When the Justice Department filed its opposition to a Special Master, there were a number of elements that immediately stood out. The first that I noted was the most important: the allegation that the FBI believed that Trump or his associates “likely” acted to obstruct their investigation. Such public statements are always serious in a criminal case because they can commit investigators to the path of prosecution. I also later noted the curious inclusion of the now widely known photo of classified files that has been widely published. I warned that the photo could leave a misleading impression that this was how the documents were found by the FBI, which has occurred. I then asked why it was included as Attachment F. At best, it seems superfluous. At worst, it could be staging. That debate is now raging on cable programs and the Internet. Update: the photo came up in the hearing after the Trump counsel called it “perfectly staged” but there was no ruling on the Special Master.
As I mentioned earlier, the photo was entirely unnecessary. The attachment is referenced only once in noting that documents had covers with classified markings. That point has not been disputed and the court hardly needs a picture of these documents to establish the point.
Then there is the picture itself. I immediately flagged the danger of people misreading the photo because the photo did not state whether this was a picture of how the documents were found as opposed to placed by agents. That fear was quickly proved valid as various people assumed that Trump or his staff had left classified material strewn across the floor.
Putting aside that anticipated confusion, there remains the motive in the inclusion of the photo. Since I fail to see the need for this single photo, I have said that it appeared included for public consumption. Some on the left have insisted that it is “ludicrous” to suggest such a motive despite a series of leaks from the government as the Justice Department was in court demanding absolute secrecy.
The only textual reference is found on page 13 and 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”).”
Other basic facts in the filing did not seem to warrant such photo support. Yet, the reason for the concern is not simply because the photo was superfluous. It was also the photo itself. The documents were laid out for the photo and evidence marker with a box that prominently featured Trump’s collection of framed Time magazine covers. (Trump was previously ridiculed for his hanging of faux Time covers in his resort).
It is possible that the FBI was showing that these files were 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 to show the commingling of documents raised in other parts of the filing. We simply do not know.
It is, also, entirely possible that the placement of the documents next to these Time covers was not intentional. However, a great number of photos were taken of the scene from individual documents to boxes to the storage room. Of all of those documents, the Justice Department selected this photo even though some of the covers had to be redacted. This was the only photo that the Justice Department wanted released into the public docket.
When combined with the leaks from the government, there is a reasonable concern that the photo was included not for the court but for public consumption to help frame the public debate. It is striking to see so many pundits on the left expressing shock that we should doubt that claims or representations of the government, particularly after the documented history of bias and false statements by Department officials in related Trump investigations.
In the end, this is not nearly as important as the affirmative statement that agents believed that obstructive conduct had occurred. Yet, with the objections to the leaks from the government, such concerns are magnified when the Justice Department is resisting the release of any information from its prior filings. That control of the framing of the public record is a huge advantage that the government has used in prior cases.
Until abusive members of DOJ and FBI Intelligence agencies go to prison when involved in criminal behavior, this type of abuse of “law enforcement authority” for intelligence power purposes will continue. There is no federal law enforcement to impose consequences. Intelligence agents believe in the amoral ends justifies the means values for power, but they are then granted law enforcement authority to abuse. These intelligence agents see nothing “wrong” in this as they consider it in the “best interests of the country.” This is known as “noble cause corruption” in law enforcement. Posting on social media an image of ANY classified document (I don’t care what is “revealed”) is a crime. Period. Such outrageous abuse has no boundaries, until we have a federal law enforcement to exercise consequences for endless criminal acts. Of course, POTUS would have such documents as a routine part of Executive Branch business. I am certain a massive amount of such documents were classified as in the image. And? If they were or were not declassified by the former POTUS, is for law and courts to decide. But intelligence agents decide that they will try to influence not only the courts and the law, but also domestic elections. It is wrong in every aspect of what can go wrong with U.S. domestic intelligence. That train wreck really needs to stop. It will not end well for USA.
Professor Turley,
Curiously absent from your commentary is the citation to a specific FBI protocol that was not followed in connection with the taking of this photograph or with its inclusion in the filing.
One of the primary reasons for including the photo is that it will help the DOJ establish the mens rea needed to indict Trump. All three statutes cited in the warrant require a the DOJ to prove Trump an intent element. The photo shows evidence that the DOJ seized material in the former President’s office. [Despite what you claim, it very clearly states that this came from a desk drawer, so obviously, it was not left there by Trump.] A footnote claims “the contents of a desk drawer that contained classified documents and governmental records commingled with other documents” (including the 3 passports) and notes that “the location of the passports is relevant evidence in an investigation of unauthorized retention and mishandling of national defense information.” While this alone does not prove intent, it makes it much easier to argue that he was personally involved in the mishandling of the NDI.
