been wrong this entire time, so he keeps going in circles and beating around the bush rather than addressing the real questions.

 

[FullMonte]

He can't admit he's actually been wrong this entire time, so he keeps going in circles and beating around the bush rather than addressing the real questions.

I know. It’s just fun to keep asking him.

 

[Sendai]

the Judiciary act of 1789 created the US Attorney Office.

did you know that act also created the office of US Marshal? Did you also know that the US Marshal office has the power to "deputize" without having to get consent from Congress?

So how does the US Marshal office, created from the same Congressional Legislation, get the ability to deputize, yet the Attorney General cannot?

Well the Judiciary act of 1789 specifically grants the power to the Marshal.

“SEC . 27. And be it further enacted, That a marshal shall be appointed in and for each district for the term of four years, but shall be removable from office at pleasure, whose duty it shall be to attend the district and circuit courts when sitting therein, and also the Supreme Court in the District in which that court shall sit. And to execute throughout the district, all lawful precepts directed to him, and issued under the authority of the United States, and he shall have power to command all necessary assistance in the execution of his duty, and to appoint as there shall be occasion, one or more deputies, “

While for the Attorney General there simply is no power to create a U.S. Attorney granted.

“And there shall also be appointed a meet person, learned in the law, to act as attorney-general for the United States, who shall be sworn or affirmed to a faithful execution of his office; whose duty it shall be to prosecute and conduct all suits in the Supreme Court in which the United States shall be concerned, and to give his advice and opinion upon questions of law when required by the President of the United States, or when requested by the heads of any of the departments, touching any matters that may concern their departments, and shall receive such compensation for his services as shall by law be provided.”

The Avalon Project : The Judiciary Act; September 24, 1789

 

[Sendai]

The post you just quoted addresses that. Just repeating yourself as if it doesn't really isn't going to work, given that other people can, and have, read it. Maybe you should try that?

Or are you, as @LA - L.A. says, just throwing whatever you can out there to try to obfuscate from the fact that Trump blatantly violated the Espionage Act by taking, keeping and hiding national security documents that belong only to the US government, and obstructed justice to try to hide and perpetuate his crimes?


Why do you think a special counsel is appointed in the first place? Or do you not actually know?

I know why special counsels are appointed. And what I stated is a valid special counsel because they are presidentially appointed and senate confirmed.

I’m not obfuscating anything. As I’ve said before the solution is simple. There’s nothing stopping the AG from appointing a special counsel from the pool of U.S. Attorneys and re-filing the case. They are all presidentially appointed and senate confirmed. Unlike Smith. I’ve pointed that out several times. Just get the ball rolling again.

The case was dismissed because Smith wasn’t presidentially appointed and senate confirmed. Just have the current District Attorney re-file it.

 

[Bigdaddysaints]

I know why special counsels are appointed. And what I stated is a valid special counsel because they are presidentially appointed and senate confirmed.

I’m not obfuscating anything. As I’ve said before the solution is simple. There’s nothing stopping the AG from appointing a special counsel from the pool of U.S. Attorneys and re-filing the case. They are all presidentially appointed and senate confirmed. Unlike Smith. I’ve pointed that out several times. Just get the ball rolling again.

The case was dismissed because Smith wasn’t presidentially appointed and senate confirmed. Just have the current District Attorney re-file it.

so you are saying the special council Barr appointed was illegal also?
if it's overturned on appeal are you going to accept it or cry foul?

 

[Sendai]

Actually, a CFR specifically gives the AG that power. Almost every special counsel that has been appointed has been challenged in court, and the courts have upheld the appointment every time. Are you saying that all of those courts were wrong?

And why do you keep ignoring the question I asked you?

And now a federal district court is saying the CFR doesn’t cut it, that it requires specific legislative power or presidential appointment plus senate confirmation.

Again, just have to wait for the Supreme Court to weigh in.

In the mean time the AG can pick a special counsel from the District Attorneys and re-file the case.

 

[Sendai]

so you are saying the special council Barr appointed was illegal also?
if it's overturned on appeal are you going to accept it or cry foul?

I’m saying the exact opposite. Durham was the United States Attorney for the District of Connecticut. Properly appointed by a president and confirmed by the Senate. Unlike Smith.

 

[DaveXA]

And now a federal district court is saying the CFR doesn’t cut it, that it requires specific legislative power or presidential appointment plus senate confirmation.

Citation?

Again, just have to wait for the Supreme Court to weigh in.

In the mean time the AG can pick a special counsel from the District Attorneys and re-file the case.

In the meantime he'll simply wait for the appeal to play out. There's no need to re-file the case.

 

[LA - L.A.]

No amount of repeating false claims is going to change the fact that Trump violated the Espionage Act by taking, keeping and hiding national security documents that belong only to the US government and obstructed justice to try to hide and perpetuate his crimes. Trump betrayed the trust of we the people of the United States and he put our national security at risk because he's a selfish, thuggish criminal.

While for the Attorney General there simply is no power to create a U.S. Attorney granted.

A Special Counsel is not a US Attorney and you know that, yet you keep repeating the same false claim.