Last night, Department of Justice filed in opposition to the appointment of a Special Master in Florida. It used the filing to add new facts and allegations to the public record, including the statement that “obstructive conduct occurred” at Mar-a-Lago by concealing or moving documents. The Department makes many of the same claims that it used to opposed the release of a redacted affidavit, claims shown to have been misleading and exaggerated after the magistrate ordered the release. Notably, this filing contained details that were likely redacted in the affidavit but just released on the public record.
In the most direct challenge to the former President’s public claims, the Justice Department claimed that he and his staff had failed to turn over classified material and that the Department had no choice but to search areas outside of the storage room. Indeed, it says that it found three classified documents in Trump’s desk without indicating the level of classification or subject matter.
It also said that the Trump staff barred the FBI from looking at documents in the storage room after turning over classified information to them.
“As the former President’s filing indicates, the FBI agents and DOJ attorney were permitted to visit the storage room. See D.E. 1 at 5-6. Critically, however, the former President’s counsel explicitly prohibited government personnel from opening or looking inside any of the boxes that remained in the storage room, giving no opportunity for the government to confirm that no documents with classification markings remained.”
The filing also adds new disclosures on past claims of declassification by Trump. It states that “[w]hen producing the Fifteen Boxes, the former President never asserted executive privilege over any of the documents nor claimed that any of the documents in the boxes containing classification markings had been declassified.” That was in January 2022. It then alleges that, in the June 3, 2022 meeting, “neither counsel nor the custodian asserted that the former President had declassified the documents or asserted any claim of executive privilege.” It is not clear if or when the Trump team made the declassification claim.
The filing also includes this notable allegation:
“The government also developed evidence that government records were likely concealed and removed from the Storage Room and that efforts were likely taken to obstruct the government’s investigation.”
The Justice Department told the court that it was vindicated in its suspicions and that
“the FBI, in a matter of hours, recovered twice as many documents with classification markings as the ‘diligent search’ that the former President’s counsel and other representatives had weeks to perform calls into serious question the representations made in the June 3 certification and casts doubt on the extent of cooperation in this matter.”
It is not clear from the filing if the FBI has evidence of intentional acts of concealment as opposed to negligence in keeping track of such material. However, stating that the FBI believes that “obstructive conduct occurred” is very serious, particularly if the FBI also believes that this conduct was knowingly or intentional obstructive.
The main point of the filing was to address the court’s indication that it wanted a special master appointment. I have supported such an appointment, even at this late date. Indeed, I felt that this was one of the four failures of Attorney General Merrick Garland in not taking proactive steps to assure that public that this was not a pretextual raid to collect sensitive material for other investigative purposes. It would still have considerable value in the case.
The special master could divide these documents into groups of classified material, unclassified but defense information, and unclassified material outside of the scope of the alleged crimes. The last category would then be returned. That accounting could also offer basic descriptive information on the material without revealing their precise content or titles. The special master could describe material as related to national defense or nuclear weapons (as was previously leaked government sources). The government has already leaked that there was nuclear weapons material being sought. Confirming such general details can be done without giving details on the specific information or even titles for the documents to protect national security. In national security cases, including cases where I have served as counsel, such indexes and summaries are common.
Notably, this filing includes the picture which is being widely distributed. It can, however, leave an obviously misleading impression.
The picture could be seen by many that secret documents were strewn over the floor when this appears the method used by the FBI to isolate classified documents. However, putting that initial concern aside, there is a question as to the purpose of the attachment. It seems entirely superfluous in releasing this one picture. The picture is Attachment F and the textual reference on page 13 simply says
“Certain of the documents had colored cover sheets indicating their classification status. See, e.g., Attachment F (redacted FBI photograph of certain documents and classified cover sheets recovered from a container in the “45 office”).”
It is curious that the DOJ would release this particular picture which suggests classified material laying around on the floor. The point is to state a fact that hardly needs an optical confirmation: the possession of documents with classified cover sheets. Indeed, the top of roughly half of the documents are redacted in the photos. The government could simply affirmatively state the fact of the covered pages and would not likely be challenged on that point without the inclusion of this one photo.
