|
That means the bills aren't getting paid at all right?
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2022 01:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 04:23 |
|
|
The Lone Badger posted:That means the bills aren't getting paid at all right? it makes me wonder if one of the applicable strategies of trump could be to continually force his legal representation to quit and have to be replaced in messy and convoluted integrations that repeatedly run the clock on the legal process
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2022 01:52
|
|
|
Charlz Guybon posted:Surprising, hard to see them finally cutting ties with Trump after all they've followed him with. this mixed with the escalation in bidens rhetoric including a prime time address on thursday and trumps insane ravings escalating makes me think something is gonna happen soon. am i wrong, probably, but something has biden going full force against chuds and trump more batshit then normal
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2022 02:02
|
|
|
Kavros posted:it makes me wonder if one of the applicable strategies of trump could be to continually force his legal representation to quit and have to be replaced in messy and convoluted integrations that repeatedly run the clock on the legal process Doin' the old Alex Jones Sandy Hook Special, I guess. Dapper_Swindler posted:this mixed with the escalation in bidens rhetoric including a prime time address on thursday and trumps insane ravings escalating makes me think something is gonna happen soon. am i wrong, probably, but something has biden going full force against chuds and trump more batshit then normal It's more than a bit disquieting that after years and years of awful things not mattering (except for ever-rising bodycounts) things might be actually... happening? Maybe?
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2022 02:20
|
|
|
Kavros posted:it makes me wonder if one of the applicable strategies of trump could be to continually force his legal representation to quit and have to be replaced in messy and convoluted integrations that repeatedly run the clock on the legal process The farther along proceedings are, the vastly less likely judges are willing to allow them to withdraw, especially once you're in or approaching trial. IIRC we've seen it happen recently with multiple Trump or Trump associate cases, judges going "no you absolutely can not withdraw from representing him, and I can disbar or jail you if you fight me on this. He's not paying you? Tough poo poo, you knew who he was when you took him on as a client, should have thought of that then."
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2022 02:53
|
|
|
Dapper_Swindler posted:this mixed with the escalation in bidens rhetoric including a prime time address on thursday and trumps insane ravings escalating makes me think something is gonna happen soon. am i wrong, probably, but something has biden going full force against chuds and trump more batshit then normal If something is gonna happen with Trump that announcement is not going to come from Biden. It'd be the DOJ.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2022 03:01
|
|
|
Dapper_Swindler posted:this mixed with the escalation in bidens rhetoric including a prime time address on thursday and trumps insane ravings escalating makes me think something is gonna happen soon. am i wrong, probably, but something has biden going full force against chuds and trump more batshit then normal Either something is going to be going down soon or he has reached the point mentally where his mental disorders have basically completely taken over. This story may end with him hiding in a bunker either way.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2022 03:28
|
|
|
https://mobile.twitter.com/KFaulders/status/1564819249893359617 The stupidest.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2022 05:05
|
|
|
Here, have some light reading : https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flsd.618763/gov.uscourts.flsd.618763.48.0_1.pdf (It's the investigation's response to Trump's crazy-rear end bowel motion.) I'm only 8 pages in cause I'm bothering to read close, but so far it's got a very thorough-seeming summary of the investigation with some new details. Like, Trump tried to hold up NARA from passing on the boxes to the FBI to look over, which is part of why there was that weird time-gap around April.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2022 05:08
|
|
|
I just finished it-I'm a little surprised they argued that last section D in the alternate. I do, however, love that the guy had classified records in among his boxes full of framed magazine covers.
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2022 05:10
|
|
|
Jesus loving christ
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2022 05:11
|
|
|
Why not lie about that when theywere willing to lie about not having any more classified docs? https://mobile.twitter.com/rgoodlaw/status/1564822610600501250 Charlz Guybon fucked around with this message at 05:26 on Aug 31, 2022 |
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2022 05:12
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:I just finished it-I'm a little surprised they argued that last section D in the alternate. I do, however, love that the guy had classified records in among his boxes full of framed magazine covers. I like how catty it gets, like where they point out that the attorneys handing over of the documents from Trump sure acted like they were classified when they did it. I just have this mental image of some very put-upon looking DoJ lawyer typing that and whispering, "Yeah... gently caress that guy."
