House GOP ponders action against DOJ in defense of Trump

[jerrymahoney]

15 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Note to Jack Smith.

 

Add disposing of classified documents to the charges.

 

I’m sure most people don’t know if a classified map is indeed a classified map. 
 

But it’s not their understanding of what information they were shown that is the crime.

 

Trump was showing people classified information 

 

Clutch at straws.

Trump said this is classified map and "not too get too close".

 

Item 35 of the indictment.

 

So the PAC guy can't say what actually was the map. It could have been a map of the local cheeseburger fast food outlets.

 

 

[Chomper Higgot]

4 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

Trump said this is classified map and "not too get too close".

 

Item 35 of the indictment.

 

So the PAC guy can't say what actually was the map. It could have been a map of the local cheeseburger fast food outlets.

 

 

He also said he could have declassified it as President but didn’t and can’t now.

 

An admission out of his own mouth that he understands classification is a process now out of his control.

If he understands he can’t show people classified documents then why was he keeping them scattered around Mar A Largo?

 

More indictments coming.

 

Jack be nimble, Jack be quick.

 

 

 

[jerrymahoney]

16 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

He also said he could have declassified it as President but didn’t and can’t now.

 

An admission out of his own mouth that he understands classification is a process now out of his control.

If he understands he can’t show people classified documents then why was he keeping them scattered around Mar A Largo?

 

More indictments coming.

 

Jack be nimble, Jack be quick.

 

 

 

Since the document in question likely does not exist, he could just as easily be saying:

 

"I can't show you this because it's classified" because if he showed them, they might realize the document he was waving at them has nothing to do with the Gen. Milley type-written letter as described at 34.  -- which Gen. Milley has let it be known per CNN he never typed such a letter.

 

"Sometimes aides and visitors weren't even sure if what Trump was talking about on national security or military matters was true or if documents Trump mentioned existed, sources recalled."

 

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/donald-trump-indictment-documents-mark-milley-mar-a-lago/

Edited June 18, 2023 by jerrymahoney

[Chomper Higgot]

23 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

Since the document in question likely does not exist, he could just as easily be saying:

 

"I can't show you this because it's classified" because if he showed them, they might realize the document he was waving at them has nothing to do with the Gen. Milley type-written letter as described at 34.  -- which Gen. Milley has let it be known per CNN he never typed such a letter.

 

"Sometimes aides and visitors weren't even sure if what Trump was talking about on national security or military matters was true or if documents Trump mentioned existed, sources recalled."

 

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/donald-trump-indictment-documents-mark-milley-mar-a-lago/

Once again, do you suppose the Government had records of what documents were given to Trump and what documents were not returned?

[ozimoron]

Just now, Chomper Higgot said:

Once again, do you suppose the Government had records of what documents were given to Trump and what documents were not returned?

I wouldn't discount the possibility that Trump was just pumping up the status of that doc or even mischaracterising it's contents altogether, just to brag to his donors. Milley has denied writing it so it may be just like the Biden tapes, all hat and no cattle.

[jerrymahoney]

1 minute ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Once again, do you suppose the Government had records of what documents were given to Trump and what documents were not returned?

The government will not have a record of imaginary documents.

[scottiejohn]

8 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Once again, do you suppose the Government had records of what documents were given to Trump and what documents were not returned?

Or a record of which ones he copied and kept without their knowledge!

[Chomper Higgot]

19 minutes ago, scottiejohn said:

Or a record of which ones he copied and kept without their knowledge!

If Trump copied classified documents and those copies were retrieved by the FBI then that there is evidence of more Trump crimes.

 

More indictments are to follow.

 

 

Jack be nimble, Jack be quick.

[jerrymahoney]

This is opinion piece in Washington Post:

 

Trump’s smoking gun recording gives Jack Smith all he needs

According to news reports, he shared the substance of the document with others in the room, including biographers with no security clearance.

 

This evidence effectively destroys whatever defense Trump was trying to concoct (he didn’t know there were classified documents, he declassified them, he thought they were not classified).

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2023/06/04/trump-smoking-gun-tape/

 

The indictment states that Trump was livid about the recent New Yorker article. It was not Trump he claimed who wanted to invade Iran late in his presidency but it was Milley whpo wanted to invade Iran.

 

And he claims to have the document to prove it. Except Milley has let it be known that he never wrote such a 4-page typewritten document.

 

The whole reason this was looked at as a smoking gun is that although Trump and staff had said he had no still classified documents , this is proof he did.

 

OK so at trial the prosecution may be asked to show the documents -- as far as the tape recording document, they issued subpoena in March. Nothing so far.

 

Edited June 19, 2023 by Pink Mist
Reply to removed post

[Chomper Higgot]

1 minute ago, jerrymahoney said:

This is opinion piece in Washington Post:

 

Trump’s smoking gun recording gives Jack Smith all he needs

According to news reports, he shared the substance of the document with others in the room, including biographers with no security clearance.