For critics, the photo may appear another effort (with prior leaks) to help frame the public optics and discussion. Clearly the court did not need the visual aid of a picture of documents with covers. It seems clearly intended for public consumption.
It is possible that the FBI was showing that these files with intermixed in that box with the framed Time covers. If so, that is an appropriate combination if it is being used not to show the covers as cited in the text but the commingling of documents raised in other parts of the filing. We simply do not know.
The arguments raised by the Justice Department are not just familiar but transparently weak. The government argues that Trump lacks standing because the records belong to the United States, not him. However, that is the point. The court is trying to determine who has a right to these documents. The Justice Department itself recognizes that it may have gathered some attorney-client privileged documents in this ridiculously broad search. It allowed the seizure of any box containing any document with any classification of any kind — and all boxes stored with that box. It also allowed the seizure of any writing from Trump’s presidency.
Moreover, the court itself has ample authority to appoint a special master to help sort through such material.
The government and its allies, in my view, misconstrue the impact of Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 41(g), which provides
” A person aggrieved by an unlawful search and seizure of property or by the deprivation of property may move for the property’s return. The motion must be filed in the district where the property was seized. The court must receive evidence on any factual issue necessary to decide the motion. If it grants the motion, the court must return the property to the movant, but may impose reasonable conditions to protect access to the property and its use in later proceedings.”
However, the Special Master is being used by the Court to determine the status, classification, and categorization of the documents. The Court has the inherent authority to seek such assistance in an independent review of material. Special masters are fairly common helping courts establish the record for ruling on the merits of motions. It may turn out that most or all of this material is properly held by the government, but a Special Master can help establish the record for that decision, including the status of material acknowledged as potential attorney-client material.
The Justice Department also makes the same type of arguments used to oppose the release of a single line of the affidavit in redacted form. It claims that both its investigation and national security would be harmed. That is even less compelling here. A special master would be reviewing documents in a secure facility and would presumably have a clearance. Many of us who have handled national security cases have been cleared for TS/SCI material.
Notably, however, the Justice Department states in a footnote that “the government is prepared, given the extraordinary circumstances, to unseal the more detailed receipt and provide it immediately to plaintiff.” That sounds like (as with the redacted affidavit) that they clearly can release more information, particularly to avoid a Special Master appointment.
The use of such arguments after the release of the redacted affidavit only undermines the arguments further. The Justice Department insisted that the court should not release a single line of the affidavit and that any substantive disclosure would unleash a parade of horribles, from damaging national security to sacrificing witnesses.
For those of us who have litigated cases against the Justice Department, it was an all-too-familiar claim by a department notorious for over-classification and over-redaction arguments. For a week, media pundits mouthed the same exaggerated claims and challenged those of us who argued that it was clearly possible to release a redacted affidavit; liberals suddenly shuddered at the thought of doubting the Justice Department. Then the government produced a redacted version that caused no such harms while confirming important facts in the case.
Notably, some of the details in this filing on meetings before the August raid may have been part of the affidavit but redacted.
The Department also claims that it does not need to return personal material to the former president because the evidence of “commingling personal effects with documents bearing classification markings is relevant evidence of the statutory offenses under investigation.” That is again transparency weak. The government has recorded or documented such intermingling and make a record for any trial without refusing to return material that is neither classified nor otherwise subject to government confiscation or removal.
The Department also makes other incomplete or dubious arguments. For example, it asserts that no executive privilege claim can be made by a former president: “The former President cites no case—and the government is aware of none—in which executive privilege has been successfully invoked to prohibit the sharing of documents within the Executive Branch.” That is because this issue has not been fully litigated. It has been a long debate over the ability of former presidents to claim privilege. Indeed, under the Presidential Records Act, such assertions are honored over documents in its possession.
