When U.S. District Judge Aileen M. Cannon issued an order for the appointment of a special master, she instantly became the latest jurist targeted by a furious mob of media and pundits. Rather than simply disagree with her order, these critics attacked Cannon personally and ethically, including lawyers and law professors. It is a familiar pattern but the fury shown in the last two days is chilling for our federal judges who have seen increasing attacks, including an alleged attempted assassination of Justice Brett Kavanaugh. Nevertheless, legal and media figures seemed to rush to outdo each other in the most extreme statements about a judge with a distinguished background.
MSNBC host Joy Reid hosted a frenzy of condemnations of this “corrupt” judge. Reid said that Cannon is little more than an extension of Trump like other possessions stolen by the former president.
As always, MSNBC regular (and columnist for Above the Law and The Nation) Elie Mystal struggled to outdo a panel assembled to attack this jurist:
“She’s biased and corrupt. Like, I don’t know what to tell everybody anymore. Like, I’ve been saying this since he took office. When you allow Republicans to control the courts you get nothing. Trump judges do not believe in the rule of law, they do not believe in precedent, they do not believe in facts, they do not believe in logic—they just believe in whatever’s going to help Donald Trump, and they’ve proven it again and again and again.”
Mystal recently criticized Biden’s controversial MAGA speech because it did not go far enough: in his view all Republicans are white supremacists, not just MAGA Republicans. Now he is claiming that all Trump appointees (even those who have ruled against Trump) “do not believe in the rule of law…do not believe in facts…do not believe in logic.”
MSNBC clearly wants Mystal’s brand of commentary. It recently declined to even express discomfort with launching a racist attack on Georgia’s senatorial candidate Herschel Walker. Mystal previously caused uproars for claims from accusing a senator of wanting to murder Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson to his continued attacks on a high school student even after he was cleared of a false race-based story. He has called the Constitution “trash” and previously stated that white, non-college-educated voters supported Republicans because they care about “using their guns on Black people and getting away with it.” He has also lashed out at “white society” and explained how he strived to maintain a “whiteness free” life in the pandemic.
Mystal, however, has competition on this occasion from AEI’s Neil Ornstein who suggested that Judge Cannon is now engaged in obstruction by simply ordering a third-party review. The over-wrought response to this order is par for the course over the last six years.
Lawyers like former top Obama official Neal Katyal, said that Judge Cannon’s decision appeared designed to “protect their guy” or at the very least, “delay justice.” In other words, Cannon was acting as a political operatives rather than a judge.
Harvard Professor Laurence Tribe declared that an order to appoint a special master to review the documents is analogous to the Dred Scott decision as an abuse of judicial power. Tribe recently said that Trump could clearly be charged with the attempted murder of former Vice President Michael Pence. However, this is both legally and historically unintelligible. Tribe wrote:
“Cannon’s order will go down as part of the judicial anticannon — the body of decisions, like Dred Scott or Korematsu, that lawyers use for generations to teach students how NOT to wield the judicial power.”
Unpack that for a moment. Tribe is analogizing the appointment of a special master to assist the court to a decision declaring former slaves as outside the protection of the Constitution and the definition of a “citizen.” Likewise, he believes it is similar to a decision, Korematsu, where Japanese Americans were put into concentration camps in World War II. One can reasonably disagree with Judge Cannon’s order, but it is designed as a check on government power and abuse. Yet, Tribe believes it is akin to a decision allowing the government carte blanche to imprison Americans based on race or nationality.
Judge Cannon was faced with a breathtakingly broad search that appears to have seized attorney-client material and personal material, including passports and personal medical information. She is allowed to conduct in camera inspections of such documents but elected to appoint a special master to conduct such reviews. While the Justice Department claimed that such an appointment would endanger national security, Judge Cannon correctly rejected that unsupportable claim. The documents will remain under secure controls of the government and the national security investigation will continue unabated.
As I have discussed, there are good-faith objections to the order and it may be curtailed or even overturned on appeal. However, while rare at this stage, special masters are routinely appointed to assist judges in creating a record for further orders. Moreover, the investigation can go forward without the use of the documents in establishing what was known about the contents of the boxes and whether there were acts of concealment.
The attacks on Judge Cannon follow a familiar pattern. It is not enough to disagree with a judge. You must attack the jurists as unethical or corrupt — and standout in your rhetoric. Notably, some of these same experts denounced Trump for attacking jurists as “Obama judges” or ideologues when they ruled against him. Now it appears perfectly acceptable in dealing with Trump appointees. At the time I criticized Trump repeatedly for such attacks. However, Democrats quickly adopted the same rhetoric that they once denounced. Now Judge Cannon is fair game for legal experts to impugn her integrity and ethics.
Just for the record, Judge Cannon has an inspiring and impressive background. She was born in Cali, Columbia and her mother fled the dictatorship of Fidel Castro. Yet, she would graduate from Duke University in 2003 and the University of Michigan in 2007 with a Juris Doctor magna cum laude (and Order of the Coif). She worked at the Justice Department as a prosecutor as well as a leading law firm as well as serving as an appellate judicial clerk.
Wow, what a surprise. The ‘party of women’ once again going into full attack mode on a woman who dares to see the world differently than they do. She’ll probably soon have a mob of ‘mostly peaceful’ protestors outside her house trying to assassinate her.
So lets skip the contents of the affidavit and warrant and focus on why the affidavit and warrant were needed. The numerous Top Secret documents that are the property of the US Government that were taken from the government and not maintained in a secure facility. Moreover, after multiple efforts by the National Archives to have the documents returned were ignored.
If it were your responsibility to regain control of those documents, what steps would you take to regain possession of those government documents?
Why does the ex president, with no Executive Privilege, get a pass? As an ex-president, it is my understanding that he has no need to have these sensitive documents.
Explain to me what would happen if the good professor had these in his possession in his Georgetown University office? How long would it take US Marshalls or the FBI to serve a warrant to take back those documents and take the good professor to a new office.
Let’s hear a logical and factual response. Thank you and have a marvelous day.
Granite:
It’s actually quite common, more times than not, for the National Archives to spend time, even years, chasing down documents.
For a non presidential example, there is Eric Holder, who took classified documents, lied about it, was found guilty of contempt of Congress, and spent 5 years fighting their return. Strangely, the FBI did not raid his house at gunpoint.
The difference between Professor Turley and President Trump, in your example, is that a president can declassify anything he wants. Professor Turley does not have that power. Neither did Hillary Clinton.
There needs to be the same legal standard applied to all. Unlike Hillary Clinton, Trump did not hide the documents, upload them to the Cloud, destroy them with BleachBit, and they were not found on the laptop of a convicted pedophile, such as Anthony Weiner was found in possession of classified emails on Huma’s laptop.
How is it possible that Hillary Clinton could hide classified information on an illegal server in her house, unsecured, back it up to the Cloud, refuse to hand over 80,000 emails, delete them with BleachBit, lie about it, and then smash her phones and laptops with hammers, yet the FBI never paid her a raid? How can that be OK, while Trump showed the FBI his storage room, got their advice on security, cooperated with the National Archives, only disagreeing on classification status, as he declassified documents as president, yet the FBI committed an armed raid?
We are always told the law just does not apply to prominent Democrats, but it’s applied excessively and with an extraordinary low standard to prominent Republicans?
It’s like the Dinesh D’Souza case. He coordinated donations exceeding campaign limits for a friend. If he’d given to a PAC, the amount would not have mattered. It was a low risk act, as people are ALWAYS just fined for amounts like that. Rosie O’Donnell infamously used multiple misspellings of her name in order to exceed campaign donations, yet she didn’t spend any time in the slammer. Yet, Dinesh was actually imprisoned for a minor infraction. Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, and many other prominent Democrats have done the same thing or similar. It’s like arresting Dinesh and sending him to prison with murderers for driving 5 miles over the speed limit. Yes, it was wrong, but the law was not equally applied.