Second, I think the photo supports the claim that Trump, through his custodian (Christina Bobb, most likely), obstructed justice when the custodian claimed in a sworn statement on June 3 that:
“a diligent search was conducted of the boxes that were removed from the White House to Florida; This search was conducted after receipt of the subpoena, in order to located any and all documents that are responsive to the subpoena; Any and all responsive documents accompany this certificate; and no copy, written notation, or reproduction of any kind was retained as to any responsive document.” https://reason.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/Trump-v-USA-DOJ-motion-response-8-30-22.pdf#page=52.
The photo shows how clearly the documents were marked, and it also shows the location of the seized materials (in Trump’s office). Remember, Trump’s counsel previously claimed “there were no other records stored in any private office space or other location at the Premises and all available boxes were searched.”
How far we have gone away from any concept of equality under law. Sad sad state of USA.
Trump didn’t share top secret docs but the FBI has.
For political effect, the leftist media and dem controlled government is very glad to take the heat off of our horrible conditions to bash Trump and to provoke the right through outrage.
Who brought the docs down to MAL from the White House? Did Trump move them himself?
Allegedly classified documents. Perhaps the documents that previously identified as classified in a dead-naming convention. That said, without evidence of distribution or subterfuge, does the government have standing to invade a private residence, let alone to bring charges?
Mere possession is enough evidence. The fact that those documents did not belong to him and he hid them from authorities and lied about turning over all documents earlier in the year justified the search warrant.
That isn’t exactly true. Intent will be required, but the DOJ likely will have the intent element covered, given Trump’s own public admissions. By boasting that the documents were no longer classified once removed from the White House, he has helped the DOJ prove that he knew he had the NDI.
Your allegation is without merit. It has NOT been determined that these documents belong to the government and the FBI is NOT an authorized arbiter of that question. The Presidential Records Act of 1978 SPECIFICALLY gives a sitting President SOLE authority to decide – for every document that comes into his possession during his term in office – whether that record will become the property of the USA (“Presidential Records”) or will REMAIN HIS (“Personal Records”). He can even destroy a record if he wants. It’s HIS call. Further, the question of how much authority the PRA actually gives a POTUS has already been settled by the court in a 2012 claim against Bill Clinton when Judicial Watch tried to get some tapes that were in Bill Clinton’s possession in his private home. US District Court, DC, Judge Amy Jackson Bergman ruled that the PRA did, in fact, grant such SOLE authority to the President to declare which of his official records were his “Personal” records. “If he SAID it is a Personal Record then it IS a Personal Record”. There is nothing in the law and nothing in her ruling to suggest that “classified”, “restricted” or “top secret” documents are an exception to law or her ruling. She further ruled that the government could NOT “seize” a former President’s “personal” records. Therefore, Trump’s records are, in fact, HIS a records, NOT the governments and he has absolutely NO OBLIGATION to give them to ANYBODY. And the federal government has even LESS right to raid his home and take whatever they wanted.
If there were chargeable offenses by Trump the prog/left denizens of our swamp would have had him in jail years ago. This is all staging, as good as any TASS/PRAVDA event could ever have been done.
Impeachment 3.1, this time they bitterly cling to the assertion that the baby is, in fact, viable, but all evidence suggests that they are merely tending a fetid fetus, at best, or confessing through projection as the hunters and judges were implicated in impeachment 1.0 and 2.0.
“ That control of the framing of the public record is a huge advantage that the government has used in prior cases.”
Well…duh! They have…evidence. Trump’s multiple excuses and lies have fallen flat every time evidence is presented against him.
What I does show is that Trump has been lying from the start.
Reality Winner was convicted with far less evidence than this.
Evidence is supposed to be introduced in COURT….not the newspapers or on TV until AFTER the Trial.
Also…unless you know whether the documents are in fact still classified….none of the cover sheets mean a thing.
If President Trump declassified those documents….they are not classified no matter what. you think.
This is why we need a Special Master to determine the status of every single page of every document….every box….as to its status.
The FBI cannot be trusted to do that based upon its past misconduct.
More importantly….every single Leak of information, of information claimed to be too sensitive for release in Court prior to Trial, must be investigated and the Leaker indicted and prosecuted for those Leaks.