What is clear from this filing is that Merrick Garland will not change his refusal to seek modest steps to assure the public that this investigation is neither pretextual nor political. Instead, he is “all in” on these sweeping and untenable claims of the need for absolute control and secrecy. What is missing is real leadership to address the deep concerns of millions of Americans over the past records of the Department and its current investigation. Instead, Garland has required courts to force the release of a redacted affidavit and the possible appointment of a special master.
What is clear is that Garland’s “trust us” mantra has done little to assuage concerns. Indeed, that seems almost comical to many people, given the Crossfire Hurricane debacle and the fact that this investigation is being handled by the same section.
The court should reject the arguments against the appointment of a special master and allow for an independent review of these documents.
Here is the filing: doj-response-to-trump-special-master
This column was edited to add the language from Rule 41 and the basis for such motions.
And finally,
“ What is clear is that Garland’s “trust us” mantra has done little to assuage concerns.”
As opposed to trusting Trump? It’s already been established that he lied to the DOJ when team Trump claimed they turned over all classified documents. They also didn’t cooperate for nearly two years. After fighting a subpoena and making excuses a search warrant was issued. Then Trump continued to lie after the search warrant was executed. Clearly Trump couldn’t be trusted and he was obviously in possession of highly sensitive defense information that posed a serious security risk to the nation. Who do you think has more credibility when saying “trust us”. The man who was not following the law or the justice department who was proven correct in its claims about Trump being illegally in possession of documents he was not supposed to have?
If Trump doesn’t have copies somewhere of every doc the FBI hauled away he’s stupid enough to deserve the fate dreamed of for him by the Dems & deep staters
If he does have copies, then he’s provided the mens rea for criminal prosecution.
“Deep staters”? And who are they? Get a life and stop making stuff up. This deep state BS needs to end. I know that is wishful thinking but come on, stop it and grow up. Read some history, there have been claims of this sort of thing for centuries, thing is, history shows it is never true.
“ The Department also makes other incomplete or dubious arguments. For example, it asserts that no executive privilege claim can be made by a former president: “The former President cites no case—and the government is aware of none—in which executive privilege has been successfully invoked to prohibit the sharing of documents within the Executive Branch.” That is because this issue has not been fully litigated. It has been a long debate over the ability of former presidents to claim privilege. Indeed, under the Presidential Records Act, such assertions are honored over documents in its possession.”
Trump can’t claim executive privilege. He’s no longer president. Biden can grant that privilege to Trump but Trump can’t invoke it since he’s literally a private citizen. Executive privilege is honored by the government as a courtesy, but not as a right. Trump can’t assert an executive privilege against the executive branch, it’s just not a thing.
This issue doesn’t need to be litigated. Trump is no longer part of the executive branch. Only Biden can assert executed privilege because he’s THE president. Trump is just a private citizen with no real power to assert executive privilege.
SCOTUS has rules the executive privilege exists in the hands of the current President.
Of course they would oppose a special “Master” to see what’s truly happening. They sound a bit like Scotland Yard when they cll in Sherlock Holmes. Surely they don’t want anyone getting to the VERY DIRTY bottom of just what has been going on at government agencies filled with partisan hacks like Thibault.
I think this is just a strike back at Trump. This is my gut feeling. If Trump ts inxicted it would tear this country apart inlight of all the others that have not been held accountable. The President knows this so now he is out demonizing the Maga followers as Neo Nazis.
Some Trumpists ARE Neo-Nazis.
Some? I honestly do not understand a single defense of trump the fascist stooge. He cares not a rats ass about anybody but himself. From what I’ve seen, he never has. I love how he put his beloved ex wife in a corner of his golf course. What kind of “person” does this? And yes, I do use the word person carefully here because I have doubts he is human.
Go ahead and defend trump, but a follower? he is actively calling for democracy to end in this country. Stop the nonsense, Votes count, when you loose, come up with a better idea, not violence.
Yes, “some.” They are not all Neo-Nazis. There is no reason to overgeneralize about them. It’s easy and accurate to add the qualifier “some.”
