Jump to content

Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty


Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, Gatorubet said:

My comment that he is fucked was really addressing the fact that I do not see the gist of the gag order being overturned. I could see them tweak it some.

Trumps lawyer may not have thought that answer through entirely. He is essentially arguing that you can corrupt the criminal justice process as long as you do it in a stump speech. I don’t think that is going to fly.

Agreed.  This incessant incantation of "core political speech" is not going to get them there.

One of the remarkable things, as usual, each side was given 20 minutes.  Somehow or other, Trump's side wound up lasting 70 minutes.  I didn't see what the government wound up getting, but the total was more than 2 hours.   Quite unusual.

For the peanut gallery, when you're doing oral argument, there's usually a pair of lights, green and red, up near the judges bench.  In the last few minutes, the red light starts blinking and when it turns full red, you usually stfu, but also answer any pending questions from the judges, they give you that.  Not sure how it bled into 70 minutes, but the judges obviously didn't do anything.

Edited by TwiceHorn
Posted
On 11/20/2023 at 12:35 PM, Biff Tannen said:

It's amazing how many people don't understand this.

They do. But they think that you're the traitor. For reasons.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted

Aileen Cannon is going to personally try and torpedo the Florida classified documents case by helping Trump slow-play the process past the election. If Trump wins, he'll shut that case down himself.

https://www.politico.com/news/2023/11/22/aileen-cannon-trump-trial-slow-00128391

Quote

Judge Aileen Cannon seems to be in no hurry.

On paper, she has scheduled a trial to open next May in the case charging Donald Trump with hoarding national security secrets at Mar-a-Lago.

An every day hoodie that you won't want to take off. The Mitch is made of a wool / cashmere blend that's breathable and super comfortable. The Mitch pairs extremely well with our Dos Jean and any of our Hangin' Out Polos. The 1/4 zip opening lets you easily slip in and out of the hoodie. The perf...

In reality, she has run the pretrial process at a leisurely pace that will make a postponement almost inevitable, according to experts on criminal prosecutions related to classified information.

Delaying Trump’s trial until after the November election would have a momentous implication: It might mean the trial never happens at all. If Trump wins the election and the case is still pending, he’s expected to order the Justice Department to shut it down.

Even a shorter delay would be fraught: Pushing the trial into the summer or fall could run headlong into the Republican National Convention or the heart of the general election campaign.

For now, Cannon, a Trump-appointed federal district judge in Florida, is officially sticking with the May 20 trial date she announced four months ago. She even recently denied Trump’s bid to push it back. But in a series of more technical rulings, Cannon has postponed key pretrial deadlines, and she has added further slack into the schedule simply by taking her time to resolve some fairly straightforward matters.

“It could be seen as a stealth attempt to delay the ultimate trial date without actually announcing that yet,” said Brian Greer, a former Central Intelligence Agency attorney.

“There’s pretty much no chance they could go to trial on May 20 with the current schedule,” he added.

David Aaron, a former DOJ national security prosecutor, agreed, saying a May 20 trial is unlikely “unless a lot of discipline is imposed.”

Early delays in a complex case

The case would not be a simple one for any judge to manage. Trump is charged with retaining classified documents at his Florida estate after he left the White House and then impeding the government’s effort to retrieve the records. Because much of the evidence in the case is classified, a 1980 law known as the Classified Information Procedures Act, or CIPA, governs how that evidence should be handled.

Most federal judges outside the Washington area rarely encounter CIPA cases, and Cannon isn’t known to have handled one before Trump’s. She has already lamented some of the practical complications surrounding this one. A facility to store classified information near the southern Florida courthouse she has designated for the trial isn’t expected to be ready until early next year, the judge said during a Nov. 1 hearing.

Other delays are more substantive. Last month, after prosecutors in special counsel Jack Smith’s office ran into difficulties making a small amount of evidence in the case available to Trump and his lawyers due to what the government says is its extremely sensitive nature, Cannon suspended the deadlines for motions related to classified information.