You know, Karen, every time I think of this whole Trump vs. DOJ mess, I think of Eric Holder…..
Thanks for reminding everyone .
Karen S: it’s considered proper protocol to ascribe the source of information you provide, but you never do this. You are a Fox disciple and believe whatever lies they tell, but when you repeat the blather put out by Hannity, or Ingraham, or Levin or Tucker, you should disclose them as the source of your information. You state the crap they tell as if it’s established fact, which it never is. You have no idea how “common” it is for the NARA to “chase down” documents, much less that it’s the norm. That’s something you heard on Fox, and it’s not true. Hillary Clinton DID NOT INTENTIONALLY STEAL classified information or documents. She shouldn’t have allowed such papers to be sent to her home email, and she tried to mitigate any damage that could result. Trump, on the other hand, intentionally stole hard copies of TS/SCI documents AFTER beint told tby his White House counsel, Pat Cippoloni and Pat Philbin, who both told him that he couldn’t take them. He went through papers, took out a few boxes that had TS/SCI papers commingled with passports, magazines and newspapers, and returned them, with his lawyer swearing under oath that all of them had been returned. He drug his feet for a year and a half, resisting efforts to repatriate the documents. He is using this matter to raise money even though, as an undeclared candidate, he can spend it for whatever he wants.
For the umpteenth time, John Bolton, head of national security at the time, and former US AG Bill Barr both said that Trump did NOT “declassify” anything, AND it wouldn’t make any difference if he had–the documents became the property of the NARA as of noon on Jan 20, 2021. Declassification of previously classifed documents is a process that creates a paper trail, and no such paper trail exists. The issue isn’t whether a POTUS has the power to declassify, and here’s where your blind discipleship comes into play: Trump says he declassified them, and that they therefore magically became his property, and you believe it. The fact is that Trump never did declassify anything, and he had no power to do so as of noon on Jan 20, 2021. Declassification cannot be done by waving a magic wand and saying: “I declassify you”. The arguments about declassification are a red herring calculated to mislead disciples like you. If Trump is correct about the papers being declassified and therefore his personal property, then WHY did he return some of them when he was served with a subpoena? Why didn’t he object to the subpoena at the time, which the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure require?
Trump DID hide documents, which the search warrant proved. An insider gave a tip to the FBI that Trump’s lawyer lied about all of them having been returned in June, and the tip was correct–TS/SCI documents were found all over the place–an unlocked desk, closets, etc.. Importantly, Trump wasn’t even home at the time, so there ws NO security around to prevent a maid, pool boy, visitor, gardner, contractor or anyone else who wanted to get hold of the papers and copy them digitize them, or disclose the contents. It’s so bad that a damage assessment must be done to calculate the risk that there has been disclosure. Our allies will be wary of ever sharing sensitive information with us when our so-called “leader” is willing to steal secret documents, lie about them, fail to secure them and then polticizes his theft for political and financial gain. Rick Wilson said it best: “everything Trump touches, dies”.
” it’s considered proper protocol to ascribe the source of information you provide, but you never do this. ”
nutacha – I can not think of a single post in which you have provided anything close to a useful source.
You claimed Bolton and Bar said things – but you did not quote them, not articles that quoted them.
What they actually said – if they said anything matters.
“you should disclose them as the source of your information. You state the crap they tell as if it’s established fact, which it never is.”
Wise advice you should take it.
“You have no idea how “common” it is for the NARA to “chase down” documents, much less that it’s the norm.”
Innumerable members of white house staff have publicly stated exactly this.
There is even a documentary on Nextflix predating Trump that covers the chaos in the white house on Jan 20, when one president leaves and the next moves in. The WH staff and GSA have 6 hours to clear much of the WH and replace it with what the new president wants. While there is SOME prep work done in advance. Not only must the presidents personal space be maintained until the last minute, but the entire government office space within the Whitehouse must be fully operational through a transition that takes place within a single day.
The vast majority of the documents of the president leaving office are NOT available for the incoming president.
You fixating on the PRA – but do not really grasp what it is about. The WH documents of an outgoing president are generally NOT accessible to the incoming president they are rapidly boxed up and transfered to storage.
Prior to the PRA that storage was provided by the outgoing president. Since the PRA that storage is provided by NARA, accessible to the ex-president and those he designates – but NOT the current president. The documents will eventually be transfered tot he ex-presidents library.
Those on the left have cited innumerable court cases where documents were made available to DOJ or government agencies – over the objections of the ex-president. What the left misses is that in general it is STILL necescary for the current administration to go to court to gain access to the prior administrations WH documents. They are likely to win, but even current presidents can not just roam the halls of wharehouses with tens of millions of documents looking for dirt on their predecessor.
This is UNIQUE to the WH. Though ex-administration officials get to take some of their personal materials with them, most everything else just stays in place.
In the case of the WH even computers are removed to storage. While those of the incoming administration are moved from their transition spaces to their offices in the WH in a very short period of time.
I would further note that NARA is not an investigative arm of the federal government.
The left’s view of how all this works is simplistic and wrong.
“Hillary Clinton DID NOT INTENTIONALLY STEAL classified information or documents.”
Of course she did. You really are completely unfamiliar with the Clinton case.
Clinton did not end up with Classified information on her mail server because people in government SENT classified email to her private email address, That would be a crime for THEM, and it is quite difficult to do.
Regardless, for most of the classified information on Clinton’s email server Clinton was the SOURCE.
She transfered – or had it transfered from the SCIF to here private email and then sent it to people who were not authorized to receive it.
Most of Clinton’s classified documents came from the computers in the State Departmnet SCIF
Those computers are 100% air gapped from the internet. To get classified material from them to her email,
someone had to:
Use a cell phone to photograph the information and then type it in later – and they would have to sneak the cell phone into the SCIF.
Handwrite information from the computers in the SCIF onto paper and take it out of the SCIF.
Take Classifed folders – paper documents – which as you see in the FBI photos purportedly of Trump documents are in special binders most of which are very carefully controlled. Just as you are not permitted to take cell phones in to a SCIF, you are not allowed to take paper documents OUT.
Alternately you can bring in a USB stick and copy the files and then remove the USB stick – except that you are not allowed to take USB sticks into and out of a SCIF, and the computers in a SCIF are not allowed to have USB ports, bluetooth, WiFi, serial ports or connect to printers.
Snowden and Manning had to go to a great deal of effort to find ways to remove classified information from classified systems – it is not easy.
“She shouldn’t have allowed such papers to be sent to her home email”
She did not “allow” – she or people directed by her actually transfered classified information.
Among other things she had classified documents faxed to her home where her Maid put them into her home office.
“and she tried to mitigate any damage that could result”
That is just ludicrously stupid.
She had classified documents on a mail server on the internet. Short of posting “come and get it” to 4chan there is little more she could have done. Eventually Comey testified that atleast one hostile foreign power(probably china) had access to her emails in real time.
“Trump, on the other hand, intentionally stole hard copies of TS/SCI documents AFTER beint told tby his White House counsel, Pat Cippoloni and Pat Philbin, who both told him that he couldn’t take them.”
False. And ludicrously stupid.
The president of the united states can and routinely does take classified documents anywhere that he wants. To the east wing, to the bath room,
to Marine one, to Airforce one, to wherever he goes when he is not in the WH.
Every single president does this all the time – allthough more accurately – other people typically do it for him.
But legally it is exactly the same.
No lawyer would ever tell the president otherwise – because that would be FALSE.
No lawyer is going to tell Biden that he can not take a classified document to Delaware with him.
There are likely thousands of classified documents in Biden’s delaware home right now.