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2022 05:13
|
|
|
Oh lordy there are photos. Renato Mariotti (former prosecutor) is breaking down the DOJ filing that resulted in that photo. Pulling this out because it's got an interesting little detail about where some of the docs were. https://twitter.com/renato_mariotti/status/1564827463401836546?t=lTKTtox1JjYoYH1ttluHdw&s=19
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2022 05:15
|
|
|
How much staging was done by the photographer here? Like did Trump literally have unjacketed TS//SCI documents strewn across the floor with the fuckin' coversheets like that? Because if so lol. l o fuckin' l.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2022 05:16
|
|
Xiahou Dun posted:I like how catty it gets, like where they point out that the attorneys handing over of the documents from Trump sure acted like they were classified when they did it. For reference (and for others who haven't read the report), the attorneys handed over the documents in a "Redweld envelope", which is a sort of accordion file like this...  which they "double sealed with tape". I have no idea why that would be considered an appropriate transfer vehicle, I don't know what would be an appropriate transfer vehicle; it's like what someone would throw together in a panic 30 minutes earlier. edit: to be clear because I've seen some confusion on this point- I don't believe the FBI found the documents spread across the floor. I think this was one of them pausing as they worked their way through removing these from a box to take a photo. Discendo Vox fucked around with this message at 05:25 on Aug 31, 2022 |
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2022 05:18
|
|
|
AsInHowe posted:The stupidest.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2022 05:19
|
|
|
Bob is toast. She's gonna flip or go down hard https://mobile.twitter.com/rgoodlaw/status/1564826535990857729 https://mobile.twitter.com/rgoodlaw/status/1564828688176349185 They found classified docs in his desk. https://mobile.twitter.com/rgoodlaw/status/1564831321695916032 Charlz Guybon fucked around with this message at 05:30 on Aug 31, 2022 |
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2022 05:24
|
|
|
SubG posted:How much staging was done by the photographer here? Like did Trump literally have unjacketed TS//SCI documents strewn across the floor with the fuckin' coversheets like that? Because if so lol. l o fuckin' l. Sorry to disappoint, but it's staged. From the Washington Post article that includes the above photo: "The filing includes a photograph showing a number of files labeled 'Top Secret' spread out over a carpet, and says those documents were recovered from a container in Trump’s office."
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2022 05:44
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:For reference (and for others who haven't read the report), the attorneys handed over the documents in a "Redweld envelope", which is a sort of accordion file like this... That container is possibly fine for transferring documents if the appropriate safeguards are being made. Think about diplomatic pouches with state secrets--probably made of leather or canvas with a lock. They can generally be defeated with a knife or, at worst, a power tool--it's just a fancy briefcase/bag/envelope. The goals of the container, when not in storage but in transfer is to do a few things: -should protect from unauthorized disclosure. The container needs to close. A courier should not round a corner, bump into a person and throw state secrets into a pile like some sort of espionage cutemeet. "doublesealed with tape" is this. -should not advertise it's secrecy--you don't put the classification on the outside -should allow someone who discovers it, if lost, to do the right thing--classification is on the outside of an internal compartment (coversheets or sealed internal containers depending on handling requirements). Diplomatic pouches are usually two sets of pouches, one that goes in the other. The inside one displays the classification so when you open the weird bag you found next to the car accident victim, you say "oh poo poo" and take them to a security office or to a police station or whatever. -depending on classification, reveal unauthorized tampering. It could-be locked in such a way that someone would have to damage the container to get at the material unless they have the key, or an intruder may need to break tamper-evident tape. Obviously check with your security manager before you move around classified documents--above are my own unofficial conclusions of the theory behind the policies that govern classified material. SCI has additional requirements, but the theory mostly remains