Hey Baby: you want to know why Trump planted Ivana at the golf course? Because he could use her internment there to argue that the land is now a cemetery, which, under state law, exempts it from property taxes. I’ve seen reporting that he’s trying to do just that. Trump is a crook and grifter. Always has been, and always will be.
You sound like a Nazi. National Socialist. Got that?
“It is not clear from the filing if the FBI has evidence of intentional acts of concealment as opposed to negligence in keeping track of such material.”
So trump is either a criminal mastermind that concealed classified material or he is an inept stooge that didn’t know classified material from toilet paper.
Stop trying to defend this inept dufus, He is a traitor to our country and if they tried him for treason and he was found guilty and hung, I would not shed a tear.
The DOJ and FBI cannot be trusted to tell us the truth about the Mar-a-Lago raid… We need to hear from an unbiased Special Master…
So hearing from Judge Cannon isn’t sufficient for you? She was appointed by Trump.
“The government also developed evidence that government records were likely concealed and removed from the Storage Room and that efforts were likely taken to obstruct the government’s investigation.”
Um, government DEVELOPING EVIDENCE… – no, that doesn’t sound fishy at all. <SARC
Because obviously the FBI and the DOJ aren’t politically motivated at all.
Federal government hasn’t outgrown itself decades ago, naaah.
“ It also allowed the seizure of any writing from Trump’s presidency.”
Good grief this column is so full of bad assumptions and false claims. Any writing from Trump’s presidency are presidential records that fall under the purview of the PRA. That’s why it’s illegal to keep those writings. Unless they are writings of a personal nature that didn’t involve official government business. Trump doesn’t seem like the kind of guy that writes sentimental letters to family members so it’s very unlikely there would be much of anything to lay claim as personal.
You’re forgetting his “love” letters to all the dictators of the world.
You’re a special kind of stupid, aren’t you snowflake?
They sure are. They think that by protecting the corrupt government that they will be safe. Just wait. First they came for the socialists……ect..ect..ect..
Tell me, what is your definition of “socialism”? What countries consistently are found to have the happiest citizens? Hint: they are all democratic socialist counties. 2nd Hint: they are Scandinavian countries.
“ You’re forgetting his “love” letters to all the dictators of the world.”
Well he could have been asking Kim or Putin pointers on how to root out snitches within his administration.
The FBI and DOJ are supposed to represent justice for the entire nation. They failed to do so and are now politically corrupt while appealing to those who never had common sense. America is not their first concern.
The positive image projected by the FBI and the DOJ is essential. It is they who must adhere to the law while not violating the rights of citizens. They have not done so and therefore ruined their authority in the eyes of too many.
The foolish will try to blame the victim, but that only leads to despotism.
S. Meyer says, “ It is they who must adhere to the law while not violating the rights of citizens. They have not done so and therefore ruined their authority in the eyes of too many.”
They are adhering to the law. Trump isn’t and that’s why they are enforcing it. Trump had documents that did not belong to him. That’s considered stolen property. Trump already lied to the FBI. Lying to the FBI is a crime. Oops. Many have tried to get away with lying to the FBI and many fail. Trump is just another who tried and failed. Trump being a known criminal helps the FBI have an easy case because easy cases are only from known criminals. Speaking in S. Meyer language is fun. No wonder he does it all the time.
“They are adhering to the law. “
How do you know that, Svelaz? You don’t. It was one foolish assertion among many. That is why there is litigation.
“Trump isn’t “
Of course, he is. That is why he uses the judicial system instead of hiring people to break into the FBI and take back his stolen documents. That is how things are supposed to work, but you don’t know that. You think anything a dictator says is fine and dandy.
“Trump had documents that did not belong to him.”
Can you name and tell us what is in the document? No. In fact, I think, except for a possible error, everything taken belonged to Trump starting with his passports. You don’t have the requisite knowledge to say the things you do. That makes you look foolish or stupid.