She took more than five weeks to hold a hearing on Trump’s request for a new schedule and nine days more after that to issue a new one. And when she did finally set a new schedule, she put off the deadline for many pretrial motions by nearly 16 weeks.

“She’s certainly taken her time to litigate things,” Greer said.

Last week, prosecutors tried to jump-start the case by asking Cannon to give defense lawyers a Dec. 18 deadline to file most of their requests to use classified information at trial. The next day, before any of the defense attorneys had even responded, Cannon denied the request and said she doesn’t plan to set such a deadline until March 1.

“The signals are of a court that is proceeding slowly and methodically through the process,” said Brandon Van Grack, a former national security prosecutor who also was part of special counsel Robert Mueller’s team. “In order to have a trial by May, the court would just need to push the parties on a tighter deadline.”

At a hearing earlier this month, Cannon said prosecutors pressing for a faster schedule in the case were being unrealistic about the complications involved.

“I’m just having a hard time seeing how realistically this work can be accomplished in this compressed period of time, given the realities that we’re facing,” Cannon said.

A clash of legal and political calendars

Cannon’s approach stands in stark contrast with her counterpart in Washington, Judge Tanya Chutkan, who is overseeing the other federal criminal case against Trump. (Trump faces separate state-level criminal charges in Georgia and New York.)

The case in Washington, involving Trump’s efforts to interfere with the 2020 election results, is scheduled for trial in March — and Chutkan, an Obama appointee, has seemed determined to stick with that timeline. She has repeatedly insisted that she will not, and cannot, consider Trump’s political schedule as she sets deadlines for the case.

Cannon, in contrast, has so far danced around the issue of whether Trump should get any deference in scheduling because of his status as a presidential candidate. But those questions may soon become impossible to dodge.

The classified documents trial is expected to last for weeks or longer. If the May 20 start date proves infeasible, the trial could risk overlapping with the Republican convention, set to open July 15 in Milwaukee.

“Could she try to squeeze it in before that? Maybe, but I doubt she’d do that,” Greer said.

Delaying it until August, September or October would open its own can of worms, assuming Trump wins the GOP nomination. The political stakes would be white hot, as Trump would be sidelined from the campaign trail to attend a trial on charges that carry decades of potential prison time.

But pushing the trial until after the election might be the most controversial move of all. It would set up the chance for Trump to avoid the trial altogether by winning the election, because as president he could appoint an attorney general willing to fire the special counsel and drop the charges. Trump might even be able to pardon himself.

Many Trump critics are already deeply skeptical of Cannon. Before he was even indicted, she sided with Trump on issues related to the materials that investigators seized from Mar-a-Lago. A federal appeals court quickly blocked part of Cannon’s order and later overturned the rest of it.

“Judge Cannon’s bias is showing over and over again,” former Mueller deputy Andrew Weissmann wrote last week on X, formerly known as Twitter, declaring the judge to be “in the bag for Trump.”

Cannon is surely aware of the suspicion about her in some quarters. That has led some lawyers to conclude she may already know the trial is unlikely to start in May, but sees no reason at the moment to ignite the firestorm she would face if she puts it off.

Whatever Cannon’s motivations, there’s little dispute that she and prosecutors have very different views of the urgency of getting the case to trial.

“The Department of Justice is trying to do everything in its power ahead of trial to move as expeditiously as possible,” Van Grack said. “And the court is just reluctant to or resistant to any efforts to expedite the process.”

More delays on the horizon

Other significant pretrial showdowns are lurking in the case, all of which may cause further delays, attorneys warn.

One almost certain clash is over Trump’s plan to ask the judge to force prosecutors to gather more evidence that the defense thinks might be relevant to the case, like files from the National Archives and Records Administration, which manages presidential records. The Justice Department’s probe into Trump’s retention of classified records after his presidency kicked off after NARA notified the department that it was missing many records.

If any of that additional evidence is classified, the parties and the judge may have to go through multiple rounds of litigation about what portions can be used at the trial.

Another layer of complexity: Trump is not the only defendant in the case. His personal aide, Walter Nauta, and a Mar-a-Lago facilities manager, Carlos de Oliveira, are also charged for allegedly helping Trump conceal the records and other evidence from investigators.