Nearly everything the president touches is classified. Nearly everything that happens in the WH is classified.
The presidents schedule is classifed.
The schedule of everyone in the cabinet is classified.
Contra to your claims – several people – including those you cite have offered to testify to exactly the opposite.
That they told Trump he could declassify anything that he wanted.
We can debate whether Trump declassified documents unrelated to the collusion delusion.
But it is part of the PUBLIC RECORD – reported by WaPo and NYT that Trump declassified collusion delusion documents in 2018, and 2019, andthen as one of the last Executive orders while in office declassified EVERYTHING related to the collusion delusion – probably hundreds of thousands of documents.
None of this is secret – yet you are pretending it never happened.
“He went through papers, took out a few boxes that had TS/SCI papers commingled with passports, magazines and newspapers, and returned them, with his lawyer swearing under oath that all of them had been returned.”
No they provided a verification that to the best of their knowledge there was no classified documents at MAL.
This is not exactly the same.
It is important that we get the words straight.
Verifications are under penalty of law.
But these lawyers did NOT claim there were no documents MARKED classified.
We still do not know what the alleged classified documents are.
If you have a leak that claims something – such as nuclear documents, you can BET heavily that is FALSE.
If it were true it would be a crime, and the person leaking would be prosecuted.
But “sources close to the investigation” can lie to the press and it is not a crime. It is not even a leak.
Those in government have been doing this for a very long time – long before Trump.
The press USED to be more careful, they USED to quit trusting sources that lied to them.
But today if a leak is salacious, the media does not care if it is true.
If as increasingly is suspected these are collusion delusion related documets – and there is material in the unredacted part of the afadavit that strongly suggessts that is the case – there is ZERO debate these documents are declassified.
They were declassified by Executive order.
I would further note if these are collusion delusion documents – this entire NARA/WH/DOJ/FBI mess is actually a CRIME. ‘
It is an attempt to coverup the malfeasance to the DOJ/FBI in the collusion delusion.
“He drug his feet for a year and a half, resisting efforts to repatriate the documents.”
Not true and not relevant. DOJ/FBI/NARA were free to get a court order. Thy did not.
One of the reasons they did not, is that Trump would have contested any court order.
And I highly suspect they would have lost.
“He is using this matter to raise money even though, as an undeclared candidate, he can spend it for whatever he wants.”
If you do not like the law – change it.
It is highly unlikely Trump is pocketing anything. He has more money than he could ever spend.
“For the umpteenth time, John Bolton, head of national security at the time, and former US AG Bill Barr both said that Trump did NOT “declassify” anything”
For the umpteenth time stupidly FALSE, and you have not cited a source, you have not quoted them.
Can you please quit making obviously false and stupid claims that just make you look like an idiot and waste bandwidth ?
In response to your completely idiotic claim that Trump did not declassify anything.
https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/17/politics/donald-trump-declassify-documents/index.html
With respect to the claim that Barr knew nothing about declassification.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-gives-ag-barr-authority-to-declassify-documents-related-to-2016-campaign-surveillance
Maybe you will trust the washington post.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-gives-barr-power-to-declassify-intelligence-related-to-russia-probe/2019/05/23/06950e90-7dbc-11e9-8ede-f4abf521ef17_story.html
What should the consequence be for YOUR POSTS that are making completely stupid claims regarding such as that AG Barr said Trump declassified nothing ?
MoreTrump declassifiying – this time CNN reporting.
https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/23/politics/trump-intel-agencies/index.html
It looks like this shows Trump delegating to Barr the ability to declassify. It does not state that Trump declassified a single document. Do you recognize the difference?
I provided innumerable links regarding Trump and declassification.
The Barr link was specifically to refute idiotic claims that Barr was unaware of Trump’s efforts to declassify things.
Barr was not only aware he was heavily involved in atleast some of those. And the link provided proves that.
As to your claim – when a President orders something to be done – it is malfeasance to fail to do it.
Are you saying Barr disobeyed the order of the president ?
Whether you like it or not there are myriads of example of Trump, declassifying, ordering declassification, authorizing declassification – all overlapping.
As well as judicial opinions confirming that even a Tweet From the president saying X is declassified – means X is declassified.
Do you understand that if as appears this all turns out to be about collusion delusion documents – that the Malfeasance is on the part of Biden/DOJ/FBI/NARA ?
Is it acceptable – less than criminal for an incoming administration to use to power of government to hide government misconduct that was declassified by the prior administration, misconduct that those attempting to cover it up participated in ?
If this is about collusion delusion documents – those involved should not merely be impeached they should be in jail.
More Trump declassifying documents.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-authorizes-declassification-of-all-russia-collusion-hillary-clinton-email-probe-documents
More Trump declassifying documents.
https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/445478-trump-declassification-move-unnerves-democrats/
Here we have a federal judge Directing DOJ that even a Trump tweet ordering the declassification of documents
is more than sufficient to order them declassified.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/legal-issues/trump-tweet-declassify-russia-documents/2020/10/16/8846f3c8-0fc8-11eb-8a35-237ef1eb2ef7_story.html
More
https://www.politico.com/news/2021/01/19/trump-doj-declassify-russia-probe-documents-460511
The full text of Trump’s Executive order declassifying collusion delusion documents.
https://www.conservativedailynews.com/2021/01/president-donald-trumps-executive-order-declassifying-crossfire-hurricane-materials-full-text/
You keep ranting about Bolton, as if he could have anything significant to day.
Bolton was only in the Trump WH briefly. Further he is not the relevant person.
You do not understand anything about the handling of classified documents.
Bolton is heavily involved in the production and analysis of national security information.
He has nothing to do with the handling of Classified documents.
Those involved in the marking, unmarking, tracking, and safe keeping of classified documents at the WH are people whose names you will never have heard. They are staff people associated with the Fascility Security Officer.
Though I will note that you should look carefully at the Judges direction to DOJ when DOJ claimed that a Trump tweet did not constitute and order to DOJ to declassify. The Judge said that any directive from the president in any form that is clear is a presidential order. That this nonsense offered NOW by the left about protocol is stupid.
There is no protocol in the constitution. When the president says “do this” it is a presidential order, no matter how it is delivered.
Again please reference the CNN article where a Federal Judge Directed DOJ to declassify documents based on a Tweet.
The president CAN just wave a magic wand an say “I declassifiy you” – infact he can skip the magic wand.
None of all of this is unique to Trump – despite claims by the left.
There is no “Trump can or can’t do this” – ANY president can. Trump lost the power to block people on his twitter account specifically because he effectively made that into the account of the President by issuing orders through it, rather than the persona account of Donald Trump.
Is there anyone here who beleives that if this was Biden or Obama or Clinton that you would not be arguing the opposite.
You are already arguing the opposite regarding Clinton – who did NOT have any authority to declassify documents.
You are pretending Clinton is innocent by warped comparisons to Trump that make her far more guilty.
You are pretending she was more careful by criteria that makes it obvious she was far more reckless.
There is no way that classified information gets on Clinton’s basement bathroom email server without Clinton acting to do so.
Clinton’s crimes involved electronic documents. Either these were converted from Paper Documents in the State Department SCIF or they were transfered electronically from the state department SCIF. Both of which would be illegal acts.
There is no means for Clinton to get electronic versions of classified documents on her email server without commiting a crime.
Conversely the only thing that occured with Trump is that someone Transported classified documents to MAL.
So long as that occured while Trump was president that is not only legal but it is normal.
Armies of people follow the president arround including people moving classified documents that the president might need from place to place. That does not occur with Sec State. and in fact can not legally occur.
That is a very important point – there is no possible legal way in which classified information can get on Clinton’s email server.
There is no way that does not involve illegal acts by someone.
Conversely there are very few illegal ways that classified information can get to MAL.
nutacha;
Do I need to provide even more links of Trump declassifying things as president ?