Cue….Special Counsel needed for that.
We still need a Special Counsel for the Hunter Biden Laptop investigation itself…..AND a separate Special Counsel for the FBI Coverup of that investigation!
You think Orange Man Bad…..stop and consider what the Biden Administration is up to…..and how many Laws are being broken….and ignored by the Media and AG Merrick Garland.
Ralph Chappell,
“ Evidence is supposed to be introduced in COURT….not the newspapers or on TV until AFTER the Trial.”
It was introduced in court. The FBI FILED that evidence in court in response to Trump’s motion for a special counsel.
“ Also…unless you know whether the documents are in fact still classified….none of the cover sheets mean a thing.”
They are still classified. Trump’s lawyers have not asserted that they are declassified. The FBI had to add additional clearance to some agents and lawyers to be able examine the classified documents. That’s evidence that they still are.
“ If President Trump declassified those documents….they are not classified no matter what. you think.”
He didn’t declassify them. He only claims to have done that AFTER his first couple of excuses were contradicted by the evidence from the FBI. Remember, Trump already lied about the FBI planting documents. He’s now lying about declassifying them. He has no proof other than his lying mouth. His lawyers already lied about handing over all the documents. Why would anyone believe Trump isn’t lying about declassifying those documents?
“ importantly….every single Leak of information, of information claimed to be too sensitive for release in Court prior to Trial, must be investigated and the Leaker indicted and prosecuted for those Leaks.”
These are not leaks. They are court filings in response to Trump’s own filings.
The photograph attached to the DOJ declaration has not been introduced into evidence. That can only happen at a trial, or a motion, after the proper foundation has been laid for its introduction.
When you attach an exhibit to a declaration in support or in opposition to a motion, you have to lay a foundation for the exhibit before it can be considered by the Court. No foundation is set forth, then the exhibit cannot be considered as it is double hearsay in this matter.
A photograph is hearsay. Hearsay is inadmissible unless there is a hearsay exception. The photograph is double hearsay as each item has a statement contained on cover sheet covering the unknown documents, which themselves are hearsay.
I think you are confusing hearsay with authentication. Exhibits must be relevant and properly authenticated to be entered into as evidence. A photo is not typically hearsay, esp. one taken by police at the crime scene.
“No foundation is set forth”
You’re mistaken. They were clear that the foundation for the photo was to show evidence for their statement “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”). The classification levels ranged from CONFIDENTIAL to TOP SECRET information, and certain documents included additional sensitive compartments that signify very limited distribution.”
“He didn’t declassify them.”
Nincompoop. No evidence, no logic and no common sense. You are a disaster.
Turley is partly right. The photo was released for public consumption. What Turley doesn’t see is that part of it’s purpose was to undercut Trump’s own lies and it did.
Trump’s lawyers asserted to the FBI that they diligently looked for any more classified documents after they have them the first set of 15 boxes. It took only a matter of hours for the FBI to find them.
What this photo does and what nobody else seems to be paying attention to is how obvious these classification markings are.
The insinuations and assumptions being made by Trump supporters that this was fake, a setup, or that it implies they were found that way are just that insinuations and assumptions that will have no bearing in court when charges are filed. The court will know that was not the case as Turley noted and that’s all that matters.
Trump’s attempts at lying about it are severely limited with the publication of that photo. It also forces him to admit that he didn’t declassify those documents.
I’ve said before people keep forgetting that the FBI is also a counterintelligence organization and it seems they are always one step ahead of Trump’s excuses and lying. They obviously have a lot of evidence and every time Trump tries to make excuses or lies they have something to immediately contradict it. The fact that Trump has been constantly changing his excuses proves the FBI has been successful.
“Turley is partly right. The photo was released for public consumption. What Turley doesn’t see is that part of it’s purpose was to undercut Trump’s own lies and it did.”
One undercuts another’s lies with the truth. But there were no Trump lies and plenty of lies by the FBI including the photo.
“What this photo does and what nobody else seems to be paying attention to is how obvious these classification markings are.“
The markings frequently exist on declassified documents.
“Trump’s attempts at lying about it are severely limited with the publication of that photo. It also forces him to admit that he didn’t declassify those documents.”
The above comment is stupid and demonstrates an ignorant mindset. Originally you raised fair questions that I answered but the rest of the post is junk.
SM
“ One undercuts another’s lies with the truth. But there were no Trump lies and plenty of lies by the FBI including the photo.”
