No Special Master?

[msc545]

A federal appeals court panel on Thursday halted an outside review of thousands of documents seized from former president Donald Trump’s Florida residence, ruling that a lower-court judge was wrong to appoint an expert to decide whether any of the material should be shielded from criminal investigators.

What do you think?

[Anonymous]

The 4th amendment is pretty clear:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Clear probable cause. warrant issued, evidence of crimes seized. What part of that is confusing to conservatives?

[goaded]

It was a clear case of a judge doing what the person who appointed them to a lifetime position wanted. Corrupt to the core. But it's delayed the case for a month or two.

[Anonymous]

The federal appeals judges on the left have to get as much information exposed before the Supreme Court shuts it down.

[BeMuse]

Either all the documents were declassified already and open for anyone in the public to see at will, thus no special master is needed and there is no case to be had against Trump thus the raid was all bullshit, or the federal appeals court is in violation of their oath and subject to arrest for sedition by the military and soon to face a military tribunal.

[slatyb]

The judge who appointed the special matter was a Trump appointee of low reputation.

[exitseven]

yes, lets not have an expert review the documents before we let the crooked DOJ look at them. It is a good thing that there is nothing there but a couple of old issues of Time Magazine, a letter from Kim Jong Un and some of Milania's used underwear. Even if they do find something it will be hard to show that it wasn't planted by the FBI since they kicked out everyone during their raud so nobody knows what they did. It is just a show to try and keep Trump from running again anyway.

[goaded]

Do you think anyone believes that sort of nonsense?

Trump took documents belonging to the government and lied about having given them back. They included documents so secret they weren't supposed to have left the room they were kept in.

[exitseven]

@goaded No, Trump took documents from his administration like all presidents do. He declassified them before he left office. Hr broke no laws. He put them in a locked room until they could all be sorted out like other presidents have done. The raid on his house will turn up nothing.

[msc545]

@exitseven Trump is not entitled to special treatment despite what he and his followers might think. No point in encouraging his symptoms.

[goaded]

I don't know who's telling you all these lies. Presidents leave documents to the National Archives, then request the ones they want to put in their library. They are never currently important to national security, let alone highly classified ones.

Trump was asked for the documents back. He gave some back and pretended that he didn't have any more. That's obstruction of justice. If he'd had the documents legally, and if the DoJ didn't have probable cause to believe he'd held some back, the FBI would not have been granted a warrant for the search. The search that turned up boxes of stolen documents that Trump had claimed not to have.

Trump's lawyers have never claimed in court that any of those stolen documents were declassified, because it's a crime to lie to the court and they could be punished. They could not prove to the special master that any of them had been declassified. They wouldn't even try. www.rawstory.com/trump-court-documents-hearing/

[exitseven]

He just wants to be treated like Obama was.

[goaded]

But Obama didn't steal loads of sensitive documents and not give them back. Why should Trump be treated like someone who didn't break the law?

[exitseven]

@goaded Obama stole millions of documents and instead of putting him in prison he is building a library in Chicago where the stolen documents will reside.

[goaded]

No he didn't. There's a process. It goes something like this: The government gets the documents, the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) handles them, the ex-president requests documents to go in their library, NARA checks the documents to make sure they're appropriate and, if so, release them to the care of the presidential library.

Your theory is that me taking $100 from your wallet is just the same as you lending me $100. I doubt you'd think that.

Trump took things that the archive would never have released to any ex-president, kept some of them in his desk, then he lied to the FBI about having them.

[exitseven]

@goaded He gave back what they asked for. They told him to install a better door and lock and he completely. He told them anytime they wanted to come back for more it was okay. Just admit this is a show. Clearly the democrats are grasping at straws. They really do not have a very strong hand and with Republicans in the house their stock is getting ready to drop.

[goaded]

No he didn't! If he'd done that there wouldn't have been a search, or it wouldn't have found anything! There was, and it did.

Why would he have said "anytime they wanted to come back for more it was okay", when he'd claimed there wasn't any more?

[AngryCarl]

The correct decision, a long time coming. Judge Aileen Cannon was wrong to exercise jurisdiction in the first place. She should be censured.

[joeldalton]

so you're the one still holding out hope on these documents? lol.