Or can we permanently kill your idiotic claim that Trump declassified nothing ?
Do you aim to look childish in calling her “nutacha”?
I would suggest reading her posts – they are NUTS.
She is constantly making long arguments that have no connection to reality.
As an obvious example she has repeatedly claimed that Trump declassified nothing – when there are court cases regarding things Trump declassified and whether Trump can declassify things via Tweet.
She also claims no one says Trump declassified anything – when there is massive amounts of reporting – there is even information in the DOJ afadavit about Trump declassifying things.
If you do not wish to be called nuts – do not make obviously stupid arguments that the most trivial google search will refute.
It is both NUTS and a waste of her time and everyone else’s to constantly have to address bat$hit crazy arguments that are trivially refuted by the facts.
RE:”I would suggest reading her posts – they are NUTS.” I would suggest otherwise for the same reason. I have done so for weeks now. Waystomahtyme!!
Believe whatever you want about her comments, but distorting her name is childish.
Nutacha’s posts are self evidently childish.
That is not a beleif.
Nearly everything she posts has been long ago refuted – not be me, not by other posters here, but by established facts,
By Horrowitz, by Mueller, By Durham, by Retractions in WaPo or NYT, by court decisions, by primary source documents.
When you claim that the sun revolves around the earth – you are nuts and childish.
Most of your posts suffer from the same flaws – but not nearly the same magnitude as Nutacha.
Correct me if I am wrong – but I do not beleive YOU are still claiming that Trump colluded with Russia to steal the 2016 election ?
If you are you should expect to be called ATN rather than ATS.
When the 2020 election has had 1/10 the scrutiny the 2016 one has.
When we have had the FBI thoroughly chase down even the most ludicrous claim of 2020 election fraud and prove beyond any doubt at all that they could not have happened, When we have has a Special Counsel labor for 2 years trying to find fraud in 2020 and failing. When the Senate has conducted multiple thorough investigations of every single claim and failed to find anything. When thenews has scoured the planet for evidence of election fraud and found none. When State AG’s have gone to court multiple times and failed.
When you have done 1/10th the due dilligence to try to actually find 2020 election from as you have with 2016 and failed.
Then and only then can you call those who still doubt the 2020 election “nuts”.
Regardless, those of you still claiming the 2016 election was stolen are “NUTS”
Trump responded to the subpoena providing what he believed he was obligated to.
It is highly unlikely that he had significant personal involvement in this.
Regardless, Trump did not object to the subpoena because he complied with the subpoena.
It is very commonplace for one party to believe they complied and the other party to believe they did not
DOJ had the choice of ignoring their perception that Trump did not comply or getting a court order to enforce compliance.
THAT is the least intrusive means of proceeding and DOJ/FBI rules REQUIRE using the least intrusive means of proceeding.
I have personally had people claim to have complied with a subpeona while obviously failing to do so, and had to decide whether to have the court compel further production, and opting not to do so.
Presuming that the documents FBI found on its MAL raid are actually classified, rather than merely marked, they will be evidence that Trump did not comply with the subpeona which will be evidence of bad faith on his part. But none of that is established at this time. Further we do not have copies of the subpeona itself, nor Trump’s responses so we have no idea what was actually asked for, or what Trump responded.
More accurately everything Trump touches provokes the left into a lather.
We all listened to – and oddly still must listen to those on the left tell us that inarguably several orders of magnitude more egregious conduct by Clinton was not criminal, while at the same time arguing Trump’s is.
A better aphorism still is “everything the left says is a lie.”
Here is a story documenting actual declassification of Collusion Delussion documents, as well as the involvment of DOJ, Msadows and Radcliff in the process and the legitimate fear that as Trump left office the Biden administration would hide or destroy these documents exposing misconduct in the Obama administration.
https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/donald-trump-declassify-russia/2022/09/08/id/1086552/
Again it is increasingly likely the documents involved are collusion delusion documents.
If that is the case Biden/Wray/Garland should all be impeached immediately an unanimously and removed by the full house and Senate.
If that is the case Biden is using the FBI/DOJ/NARA to coverup crimes committed by himself and his cronies during the Obama administration.
The National Archives Director has NO “authority” to demand documents from Trump! Plus, Pres. Biden gave the Archives Director “the authority” to rescind Trump’s executive privilege—-which I do not believe the President can do! It’s another one of those “it’s never happened before!” instances that both Obama & Biden have used. Also, a PRA violation is not a “crime.” It falls under “civil litigation,” and NOT criminal—-according to Fed. Judge Amy Berman Jackson whose ruling on this still stands, and has never been repealed, nor rescinded.
“Explain to me what would happen if the good professor had these in his possession in his Georgetown University office? How long would it take US Marshalls or the FBI to serve a warrant to take back those documents and take the good professor to a new office”.
Probably would not wait three days. Why the wait if National Security was at risk? Just wondering,,,,
Presidential library.
Well that’s the rub….our country is in ….Turley isn’t a former president….but Trump is and he’s still eligible for another term. Indeed he is the only living former potus actually “eligible” both constitutionally and realistically for another term. Ironically I read the presidential records act….doesn’t apply to “vice” presidents (they might expect a run at potus?) Basically what we have here is law that applies to only one person in all of America….and it’s so unfair to let that one person….have a special master…bc boo boo none the rest of us get one? You been subject to the president records act lately? I rest my case.
Elie Mystal is a table-pounder; he has no facts, no law, but he has a loud mouth and is obviously impressed by himself.
As POTUS, DJT would be considered the top OCA in the USG. His ability to classify or declassify information would be fairly simple. Unlike Hillary, who was probably an OCA for the DOS and who’s unsecured private email server contained TS SCI SAP information from the DOE, she could not declassify outside of her authority and was clearly guilty of mishandling classified information.
Are we at the point where a raid on a former President’s residence is reasonable just because of an impasse in negotiations with the National Archives?
I think there are better avenues to address the issue.
It wasn’t “an impasse in negotiations with the National Archives.” It was his refusal to produce all of the documents that were subpoenaed by the grand jury, his failure to properly secure them, and his alleged obstruction of the investigation.
How do you know?
Because I’ve paid attention to the record of the two FL court cases:
https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/64872441/united-states-v-sealed-search-warrant/
https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/64911367/trump-v-united-states-government/
LOL! OK Bill Barr…thanks for your legal opinion!
“Inside Every Progressive Is A Totalitarian Screaming To Get Out”
– David Horowitz
Tribe has far outlived his usefulness in the American court system. In all truth, the American court system of today and recent history has been shown to be a complete farce, filled with lies.
Judgement IS coming, but not from you, Judicial system. It is FOR you.
“The goal of Socialism is Communism.”
– Vladimir Ilyich Lenin
Professor, you are correct. There are good faith reasons to support a special master. Unfortunately, there are no good faith democrats. You’re a good man. You should switch parties.
I believe Professor Turley is a Classic Liberal not to be confused with Progressive Marxism or a National Socialist Democrat.
Unaffiliated, I still consider myself a JFK Classic Liberal although definitely not a Democrat.
It is my undertanding that several of the items being debated here are before SCOTUS in the coming term – and have been long before this started.
Several courts have found law enforcement filter teams unconstitutional – the determination of what documents are privilidged has always been one of the courts – not law enforcement. Regardless, atleast one case on the constitutionality of filter teams is infront of SCOTUS.
It is my understanding that the issue of whether a former president can claim priviledge and whether a current president can waive that priviledge is also before SCOTUS already – again unrelated to this case.
The conduct of the DOJ/FBI/WH may well influence those cases in an unfavorable fashion.
Analysis of DOJ submissions to this court are also raising questions about what was redacted from the affadavit.
