The Justice Department is asking a federal judge to hold Donald Trump in contempt of court for failing to comply with a subpoena issued this summer ordering the former president to turn over records marked classified, two sources familiar with the matter told CNN.

The development comes after Trump’s legal team said it conducted searches at four locations just before Thanksgiving, finding two documents with classified markings at a storage facility in Florida. The Trump team turned over those two documents to the FBI and announced to a federal judge in Washington, DC, that they believed Trump was now in compliance with a 6-month-old subpoena.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/12/08/politics/doj-trump-contempt-classified-documents/index.html

That’s not entirely correct.

 

The DOJ has asked the court to hold Trump’s legal team in contempt.

 

These are the people who have conspired with Trump to hide and withhold the classified documents.

 

If the court grants the request, Trump’s lawyers will have to make a decision on when (not if) to flip on Trump.

 

The first to flip gets the best deal, they are lawyers, they all understand this.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/dec/08/doj-trump-team-contempt-classified-documents-mar-a-lago

 

 

[edit]
 

Jack be nimble, Jack be quick…

 

 

Edited December 9, 20223 yr by Chomper Higgot

The post heading and the CNN "reporting" is misleading and/or incorrect (surprise surprise)...the contempt request is directed towards "Donald Trump’s office" and not him personally. In particular, it's directed towards the attorneys representing him in the Mara Lago documents case and the claim these lawyers delayed and/or conducted inadequate searches for documents in response to the Department's subpoenas. 

 

Justice Department asks judge to hold Trump team in contempt over Mar-a-Lago case

 

Prosecutors have urged a federal judge to hold Donald Trump’s office in contempt of court for failing to fully comply with a May subpoena to return all classified documents in his possession...In recent days, Justice Department lawyers have asked U.S. District Judge Beryl A. Howell to hold Trump’s office in contempt...he hearing is scheduled for Friday, according to two people with knowledge of the matter. (The Washington Post)

3 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

That’s not entirely correct.

 

The DOJ has asked the court to hold Trump’s legal team in contempt.

 

These are the people who have conspired with Trump to hide and withhold the classified documents.

 

If the court grants the request, Trump’s lawyers will have to make a decision on when (not if) to flip on Trump.

 

The first to flip gets the best deal, they are lawyers, they all understand this.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/dec/08/doj-trump-team-contempt-classified-documents-mar-a-lago

 

 

[edit]
 

Jack be nimble, Jack be quick…

 

 

 

2 minutes ago, Pattaya Spotter said:

The post heading and the CNN "reporting" is misleading and/or incorrect (surprise surprise)...the contempt request is directed towards "Donald Trump’s office" and not him personally. In particular, it's directed towards the attorneys representing him in the Mara Lago documents case and the claim these lawyers delayed and/or conducted inadequate searches for documents in response to the Department's subpoenas. 

 

Justice Department asks judge to hold Trump team in contempt over Mar-a-Lago case

 

Prosecutors have urged a federal judge to hold Donald Trump’s office in contempt of court for failing to fully comply with a May subpoena to return all classified documents in his possession...In recent days, Justice Department lawyers have asked U.S. District Judge Beryl A. Howell to hold Trump’s office in contempt...he hearing is scheduled for Friday, according to two people with knowledge of the matter. (The Washington Post)

Incorrect.

 

A hearing is set for Friday, when Howell will consider whether to hold Trump and his post-presidency office in contempt of court.

 

 

2 hours ago, Pattaya Spotter said:

The post heading and the CNN "reporting" is misleading and/or incorrect (surprise surprise)...the contempt request is directed towards "Donald Trump’s office" and not him personally. In particular, it's directed towards the attorneys representing him in the Mara Lago documents case and the claim these lawyers delayed and/or conducted inadequate searches for documents in response to the Department's subpoenas. 

 

Justice Department asks judge to hold Trump team in contempt over Mar-a-Lago case

 

Prosecutors have urged a federal judge to hold Donald Trump’s office in contempt of court for failing to fully comply with a May subpoena to return all classified documents in his possession...In recent days, Justice Department lawyers have asked U.S. District Judge Beryl A. Howell to hold Trump’s office in contempt...he hearing is scheduled for Friday, according to two people with knowledge of the matter. (The Washington Post)

Clearly the DOJ believe, or have reason to believe, that Trump is still withholding classified documents.

 

This isn’t going to go well for him.

No one is above the law. Steve Bannon thought he was and ignored a subpoena, and now probably wishes he hadn’t. Hopefully Trump and his lawyers can get the same treatment, just like anyone else would be treated when they ignore a subpoena. It’s not rocket science, is it?

5 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Pity the Justice department isn't as diligent when dealing with certain other politicians.

 

 

Well there is this tricky little thing called evidence or proof. If you have it and can prove it, then go for it.

 

OTOH if all you have is allegations and no proof, it tends to be a bit tricky.

 

63 court cases brought by Trump's lawyers, many in front or Republican courts, would be a case in point.

21 hours ago, ozimoron said:

 

Incorrect.

 

A hearing is set for Friday, when Howell will consider whether to hold Trump and his post-presidency office in contempt of court.

 

 

Incorrect. 

On 12/8/2022 at 10:05 PM, Chomper Higgot said:

Clearly the DOJ believe, or have reason to believe, that Trump is still withholding classified documents.

 

This isn’t going to go well for him.