intact. Security professionals know that no portable means of transfer is going to stop a focused bad actor. Even the higher requirements for storage are based around how long it would take a bad actor to defeat them. There's no assumption that a class B vault or GSA-approved container is completely impervious to intrusion. Rather, they should delay an intruder long enough that security personnel will notice something and mount a response. edit: while there are often fancy containers for classified material, especially if it's going to be reused or quickly accessed, plenty of classified material moves about through vaguely standard office supply with special procedures in place. This doesn't mean that the wrong measures couldn't have been taken, just that being in a taped-up accordion envelope isn't necessarily bad in and of itself. piL fucked around with this message at 07:03 on Aug 31, 2022 |
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2022 06:58
|
|
|
This is why you should always pay your lawyers https://mobile.twitter.com/rgoodlaw/status/1564839624391925765 https://mobile.twitter.com/rgoodlaw/status/1564846692150697984
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2022 07:21
|
|
|
I know, former Chief Executive & all that... But just reading this, he is fuuuuuuucked.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2022 14:38
|
|
|
Keeps digging that hole https://mobile.twitter.com/rgoodlaw/status/1564978272538165249
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2022 15:13
|
|
|
The cover sheets aren't classified, that's why they are cover sheets. So if people see them they know not to look inside without authorization.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2022 15:33
|
|
|
So, let's say you made a printout of Title 18 on standard double sided paper at a reasonable print typeface and put it in a tasteful hardback binding. Approximately how thick is the projectile now speeding at Trump's noggin?
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2022 15:36
|
|
|
The actual big news in the filing is DoJ saying that there is a Grand Jury seated and that they did issue a subpoena which Trump mostly ignored prior to the search warrant. That was one of the right wing talking points trying to pretend the search was illegal. edit: DoJ to Trump, "gently caress around some more and find out" quote:Although the receipt of property already provided to Plaintiff at the time of the search, see In Re Sealed Search edit2: Also trump claimed that at the June 03 meeting where Trump turned over even more classified documents that the FBI could have just taken the rest of the document then, however quote:Critically, however, the former President’s counsel explicitly prohibited government Murgos fucked around with this message at 16:11 on Aug 31, 2022 |
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2022 15:48
|
|
|
Charlz Guybon posted:Surprising, hard to see them finally cutting ties with Trump after all they've followed him with. Keep in mind that all the big Republican donors made a beeline from Trump to DeSantis months ago and DeSantis is now on track to raise more money than any gubernatorial candidate in history. The RNC and GOP establishment want to go back to the old days, but Trump would probably swat DeSantis like a fly, especially now. Before, DeSantis was gaining on Trump in the polls and was usually within 10 points of him even neck and neck in some polls. The FBI raid and possible DOJ indictment changed all that. Support for Trump as the 2024 Republican Presidential nominee went up 10 points with Republicans basically over night, his base is digging in. The RNC and GOP establishment are praying for the DOJ to indict Trump, it's the only way to potentially clear the path for DeSantis.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2022 16:17
|
|
|
-Blackadder- posted:The RNC and GOP establishment want to go back to the old days, but Trump would probably swat DeSantis like a fly, especially now. Before, DeSantis was gaining on Trump in the polls and was usually within 10 points of him even neck and neck in some polls. The FBI raid and possible DOJ indictment changed all that. Support for Trump as the 2024 Republican Presidential nominee went up 10 points with Republicans basically over night, his base is digging in. The RNC and GOP establishment are praying for the DOJ to indict Trump, it's the only way to potentially clear the path for DeSantis. Would it clear the path or would it cause the Republican vote to schism as the Trumpers try to write in for Donald Trump (some belief along the lines of "You can't be in jail while president" would be my guess) while the Republican voters vote for DeSantis? Can you even write in for a President who's in jail?