DOJ has publicly argued factual claims that are not in the unredacted affadavit.
Either they were overly broad in their redactions – because obviously what they argue publicly to another court should not have been redacted, or the affadavit is missing claims that are being raised now, and that should have been in the affadavit.
Or DOJ is lying to the current court.
Plaque on the walls at the “Deep Deep State Swamp” DOJ, FBI, CIA et al.
___________________________________________________________
“The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves.”
– Lenin
Judge Cannon knows communism when she see’s it and she see’s it with these communist democrats.
OT
If I may be indulged, U.S. District Judge Aileen M. Cannon is an eminently handsome woman, nay, the veritable definition of the word “woman.”
The meritless affirmative action project, Ketanji Brown Jackson, might have held up Judge Cannon’s photograph for the purposes of edification.
How dare you! LOL!!!
Honest question for those on this blog: Under what circumstances should a civilian who is subjected to an FBI search at his home, pursuant to a warrant, not be able to request the use of a special master to review the contents of the FBI’s search?
The 4-prong test for exercising jurisdiction is: (1) whether the government displayed a callous disregard for the movant’s constitutional rights, (2) whether the movant has an individual interest in and need for the seized property, (3) whether the movant would be irreparably injured by denial of the return of the seized property, and (4) whether the movant otherwise has an adequate remedy at law.
Judge Cannon acknowledges that the first factor does not weigh in favor of Trump, so she relies on the others.
As for the second factor, Judge Cannon states that the seized materials include medical documents, correspondence related to taxes, and accounting information. Forgetting for a moment that these are largely irrelevant for the purpose of a special master (which is only used for review of potentially privileged documents), police searches include some of this stuff any time they look through a civilian’s home office. So, if that is sufficient to weigh in favor of Trump, then it should be applied to any search of a civilian’s home.
As for the third factor, she says that “being deprived of potentially significant personal documents” creates a “real harm.” That certainly would be true any time an FBI search occurs. She also attributes, without evidence, that the leaks of information to the press suggest that Trump is facing an “unquantifiable potential harm by way of improper disclosure of sensitive information to the public.” This surely cannot mean anything because she offers no evidence that this information has come from the FBI. So, without that rationale, we now just have the fact that a real harm occurs when the FBI takes from a civilian personal documents that the civilian does not even own. Therefore, if this factor weighs in favor of the movant, then it should for any movant.
Judge Cannon argues that the fourth factor weighs in favor of Trump because he would have no legal means of seeking the return of his property “for the time being” and “no knowledge of when other relief might become available.” Again, no civilian has an alternative legal means of seeking the return of his (or in this case, the government’s) property absent a special master or Rule 41(g) motion for the return of property. So, this would again have to apply to any civilian.
How can we have equality under the law if we apply different standards for some civilians but not others? ”
If were a Florida criminal defense attorney, I would start forum shopping right away.
If I were a criminal, I would make sure contraband is always mixed in with my TurboTax filings.
Anonymous: Thank you for your lawyerly explanation of Judge Cannon’s flawed reasoning.
Thank you anon for your absolutely flawed response…..reasoning goes to say here as well.
1. Must the movant meet all four prongs of the test?
2. As to the second factor, isn’t the issue that they admit that they took those non related items but will not return them?
3. As to the third factor, doesn’t one of the footnotes indicate that the DOJ lawyer thinks the leaks came from the government, just not from him (or her)
4. So if there is this apparently long standing rule called 40 something, has it never been applied before (or conversely, if it has been then it does apply to any citizen)
(Breaking a rule here replying to a person too cowardly to provide a name.)
The answer to all 4 of your questions is “no.”
To elaborate,
1. These are called “balancing tests” in the law. The parties must argue that, on balance, the factors weigh towards one side or the other. Technically, a judge could value the weight of one prong more than the collective weight of the other three, provided there’s a decent justification (and/or support for doing so in the case law). So, no, not all 4 are needed.
And, in fact, the Richey case that the Judge cites, characterizes the first factor as “first, and perhaps, foremost,” suggesting that it is the most important factor. Remember, this is the one that Judge Cannon acknowledges weighs in favor of the DOJ. https://casetext.com/case/richey-v-smith.
2. The second factor concerns Trump’s interest in and need for the property taken in the search. Again the Richey case notes in a footnote that this factor weighs in favor of the government when the seized property is “contraband to which the movant is not legally entitled” (which in this case would be government documents, which legally belong to the government) or “consists of items for which the movant has no noteworthy need, such as bet slips or wager tickets” (and in this case, perhaps expired passports). However, Judge Cannon fails to include these details in her order.
3. I assume you are referencing Footnote 11, which states, “When asked about the dissemination to the media of information relative to the contents of the seized records, Government’s counsel stated that he had no knowledge of any leaks stemming from his team but candidly acknowledged the unfortunate existence of leaks to the press.” This does not provide any new information regarding the source of the leaks.
4. I do not know what to what you are referencing. Rule 41(g) is a motion to return property. Rule 53 governs pretrial special master motions.
I think you meant to reply to Dennis, not me. He is the one who asked the questions.
A SJW blue haired ”female” told me that Trump is nothing but a sexist, so I asked her what did she called Bill Clinton and while she tries to remember that far back what she called Mrs Clinton as she publicly denigrated all the women her Husband had sex with… Silence…
He’s a racist she replied… So why did both Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson give Donald Trump an Award in thanks for all the good things he did for black American Communities around NYC…Why was that Rapper Snoop Doggie putting his arm around Trump in the Plaza calling Trump… Ma main Man ya,ll….that was in the 1980s but then when the man was President he wanted him shot…
And why did Trump manage to get so many guys out of Prison who were sentenced to 30 plus years for holding less than a Pound of Weed, due to the three strikes Law… and most of those guys were black….Silence…
Ya cant fix that kind of rabid cult psychopathy, its as if they are all programed to scream at the screen like in the movie 1984 without knowing why they scream…
Now you know why the Founders/Framers provided the power to the States to restrict the vote through the application of criteria.
Turnout was 11.6% in 1788. What’s that tell you?
Criteria in 1788 were male, European, 21, 50 lbs. Sterling/50 acres.
Never was the American restricted-vote republic intended to be a one man, one vote democrazy.
Parasites, dependents and anti-American communists (liberals, progressives, socialists, democrats, RINOs) were never intended to vote.
No matter the vote, America was intended to strictly adhere to the clear and evident, meaning and intent of the literal words of the Constitution and Bill of Rights.
The illicit “Reconstruction Amendments,” which compel one man, one vote democrazy, were a concept of Karl Marx and corruptly and improperly rammed through and ratified under the extreme duress of brutal post-war military occupation and oppression, and they are illegitimate and unconstitutional to this day.
Trump is a joke and so is his hand-picked forum shopped Judgie Wudgie Cannon. I find it laughable when those Trumpsters on this blog accuse the FBI of “forum shopping” when that’s exactly what Trump did–he passed by federal courts closer in proximity to MAL just to go to the one in Ft. Pierce because it has only ONE judge–guess who? And, it’s certainly not clear that she even has jurisdiction–why didn’t Trump’s inexperienced lawyers go back to the Judge who issued the warrant in the first place to litigate all issues associated with the warrant? We all know why. I know of NO reputable lawyer who defends her whacky, poorly drafted opinion. Notice Turley’s little pile of word vomit today: he goes after legal experts who criticize her, but avoids discussion of the merits and shortcomings of her “legal opinions”.
Quoting Attorney Liz Dye of “Above the Law”: “But Team Trump’s failure to make a coherent legal argument was no deterrent to Judge Cannon, who filled in all the blanks for them, and even spared them the trouble of going through the hassle of filing a Rule 41 motion for the return of personal property, under the guise of ensuring ‘at least the appearance of fairness and integrity under the extraordinary circumstances presented.’ ” In other words, she ignored the fact that Trump failed to even file a Fourth Amendment claim, and the fact that the law required him to lodge any objections with the Judge who issued the warrant–US Magistrate Judge Bruce Reinhart– instead of going to another judge, which no other litigant could get away with. These shortcomings would be fatal to any other litigant.