“With three defendants all having the opportunity to make motions, it could be that at least one of the defense teams decides to move to use a lot of classified information as evidence,” Aaron said.

Prosecutors are also likely to ask Cannon to allow special procedures at the trial itself, potentially proposing a procedure called the “silent witness rule” to try to admit some evidence without it being shown or read out in court. Sometimes witnesses testifying about classified matters even appear in disguise or are obscured from the public by a divider placed in the courtroom.

Trump, his co-defendants and members of the media will likely oppose such measures, leading to more litigation. This can put the government to a choice — sometimes called graymail — between making secrets public and abandoning a prosecution or part of it.

“There are valid reasons [to object] from a press perspective and a defense perspective, but it also does provide an opportunity for mischief by the defense as part of the graymail problem that CIPA is supposed to thwart,” Aaron said. “CIPA will thwart the graymail problem, but that does sometimes take time.”

 

Posted
5 minutes ago, C-Man said:

Aileen Cannon is going to personally try and torpedo the Florida classified documents case by helping Trump slow-play the process past the election. If Trump wins, he'll shut that case down himself.

image.gif.58e9e5023e01ce9ba9750457380c7d35.gif

  • Rage+1 2
Posted

I would think that when the front runner for President of the United States is accused of a shitload of extremely serious crimes, it's probably best to get that trial squeezed in prior to the, you know, presidential election. That is still a year away. But hey, not a lawyer or judge.

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 2
Posted

All those little random parties at the bottom of a presidential ballot.  Some of them just need 10k signatures in one state to get on a proper ballot.  In this digital age, you can have a targeted campaign to get that many signatures for less than $50k.  Which means you can’t be tried for a federal crime because you’re running for federal office.  And $50k is a fuckton less than it costs for good defense lawyers and appeal for attempting to overthrow the U.S. elections and government.  
 

this precedent gonna be fucking lit

  • Fuck Around and Find Out 2
Posted
41 minutes ago, C-Man said:

But I was assured that wasn't going to happen by Surly law-dogs.

200w.gif

You guys always like to attribute positions to us that we never took or said.     Post a quote where I said that.  

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
47 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

Just the one law-dog, actually.

 

29 minutes ago, Gatorubet said:

You guys always like to attribute positions to us that we never took or said.     Post a quote where I said that.  

Probably was just the one but I didn't want to mention his name.

Posted
27 minutes ago, C-Man said:

 

Probably was just the one but I didn't want to mention his name.

Nor did I ever say such a thing. 

As acknowledged in the article, the case is turning into a furball because of all the classified shit.  Even a good unbiased judge would probably have trouble keeping this on track.  That said, she had the opportunity to move the trial date at Trump's request and declined to do so.

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 1
Posted
16 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

Agreed.  This incessant incantation of "core political speech" is not going to get them there.

One of the remarkable things, as usual, each side was given 20 minutes.  Somehow or other, Trump's side wound up lasting 70 minutes.  I didn't see what the government wound up getting, but the total was more than 2 hours.   Quite unusual.

For the peanut gallery, when you're doing oral argument, there's usually a pair of lights, green and red, up near the judges bench.  In the last few minutes, the red light starts blinking and when it turns full red, you usually stfu, but also answer any pending questions from the judges, they give you that.  Not sure how it bled into 70 minutes, but the judges obviously didn't do anything.

I listened to the whole to the whole thing.  It lasted that long because the judges (particularly the  women) grilled the fuck out of Trump’s lawyer (and the a lesser degree the state’s).  At one point she was literally reading word for word back to Trump’s lawyer one of the cases they cited and explaining to him how it doesn’t say what they claim it says.  

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted

It’s truly awesome, and it reflects exactly how Trumpworld thinks. I mean…asset valuation is literally ONLY about “numbers,” as a matter of law, but Trumpworld can just opt out of that….”I feel like it also has great value, magnificent value, the best value…a value of fliggety floogety.” We live in a post-reality, post-truth world. And it’s fucking insane.
Posted
21 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

Nor did I ever say such a thing. 