“That’s considered stolen property. “
Presently, it is disputed property, but your lack of understanding of the English language permits you to say ignorant things without knowing it. It would be laughable, but one hopes for an intelligent society, something you are not providing. That makes your foolishness sad.
“Trump already lied to the FBI. “
Tell us the lies. Was Trump under oath? The FBI has lied repeatedly in its official capacity. Think of the FISA warrants. That is serious. Are you not smart enough to understand how dangerous it is when the FBI lies to judges and violates the rights of American citizens? I doubt you do because you lack knowledge of Liberty and the law. You demonstrate that lack of knowledge in virtually every sphere. You need to learn how to check the facts and words that describe things correctly.
“Trump being a known criminal”
With statements like that, you are either paid to write them, or you are more of a fool than anyone recognizes.
“ Clearly the court did not need the visual aid of a picture of documents with covers. It seems clearly intended for public consumption.
The arguments raised by the Justice Department are not just familiar but transparently weak. The government argues that Trump lacks standing because the records belong to the United States, not him.”
Yes it did, the pictures provide evidence beyond reasonable doubt. The FBI is taking no chances in being stingy with details of evidence. It is providing hard evidence that would make it impossible to refute. Which is the whole point.
The arguments are particularly strong since the PRA explicitly makes those documents the property of the U.S. government. Turley has admitted to this already. Trump does lack standing because EVIDENCE was found to prove the government correct. Trump was illegally in possession of documents that did not belong to him.
Is Turley being deliberately obtuse or is he just intentionally making these claims to feed the rage of his gullible Trump supporters on this blog? Surely he couldn’t be this ignorant, could he?
Don’t you think that the seized documents themselves provide evidence beyond a resonable doubt? If so, the photo is clearly intended for us, not the court.
Better Headline….democrats oppose the Rule of Law
That’s false.
Fascist Democrats don’t want to let anything to chance!
The fascists are on the right.
The last time we discussed what the fascists were you screwed up and got everything wrong. Let us hear the major points that demonstrate fascism. Once you do that you will find the fascists are on the left. Until the you will remain ignorant.
Boy oh boy – Those Washington Boujwa must be in the thick of it.
They want this Man’s ass so bad.
I mean Damn … Holy Mother of God.
Bourgeois Blues · Odetta
“The government has already leaked that there was nuclear weapons material being sought.”
Turley doesn’t actually know who shared that info with reporters. Might be a government leak, might be a story planted by Trump’s side (to suggest that the government is lying/untrustworthy). We don’t know, and Turley shouldn’t pretend to know.
“In the most direct challenge to the former President’s public claims, the Justice Department claimed that he and his staff had failed to turn over classified material and that the Department had no choice but to search areas outside of the storage room.”
They **found** classified material outside the storage room, so that choice was clearly warranted.
“It is not clear from the filing if the FBI has evidence of intentional acts of concealment as opposed to negligence in keeping track of such material.”
As you partly quote: “[T]he government developed evidence that a search limited to the Storage Room would not have uncovered all the classified documents at the Premises. The government also developed evidence that government records were likely concealed and removed from the Storage Room and that efforts were likely taken to obstruct the government’s investigation.” Elsewhere, they note “Notwithstanding counsel’s representation on June 3, 2022, that materials from the White House were only located in the Storage Room, classified documents were found in both the Storage Room and in the former President’s office.” The filing says that at least 25 classified documents were found in the office. If that’s “negligence,” it’s pretty extreme negligence for a former President to have classified docs in an unsecured room (unsecured in the sense of 32 CFR Parts 2001 and 2003) in a club where there are foreign nationals walking about, when those documents never should have been taken, and when they should have been returned the first time Trump was asked for them.
“The Department also makes other incomplete or dubious arguments. For example, it asserts that no executive privilege claim can be made by a former president: ‘The former President cites no case—and the government is aware of none—in which executive privilege has been successfully invoked to prohibit the sharing of documents within the Executive Branch.’ That is because this issue has not been fully litigated. It has been a long debate over the ability of former presidents to claim privilege. Indeed, under the Presidential Records Act, such assertions are honored over documents in its possession.”