She literally invented reasons to arrive at her conclusions. While admitting that “there has not been a compelling showing of callous disregard for Plaintiff’s constiutional rights”, she invents “an individual interest in and need for the seized property” and “irreparable injury” from deprivation thereof–arguments that were NEVER RAISED by Trump, and for which there is no evidence on the record. Judge Reinhart authorized the FBI to seize items adjacent to the TS/SCI documents because they constitute proof of Trump’s callous disregard for the security of the NARA doocuments–he commingled his passports, medical records, newspapers and magazines with documents laying out our allies’ nuclear capabilities. In her order, Judge Cannon compensated for Trump’s lawyers’ failure to file a motion for reutrn of property pursuant to Fed.R. Civ. Pro Criminal Rule 41, which wouldn’t apply in a civil proceeding anyway, but that didn’t stop her.
Quoting Liz Dye’s excellent piece: “this order invents a set of entirely new judicial standards for the person who appointed her to the bench, and Judge Cannon makes no effort to hide it. ‘Plaintiff has claimed injury from the threat of future prosecution and the serious, obten indelible stigma associated therewith,” she says, invokind a legally-cognizable interest in not getting prosecuted that regular investigatory targets could only dream of.” She adds: “as a function of Plaintiff’s former position as President of the United States, the stigma associated with the subject seizure is in a league of its own”….A future indictment based to any degree on property that ought to be returned, would result in reputational harm of a decidedly different order of magnitude.”
Quoting Laurence O’Donnell, given everything we know about Trump, his endless lying, cheating on his wives, bragging about assaulting women, inciting of an insurrection, trying to rig the 2020 vote counts, and now, stealing TS/SCi documents, the only thing that could make Trump’s reputation worse would be if the FBI found kiddie porn among the papers. By definition, the papers Trump stole belong to the Executive Branch, but Judge Cannon claims that “arguably” Trump could assert executive privilege, even though Biden, the current president, waived it. She attempts to cite Nixon’s case and the case Trump lost when he tried to assert executive privilege to keep documents away from the Jan 6th committee, but ignores the fact that Nixon and Trump both LOST their cases. Liz Dye says: ….it seems highly unlikely that any privilege claim invoked to shield his own criminal activity from investigation by the DOJ which is part of the executive branch, is totally doomed. And, not for nothing, but the Presidential Records Act sets out a procedure and venue for the invocation of executive privilege, and it doesn’t involve absconding with documents and lucking into a the friendly docket of a 41-year old denizen of the Federalist Society parked in Florida.”
A defense lawyer I know says that the defense attorney listservs he’s on are already saying that they’ll be using it as persuasive precedent for all their clients.
Actually, the First argument weighs more in Trump’s favor as, arguably, the Warrant was illegally overbroad in it’s form and execution under the Fourth Amendment, violating Trump’s Constitutional rights.
“No reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case.”
– James Comey
of course penned by “Anonymous” …
Problem is there are so many damn laws most ppl don’t know they are likely a felon on most days. So most ppl don’t have to hide their “contraband” …amongst their turbotax filings because all their crap is intermixed already by innocent and natural conduct. I would though if I had contraband drop some all over my damn house and hope for an FBI raid that takes away all the damn stuff in my house … Reduce the clutter. And I wouldn’t sue to get it back either. They could keep it.
Whatever happened to Timmy Geitner and his turbotax saga? See he had reputational harm….where as Joe Blow making the same turbotax error….never made the national news….or local paper. So I’m willing to see the harms to some ppl are relative. Here the 99.999 percent are not going to have alleged “govt records” in our homes. So a warrant to seize will be particular describing the thing(s) to be seized. So most ppl probably wouldn’t even need a special master….bc in the first instance a judge wouldn’t allow a fishing expidition. Which begs me to go down a rabbit hole to go find out why if the PRA gives all the jurisdiction to a dc court …..why the FBI forum shopped the Fl .magistrate for the warrant….if they did????
No less a thinker than Dersh thinks the Special Master gets the “DOJ elbow” off the scales of justice. Bill Barr proves ince again he’s a “company man” just like I said eons ago. Dersh is not:
https://rumble.com/v1iswo7-judge-agrees-to-special-master.html?mref=6zof&mc=dgip3&utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=The+Dershow&ep=2
William “Mr. Deep Deep State” Barr
Wasn’t he involved in covering for the Ruby Ridge FBI agent that shot and killed an unarmed woman holding a baby? Obviously a threat to the sniper involved. Federal Bureau of Intimidation
Yes he did. Barr is a deep, deep state CIA hack.
Joe Biden looked shaky as he hobbled onstage Thursday night, but at the podium the drugs kicked in and Joe Biden delivered a commanding speech, by his standards.
But something was off from the start. Biden’s handlers had the otherwise inspiring setting of Philadelphia’s Independence Hall bathed in so much blood-red light, he looked like an opening act for Queensrÿche or Rammstein. Trying to create a setting for judgment and warning, they overshot the staging and made the white-haired ex-Senator look like a vampire sat up from a crypt.
The content matched the ominous staging. Biden delivered a remarkably menacing manifesto. Biden sounded like a man preparing followers for an enforcement response to Trumpism itself, and even if that wasn’t what he was doing, it’s clear many Trump supporters heard things that way.
Biden went out of his way to quote federal judge Michael Luttig in calling the MAGA enemy a “clear and present danger.” The loaded term traces to a 1919 Supreme Court case in which Oliver Wendell Holmes created a test for judging if speech and/or other political activities may be suppressed. “The question,” Holmes wrote, “is whether the words… create a clear and present danger that they will bring about the substantive evils that Congress has a right to prevent.” This “balancing test” was invoked to justify restrictions ranging from a ban on passing out antiwar leaflets to bars of membership in communist organizations. The “substantive evil” in such cases often involved a judgment that groups or individuals posed an active threat to overthrow the state — not so different from arguing that a political movement threatens “democracy itself.”
In the context of what increasingly feels like a fifties-style PR campaign to describe “MAGA Republicans” as dangerous subversives, “clear and present danger” sounded particularly ominous.
Seventy-four million people voted for Trump in 2020. It’s beyond delusional to think they are all violent extremists. A smart politician would recognize the overwhelming majority are just people who pay taxes, work crap jobs, raise kids, obey the law, and give at most a tiny share of attention to politics. The University of Virginia did a study arguing that as many as 8 million previously voted for Obama, so there’s that. I’d bet more than half would pick a screening of Thor: Love and Thunder over a Trump speech. The only sure way to radicalize the lot is to call them one big terror cell, or have the president go on TV to describe them as an existential threat to national security.
Having done that, Biden now has a bigger problem than ever. What a mess, but how perfectly in character for our leaders! Metaphorically we’re always blowing up villages and pyramids to chase a terror suspect into the desert. Now we’re factory-producing enemies at home, too, and it doesn’t look like anyone up there knows how to stop.
“Seventy-four million people voted for Trump in 2020. It’s beyond delusional to think they are all violent extremists.”
*************************
I wish they were. One man’s “violent extremist” is another’s “courageous patriot.” To King George III, Geo. Washington was a dangerous subversive.
Yes, the FBI searching a civilians home for stolen government secrets is exactly like colonial economic tyranny.
Except it was King Trump who advocated for mercantilism, no?
So would that make you a Tory?
Aninny:
“Yes, the FBI searching a civilians home for stolen government secrets is exactly like colonial economic tyranny.”