Is Trump behind bars yet? I can't find much about this anymore. Perhaps you can elaborate.

2 minutes ago, EVENKEEL said:

Is Trump behind bars yet? I can't find much about this anymore. Perhaps you can elaborate.

Be patient.

 

If I can be, so can you.

11 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Be patient.

 

If I can be, so can you.

So basically there's nothing. I mean I tried searching and not much out there about it. huh

21 minutes ago, EVENKEEL said:

So basically there's nothing. I mean I tried searching and not much out there about it. huh

You m an there is no update.

 

If that gives you comfort that Trump will not face Justice, let that be enough for now.

 

 

Edited January 3, 20233 yr by Chomper Higgot

How's the seeking going ????

46 minutes ago, Pattaya Spotter said:

How's the seeking going ????

Are we there yet?

 

 

 

Are we there yet?

4 hours ago, EVENKEEL said:

Is Trump behind bars yet? I can't find much about this anymore. Perhaps you can elaborate.

 

 

 

Hoping to keep you well informed today .

 https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/appointment-special-counsel-0

 

7 hours ago, earlinclaifornia said:

 

 

 

Hoping to keep you well informed today .

 https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/appointment-special-counsel-0

 

Thank you, hopefully in near future you'll have more results or else I'd be forced to conclude theirs nothing to find.

40 minutes ago, EVENKEEL said:

Thank you, hopefully in near future you'll have more results or else I'd be forced to conclude theirs nothing to find.

It's truly bizarre given that we know that Trump was in possession of documents without the approval of the National Archives that somebody could still maintain that there is no clear evidence against him.

2 hours ago, placeholder said:

It's truly bizarre given that we know that Trump was in possession of documents without the approval of the National Archives that somebody could still maintain that there is no clear evidence against him.

They really don’t care, not one iota . If a Democrat did it, they’d be screaming to lock them up up, but now that their guy did it they’re totally okay with it. It’s called selective outrage.
Evangelicals are very religious, or so they say, but tens of millions of them voted for Trump, probably one of the biggest sinners out there. How they justify that is a total mystery to me, but they do, and they’re proud of it. Ignorance and arrogance.

2 hours ago, placeholder said:

It's truly bizarre given that we know that Trump was in possession of documents without the approval of the National Archives that somebody could still maintain that there is no clear evidence against him.

Obviously there's not enough meat on the bone to bother with. The evidence they have must not be enough for legal action, and that's what matters. People's indignation with Trump doesn't count as evidence.

9 minutes ago, EVENKEEL said:

Obviously there's not enough meat on the bone to bother with. The evidence they have must not be enough for legal action, and that's what matters. People's indignation with Trump doesn't count as evidence.

Not a matter of indignation. A case with obvious and simple facts: took/kept/hid/refused to give back documents. Trump himself signed a law to make it a felony (he was hoping to use it against Hillary). 

14 minutes ago, EVENKEEL said:

Obviously there's not enough meat on the bone to bother with. The evidence they have must not be enough for legal action, and that's what matters. People's indignation with Trump doesn't count as evidence.

Obviously trump represents a clear and present danger keep in mind trump when cornered will attempt to raise violence you know like getting folks killed he doesn’t care the doj is fully aware they will move when everything is 100% ready watertight beyond any doubt and we allready have him dead to rights in possession of top secret docs he has no business having be patient it’s coming 

5 minutes ago, candide said:

Not a matter of indignation. A case with obvious and simple facts: took/kept/hid/refused to give back documents. Trump himself signed a law to make it a felony (he was hoping to use it against Hillary). 

Are there felony charges against Trump at this time? Don't think so. But feel free to correct me.

5 minutes ago, EVENKEEL said:

Are there felony charges against Trump at this time? Don't think so. But feel free to correct me.

Not yet.

3 minutes ago, EVENKEEL said:

Are there felony charges against Trump at this time? Don't think so. But feel free to correct me.

Not yet, but he could be. The law the GOP and Trump strengthened would allow it. Before they changed the law it was not a felony.

1 hour ago, candide said:

Not yet, but he could be. The law the GOP and Trump strengthened would allow it. Before they changed the law it was not a felony.

Optimism is a good thing, hang in there.

19 minutes ago, EVENKEEL said:

Optimism is a good thing, hang in there.

More like inevitability than optimism dude.

18 hours ago, EVENKEEL said:

Is Trump behind bars yet? I can't find much about this anymore. Perhaps you can elaborate.

Doesn't the same logic apply to Hunter Biden?

10 hours ago, EVENKEEL said:

Obviously there's not enough meat on the bone to bother with. The evidence they have must not be enough for legal action, and that's what matters. People's indignation with Trump doesn't count as evidence.

I'm really glad they are doing the job right and will take there time as this is really very important. Just imagine if it was your fate locked in a timely investigation. I too would test my own resolve hoping the truth is an indictment only if they can prove he is guilty

12 hours ago, earlinclaifornia said:

I'm really glad they are doing the job right and will take there time as this is really very important. Just imagine if it was your fate locked in a timely investigation. I too would test my own resolve hoping the truth is an indictment only if they can prove he is guilty

Classic response when nothing is happening.

3 minutes ago, EVENKEEL said:

Classic response when nothing is happening.

If nothing is going to happen Garland will say so when it doesn't happen. Saying that nothing is happening does not mean that nothing will happen.

Edited January 4, 20233 yr by ozimoron