As acknowledged in the article, the case is turning into a furball because of all the classified shit.  Even a good unbiased judge would probably have trouble keeping this on track.  That said, she had the opportunity to move the trial date at Trump's request and declined to do so.

You say that like she can’t move his trial date in the future.

Posted
47 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

You say that like she can’t move his trial date in the future.

Of course she can, but while we are wildly speculating, why don't we look at what is actually happening. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
1 hour ago, TwiceHorn said:

Of course she can, but while we are wildly speculating, why don't we look at what is actually happening. 

Sure, let's look at her extensive pattern of behaving exactly like you would expect a Trump lackey whom he has paid off to behave, rather than a serious federal judge. You can't seriously think that it's "wild speculation" to think she'll delay the trial date. It's not like there's nothing to reasonably base that belief on.  

You seem to see it as your duty to defend her (apparently as the most laughably stupid and incompetent judge to ever sit the bench) since nobody else here will, and that's obviously up to you, but don't act as if there aren't many good reasons for intelligent people who know the legal profession (either as lawyers or more-than-casual observers) to think she's in the tank for Trump.

  • Fuck You 1
  • Drool 1
Posted

Numbers don’t represent worth?  He realizes this changes everything from not just real estate valuations, but mathematics as a whole and Arabic numbers.  Roman Numerals Jihad!!!

  • Like 1
Posted
46 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

Sure, let's look at her extensive pattern of behaving exactly like you would expect a Trump lackey whom he has paid off to behave, rather than a serious federal judge. You can't seriously think that it's "wild speculation" to think she'll delay the trial date. It's not like there's nothing to reasonably base that belief on.  

You seem to see it as your duty to defend her (apparently as the most laughably stupid and incompetent judge to ever sit the bench) since nobody else here will, and that's obviously up to you, but don't act as if there aren't many good reasons for intelligent people who know the legal profession (either as lawyers or more-than-casual observers) to think she's in the tank for Trump.

Please stop shitting up the thread with this fuckery.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted
Numbers don’t represent worth?  He realizes this changes everything from not just real estate valuations, but mathematics as a whole and Arabic numbers.  Roman Numerals Jihad!!!

Whatever happened to Numbers? I know it's the wrong thread, but still. ?
Posted
On 11/22/2023 at 2:40 PM, coachherman'sgrill said:

And granted, the tapes themselves are uh... you own them, alright? But the magic that is on those tapes, that fucking heart and soul that we put onto those tapes, that is ours and you don't own that! Now I need to take that magic and get it over the record company. And they're waiting for us, we were supposed to be there a half hour ago. We look like assholes, man!

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Posted
3 hours ago, wildcat09 said:

Sure, let's look at her extensive pattern of behaving exactly like you would expect a Trump lackey whom he has paid off to behave, rather than a serious federal judge. You can't seriously think that it's "wild speculation" to think she'll delay the trial date. It's not like there's nothing to reasonably base that belief on.  

You seem to see it as your duty to defend her (apparently as the most laughably stupid and incompetent judge to ever sit the bench) since nobody else here will, and that's obviously up to you, but don't act as if there aren't many good reasons for intelligent people who know the legal profession (either as lawyers or more-than-casual observers) to think she's in the tank for Trump.

We really don't have to belabor this any more. 

Posted (edited)
On 11/22/2023 at 11:45 AM, Red Five said:

I would think that when the front runner for President of the United States is accused of a shitload of extremely serious crimes, it's probably best to get that trial squeezed in prior to the, you know, presidential election. That is still a year away. But hey, not a lawyer or judge.

When it comes to indictments while in office, he's president and gets special treatment. When he is taken down to the hoosegow for printing and processing, he gets the special treatment because he's an ex-president. When he's accused of crimes that threaten the security of the US, he doesn't get incarcerated to disable his ability to plot against the US or just sell us out, well, we all know that it's a big unprecedented step to jail an ex-president. 