How was the photo a lie? The FBI filed that with the court as evidence. Trump’s lawyers lied when they gave the FBI a signed affidavit attesting that they diligently looked for more documents and that they turned over all documents to the archives. Turns out that was not true when the FBI found more documents during the search.
Trump lied about the FBI planting the documents when he admitted that he declassified them. Oops that was a lie.
“ The markings frequently exist on declassified documents.”
No they don’t. Because any declassified documents will be marked “declassified”. Then there’s the problem of Trump’s lawyers not claiming in legal filings that they are declassified because they would have prove they are and they can’t, because Trump is lying.
S. Meyer, you’re not doing too well with your arguments
“How was the photo a lie?”
The photo was dressed up. Immediately that demonstrates intent and a perversion of evidence. It’s simple Svelaz even if understanding that is beyond your abilities. The FBI could have placed it neatly on a desk and taken a picture even though that wasn’t necessary.
“Trump’s lawyers lied when they gave the FBI a signed affidavit attesting that they diligently looked for more documents and that they turned over all documents to the archives.”
Can you show the evidence to prove what you say? Of course not. You rely on opinion meant to distort the truth, just like the photo.
“Trump lied about the FBI planting the documents”
No, he didn’t. He said the FBI could have planted documents because they didn’t permit observation of the FBI’s actions. The FBI even wanted his cameras turned off. Ask yourself, why? You have problems questioning what you read from the left. You rely on that literature for almost everything, but much of it is a lie, just like the photograph.
“S. Meyer, you’re not doing too well with your arguments”
You can’t make such a judgment. I’ll leave it up to others to decide for themselves.
SM
Oh My God!!!
FACT: When I was in the military taking a photo of any document labeled TOP SECRET was not legal and non one could get an exception to that. This is a very serious offense and was severely prosecuted and punished if found guilty.
The FBI agent that took any photos of top secret documents should be seriously reprimanded if not prosecuted and all the photos containing Top Secret documents need to be completely destroyed with verification that none of them were transferred to anyone. This really is a serious offense.
Did’t some submariner take a pic in a classified space, only at the SECRET level and get charged and convicted?
IIRC, they tried the “Hillary Clinton” defense, but since his name did not end in Clinton it did not work.
I think Trump pardoned him too.
Witherspoon,
The FBI didn’t take photos of top secret documents. They took photos of the cover sheets. Taking pictures of what’s INSIDE those cover sheets is illegal.
Plus these photos were for evidence to present in court. Didn’t you notice that the cover sheets for the most sensitive documents were redacted?
The point of the photo was to show that Trump indeed had illegally stored classified documents in his office when they were supposed to be only in that locked storage closet in the basement according to his lawyers legal declaration to the FBI.
You’re writing like an ignorant apologist, was that your intent?
Svelaz wrote, “The FBI didn’t take photos of top secret documents.”
I wrote that taking a photo of any document labeled TOP SECRET was not legal, and the reason the word “labeled” is in there is that regardless of whether it still is or is not still Top Secret can’t reasonably be known by the photographer, the physical act of taking the photo when it’s labeled Top Secret shows intent to distribute to those that do not have the proper security clearance. Also, what you wrote directly implies that the documents were in fact still Top Secret and we do not know that to be fact.
Svelaz wrote, “They took photos of the cover sheets.”
In context with the rest of your statement and the way you worded that, that implies that they only took photos of the cover sheets and that is clearly a false statement and the proof is in the photo itself.
Svelaz wrote, “Taking pictures of what’s INSIDE those cover sheets is illegal.”
The fact that they had to redact the photos to block out content on the inside pages is proof positive that they took photos of the actual content. No redaction of covers sheets is necessary as is shown in the photo.
Ignorance and arrogance is never a winning combination!
Witherspoon,
The FBI was authorized to take photos of the cover sheets. It’s their job and the person taking the photos clearly was cleared to do so. You implied it was illegal which is wrong.
Cover sheets are not documents, they are cover sheets. That should be self explanatory but you can’t seem to grasp the distinction.
“ In context with the rest of your statement and the way you worded that, that implies that they only took photos of the cover sheets and that is clearly a false statement and the proof is in the photo itself.”
The photo that is part of this discussion IS only showing the cover sheets. It’s not implied it’s exactly what’s in the photo.
All classified material HAS cover sheets to emphasize what it’s inside.