[exitseven]

Hahahaha

[FilmGuy93]

That ruling doesn’t make any sense to me. Especially considering the track record of who they appointed as the special master. There’s no logical reason for the court to have not appointed a special master.

[goaded]

Yes there was. There's no legal reason Trump should be treated any differently from anyone else under the law.

[FilmGuy93]

@goaded that wouldn’t be “different” under the law. The purpose of the special master was to ensure equitable treatment under the law.

[msc545]

The logical reason is that Trump is not entitled to any special treatment although he thinks he is.

[goaded]

Nobody else would have been appointed a special master in that situation. There is literally no precedent for it in American justice. Trump's lawyers admitted as much.

[FilmGuy93]

@goaded the entire situation is unprecedented. The idea that this situation wouldn’t call for special treatment by it’s very nature is a joke

[goaded]

It's not unprecedented. People have unlawfully kept government documents before. People have lied to the FBI before. The only difference is that the criminal happens to have been president before he committed these particular crimes. He could have just apologised and given them back in 2021, and none of this would have happened.

[FilmGuy93]

@goaded trump was working with the FBI in determining the proper way to store the documents before the investigation happened

[goaded]

No he wasn't, he'd already told the feds that he'd returned everything. Why would they still be talking about it after that?

[FilmGuy93]

@goaded Yes, he was. Here is a PBS timeline of the raid: www.pbs.org/.../a-timeline-of-events-leading-up-to-the-fbi-search-of-trumps-florida-estate

The reason the FBI is conducting business this way is because the FBI has a long history of being an extremely corrupt organization. www.abc.net.au/.../8533382

[goaded]

That timeline is from shortly after the (very productive) search, and is missing a lot of information that's been learned since. Check out what happened in June, from this timeline, which is only a couple of weeks newer. **Emphasis** added.

www.usnews.com/.../a-timeline-of-the-investigation-into-trumps-mar-a-lago-docs

"June 3, 2022

Three FBI agents and a DOJ attorney went to Mar-a-Lago to collect additional material offered by a Trump attorney in response to the subpoena. They were given “a single Redweld envelope...

During the visit, the filing said, “Counsel for the former President offered no explanation as to why boxes of government records, including 38 documents with classification markings, remained at the Premises nearly five months after the production of the Fifteen Boxes and nearly one-and-a-half years after the end of the Administration.”

Trump’s lawyers also told investigators that ***all of the records*** that had come from the White House were stored in one location — a Mar-a-Lago storage room. ..."

The Justice Department was also given a signed certification letter stating that a “diligent search” had been completed and that ***no documents remained***."

"June 8, 2022

The Justice Department sent a letter to Trump’s lawyer requesting that the storage room be secured, and that “all of the boxes that were moved from the White House to Mar-a-Lago (along with any other items in that room) be preserved in that room in their current condition until farther notice.”"

Guess what? When the search was executed, it turned out that Trump's lawyers had lied about there being no remaining documents, and the documents hadn't been stored as demanded.

Complaining that the FBI is corrupt when there's so much evidence of criminal activity by Trump is a joke.

[FilmGuy93]

@goaded Yikes. My man. Stick to German political issues. None of what you wrote is evidence of anything outside of the fact that Trump and the FBI *might* disagree about what constitutes proper storage.

And the FBI's corruption is beyond question. It's actually widely understood by the American public that the FBI is corrupt as all hell.

[goaded]

OMG. You do understand that it's illegal just to posess those documents, let alone obstruct justice by lying about having them? Trump was literally caught red-handed with the stolen goods.

[FilmGuy93]

@goaded I understand that it's illegal to possess confidential and top secret documents. I understand that it's illegal to prevent copies of those documents from going into the National Archives, but it's not clear that that's actually what's happened. As stated in the above posted timeline; Trump was working in collaboration with the FBI and National Archives to ensure proper handling of the documents.

So, in the event that a crime actually takes place and the people are deprived of their property; Trump should be punished. But until the time comes that we actually know Trump was caught red-handed with stolen anything, we should probably stop acting like his guilt has actually been decided.

[goaded]

So you understand the laws he broke, but you think it's acceptable to keep hold of stolen goods while you lie about having them to the authorities?