Now, when it comes to trial where the charges represent profound threats to the US and its democratic processes, he's a regular Joe and nothing special can be done. Judges can delay or just allow the grinding slow process work out the way it does for everyone. Unprecedented alleged criminal activities performed by an ex-president cannot be prioritized.

This scoundrel incites followers to intimidate witnesses and representatives of the law, he can't be put in jail because we just don't do that to ex-presidents.

It just seems crazier and crazier that all of this is going on, and there is no general response to this malefactor for all sorts of alarming reasons.

  • Most people don't care enough to pay close attention.
  • Those paying attention and who oppose Trump do not recognize the paradigm shift that makes this remarkably outside the bounds of traditional conflicts thus they do not adjust their own actions to fit the new paradigm.
  • Those supporting Trump are astonishingly immune to reason or truth. They embrace the new paradigm. Enemies are to be destroyed because they are vermin socialist fellow citizens who endanger the soul of this, the greatest country the world has ever known.

In summary, execution may be the best way to go.

Edited by RomaVicta
  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 4
Posted
On 11/23/2023 at 6:49 PM, Fastbreak said:

How is he allowed to travel to Argentina?

Well, he obviously doesn't have the same kind of pre-trial restrictions as an ordinary Joe.

Largely because he doesn't pose a flight risk.

And if he flees, who gives a fuck?  That might be the best possible outcome.  If he doesn't get extradited back, yay.  If he does, he goes directly to jail, yay.

Posted
5 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Well, he obviously doesn't have the same kind of pre-trial restrictions as an ordinary Joe.

Largely because he doesn't pose a flight risk.

And if he flees, who gives a fuck?  That might be the best possible outcome.  If he doesn't get extradited back, yay.  If he does, he goes directly to jail, yay.

You sure about this?  Seems like the guy gets a lot of largely unprecedented concessions.

  • Rage+1 1
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, jimmyjazz said:

You sure about this?  Seems like the guy gets a lot of largely unprecedented concessions.

Once you establish yourself as a flight risk, nay, a flat-out bail jumper, there's no more benefit of the doubt.  Do not pass go, do not collect $200, do not stump the Iowa Caucus.

Go. Directly. To.  Jail.

Edited by TwiceHorn
Posted
Just now, TwiceHorn said:

Once you establish yourself as a flight risk, there's no more benefit of the doubt.  Do not pass go, do not collect $200, do not stump the Iowa Caucus.

Go. Directly. To.  Jail.

You'll excuse me if I'm (literally) from Missouri on this one.

Posted
1 minute ago, jimmyjazz said:

You'll excuse me if I'm (literally) from Missouri on this one.

Trump's "bail" has worked how bail really should work.  Is he really a flight risk? No.  Is he so violent as to pose an imminent threat to the community?  No.

Of course for a variety of reasons, the bail decision now takes into account a lot of frankly bullshit factors that keep people behind bars to destroy their lives and hamper their defense/coerce a plea bargain.  It's straight-up pre-conviction punishment, no more, no less.

 

  • Rage+1 1
Posted
6 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

Trump's "bail" has worked how bail really should work.  Is he really a flight risk? No.  Is he so violent as to pose an imminent threat to the community?  No.

Of course for a variety of reasons, the bail decision now takes into account a lot of frankly bullshit factors that keep people behind bars to destroy their lives and hamper their defense/coerce a plea bargain.  It's straight-up pre-conviction punishment, no more, no less.

 

Whoa there. Why does he himself have to be violent in order to pose an imminent threat to the community? Was Charles Manson not a threat to the community? 

  • Hook 'Em 4
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Hookah Horns said:

Whoa there. Why does he himself have to be violent in order to pose an imminent threat to the community? Was Charles Manson not a threat to the community? 

Bail is to secure attendance at trials and hearings.  The rest of it is mostly bullshit, pre-conviction pre-crime.

If someone is to be detained on grounds other than flight risk, they need to be a drooling, incorrigible violent criminal.

That's how bail should work, anyway.  Not how it often does.

Edited by TwiceHorn


×
×
  • Create New...