“ The fact that they had to redact the photos to block out content on the inside pages is proof positive that they took photos of the actual content. No redaction of covers sheets is necessary as is shown in the photo.”
No, some cover sheets classification labels are not supposed to be made public given the sensitive nature of the documents. The need to censor those cover sheets makes sense. They were not the exposed pages of the actual documents. It’s right on the explanation accompanying the filing.
Svelaz,
It’s really clear that your ignorant of the facts.
There are exactly six (6) cover seats “fully” visible in the photo, five TOP SECRET/SCI with yellow borders and one SECRET/SCI with an orange border, the other pages that are redacted are not, I repeat NOT, cover pages and anyone that claims that they are is a bald-faced liar. Those pages are actual redacted documents and one of them has either the Presidential or United States seal on it.
Witherspoon,
“ There are exactly six (6) cover seats “fully” visible in the photo, five TOP SECRET/SCI with yellow borders and one SECRET/SCI with an orange border, the other pages that are redacted are not, I repeat NOT, cover pages and anyone that claims that they are is a bald-faced liar.”
How do you know they are not cover pages? They are redacted and the mere redaction is not a clear indication that they are not cover pages.
You’re assuming a lot.
Svelaz wrote, “How do you know they are not cover pages? They are redacted and the mere redaction is not a clear indication that they are not cover pages. You’re assuming a lot.”
You’re sealioning.
No assumptions here; it’s self-evident and any relatively non-blind adult can see with their own two eyes why it’s self evident.
After that nonsense from you we’re done here.
Steve Witherspoon,
Do you know any professional photographers?
I downloaded the image in the professors article both as a WebP as it was published, and as a .png.
I opened it in GIMP, and zoomed in at 200%.
There may (emphasis mine) be something there.
I could be wrong.
Steve
We know that the rules only apply to the little people.
Were you military police? I can’t imagine MPs are prohibited from taking evidentiary photos.
Anonymous wrote, “Were you military police?”
No.
My last few years in the military I worked in an office that was handling some Top Secret documents directly related to a war zone at that time. I was thoroughly instructed in the do’s and dont’s regarding any Top Secret packages and/or documents that came across my desk.
Normally evidentiary photos are taken in a realistic fashion and not used to make a statement that is untrue.
ATS, I don’t understand why you haven’t learned that yet.
Whatever…if you took classified material from its authorized location to your place of residence and CID, OSI, or NCIS had to come retrieve it and you believe they can’t take evidentiary photos you need your brain housing group adjusted.
Safeside824 wrote, “Whatever…if you took classified material from its authorized location to your place of residence and CID, OSI, or NCIS had to come retrieve it and you believe they can’t take evidentiary photos you need your brain housing group adjusted.”
“Whatever…”? Really?
So you don’t give a hoot if people are breaking the law as long as they are trying to get Trump?
Does the ends justifies the means?
That’s probably the best example I’ve ever seen of how Cranial Power Generation Potential can approach infinity with one 39 word paragraph.
I think all the critically thinking people around here know full well whose brain housing group needs to be adjusted. Safeside824 may be suffering from Foot-In-Mouth Syndrome, which is when the only time a person opens their mouth is to change socks.
P.S. No one said they can’t take evidentiary photos but taking photos of documents labeled Top Secret is not legal.
Allright sunshine…lets have chapter and verse from the relevant DoD manuals and instructions to support your theory the taking of said labeled document photos in support ongoing criminal investigations is not legal. What statute(s) did the FBI violate by taking the photo(s). I believe you are suffering from the Dunning-Kruger Effect but it is probably Feltcher Syndrome.
Safeside824 wrote, “lets have chapter and verse from the relevant DoD manuals and instructions to support your theory”
My statement was not a theory, it was an absolute fact and a fact like that you don’t ever forget, it’s based on personal experience. Please notice that I clearly stated, “when I was in the military…”, I left the military late in 1`997. It’s not possible or even reasonable for me to provide you with what you’re asking, those things are committed to permanent memory.
Lastly; is it possible that the fact I stated from twenty-five years ago has changed and now people can freely take photos of Top Secret documents, I suppose it’s possible but not likely. Anybody handling Top Secret documents has to be cleared to handle them and I’d bet the combat boots on my feet right now that that clearance doesn’t allow them to take photos of Top Secret documents.
I just thought of something. Maybe the documents that were redacted weren’t actually the Top Secret documents that the cover pages were attached to; however, the clear implication is that they are.
