While pundits, politicians and the press have long expressed outrage over attacks on judges by former President Donald Trump, many are now attacking any judge who delays any trial of Trump before the election. Democrats have accused Judge Aileen Cannon of being politically compromised, if not conspiratorial, in her delay of the Florida trial over the mishandling of classified documents. Yet, there is ample reason for the delay that many of us anticipated in this type of case when it was filed.
For months, many of us have said that we doubt that this type of trial could be held on the rapid schedule demanded by Special Counsel Jake Smith. Smith has repeatedly sought to curtail trial review and even appellate rights of Trump to advance his schedule.
His office has made convicting Trump before the election the overriding objective of its motion — a sharp departure from past Justice Department efforts to avoid trials to influence elections.
As a criminal defense counsel, I have handled classified material cases and they are notoriously slow. Smith could have prosecuted this case in the shorter time frame if he simply charged obstruction. That would have also eliminated the glaring contrast with the handling of the Biden investigation into the current president’s retention and mishandling of classified material.
Smith decided to charge an array of document charges related to classified material. The defense must have access, review, and can appeal issues related to the classified procedures. Yet, Smith wanted both the array of document charges and a fast track to trial. The Supreme Court has agreed with Cannon that Smith’s desire to secure a conviction before the election is not the overriding consideration.
Judge Cannon is faced with recent admissions that the government mixed up files in the boxes and staged the famous photos of documents strewn over a floor with classified jackets. Most importantly, disputes over the relevant documents continues as expected in the case.
Nevertheless, leading democrats are denouncing Cannon as a partisan hack.
Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), the chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee’s subcommittee on federal courts and oversight, accused Cannon of “deliberately slow-walking the case.” Ignoring the fact that similar cases have taken much longer to go to trial, Whitehouse simply declared “it is hard for me not to reach the conclusion that this [judge] is deliberately slow-walking the case to put it into a position where should [Trump] be elected, he can order that the investigation and prosecution be terminated.”
His colleague Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.) insisted that Cannon was “managing this case in a way that is making it highly unlikely that it will be resolved in a timely fashion.”
Coons added “Justice deferred is often justice denied.” It is a bizarre statement. Classified documents cases routinely take longer to go to trial. The alternative is to cut off the ability of the defense to fully review the documents and review objections for resolution before trial. Yet, because the defendant is Trump and these Democrats want the trial to influence the election, such defense protections are now evidence of judicial bias.
They, of course, ignore that Cannon has ruled repeatedly against major Trump motions in the case.
Sen. Peter Welch (D-Vt.), a member of the Judiciary Committee, said Cannon’s “at it again, doing everything she can to delay.”
Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), offered the most telling line. He said “I question whether this judge understands the magnitude or the legal import of this trial.”
Indeed, it is the timing as much as the charges that makes this so important to the Justice Department and the Democrats. Smith has crafted this case to impact the election and the failure of the court to support that effort is apparently grounds for recusal.
Blumenthal called for such a motion before the window is lost before the election: “It’s a classic dilemma for justice that a particular judicial officer may be conducting a trial that could be better done by somebody else.”
Despite the statement of his colleague Coons, this is a case where justice delayed is justice.
” …leading democrats are denouncing Cannon as a partisan hack.” Senator Whitehouse is prima facie example of a “partisan hack”. as the old saying goes “it takes one to know one” keep it up Sheldon
That we are currently witnessing a ‘trial’ with no clearly defined crime is all we need to know. Thankfully, in our modern, interconnected world, the Nazis (*cough*modern left*cough*)can’t get away with it again. They vastly underestimate us.
Why don’t they just drag Trump through the streets of Somalia? Isn’t that what they want? Here’s some FREE legal advice – put a D after your name and you can save on legal fees! And MSNBC scrutiny! I’m guessing you could even store important STUFF right next to your Corvette or Trans Am
Why anonymous, ain’t got it in you to say your name. It’s easy to see, media and YOU. Want trump to walk freely. The day will come when Trump pays his due. Republican party are traitorous .
I can’t see this case hurting Trump. Particularly among independents – given the backdrop of Hillary Clinton’s server. If this had been rapped up last year like it should have been, it’s a win-win for Trump. He’s either not guilty or guilty with…….jail time. Really? Trump had hard copy in a secure location. Clinton had her classified documents floating around in cyberspace for anyone to see. The totality of what she did was easily worse even if you add obstruction for Trump. For him to actually get sentenced to some kind of jail time with no consequences for her. I just don’t see the independents putting up with that.