Actually, as the DOJ notes, it reached SCOTUS in Nixon v GSA, and SCOTUS concluded that “[a former President may not successfully assert executive privilege] against the very Executive Branch in whose name the privilege is invoked.” I have previously made this same point in exchanges here.
Turley omits several key points from the filing, including:
* The DOJ is asking that the judge review the 100+ documents rather than appointing a Special Master.
* One of Trump’s attorneys, Christina Bobb, stated that in June that
“Based upon the information that has been provided to me, I am authorized to certify, on behalf of the Office of Donald J. Trump, the following:
“a. A diligent search was conducted of the boxes that were moved from the White House to Florida;
“b. This search was conducted after receipt of the subpoena, in order to locate any and all documents that are responsive to the subpoena;
“c. Any and all responsive documents accompany this certification; and
“d. No copy, written notation, or reproduction of any kind was retained as to any responsive document.
“I swear or affirm that the above statements are true and correct to the best of my knowledge.”
But that was false: over 100 responsive documents remained in Trump’s possession. Depending on who provided the false info to her that “Any and all responsive documents accompany this certification” (was that person another of Trump’s attorneys, Evan Corcoran? was it Trump himself?), she may well have an unwaivable conflict of interest, as she is now a witness to the possible obstruction.
“Turley doesn’t actually know who shared that info with reporters.”
It might not be certain but the FBI has been leaking back into the Trump Presidency years. If they linked then, then they are most likely for the leak now. Grand Jury testimony was leaked by the FBI
Steele Dossier was leaked by the FBI
Anonymous doesn’t know what he is talking about.
You’re the one who doesn’t know what you’re talking about. For example, the Steele Dossier was not leaked by the FBI. Steele gave it to Buzzfeed, and they published it. And Trump was talking to Maggie Haberman at the NYT for his entire presidency.
“They **found** classified material outside the storage room, so that choice was clearly warranted.”
How do you know that? You don’t. They have lied repeatedly and lost all credibility just like you.
There are photos of classified material found in Trump’s office.
If Trump’s lawyers accept that it was in his office, will you?
So, the fedgov is investigating trump because of the bad decorating at MAL? Oh, the FBI released pix of the TS and TS/SCI document covers.
Wally: Don’t laugh. If Trump prevails, he may use those framed document covers for bad decorating wall art.
(FYI, I don’t think he will prevail on all of it, but I also think that DOJ is politically motivated in its zealous endeavor….)
““It is not clear from the filing if the FBI has evidence of intentional acts of concealment as opposed to negligence in keeping track of such material.””
None of this is known. What we can say is that Trump’s actions were correct and the material was impeccably cared for. To make a contrary claim you need proof. You don’t have proof so you and the FBI lack the credibility to make such statements.
Trump could murder someone in broad daylight and you’d defend it.
” it’s pretty extreme negligence for a former President to have classified docs in an unsecured room “
You don’t know what is secure and what isn’t. You are lying if you say differently. Security is based on a lot of things. We have seen proof of real security lapses with Hillary Clinton. Politics and power entered the FBI.
This poster is making things up.
Anonymous (S. Meyer) says,
“ You don’t know what is secure and what isn’t. You are lying if you say differently. Security is based on a lot of things. We have seen proof of real security lapses with Hillary Clinton. Politics and power entered the FBI.”
BWAHAHAHA!!!!!
Do you ever read back what you write? “Security is based on a lot of things”. Oh I’m sure they are, but you don’t know the security situation at MAL EXCEPT they had a…padlock in a storage room It wasn’t secure according to the rules for the level of classified materials that were there.
We have seen proof that you’re an idiot.
The relentless opposition of the Justice Department to the public’s right to know what its government is up to is yet another good reason why the Judge should appoint a Special Master. It may not tell the public all it needs to know but it will assure the public that the rule of law remains despite the FBI’s record and reputation for making up the rules.