How can you possibly say "until the time comes that we actually know Trump was caught red-handed with stolen anything", when that's exactly what the search turned up? We know that. It's a fact that there were still documents there that shouldn't have been there and it's a fact that Trump's lawyers told the DoJ that there weren't any more.

And, since there was supposedly nothing to negotiate over, clearly Trump wasn't negotiating any more, he was obstructing justice. You can't negotiate the return of something you supposedly don't have.

[FilmGuy93]

@goaded I understand the law. I do not understand that he broke those laws, and if this was about anyone other than Trump, you'd say exactly what I'm saying.

[goaded]

No, I wouldn't, because anyone caught by a lawful FBI search with government documents they weren't entitled to have (like Trump was) would be clearly guilty. They'd also be rapidly tried, convicted, and usually sent to prison.

[exitseven]

@FilmGuy93. Exactly

[goaded]

@exitseven You're both judging me by your own low standards.

What happened to John Edwards and Al Franken, whose transgressions were far less than Trump's, Jordan's, and Moore's?

[FilmGuy93]

@goaded I believe that people should be punished for crimes they actually commit

[goaded]

Good. Trump actually committed several.

[FilmGuy93]

@goaded and yet somehow the proof is just never quite anywhere close to there.

[goaded]

What? The actual physical documents that he stole aren't proof? The lies he told about not having any of those documents aren't proof?

[FilmGuy93]

@goaded not hose particular documents, and not of the crime he is being accused of, no.

[exitseven]

@goaded He did not steal anything. He brought many documents from his administration like many other presidents have done. All this hysteria about nuclear launch codes and CIA agents are just democrap BS that the CNN just parroted ad nauseum. This will end up in thje same way as Russian collision, the Ukraine phone call and all the other ridiculous things the democrats have accused Trump of doing. It will end up just another big dry hole.

[goaded]

@exitseven "He did not steal anything" Then how did he come to be in posession of documents that belong to the government and he'd lied about possessing?

There's a process. It goes something like this: The government gets the documents, the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) handles them, the ex-president requests documents to go in their library, NARA checks the documents to make sure they're appropriate and, if so, release them to the care of the presidential library.

Trump didn't bother with all that and just stole documents he would never have been allowed to have.

[goaded]

@Filmguy93 "not [those] particular documents, and not of the crime he is being accused of, no."
He's not yet been indicted, but they're definitely proof that he mishandled sensitive documents (they don't have to be classified, under the laws underlying the search warrant), and the lies are definitely proof of obstruction of justice.

[FilmGuy93]

@goaded begging the question of whether there are sensitive documents isn’t the same as proof that there are sensitive documents. And he would have needed to know or have had reason to know the documents were sensitive for that to be a lie.

This whole thing is just a stretch dude

[goaded]

The documents included details of a foreign government's nuclear capabilities, documents likely to uncover spies working for the US, and more. And he didn't claim to not have any more sensitive documents, he claimed he didn't have any more government documents, which is obviously a lie because they were seized in the search.

I really don't see how you cannot comprehend what is directly in front of your nose.

[FilmGuy93]

@goaded because those things didn’t happen. We don’t know what was in the documents pulled out of Mar a Lago. The nuclear code thing was some dumbass journalist running his/her mouth. We have no idea the contents of those documents.

[goaded]

Journalists speculating is one thing, the fact that the documents included nuclear secrets of another nation is a documented fact. "Iran’s missile program, U. S. intelligence work aimed at China were among the most sensitive material seized by the FBI, people familiar with the matter say"

[FilmGuy93]

@goaded lmfao do you know how they find “people familiar with the matter?” They go to the alley way beside the office and offer a homeless man whisky. “People familiar with the matter” is Journalist shorthand for “some asshole who gave me a comment.”

[goaded]

Bullshit. Keep denying the facts, if you want, but it just shows you're unreasonable.

[FilmGuy93]

@goaded no, what it shows is that I’m a trained Journalist who knows what he’s talking about. I swear, talking to you anti-Trump people is like trying to explain a joke to someone that everyone else is in on.

[goaded]

Again, bullshit. Did the search of Mar-a-lago turn up multiple documents owned by the government? Does a president have the right to take documents owned by the government away with him when he leaves office?