********************************
Exactly. It’s always the tyrant’s excuse that his actions are in the interests of national security or to prevent absconding. It’s exactly how the Crown, in the person of lawyer William De Grey, justified Writs of Assistance allowing searches of merchant cargo any ol’ time under the theory that not to do so would permit absconding with the goods and hence no taxation.
I’m not a Tory. I’m just well-read in history unlike … well … you.
https://www.google.com/search?q=britain%27s+justification+for+searching+colonists.
Mespo: Good. We need you around to provide foundation and breadth/depth for some of our ramblings, thank you!
George Washington
The Father of the United States of America who, with like-minded and free, European colonists, established a restricted-vote republic under the dominion of the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights for themselves and their Posterity, including a severely limited and restricted Congress which could tax for ONLY debt, defence and general Welfare (i.e. infrastructure), and which could regulate ONLY the value of money, commerce among the several States, and land and naval Forces, while observing the strict preclusion of Congress from “claiming or exercising” dominion over irrefutably constitutionally absolute private property, and a Judicial Branch with a sworn duty to support the clear and evident, meaning and intent of the Constitution, and the power of Judicial Review with reference to all acts of the executive and legislative branches.
You’re a sick person to wish for civil war.
The 2nd Amendment is the remedy for tyrannical government.
Your question should be how did we get here?
Did you say that to the American Founders in 1776?
You would be a direct and mortal enemy, in that case, right?
I WISH FOR THE ANTONYM OF THE CIVIL WAR
I wish for the implementation of the Constitution and Bill of Rights and the federal statutes and codes deriving therefrom, including extant immigration law on January 1, 1863, comprised of the Naturalization Act of 1802, which required compassionate repatriation of illegal aliens as described in the body of the law. America was stolen, its Constitution nullified and a new, false Constitution proffered. The components of the false constitution must be rejected and abrogated and America must be returned to its rightful owners if law is to prevail in this society of laws.
Jonathan: You say Judge Cannon is being “targeted by a furious mob of media and pundits”. who have attacked her “personally and ethically”. You specifically cite pundits on MSNBC. This is a diversionary tactic to avoid an actual analysis of Cannon’s decision. One such more rational analysis is in Charlie Savage’s column today in the NY Times–“Special Masters and the Trump Records, Explained”. Savage quotes former AG Bill Barr and your close friend as saying: “I don’t think the appointment of a special master is going to hold up, but even if it does I don’t see it fundamentally change the trajectory”. On Fox News Barr went further. When asked whether the docs Trump took were “declassified” Barr said: “If in fact he [Trump] sort of stood over scores of boxes, not really knowing what was in them and said I herby declassify everything in here, that would be such an abuse and–that shows such recklessness it’s almost worse than taking the documents”.
Regarding Judge Cannon’s appointment of a special master to go through all the docs–not just those that might be covered by the atty/client privilege but also those that might plausibly be protected by executive privilege Barr was less impressed: “The opinion I think is wrong. I think the government should appeal it. I was deeply flawed in a number of ways. I don’t think it will hold up”.
Barr’s message is at odds with Fox–that over a month has been telling its viewers that the DOJ is engaging in a witch hunt. Funny you haven’t discussed Barr’s views that contradict your own. You probably don’t want to jeopardize a close personal friendship. Instead, you act as an echo chamber for FOX and all the spurious claims about the DOJ investigation of Trump. Just attacking some who appear on MSNBC is not illuminating the actual issues involved. That’s hardly the approach we would expect from a legal scholar.
But the two things could be both be true:
— The ruling could be flawed; that’s what the appeals process is for
— The DOJ is conducting a witch hunt.
There is no question that the latter is true unless the judge lied on the bottom of page 2/top of page 3 of the ruling
The text on pp. 2-3 doesn’t suggest that the DOJ is conducting a witch hunt.
This raid looks like an attempt to sweep up everything from panties to medical records to correspondence to privileged communications in the hope that something, anything, will emerge that can be leaked to the press to attack Trump. It is a disgrace. A giant panty raid conducted by armed thugs.
It is time to re-think the FBI. They should be disarmed.
The street theater in which a platoon kitted up for landing on Omaha Beach to arrest a senior citizen with no criminal record is a disgrace to the entire nation.
It is a grotesque publicity stunt. They would adopt the old Gestapo Night and Fog practice of disappearing citizens without a ripple if only it could work with CNN cameras on hand.
They can do the investigations [such as they may be] but leave the actual armed arrest to U.S Marshals or local police–to people with some judgment. The FBI should be out of the arrest business altogether. They have made a mess of it.
And, they should be required to wear body cameras for every interview. Since every interview can lead to a process crime every interview should be recorded. Relying on 302s which can be twisted or altered is shoddy practice. I think it cost the government a conviction in the trial of the wife of the Pulse Nightclub killer. The word of agents just wasn’t good enough. One time it would have been good enough for me, but not any longer. Every conversation should be recorded. General Flynn thought he was having a casual chat with a fellow member of the government and then, just like that, he was charged.
As an alternative, fire all of them. They can learn to code or they can join law enforcement in Iran or China where their methods are approved.
DISCIPLINE
IF CRAZY PEOPLE ARE ALLOWED TO VOTE, YOU END UP WITH A CRAZY NATION
The communists (liberals, progressives, socialists, democrats, RINOs) are relentless and ferocious in their effort to steal elections, American treasure and the nation itself. One wonders why once-free Americans lie down in submission and refuse to conduct a campaign for their own survival and elimination of this antithetical and unconstitutional nocuous pestilence. If America had not been bamboozled into “Crazy Abe” Lincoln’s anti-American “Reign of Terror” (“Crazy Abe” didn’t fool Chief Justice Roger B. Taney), the Communist Manifesto would be in the refuse dump and the Constitution and Bill of Rights would still hold dominion.
________________________________________________________________
“[We gave you] a [restricted-vote] republic *, if you can keep it.”
– Ben Franklin
___________
“You” couldn’t.
____________
*
Merriam-Webster
republic – b(1) : a government in which supreme power resides in a body of citizens entitled to vote and is exercised by elected officers and representatives responsible to them and governing according to law
America was designed as a restricted-vote republic. Turnout was 11.6% in 1788. Citizens were “entitled” to vote through the application of criteria conduced by State legislatures. Never was America to be a one man, one vote democracy. America was designed with an electoral college system not dissimilar to that of the UK’s parliamentary form effected presently.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
“Less than 1 percent of Britain’s people voted on the new prime minister. Here’s why.”
“It may come as a surprise, particularly to those less familiar with parliamentary systems of government, that the decision on Britain’s new leader has been made by just a small (and not very representative) fraction of the country’s 67 million people. Around 160,000 people had the final say in choosing the new leader of the Conservative Party, and therefore the next prime minister. Here’s what to know about those people, how the process played out and what happens next. How did the leadership vote work? Since Prime Minister Boris Johnson resigned while his party still holds an overall majority in Parliament, the Conservatives could decide on his successor through a party leadership contest. The initial stages of a Conservative leadership race take place among the party’s members of Parliament, from whom all the potential candidates are drawn. Each needed the nomination of 20 fellow lawmakers to reach the first ballot in July, a threshold met by eight of the 11 who sought to run. Then Conservative lawmakers, through five rounds of voting, narrowed the candidates to two: Liz Truss and Rishi Sunak. After that, it was up to the rest of the party’s dues-paying members to decide. At the time of the last leadership election in 2019, 154,500 party members were eligible to vote. Now that number is estimated to be more than 160,000 — still less than 0.3 percent of Britain’s population. Party members pay an annual subscription of 25 pounds, about $30, and have been voting by mail and online since early August. Voting closed at 5 p.m. on Friday.”