Here is a thought…don’t claim absolute fact based upon 25-year old knowledge. Just like with active-duty military, the FBI Agents were “read-in” to whatever was required to enable them to complete their mission with a JAG looking over their shoulders to ensure actions were on the level.
“ I just thought of something. Maybe the documents that were redacted weren’t actually the Top Secret documents that the cover pages were attached to; however, the clear implication is that they are.”
And there it is. Coming around to what I was pointing out. Your absolute facts are no longer absolute.
Svelaz wrote, “And there it is. Coming around to what I was pointing out.”
Nope Svelaz, you’re not going to get away with that moving the goalpost lie, you never claimed that they were not the documents associated with the Top Secret or Secret cover pages. Your claim is that the redacted pages were cover sheets and that is also a lie. No one believes a confirmed liar, so stop lying.
Witherspoon,
“ Nope Svelaz, you’re not going to get away with that moving the goalpost lie, you never claimed that they were not the documents associated with the Top Secret or Secret cover pages.”
You moved the goalpost. You claimed with certainty that the redacted documents were not cover sheets, “ Maybe the documents that were redacted weren’t actually the Top Secret documents that the cover pages were attached to; however, the clear implication is that they are.”
Maybe they were cover sheets.
Svelaz,
You’re either a bald-faced liar or have the comprehension skills of a 7th grader, what’s perfectly clear is you’re trolling again.
I moved no goal post and anyone with a smidgen of what we could reasonably call an adult level of reading comprehension would ever make such an absurd accusation.
FACT: the redacted sheets are NOT cover sheets, period.
The cover sheets are the 6 visible pages that previously identified that have the yellow and orange borders, you can also see a red bordered confidential sheet buried under other redacted papers. The redacted sheets do not have the hallmarks of being the form cover sheets. If you think they are cover sheets then prove it, but first you would have to actually know what the real cover sheet looks like and you’re too damned stupid to look it up.
I moved no goal posts, you did and you’re a liar.
What he’s trying to say is: Your Honor, I Rest My Case!
LOL;)
Safeside824 wrote, “I believe you are suffering from the Dunning-Kruger Effect but it is probably Feltcher Syndrome.”
Bite me, jerk!
Sorry partner, but you insulted me first.
Safeside824 wrote, “Sorry partner, but you insulted me first.”
Liar.
No “partner”, you insulted first with your “you need your brain housing group adjusted”. Own it, lie about it like you just did or run for the hills, I really just don’t give a damn. Your choices, your consequences.
You took it as an insult. OK, fair one snowflake. But I’ll stand by it. You don’t know what you are talking about. You should remove your head from your 4th point of contact. My Oath of Enlistment to support and defend the Constitution never expires so there will be no running for the hills on my part.
Okay, sunshine, I took the same oath.
So if you are wrong, will you still honor your oath to uphold the Constitution?
This Marine will.
Dang it!
Darren, I get JetPack is easier to run, but dang it, hit the return key too many times and it posts as Anonymous!
So, “Okay, sunshine, I took the same oath.”
That was me.
Ggrrrrrr!
Absolutely…I’ll bring the box of crayons.
Safeside824 wrote, “You took it as an insult. OK, fair one snowflake. But I’ll stand by it. You don’t know what you are talking about. You should remove your head from your 4th point of contact.”
There we have it folks, Safeside824 didn’t like it when I proved that he’s a liar so he attacked the messenger with BS. That kind of behavior is far too typical of trolls, was that what you were going for?
Safeside824 wrote, “My Oath of Enlistment to support and defend the Constitution never expires so there will be no running for the hills on my part.”
Good for you, you’ll be welcome to join me in my foxhole to fight off the hordes of stupid totalitarians trying to destroy the Constitution.
Nice DARVO stud. Any proof that you know what you are talking about. I’ll answer that…no, you have already indicated you don’t because you moved the goalposts. You may have had a security clearance at one time, but it might be time for some refresher training. Ever been on a warrant service? Participated in processing a crime scene (yes, it was a crime scene)? Know anything about Rules of Evidence? Could you indicate the “stupid totalitarians trying to destroy the Constitution”, with verifiable facts. Take your time, I’ll wait. No thanks on the foxhole, I don’t know you well enough.
Safeside824 wrote, “Any proof that you know what you are talking about. I’ll answer that…no, you have already indicated you don’t because you moved the goalposts.”
I’m 100% honest, yes I know what I experienced and I moved no goalposts.