But the judicial system failed to dispense with this matter in a timely manner. And now that they have schlogged along into May, I have to reluctantly agree that you can’t have a trial from this point to the election. But it’s another black mark for a dysfunctional judicial system as far as I am concerned.
@Anonymous
I can’t see it hurting him, either. These people and their minions (ahem – the trolls here) are wasting their time. nobody sane wants any part of this, ad more of us wake up every day.
Judge Cannon has turned out to be the best lawyer Trump ever had.
You seem to have an incorrect and warped view of the roles of lawyers and judges, leftist.
Look in the mirror.
No – I understand jurisprudential roles and processes.
You do not.
Is that you, Larry Tribe?
Actually that would be Willis and Wade, or maybe Bragg and Colangelo, or no Jack Smith.
These are all proving to be Trump’s best lawyers.
Above Turley says that Smith admits that the infamous DOJ classified docs photo provided to the press and the courts was staged.
Turley is being far to KIND. What occured was a fraud on the people and a fraud on the courts by the DOJ/FBI.
That is a crime far more serious than anything Trump has been accused of.
What occured was the presentation of FALSIFIED evidence to the courts an to the people.
While that photo is the single egregious glaring example – that is not the limit of the recent admissions.
Smith has admitted that the records presented to the court of what documents were recovered, where they were found, what documents were in which boxes are all WRONG. Maybe that is an innocent mistake – it is a serious one nonetheless. And frankly it casts doubt on everything else. Getting that right is not difficult. Getting it wrong casts doubt on the entire chain of custody. How did this error occur, and how can we trust the records the government now presents ?
And WHY did this occur ? Incompetence is a really bad claim – that undermines the entire prosecution. But this does not look like an error that would occur from mere incompetence. People incompetently make small portions of the error that was made here.
In a case where a former president is being charged with mishandling classified documents – Smith has Admitted in court that the DOJ/FBI mishandled classified documents AND they mishandled evidence.
The oft quoted classified documents statute does NOT have an incompetence defense.
It does not even have a no harm no foul defence. The SC is litterally admitting the guilt of his own offices of the crime he is prosecuting.
John;
Isn’t their a case for Tumps team to challenge all the Document Evidence from being used at trial.
There is serious chain of evidence corruption.
I don’t see this case making it into a court room before the election. But if it did Trumps lawyers have learned from Merchan that every single piece of evidence would be challenged. I know Cannon has a much better record up to date.
I would add that the totality of the corrupted Deep State apparatus attack on candidate Trump, President-Elect Trump and President Trump represent an attack on America. The actors are the CIA, DOJ, FBI along with others. See my Rumble show, The Trump Assassination Files!
Student: Professor. I know final exams are next week. Could I take mine 2 years from now?
Turley: Why of course. And let me know if you need any more extensions on top of that.
Student: Oh thank you Professor.
Turley: Well you don’t need to thank me miss. After all, this is how the judicial system works in the real world anyway. So you are simply
getting here what you can expect to get there.
SteveJ, false equivalence much?
Well you’re right. It’s even more obscene than my example. Spent a year at a D.C. law firm. Paralegal. Civil case. Nontheless. All of my work was on one case — and I came to discover all of it was for pre-trial motions and other drawn out gimmicks. Endless extensions granted by the Judge. It dawned on me that I was participating in a charade.
There wasn’t going to be a trial. The two sides were simply waiting to see who was willing to spend more money on more lawyers doing pre-trial work over an indefinite time period. The client I was working for had more money. The other side blinked and settled. But in the meantime, you had to maintain the charade of a legal process that never had any deadlines. Judge had no problems with it.
What you described happens sometimes in civil cases – but not all. It should not ever.
But Criminal cases are significantly different.
Unserious cases – such as those against Trump are dropped.
In serious cases – the Government ALWAYS has more money. They can and do ALWAYS bury the defendant.
In the majority of serious cases the defendant waits in jail – creating an incentive for them to rush.
In fact I know of many loser criminal cases where the prosecutors jailed the defendant and delayed the trial such that even after they lost (or more likely got a plea deal) the defendant spent as long in prison as he would have with a conviction.
In those cases that do not jail the defendant – they are out on Bond and for most of them – that is expensive.
No one loans a shoplifter 100K for nothing. The longer the case takes the more it costs the defendant to remain free.
And if none of the above are enough – defendants that are not billionaires can just be bankrupted by the prosecution.
Much is made of the mess that was the Flynn prosecution and plea deal. But Flynn initially fought this tooth and nail.