“ The special master could describe material as related to national defense or nuclear weapons (as was previously leaked government sources). The government has already leaked that there was nuclear weapons material being sought. ”
Turley is making a false claim here. The giveaway never leaked any information referring to nuclear weapons, never. The government would never confirm any of the subject matter concerning what was in those TS/SCI documents. Turley is just plain making false allegations here.
Nobody has confirmed that nuclear weapons information was discovered in those documents. Turley should know better than be making clearly false claims.
“ Many of us who have handled national security cases have been cleared for TS/SCI material.”
Us? Does Turley have a security clearance that allows him to view TS/SCI documents?
It takes a long time to get such a security clearance and any special master would have to be someone within the. government.
Any appointment of a special master is only going to delay what has already been determined. Trump’s lawyers bear sole fault on filing late and making amateurish attempts at delaying the inevitable. The FBI has already finished reviewing the documents and they have already noted very small number of the overall cache of stolen documents are attorney-client privileged and they are in the process of returning in them. Turley is clearly way behind the curve here.
Svelaz……read the Man’s Bio…..starting with the Area 51 Case he won against the DOD.
Educate yourself and quit showing your ignorance and stupidity!
Ralph Chappell, that does confirm that Turley’s security clearance is current. There are several levels of security clearances. The ones to view TS/SCI documents are very few. I doubt Turley had that kind of clearance.
The point is that there is a very small pool of people who would be able do view the entirety of the cache of stolen documents.
The point is that there is a very small pool of people who would be able do view the entirety of the cache of stolen documents.
Freudian slip? Not the cache of seized documents that had been allegedly stolen? Your unintentional admission of what this FBI raid was all about is precious. Thanks.
Olly, Trump stole those documents. Because he refused to return documents that were not his they are legally considered stolen property.
It was a reading comprehension problem on your end.
Trump stole those documents. Because he refused to return documents that were not his they are legally considered stolen property.
Oh my bad. I wasn’t aware the investigation had been completed, that a grand jury had indicted Trump, that a trial had been conducted and a jury found him guilty.
It was a reading comprehension problem on your end.
Nope. It’s your banana republic interpretation of the U.S. legal process. Ready. Fire! Aim.
Jonathan wrote, “The Justice Department also makes the same type of arguments used to oppose the release of a single line of the affidavit in redacted form. It claims that both its investigation and national security would be harmed.”
In my opinion the DOJ and the FBI are digging themselves into a rather deep hole that they may not be able to effectively climb out of. Their intentional lies, yes the DOJ claiming that they couldn’t release any of the affidavit because it would harm national security and/or their investigation was a very intentional LIE, but now we’re just supposed to blindly believe that they’re telling the absolute truth? “Trust me, I’m from the government”, r…i…g…h…t!
The political left has shown us a verifiable pattern of propaganda lies within their narratives regarding all things Trump so many times over the last 6+ years that it’s beyond me why anyone would blindly accept any anti-Trump narrative that the political left, their DOJ, their FBI, and their lapdog media actively push?
Regardless of whether they actually think they have a justifiable reason for the things the DOJ and FBI have done during this whole raid fiasco, this fiasco has a wretched stench completely enveloping it of being purely political and they’re using the immoral rationalizing tactic “show me the man, and I’ll show you the crime.” that Lavrentiy Beria, who was the head of Joseph Stalin’s secret police, used against political adversaries.
I’m sick and tired of all this political nonsense; if the DOJ actually thinks they have a prosecutable case against Donald Trump for anything, and I do mean anything, then they need to file charges right now; no more smearing in the court of public opinion with their regular trickling out of anti-Trump leaks, do your damn job and do it now!!!
“So let it be written, so let it be done.”
Witherspoon’s impatience will do him no favors.
The FBI needs time to correctly file and build a case so that everything is done according to the law. To immediately file charges as you suggest would be a recipe for all kinds of errors and legal loopholes.
Turley has always called for thorough and complete evidence to be brought forth before filing charges and it seems the FBI is doing just that. What all this “slow process” is doing is just increasing Trump’s anxiety and irrational behavior which is becoming evident in his increasing rants in his failing social media platform.