 

This evidence effectively destroys whatever defense Trump was trying to concoct (he didn’t know there were classified documents, he declassified them, he thought they were not classified).

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2023/06/04/trump-smoking-gun-tape/

 

The indictment states that Trump was livid about the recent New Yorker article. It was not Trump he claimed who wanted to invade Iran late in his presidency but it was Milley whpo wanted to invade Iran.

 

And he claims to have the document to prove it. Except Milley has let it be known that he never wrote such a 4-page typewritten document.

 

The whole reason this was looked at as a smoking gun is that although Trump and staff had said he had no still classified documents , this is proof he did.

 

OK so at trial the prosecution may be asked to show the documents -- as far as the tape recording document, they issued subpoena in March. Nothing so far.

 

I wonder if convictions have ever been secured where the accused has destroyed or concealed evidence?

 

I wonder if sworn testimony by the accused’s own lawyers of his efforts to destroy and conceal evidence would be a factor tge court will consider?

 

I wonder if making false statements and conspiring with others to submit signed false statements about classified documents will be considered by the court?

[LosLobo]

1 hour ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Jack be nimble, Jack be quick.

I agree, but he is also relentless.

 

I suggest Jack Smith is the perfect prosecutor to indict Trump.

 

Trump will regret he ever requested a special counsel to handle this case.

 

He will be no match for relentless Jack Smith, familiar with prosecuting other criminal presidents and who also has ran multiple ironman triathlons, even after being injured after being hit by a truck.

 

Here is Jack Smith's experience bio....

 

 

Edited June 18, 2023 by LosLobo

[jerrymahoney]

You are mostly discussing whether grand jury testimony from Trump's attorneys in Washington DC will be admitted in evidence in Florida. Judge Howell's Washington DC ruling is not binding on the Florida court.

 

As for the rest, wonder away.

[LosLobo]

15 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

Judge Howell's Washington DC ruling is not binding on the Florida court.

Obviously only your opinion as you have not included anything to support your claim.

[jerrymahoney]

9 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

The Jack Smith is an idiot hope lives on.

I have never discussed anything in any of these topics other than items 33-35 of the indictment. Those items reference the two 2021 meetings in Bedminster, NJ. Those items are not refenced in any of the 1-37 charges against Trump in the Florida indictment.

 

If you want to discuss the Florida charges  in the indictment, fine. Do it with someone  else.

[riclag]

22 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

The Jack Smith is an idiot hope lives on.

According to a recent poll there is 

a chance that the DOJ and Jack has some credibility issues! The court of public opinion has just spoke in a Harvard Harris poll!

https://dnyuz.com/2023/06/17/harvard-poll-most-voters-say-trump-indictment-is-election-interference-believe-hell-be-acquitted/

Edited June 18, 2023 by riclag

[Chomper Higgot]

7 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

I have never discussed anything in any of these topics other than items 33-35 of the indictment. Those items reference the two 2021 meetings in Bedminster, NJ. Those items are not refenced in any of the 1-37 charges against Trump in the Florida indictment.

 

If you want to discuss the Florida charges  in the indictment, fine. Do it with someone  else.

I don’t believe for a moment Jack Smith has finished bringing indictments.

 

He and the DOJ have stated, investigations are continuing.

[jerrymahoney]

23 minutes ago, LosLobo said:

Obviously only your opinion as you have not included anything to support your claim.

During the investigation, Judge Beryl A. Howell of the Federal District Court for the District of Columbia ruled that the exception applied, forcing Mr. Trump’s lawyers to provide information to the grand jury. But Judge Cannon is not bound by Judge Howell’s decisions when it comes to what information should be presented to a jury.

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/12/us/judge-aileen-cannon-trump-trial.html

 

[jerrymahoney]

1 minute ago, Chomper Higgot said:

I don’t believe for a moment Jack Smith has finished bringing indictments.

 

He and the DOJ have stated, investigations are continuing.

I have no idea. But he has only issued one so far.

[Chomper Higgot]

3 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

During the investigation, Judge Beryl A. Howell of the Federal District Court for the District of Columbia ruled that the exception applied, forcing Mr. Trump’s lawyers to provide information to the grand jury. But Judge Cannon is not bound by Judge Howell’s decisions when it comes to what information should be presented to a jury.

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/12/us/judge-aileen-cannon-trump-trial.html

 

Agreed, Cannon is not bound.

 

She’ll also not bound to be the presiding judge when this goes to trial.

 

She is very clearly in breach of Statutes on impartiality.

[ThailandRyan]

Why should the GOP try and remove funding for the investigation.  The facts speak for themselves, and it appears the GOP is trying to backstop the former POTUS, yet all they will succeed in is putting there own careers in jeapordy.