Nearly bankrupting him, and then they went after his family.
But you can have far more money than Flynn and still be unable to afford to fight the government.
SteveJ – the FACT is that criminal cases typically take a long time – because the Government is in No Rush.
Time is nearly always their friend. It nearly always increases the pressure on the defendant.
The Trump cases are unusual – not because Cannon is doing anything improper, But because The defense WANTS to delay and can afford to delay for years. And the prosecution wants to Rush and Can not afford to delay.
Regardless in a criminal case the rights of the defendant Trump the wishes of the prosector – or they are supposed to.
Of course but for the political law fare – there would be no cases. By delaying the defense is getting justice – though at significant financial cost – that most of us could not afford.
But if you really think Cannon is behaving unusually. I would note there are STILL J6 defendants that are in jail and have not been tried.
Charges were filed and they were jailed 3 years ago. The charges in the Bragg case were filed just over a year ago.
A defendant in jail is supposed to get a peedier trial that one out of jail. The J6 cases are nearly all far simpler than ANY of the Trump cases – yet it has taken DOJ in DC as long as 3+ years to bring some to trial.
“SteveJ – the FACT is that criminal cases typically take a long time – because the Government is in No Rush.”
Oh I am very much aware of this John. And I have to tell you, there are some unfortunate parallels between the case I described, which happen all the time, and criminal cases
As with the civil case I described, there isn’t going to be a trial. The “client” in criminal cases with the most money is the government who will bleed the other side of resources. The other side blinks, and enters into a plea bargain agreement — regardless of guilt.
It’s a money mill.
Not even close to how the courts “work”
Do better.
That may be the dumbest analogy I’ve ever read…
The men cited by Professor Turley lead the parade of Democrats seeking to politicize every area of the law and the courts. A trial of a former president (of which there will now be many) should go overboard in allowing the defense both time and deference.
Especially concernimg issues of “first imprssion” which have never before been considered by the courts and implicate entirely new law.
Well you can’t expect a government operation, whether executive, legislative, or judicial, to be done within a reasonable time frame. Particularly a government operation that involves lawyers. So you are quite right Professor. This was to be expected.
Cases involving classified information alsmost never, if ever, take less than two years to go to trial, and usually 3 or more years. It’s a monument to the corruption of the DOJ and the NY and Washington DC court systems that they would even dream of bring cases like these to trial in less than several years.
Only a lawyer could rationalize such a time frame and such endless deadlines. Any private business that operated in this manner would go under in 2 months.
I’m not a lawyer, however I have participated in the court system for around 12 years after my rights were violated. I can assure you that careful attention to detail is required when basic rights and laws are at stake. Private businesses don’t issue laws that impact the lives of hundreds of millions of people.
In my own cases, two judges were eventually kicked off the bench for improper conduct.
In this case, it only recently came to light that the DOJ tampered with evidence and knowingly lied about it to the court while trying to rush matters to trial in an attempt to influence the coming elecion. This isn’t McDonald’s and there’s no drive-thru window to get fast-food justice.
You are conflating incompetence with overly long time frames. Careful attention to detail does not take 2 years. And there’s no indication the incompetence with evidence in this matter had anything to do with rushing to trial. It was just plain sloppy work. If they can’t get their act together in a timely matter, the case should be dismissed.
LOL — and YOU are conflating incompetence with intentional criminal conduct by the DOJ and “Special” Counsel Smigh, who is indeed very very special, like participants in the Special Olympics or Special Education.
Innocent people have rotted their lives away in prisons because some prosecutors either concocted cases against them or were just too lazy to stick to evidencary standards.
I’m perfectly willing to call it criminal conduct as opposed to incompetence for purposes here. And again, that has nothing to do with an overly-long time frame. You appear to want dismissal. Fine. My comment simply states that something that happened in 2020 would be resolved by 2024, or would not be prosecuted in the first place, in a functioning system — which we do not have.
Forcing the system to function more-quickly doesn’t guarantee that it will function better or dispense a higher quality of justice. Odds are that a faster justice system would be sloppy and result in more injustice than justice. Chances are that people with their own agenda — such as the democrats that concocted all these goofy cases against Trump — would try to bamboozel judges and juries even more than “Special” Counsel Smith is doing in Florida and Washington DC — injecting nonsense even stupider than calling a porn star to testify about irrelevant BS purely to taint the reputation of the accused, with the potential bonus of getting a wrongful conviction while interfering in a national election.
More quickly? We’re talking about an event in 2020 and now its 2024. You and I are at an impasse as what constitutes reasonable time.