The only true answers are "yes" and "no". Anything else is simply lying.

[FilmGuy93]

@goaded think what I’m saying is bullshit? Fine. You’re about to get an education, buddy.

[goaded]

I notice you didn't answer the questions. Did the search of Mar-a-lago turn up multiple documents owned by the government? Does a president have the right to take documents owned by the government away with him when he leaves office?

The only true answers are "yes" and "no". Anything else is simply lying.

[FilmGuy93]

@goaded I’ve already answered your questions ad nauseam

[exitseven]

@FilmGuy93 yes it is exactly like that. Maybe because all they watch is MSNBC

[goaded]

I'm still waiting for that "education" you promised me. I mean, Trump himself says he took the documents.

[FilmGuy93]

@goaded I've told you multiple times, and you don't believe me. Just watch how the situation unfolds.

[goaded]

You've told me things that are not true, starting with "There’s no logical reason for the court to have not appointed a special master."; the three Republican nominated judges on the appeals court disagree with you and Judge Cannon.

[FilmGuy93]

@goaded and they (and you) are entitled to their opinions, but that doesn’t mean they are right. Judges’ rulings often have very little to do with the law; you learn that in law school.

[goaded]

They're judges on a federal appeals court, you're a nobody on the internet. I'll take their legally binding decision over your fantasies.

[FilmGuy93]

@goaded like I said; you’ll learn soon

[goaded]

I don't think you ever will.

[Anonymous]

What I think, is that leftists are probably afraid a outside review might prove them wrong.

[goaded]

The DoJ has already established that they were government documents, and that Trump lied about having them, adding obstruction of justice on top of the theft.

[Opinion Owner]

@goaded I simplybanswered the question "What do you think?" Regarding the halting of a outside review.
I also think that if Trump ends up being found guilty, I will do leftists the favor of reminding them of how corrupt they think the justice system is and that each and every person who ends up happy about that guilty verdict is a true supporter of corruption, and not someone worth supporting.

[AngryCarl]

Well most of the documents belong to the government. If Trump mixed them up with personal documents and they got seized during a lawful search that is on him. He will get them back when the Feds are done with them.

[goaded]

"if Trump ends up being found guilty, I will do leftists the favor of reminding them of how corrupt they think the justice system is and that each and every person who ends up happy about that guilty verdict is a true supporter of corruption, and not someone worth supporting."

The evidence of corruption in the justice system includes the fact that powerful people get away with crimes that normal people would be locked away for in a heartbeat. Celebrating a solitary exception to that rule is nothing like declaring that the system as a whole is not corrupt. I mean, it's taken two years to even get to this point, and people have been imprisoned for taking a couple of confidential documents home to work on.

[Jamie05rhs]

Sounds like a cover-up.

[msc545]

what cover-up?

[Jamie05rhs]

An internal cover-up within the FBI.

[msc545]

Evidence?

[Jamie05rhs]

@msc545 How the f would I have evidence of internal workings at the FBI? I'm not a Fed. FFS, man.

[Jamie05rhs]

Why did you ask your question (the original post)?

[msc545]

I wanted to know what people thought. However, I was not contemplating very unlikely answers from very intelligent people such as yourself.

[Jamie05rhs]

@msc545 Tell me honestly: Do you not believe that my theory is possible?

I value your opinion.

[msc545]

Anything is possible. Perhaps space aliens are responsible - that too is possible. You need to calculate probabilities, not possibilities.

[Jamie05rhs]

@msc545 Lol. Okay- let me put it to you this way: What would be the incentive of the government objecting to the Special Master?

[msc545]

Probably because of the delay it creates.

[Jamie05rhs]

@msc545 In the field of criminal justice, delays are never an issue. In fact, our American system of government was specifically set up to guard the rights of the accused.

[msc545]

That's fine. Funny how people reference the delays Trump has been able to create in the past.

[Jamie05rhs]

Well, lucky for him he's rich, so he has good lawyers. As we all know, not everyone is that privileged.

[msc545]

I am not sure his lawyers are all that good.

[Jamie05rhs]

@msc545 Touché. At least Guiliani was not.