 

So did Trump misappropriate documents which he should not have had and which should have been in NARA's hands to begin with. The answer is yes he did.  Misappropriation is a form of theft and so yes the Donald did steal documents which should have been returned to NARA

 

https://www.cnn.com/2023/06/08/politics/fact-check-trump-claims-documents-investigation/index.html

 

False claim: Trump was following the Presidential Records Act by refusing to immediately return documents

 

Trump has repeatedly claimed that the Presidential Records Act, a 1978 law, says he was supposed to hold negotiations with the National Archives and Records Administration about the return of official documents after his presidency.

For example, he said in a March 2023 interview on Fox that the law is “very specific”: “It says you are going to discuss the documents. You discuss everything – not only docu– everything – about what’s going in NARA, et cetera, et cetera. You’re gonna discuss it. You will talk, talk, talk. And if you can’t come to an agreement, you’re gonna continue to talk.”

 

He made a similar claim at a CNN town hall in May, saying the law “says you talk, you negotiate, you make a deal.”

 

Facts First: Trump’s claim is false. The Presidential Records Act says that, the moment a president leaves office, NARA gets custody and control of all presidential records from his administration. Nothing in the law says there should be a negotiation between a former president and NARA over a former president’s return of presidential documents – much less that there should have been a monthslong battle after NARA first contacted Trump’s team in 2021 to try to get some of the records that had not been handed over at the end of his presidency.

[jerrymahoney]

6 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Agreed, Cannon is not bound.

 

She’ll also not bound to be the presiding judge when this goes to trial.

 

She is very clearly in breach of Statutes on impartiality.

She has not recused herself and the prosecution has as yet filed no motion to have her removed by order.

[jerrymahoney]

1 minute ago, ThailandRyan said:

So did Trump misappropriate documents which he should not have had and which should have been in NARA's hands to begin with. The answer is yes he did

I have no love for Trump but there is this thing called a trial.

[Chomper Higgot]

12 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

She has not recused herself and the prosecution has as yet filed no motion to have her removed by order.

The Jack Smith is an idiot hope lives on.

 

Cannon made her first ruling, indicating she has no intention to recuse herself.

 

I look forward to the DOJ response.

[Chomper Higgot]

11 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

I have no love for Trump but there is this thing called a trial.

‘Trials’ and you are speaking the in his defense in topics discussing all of them.

[CharlieKo]

1 hour ago, LosLobo said:

He will be no match for relentless Jack Smith, familiar with prosecuting other criminal presidents

Which Presidents were they?

[ThailandRyan]

15 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

I have no love for Trump but there is this thing called a trial.

Of course there is and a Trial or trials will be held.  Yet there is another poster who insists that the Donald did not steal the items and he was allowed to have them.  I think he doth protest to much as he does not know the true rules for the Donald to get his hands on the documents prior to leaving and after leaving office.

[jerrymahoney]

6 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

‘Trials’ and you are speaking the in his defense in topics discussing all of them.

I am a legal wonk. I just look at the case.

 

And personally, I think Trump is more at legal peril in Georgia than with either the Florida or the possible Washington DC cases.

Edited June 18, 2023 by jerrymahoney

[onthedarkside]

Edited video from a non news source removed along with another attempt by the same poster via a different non news source.

 

18. Social media content is acceptable in most forums. However in factual areas such as but not limited to news, current affairs and health topics, social media cannot be used unless it is from a credible news media source or a government agency, and must include a link to the original source. In some circumstances a moderator may relax this rule and this will be determined on a case by case basis. If this rule is relaxed a moderator will post a public notice explaining the limit and scope of the relaxation.

 

A comment on moderation also removed

 

 

[LosLobo]

5 minutes ago, CharlieKo said:

Which Presidents were they?

Kosovo President Hashim Thaçi as stated in the included video.

 

 

 

 

[jerrymahoney]

18 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

The Jack Smith is an idiot hope lives on.

Lawyers Unable to Find Document Trump Discussed in Recorded Conversation

Prosecutors issued a subpoena for a description of military options for Iran mentioned by the former president during an interview. But Mr. Trump’s legal team said they could find no such document.

 

But Mr. Trump’s legal team has informed the Justice Department that it was unable to find any such records in his possession, the people said. It is unclear whether prosecutors have been able to track down the document themselves, leaving open the possibility that the material remains at large or that the famously blustery Mr. Trump incorrectly described it on the recording.   (my underline)

 

The subpoena, which was issued in March, sought any and all records pertaining to Gen. Mark A. Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and to Iran, including maps or invasion plans, according to the people familiar with the matter.

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/02/us/politics/classified-documents-trump-recording.html

 

From CNN:

 

Meadows’ autobiography includes an account of what appears to be the same meeting, during which Trump “recalls a four-page report typed up by (Trump’s former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff) Mark Milley himself. It contained the general’s own plan to attack Iran, deploying massive numbers of troops, something he urged President Trump to do more than once during his presidency.”

 

The document Trump references was not produced by Milley, CNN was told.

 

https://edition.cnn.com/2023/05/31/politics/trump-tape-classified-document-iran-milley/index.html