You’re referring to an event that supposedly happened in 2020 but wasn’t prosecuted until 2023. So the corrupt Specical Counsel and assorted local democrat District Attorneys in NY and Atlanta had 3+ YEARS to design, coordinate, and time their bogus civil and criminal actions acting in concert so as to interfere with the 2024 election and campaign that precedes it by burying the defendant in litigation.
So I guess your warped definition of justice is to give a handful of corrupt prosecutors and literally dozens (if not hundreds) of their supportive staff YEARS to conspire against a defendant, and then rush to trial when the defendant’s lawyers have had only a fraction of those YEARS to prepare a defense while reviewing MILLIONS of pages of documents, many of which were only recently made available and some of which are yet to be made available.
Perhaps you and I can end the night with some sort of agreement — or not. That’s my post at the top. Forgot to put my name.
Pretty much nothing in law operates the way private businesses do.
Pretty much nothing involving governemnt operates the way private businesses do.
While there is much to criticize about the law and govenrment – we do not WANT government and law to operate like private businesses.
In business it is often better to be quick and good enough rather than slow and near perfect.
It is often better to fail quickly and try again.
Government is the one institution that can not be allowed to fail.
It also must endeavor to be as close to perfect as possible.
Government is FORCE and it is morally wrong to use force without sufficient justification.
Those are just a few of the reasons that govenrment is and always must proceed SLOW.
LOL — Trump-hating NY Judge Engoron who fined Trump almost a half TRILLION dollars is now being investigated for improper communications and advice which he shouldn’t have listened to, and was REQUIRED to have been reported to the parties in the litigation after he DID listen to it:
High-profile New York lawyer says he tried to advise judge in Trump civil fraud case
https://www.nbcnewyork.com/investigations/new-york-lawyer-tried-advise-judge-trump-trial-civil-fraud/5395676/
Per that article:
“The New York State Rules of Judicial Conduct state that ‘a judge shall not initiate, permit, or consider ex parte communications, or consider other communications made to the judge outside the presence of the parties or their lawyers.’ The rules do allow an exception to ‘obtain the advice of a disinterested expert,’ if a judge gives notice to the parties in the case and gives them the opportunity to respond.”
The article also says;
“Christopher Kise, a member of the Trump defense team which has repeatedly criticized Engoron’s handling of the case, said if Bailey’s claims are true, it casts doubt on the integrity of the process. ‘The code doesn’t provide an exception for ‘well, this was a small conversation’ or ‘well, it didn’t really impact me’ or ‘well, this wasn’t something that I, the judge, found significant,’ Kise said. ‘No. The code is very clear’.”
Thus I repeat my earlier comment, that the NY justice system is an absolute dumpster fire.
Dorredtion: Make that a half-billion-dollar fine, not half trillion. Sorry for the clerical error. It’s been a long day.
And sorry for all the typos today in my several comments or replies. My eyes are bothering me from too much online reading.
Reading through these comments, it’s now abundantly clear that, just as the NY court system has devolved into an extrajudicial partisan political process instead of being a properly-functioning legal system, the Turleyville comment section has devolved into a wild collection of bickering, empty-headed morons that make a Three Stooges pie fight seem intellectual by comparison.
I can appreciate Turley’s objection to censorship, but that doesn’t mean that there shouldn’t be SOME standards of intellect, maturity, or civilized discourse. The allowance of some of this nonsense invites a backlash and becomes an advertisement for the blessings of censorship.
I have to wonder whether the mothers of some of these glue-huffing preschoolers even know that their children are online.
I was thinking the same thing. I’m not a lawyer, but some of the comments are just insane. They really have to be getting their news of this case and others from the lame stream media talking heads, who get their talking points from one source, a source that is usually way off base. When someone tries to set them straight, they go off the deep end. Evidently some of them know more about the law than a guy who teaches it. SMH
Yeah, but I’m not just referring to legal ignorance, although there’s plenty of that. I’m also referring to jevenile name-calling and other extraneous stupidity. When the fools are wrong about the law and/or facts, they’re at least referencing something relevent to the subject of the article. But when they hide behind fake screen names to repeatedly call someone a “steaming turd” and other such kindergarten behavior, I really see no legitimate reason that they shouldn’t be booted until such time (if ever) that they grow up and learn to behave like adults.
Anonymous said: “I’m not just referring to legal ignorance, although there’s plenty of that. I’m also referring to jevenile name-calling and other extraneous stupidity.”