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2022 16:31
|
|
|
Randalor posted:Can you even write in for a President who's in jail? You can (like Debs). You can also probably pardon yourself from prison, at least for federal charges, but who the hell knows
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2022 16:34
|
|
|
Randalor posted:Would it clear the path or would it cause the Republican vote to schism as the Trumpers try to write in for Donald Trump (some belief along the lines of "You can't be in jail while president" would be my guess) while the Republican voters vote for DeSantis? Can you even write in for a President who's in jail? You can write in for whoever, if your state ballot allows it. Also none of being under criminal investigation, indictment, trial, conviction, or even currently serving a sentence are any barrier to entering or winning a federal election. Only a conviction for impeachment or treason can prevent that.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2022 16:37
|
|
|
Failed Imagineer posted:You can (like Debs). That's what I figured would be the end goal if Trump was jailed and elected, just pardon himself and walk out to the hugest crowd ever seen.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2022 16:39
|
|
|
Fuschia tude posted:You can write in for whoever, if your state ballot allows it. Also none of being under criminal investigation, indictment, trial, conviction, or even currently serving a sentence are any barrier to entering or winning a federal election. Only a conviction for impeachment or treason can prevent that. Doesn't at least one of the Federal laws that Trump is being accused of breaking include a penalty of "may be prevented from holding public office" (or something to that effect)? I remember there being someone online discussion videos around that being a potential consequence a few weeks ago. If that's the case, and if this goes to trial and if he gets found guilty (both of those being big "ifs" right now, I'll grant), couldn't the judge slap him with a writ or whatever that says "The plaintiff may never again hold any public office in the United States" as part of the sentencing or whatever?
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2022 16:53
|
|
|
Class3KillStorm posted:Doesn't at least one of the Federal laws that Trump is being accused of breaking include a penalty of "may be prevented from holding public office" (or something to that effect)? I remember there being someone online discussion videos around that being a potential consequence a few weeks ago. If that's the case, and if this goes to trial and if he gets found guilty (both of those being big "ifs" right now, I'll grant), couldn't the judge slap him with a writ or whatever that says "The plaintiff may never again hold any public office in the United States" as part of the sentencing or whatever? He can literally just appeal that to SCOTUS and get it flipped. Granted, the timing might not work out
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2022 16:54
|
|
|
Murgos posted:The actual big news in the filing is DoJ saying that there is a Grand Jury seated and that they did issue a subpoena which Trump mostly ignored prior to the search warrant. That was one of the right wing talking points trying to pretend the search was illegal. Regarding the last quote: How do the feds not also go after the lawyers as co-conspirator at that point? Assuming the attorneys knew the contents of the containers they would actively be aiding and abetting the crime. DeathSandwich fucked around with this message at 17:34 on Aug 31, 2022 |
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2022 16:57
|
|
|
-Blackadder- posted:
He's probably going to announce his run in October. If he loses, he will claim it was rigged and either run 3rd party, or tell his voters to not vote.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2022 17:02
|
|
|
Class3KillStorm posted:Doesn't at least one of the Federal laws that Trump is being accused of breaking include a penalty of "may be prevented from holding public office" (or something to that effect)? I remember there being someone online discussion videos around that being a potential consequence a few weeks ago. If that's the case, and if this goes to trial and if he gets found guilty (both of those being big "ifs" right now, I'll grant), couldn't the judge slap him with a writ or whatever that says "The plaintiff may never again hold any public office in the United States" as part of the sentencing or whatever? I believe that turned out to be legalese for specifically "cannot be appointed to public office" while excluding any specific limitation on "can be elected to public office," which it turns out is an important difference.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2022 17:06
|
|
|
Meatball posted:He's probably going to announce his run in October. If he loses, he will claim it was rigged and either run 3rd party, or tell his voters to not vote. DOJ won't touch him once he declares an intent to run, right? That's the end of investigations etc.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2022 17:09
|
|
|
slurm posted:DOJ won't touch him once he declares an intent to run, right? That's the end of investigations etc. The election is in 2024.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2022 17:11
|
|
|
slurm posted:DOJ won't touch him once he declares an intent to run, right? That's the end of investigations etc. Why? There's no reason they have to. Trump may think they will stop, but the DoJ has made no claims to that effect.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2022 17:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 04:23 |
|
|
slurm posted:DOJ won't touch him once he declares an intent to run, right? That's the end of investigations etc. Yeah they’re definitely not going to touch him negative six years from now
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2022 17:29
|
|