– Megan Specia, Sept. 5, 2022
When you let people decide things who have no skin in the game don’t be surprised when they vote themselves other people’s money. It’s the flaw of democracy the founders sought to avoid with a republican form of government.
“PERSONS, AS ARE IN SO MEAN A SITUATION, THAT THEY ARE ESTEEMED TO HAVE NO WILL OF THEIR OWN.”
They’re running across the border at a rate of 2 million annually to join the tens of millions extant – ELE 6.6.6 – Election Fraud and Vote Tampering 101.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
“the people are nothing but a great beast…
I have learned to hold popular opinion of no value.”
– Alexander Hamilton
_________________
“The true reason (says Blackstone) of requiring any qualification, with regard to property in voters, is to exclude such persons, as are in so mean a situation, that they are esteemed to have no will of their own.”
“If it were probable that every man would give his vote freely, and without influence of any kind, then, upon the true theory and genuine principles of liberty, every member of the community, however poor, should have a vote… But since that can hardly be expected, in persons of indigent fortunes, or such as are under the immediate dominion of others, all popular states have been obliged to establish certain qualifications, whereby, some who are suspected to have no will of their own, are excluded from voting; in order to set other individuals, whose wills may be supposed independent, more thoroughly upon a level with each other.”
– Alexander Hamilton, The Farmer Refuted, 1775
When you let people vote who have NO skin in the game, don’t be surprised when they TAKE THE LIVES OF THOSE WHO HAVE NO POWER. Like Trump who dodged the draft while I and millions like me lost our freedom to our lives .during the Vietnam war I know that you think YOUR money is FAR more valuable than my life and the lives of millions of us who had little money and no power.
The left has taken you power and your money.
randyjet:
“When you let people vote who have NO skin in the game, don’t be surprised when they TAKE THE LIVES OF THOSE WHO HAVE NO POWER. Like Trump who dodged the draft while I and millions like me lost our freedom to our lives .”
****************************
Well, in reality, Trump had four college deferments and was then deemed unfit for duty due to heel spurs. Not particularly uncommon. If you resented going so much, you knew that Canada was always just an open border away. Or maybe we should infer that you you’re the type that just grouses for having to do his duty.
NO I HATE cowards like Trump who have no sense of duty and use their wealth and status to avoid their obligation. Trump cannot recall what foot had the bone spurs and had a friendly doctor produce a fake disability. Trump also hates those who were POWs as he said.
RE: “”””NO I HATE cowards like Trump who have no sense of duty.”””. I feel the same way about Bruce Springsteen and Al Kooper. Yet Obama awarded the draft-dodger, flag waver Springsteen the Medal of Freedom. https://faroutmagazine.co.uk/bruce-springsteen-dodged-the-army/
excellent comment.
So, basically, semi-Fascist behavior against any review that could protect Trump from government abuse of power.
How Stalinesque.
Fits right in with threatening to burn cities to the ground unless the Chauvin jury knows what’s good for them, trying to assassinate conservative Supreme Court Justices so Biden can appoint Liberals, and firebombing federal buildings.
In my opinion JT’s post should have included Bill Barr’s comments that were critical of the judge’s ruling also. We could have then seen whether Barr’s criticism was or was not similar in tone and substance to the other critics that JT did include. Bill Barr has made other comments related to this Trump documents matter and in my opinion JT should really address all of Barr’s comments in a follow-up post or column.
Why should Barr even comment? Perhaps there’s some of his skin in those documents.
Barr comments for the same reasons that Turley does.
William “Mr. Deep Deep State Swamp” Barr was called out of retirement from service to the Deep Deep State Swamp through the Sam P. Bush (i.e. railroad/steel industrialist among Rockefellers, Harrimans, the Fed, Coolidge et al.), Prescott Bush, George H. W. Bush and George W. Bush dynasty (and I do mean nasty, pre-“kinder and gentler”) (poor Jeb, right?).
He was attached as AG and a “Deep Deep State Swamp” mole to the Trump administration after the disaster known as Jeff Sessions. Unfortunately, Advice and Consent by the Deep Deep State Swamp Senate gives the Deep Deep State Swamp the power to force inimical AGs et al. on the President. The Check and Balance for that is the “manifest tenor” of the Constitution, which the Supreme Court must impose, by sworn oath and through Judicial Review, on every act of the Executive and Legislative branches.
It hasn’t.
The singular America failure has been and remains the judicial branch, with emphasis on the supreme court. The “Sovereign” in America is the Constitution; it must be accurately and faithfully brought to bear by the judicial branch and supreme court.
It hasn’t been.
___________
Plaque on the walls at the “Deep Deep State Swamp” DOJ, FBI, CIA et al.:
“The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves.”
– Lenin
Here is you some cannon fodder. I borrow a line from Victor Davis Hanson: ” In one of the creepiest speeches and background sets in American political history, Joe Biden railed that “Donald Trump and MAGA Republicans are a threat to the very soul of this country.” Franklin Roosevelt declared war on Japan in careful, sober, and exacting presidential tones; Joe Biden all but declared war against half his own people like a raving lunatic.
This is one thing that could bring about UN-Civil WII. Now, I would allege and say that the coming John Durham report and Whistleblowers disclosures, could allege that from the time DT became the Repub candidate in 2015. Obama, Biden, CIA, FBI, NIA, et als; I allege there was an attempted coup from 2015 until today 09-07-2022 to remove DT. I would allege it should bring forth indictments, tribunals, and trials for treason on those whom it would be shown had participated. The fat lady hasn’t sung on the 2020 election and the other alleged actions. Prepare for a big shaking derecho wind of disclosures coming soon and some big time so-called leaders abdicating their positions. Selah
I disagree in part. “Obama, Biden, CIA, FBI, NIA, et als” were after every Republican candidate in 2015. It is beyond believe that they only Republican the fascists targeted in 2015 was the candidate least qualified for the office and least likely to win the nomination in the spring of 2016
Liberal media attacks judge. Wow, that’s earth shaking. I find it inconceivable that members of the liberal establishment would ever treat a jurist like that. They have always shown great respect for our legal scholarship who sit on the bench.
It’s time for Tribe to go away, far away. He has been around since I was in law school in the late 1960s; he simply cannot get enough of himself. If he wants to do something, let law students edit another book to put his name upon.
In what passes for polite company among many self-anointed, coastal elites, it is socially acceptable to express bigotry toward working-class people, southerners, Christians, and conservatives, especially non-white conservatives. Shameful.
I used to have a lot of respect for Turley when he was not so partisan and when he was my lawyer in a suit against the FAA. Now I visit occasionally to get some laughs since he is obviously pumping to be Trump’s lawyer in forthcoming trials when and if he is indicted.
It is funny that Turley refuses to mention the well known liberal, left wing radical former AG Barr. who has stated his opposition to the judges order. I suppose Turley also thinks Barr was wrong when he said that the election was NOT stolen. Then he compounds the humor by insisting that the investigation can continue without the evidence which is the documents!. Sort of saying to the police keep investigating the murder without the body, ME report and any other evidence that is in their custody until the master can see and rule on all of it.
His bias and outlandish myopia is exemplified when he selects only the most outlandish position. I loved it when he blasted the poor DUI DA for Travis County for staying in office while facing a misdemeanor charge, and doing what MANY other Texas GOP DAs have done in similar cases. Yet he refuses to say a word against the current AG in Texas using his office to thwart FELONY charges in state court and facing other charges in Federal Courts! He might consider coming to Texas to defend Paxton I guess since he WILL be paid by the State of Texas. If he defends Trump, he better get paid up front since the government WILL NOT be paying for that. Trump is notorious for not paying for most things and demanding he be sued to force payment. I assume he was paid by the GOP or the government for defending Trump in his impeachment trial. Keep up the funny stuff at least I can get some laughs out of this site.