It doesn’t help at all that there are also a small number of otherwise mostly reasonable regular commenters here who, even though they complain about the approximately equal number of trolls who post inane or misleading comments here with great regularity, nevertheless insist on feeding those same trolls, time, after time, after time. It sometimes almost seems as if the trolls and their feeders belong to the same clique, with no goals beyond the long-term maintenance of an incessant, combative exchange.
There are a LOT of people in Turley’s comment section with WAY too much time on their hands — either retired or imprisoned.
I’m so glad that your sweeping ad hominem descriptions of those you strongly disagree with have made it to print. Feelings are so much more relevant than facts, right?
Regularly calling people “turds” and the like hardly passes for intelligent argument OR “facts,” Gomer.
Dear Prof Turley,
I don’t know how ‘Special’ Mr. Smith’s counsel is, but if he ‘crafted this prosecution to impact the election’ it is working. For the Trump MAGA2 campaign. .. that’s what’s so vexing.
It would be nice to limit this circus show to ‘obstruction’, as you suggest. Iirc, NARA, Trump, the FBI, WH, etc. were all in ‘correspondence’ for over a year concerning the material in question and I would like to know where that ‘negotiation'(?) broke down and led to the FBI raid and SC indictment.
Still, it seems the secret ‘classification’ nature of these materials, and the lawful possession of them, is what will ‘inform’ the jury in this monkey trial. And that’s illegal, a violation of the Espionage Act (among other things.). Mr. Smith could show the Jury the secret ‘classified’ material .. . but then Mr. Smith would have to arrest them.
The judge, bless her heart, is walking a fine line, too.
I continue to believe what’s left of the free Press/media, independent ‘bloggers’ and public servants of goodwill are the final authority over our ‘secrets’ .. . not more WH/DoJ pocketful of mumbles.
*Free Tibet .. . and Palestine.
@dg
Your ‘free Tibet’ says it all. You are a bumper sticker person, and that speaks volumes for those of us that have actually paid attention these past 30 or so years. It’s likely a bumper sticker on an SUV, to boot. You are an unserious person, and I have seen a million of you. You help nothing, you hinder a great deal, and there is likely no hope for you. Meanwhile, the rest of us will repair our society, and at this point, I am not even politely declining your participation, no, i’m saying: f*** off. You are a hindrance, not a help. Not to anyone suffering anywhere. Take your great white savior complex to the pyre, because that is where your ideology and half-assed participation and reticence are headed.
and when we are done fixing things, you and your children, in your clueless hubris, will take the credit. Go blow. We are done with your mentality, and it will not survive going forward.
Dear James,
At least be honest. You don’t care a wit about Tibet (doubt you could find it on a map) or its history. It’s the Palestine thing that triggers your self-absorbed myopic support for the ethno-religious ‘genocidal’ rampage in Gaza.
Evidently, now God has Chosen You to speak for Turley’s blog as well.
Unfortunately, you don’t know what you’re talking about.
*that’s why I am here.
“that’s why I am here.”
Dgsnowden, you have an overblown ego. You are neither intelligent nor informed. James shows the opposite, but not only that, he hit the nail on the head. You are a bumper sticker stuck to the garbage that litters our dumps. Your knowledge of the situations you discuss is barely above a child’s level. If you want a free Palestine, get rid of the PLO (terrorist), Hamas (terrorist) and Iran, the supporter of terrorism worldwide.
By your own admission, you’re knowingly arguing with “a bumper sticker stuck to the garbage that litters our dumps” OR alternately, someone whose knowledge is”barely above a child’s level.”
I must’ve posted this Mark Twain quote dozens of times over the years here in the Turleyville Online Nursery School for Adult Delinquents (aka prison inmates and psychiatric outpatients);
“Never argue with a fool, onlookers may not be able to tell the difference.”
https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/518524-never-argue-with-a-fool-onlookers-may-not-be-able
You’ve been here at least as many years as I have, so I’m surprised that you’d waste your time arguing with a bumper sticker or the garbage that it’s stuck to. And I’d like to see actual EVIDENCE that the garbage’s knowledge is “above” a child’s level. I think you’re crediting him/her with more knowledge than is on display.
But your metaphor regarding Turley’s comment section being a garbage dump is otherwise apt, probably due to the Professor’s well-known objection to censorship or adherence to actual RULES — which is an odd position for a lawyer to have, given that the entire profession is governed by RULES of Civil and Criminal Procedure.