Safeside824 wrote, “You may have had a security clearance at one time, but it might be time for some refresher training.”
No need to refresh my clearance, some things simply don’t change in regards to such things and I have no reason to need to refresh, without the need the request would be denied.
Safeside824 wrote, “Ever been on a warrant service? Participated in processing a crime scene (yes, it was a crime scene)?”
Nope, I’m not a law enforcement officer.
Safeside824 wrote, “Know anything about Rules of Evidence?”
Actually, yes. Taking photos are not in the rules of evidence, they are actually evidence.
Safeside824 wrote, “Could you indicate the “stupid totalitarians trying to destroy the Constitution”, with verifiable facts. Take your time, I’ll wait. “
Are you so stupid that you didn’t know that that was a rhetorical statement?
But if you really have some need to find some stupid totalitarians trying to destroy the constitution, you won’t have to look very far, there are loads of them in the progressive wing of the Democratic Party. Jonathan Turley actually wrote about some that want to basically get rid of the Constitution in his blog titled, “‘Reclaim America from Constitutionalism’: Law Professors Now Call to ‘Pack the States’ Rather than ‘Pack the Court'”. Our modern 21st century “Progressives” (that’s an oxymoron, they are actually regressives) hate the Constitution and if you don’t already know that then you aren’t paying attention.
Safeside824 wrote, “No thanks on the foxhole, I don’t know you well enough.”
Seriously? What a jerk.
I don’t have to know or like the soldier/marine in the foxhole next to me, we fight on the same side, we do our damn job and that’s all I need to know. If you wanna be friendly with or know your foxhole partner then join the freaking Boy Scouts. I think you claimed to be military or x-military, well after that nonsense I have serious doubts about that claim.
Witherspoon says,
“ There we have it folks, Safeside824 didn’t like it when I proved that he’s a liar so he attacked the messenger with BS.”
LOL!!!! No you didn’t. He proved you didn’t know what you were talking about. YOU didn’t like it when he called you out for spouting about an “absolute fact” that you later conceded it wasn’t.
You may want to look in the mirror, you have egg on your face. BWAHAHAH !!!!
“ I just thought of something. Maybe the documents that were redacted weren’t actually the Top Secret documents that the cover pages were attached to; however, the clear implication is that they are.” Looks like moving the goldposts to me…but whatever your bicameral minds justifies your thoughts. Security Clearance was a rhetorical. Photos…evidence as are the physical document held illegally in possession of the former President. Stupid totalitarians…well you went where I thought you were going to go. Useless statement with no value added except to reinforce your cognitive dissonance. I don’t know why you think I would want to share a foxhole with you as opposed to my brothers and sisters who I trained with, chewed the same dirt as, and fought with. Maybe after you prove yourself.
Marine, you are the one being a jerk.
“ So you don’t give a hoot if people are breaking the law as long as they are trying to get Trump?”
The FBI is not it’s not breaking the law. Taking pictures as part of the criminal investigation it’s not breaking the law. Your experience did not involve a criminal investigation.
My experience was that there wasn’t any exception to the rule, period.
Witherspoon says,
“ My experience was that there wasn’t any exception to the rule, period.”. Yeah, 25 years ago within a specific field. Not criminal investigations involving classified materials.
You wrongly implied that the FBI’s taking of that photo was illegal as absolute fact when you didn’t know what you were talking about.
It isn’t. It’s SOP for agents carrying out a search to take photos in situ of the items that are responsive to the warrnt, and in this case to also show which items were stored together, which is relevant to claims elsewhere about the co-mingling of classified and unclassified documents. They covered the documents themselves and only took photos of the cover sheets showing the classification markings.
Isn’t this like “commenting on an ongoing investigation”, which Garland says the DOJ doesn’t do? What a complete “Wussy” he is. Impeachment can’t come soon enough for all the lawbreakers.
No, because it was a legal filing in response to Trump’s argument that special master is necessary.
Nada wrong with the photo being taken
Turkey:. The photo shows the itShay on the floor
When it is said that one has [likely] obstructed an investigation, it is but a presumption that is given to be taken as true, and yet not known to be true for certain. When a law enforcement agency says it, everyone should be aghast. It is counter to and sorely demeans the very principle of liberty we respect as presumption of innocence.
The evidence so far suggests a strong case for obstruction. The affidavit from Trump’s lawyers that all classified documents were returned turned out to be false. This is why the search warrant was issued.
“The evidence so far suggests a strong case for obstruction.”