This is Trump’s “fiasco”. He could have avoided it if only he followed the law.
“The FBI needs time to correctly file and build a case so that everything is done according to the law.”
Ignorance is not an excuse for making things up. The FBI took attorney/ client privileged documents. A special master is essential yet the FBI and DOJ are fighting against such an appointment. That alone demonstrates the bad behavior of the FBI and DOJ.
Stop making things up and filling the blog with Svelazisms which invariably are lies or based on stupidity.
Anonymous (S. Meyer), says,
“ Ignorance is not an excuse for making things up. The FBI took attorney/ client privileged documents. A special master is essential yet the FBI and DOJ are fighting against such an appointment. That alone demonstrates the bad behavior of the FBI and DOJ.”
First of all the FBI didn’t know what it had before their review team had a chance to sift thru the seized documents. They already reviewed all of the documents and determined only a very small portion of those documents were attorney client privileged. They are already in the process of returning them. So no special master is needed.
Second, Trump’s incompetent lawyers took too long to file a motion for a special master and that motion was such an incoherent mess that the judge required clarification. That’s Trump’s fault. Not the DOJ.
It seems the ignorance is coming from you.
I’ll answer even though I don’t know that I am involved.
“First of all the FBI didn’t know what it had before their review team had a chance to sift thru the seized documents.”
Your statement indicates a random search and seizure where the FBI didn’t know what they were looking for and took things that didn’t belong to them. Some of those things obviously didn’t belong to them and the search and seizure sound like a violation of the 4th Amendment. I know that flies over your head, so don’t get dizzy thinking about it.
“They already reviewed all of the documents and determined only a very small portion of those documents were attorney client privileged.”
It doesn’t matter if it was a large number of documents, a small number, or none at all that was an attorney-client privilege. That is a violation of rights and it was intentional based on a search warrant that was intentionally too broad. Don’t get dizzy over that either.
“They are already in the process of returning them. So no special master is needed.”
You go from ignorant to a place one seldom sees. How does one respond to such brainless ideas? The special master may not be needed only if the FBI broke the laws and has already put that confidential material to their own use. The FBI has been helping keep Trump from running so presently everyone has to consider the fact that the FBI literally stole the documents for political advantage. My proof? The Steele dossier, FBI ‘spying’, the FISA warrants, the surveillance of those in contact with Trump, the seizure of cellphones from Congressmen, the arrest of officials like Peter Navarro, etc. All of this points to political motivation which is anti-American and in my estimation illegal.
“Trump’s incompetent lawyers”
To say such things when you are so incompetent and ignorant is more foolishness. You don’t know their motivations. But you talk and say ignorant things thinking that you are intelligent when you are not.
They should file charges when they’re satisfied that they have evidence beyond a reasonable doubt, and in the meantime, given a minimum of extreme negligence and dishonesty on Trump’s part, they should keep investigating.
The dishonesty remains at the FBI and the DOJ. We have a President (Biden) whose associations with our enemies appear compromised.The evidence not looked at by the FBI shows he gets 10% or sometimes 50% of the loot. Garland declared parents domestic terrorists.
At this point, one can have no faith in the DOJ or the FBI. The same is true of anonymous.
Anonymous (S. Meyer) says,
“ The dishonesty remains at the FBI and the DOJ. We have a President (Biden) whose associations with our enemies appear compromised.The evidence not looked at by the FBI shows he gets 10% or sometimes 50% of the loot. Garland declared parents domestic terrorists.”
There are times when S. Meyer has these episodes of irrelevant incoherent rants when he’s run out of excuses to put forth. SMH.
I think Garland is trying to make the case as air tight as possible. Also, there is an internal policy at DOJ that discourages law enforcement from publicizing info about on going investigation with 60 days of elections.
Only when it’s likely to affect a candidate or party. They make lots of other info public within 60 days of an election. I doubt that they’re going to pause their J6 prosecutions, for example.