The President has original classification authority, which means he can classify or declassify anything and everything and he doesn’t need the approval of some minion to do it. The power of the Executive Branch flows from the President. Art 2, Sec 2 US Constitution. Trump’s alleged classified documents were stored in a locked Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility (SCIF) at Mar-a-Lago and guarded by Secret Service. How the Espionage Act can apply under these circumstances is ludicrous. Unlike Biden who had no authority as a Senator or VP to remove classified to his garage and wherever else he stored it.
Under the Presidential Records act the President is responsible for deciding which records he thinks are personal and ones he does not. It is not up to NARA, DOJ, FBI and any other swinging Richard to make that determination for him. Their job is to store the stuff and keep it stored until the President says people can look at it. Trump’s records are subject to FOIA release in 2026.
Under the Presidential Records Act (PRA), incumbent Presidents have exclusive responsibility for the custody and management of the Presidential records of their administration while in office. The National Archives and Records Administration has no formal role in how incumbent Presidents manage their records, except when the President proposes to dispose of records; instead, NARA provides guidance and counsel to incumbent Presidents and their designated officials, upon request. For more information, see: Presidential Records Act (PRA) of 1978.
THE POWER – UTTERLY, CATEGORICALLY AND EXCLUSIVELY
______________________________________________________
Article II, Section 1
The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America.
___________________________________________________________________
The President alone wields the executive branch power of classification, declassification, disposition, and archiving of materials.
The legislative branch has no legal basis to usurp any aspect, facet or degree of the power of the executive branch.
No legislation usurping the power of the executive branch is constitutional.
No legislation usurping the power of the executive branch to classify, declassify, dispose of, and archive material is constitutional.
You don’t even know what a SCIF is and MAL doesn’t have one. Why would he need a SCIF if the documents were declassified? What business did Trump have taking sensitive national security information to his home anyway after he was put out of office? Because he has already disclosed classified information, he doesn’t receive briefings that former Presidents get. If he had some right to possess these documents, why did he return some and lie about keeping others? Why did he direct Nauta to move boxes around so his lawyer couldn’t return them? If what you claim is true there would be a statute that says so- it there isn’t.
“You don’t even know what a SCIF is and MAL doesn’t have one. ”
SCIF: Sensitive compartmented information facility https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sensitive_compartmented_information_facility, and Yes, MAL can have one.
“Why would he need a SCIF if the documents were declassified? ”
Not relevant, he can decide whenever and what he wants as defined in the law.
“What business did Trump have taking sensitive national security information to his home anyway after he was put out of office? ”
Not relevant, is up to him.
“Because he has already disclosed classified information,”
That is your opinion, not a law or rule.
“he doesn’t receive briefings that former Presidents get. ”
And why exactly is that?
“If he had some right to possess these documents, why did he return some and lie about keeping others? ”
He can do whatever he want with those documents, so not relevant again..
“Why did he direct Nauta to move boxes around so his lawyer couldn’t return them?”
Again: that is up to him, he can even declassify them on the spot, something Biden cannot do.
“If what you claim is true there would be a statute that says so- it there isn’t.”
This is so stupid that I will not even bother to answer it.
Please stay factual.
Here’s just one little item: when a member of Congress enters a SCIF, they must divest themselves of their cell phone and any device that could record information. They can’t take note pads or anything else that could be used to record the classified information they are about to review. And there are no windows to which someone could attach a listening device. Everyone has seen the boxes of classified documents in the bathroom, on the stage and spilling out of a storage room. All kinds of people can and do go to MAL and could have gotten access to the boxes and their contents. Trump stole those documents because he wanted to feel important–a salve to his ego after getting rejected by the American people. He refused to return most of them because no one tells DJT what to do. When all else fails, lie about it and hide the documents, even from his own lawyer who had agreed to retrieve and return the remaining document. And, THAT’S why he got charged.
Another item: Trump discussed the location of our nuclear submarines and discussed their capabilities just to show off to some Austrailian billionaire. From ABC News:
“Donald Trump allegedly discussed potentially sensitive information about US nuclear submarines with an Australian billionaire, Anthony Pratt, three months after leaving office, according to a new report.
Citing a source with knowledge of the Australian’s account to investigators for the special counsel Jack Smith, US news outlet ABC News reported an “excited” Trump allegedly discussed “the supposed exact number of nuclear warheads [US submarines] routinely carry, and exactly how close they supposedly can get to a Russian submarine without being detected”.
THIS is why he doesn’t receive the former president briefings that Clinton, Bush and Obama receive–he cannot be trusted and his ego comes first–he just HAS to show off.