Where is your evidence? You are making a case for thin minds. How horrible, a think mind trying to teach others with thin minds.
SM
S. Meyer,
“ Where is your evidence?”
It’s not “my” evidence, it’s the FBI’s. They have already filed evidence multiple times with the court. Trump’s own lawyers affidavit claiming they turned in all classified documents back in June turned out to be false. That’s an obstruction charge.
The evidence is like the photo, meant to appeal to emotions that run through thin minds.
Which evidence do you think is persuasive? This is the evidence that you choose, not the evidence chosen for you by someone else.
SM
S. Meyer,
“ Which evidence do you think is persuasive? This is the evidence that you choose, not the evidence chosen for you by someone else.”
I’m choosing the evidence that the FBI filed with the court.
This evidence.,
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/22272914-220830-special-master-response
In other words you are unable to read the document so you would be able to place your best evidence before the group. That is a typical Svelaz failing
“ In other words you are unable to read the document so you would be able to place your best evidence before the group.”
LOL!!!! No S. Meyer, YOU are unable to read the document, I’ll get you didn’t read it at all. I know you didn’t because all the evidence is IN that document. You’re afraid you won’t be able to understand it because you’re too stupid. I wouldn’t blame you.
You provided what you call evidence but do you know what is in it? No. In the past you proved that you link to things you never read. I showed that in the past. You didn’t sound very intelligent them or now.
If you play the fool you become the fool.
S. Meyer,
“ You provided what you call evidence but do you know what is in it? No.”
S. Meyer you have absolutely no idea what what I read or didn’t read. None. The whole point of giving you the link the document as the evidence is because I read it and KNOW that’s the evidence. YOU didn’t read it and I KNOW you didn’t read it because you never mention anything about it.
You’re just making an excuse not to read what is provided to you because you’re afraid to learn that you are wrong. Smart intelligent people READ instead of ignore. Those who choose to ignore are why they are called..ignorant. Are you ignorant S. Meyer?
Svelaz, intelligent people will list some of the claims in their own words. If you can’t list some of them, you either didn’t read what you linked to, or you didn’t understand it. Linking is a form of pseudo-intelligence and is excessively used by those in the dark. You are one of them.
Surely this is a standard method of demonstrating that the evidence asserted in the filings actually exists. Avoids trucking that into the courtroom for the justice’s eyeballs to scan.
SOP, Jonathan Turley, as well you should know!
Their message? We can do this to the President of the United States. We can do this to you.
Trump is not the POTUS.
MAGA 4evah, baby!
No doubt here that the hierarchy of the FBI/DOJ has crossed the Rubicon when it comes to partisanship
That’s because the photo, like the raid, is patently absurd. They have redacted and been more reluctant with UFO files, and if you don’t believe me go and check their website for yourself. The Swamp is gonna Swamp.
The photo array the agency arranged tells you how unprofessional the agency has become and how desperate they are to convict President Trump for something, anything.
“Unprofessional” or exceedingly professional in the art of manipulating the public?
This is an absurd argument. When LEOS make a huge bust with lots of drugs, cash and guns. Does anyone complain when all the evidence and illegal items recovered are stacked neatly on a table for a photoshoot? Hell no. Of course no one complains. Nor does anyone try to suggest the criminals stacked up all those items in the first place. It’s a picture of the evidence and the items recovered. No reasonable person of sound mind would infer anything other than that into it.
Turley posted this for the Cult 45 crowd to sound off.
It’s Ultra MAGA, baby!
Sorry, but I disagree. The reason the photo is relevant here is that one of the things Trump is being accused of here is not properly caring and protecting the documents. That is not usually part of the case with a drug bust.
That’s because the drugs are not listed a “secret” or “top secret.” If the DOJ wanted to have the Court consider the photograph, it could have made the request in its moving papers without attaching it as an exhibit, and request an in camera viewing of the exhibit.
The Department of Justice is less concerned with Justice than with winning.
The only question remaining is: “Winning against a political enemy?”.
DOJ lawyers are bright people; this picture was not an oversight.
Reminder to all our complacent lefty bloggers.
If a Dem DOJ can do that to an ex-president, imagine what a hostile DOJ can do to you.
The photo is intended for public consumption and shouldn’t have been released. ANYTHING having to do with classified information is automatically classified, including photographs. If it is real, this photo should have never been released or included in anything sent to an individual, including a judge, not cleared to view it.
Nope. The photo doesn’t release anything actually classified, just the markings.