Trump indicted in classified documents case in Florida

a reply to: Threadbare

This is to funny. Trumps attorneys are arguing that the reason they need a delay, is due to the amount of sensitive and classified material.

Newsweek

a reply to: jrod

Nothing you Mentioned in that Post is TRUE.................Try Again .

a reply to: Idelb06

Is that all that they say or is that just a nice paraphrase? The reason they are asking about that is they want to review all evidence and have no surprises but, you did not include that in your post....did you?

Also, trying to tie Noriega to Trump is, damn, so laughable who ever wrote that article should be ashamed.

Man, the media are getting ultra creative now.

a reply to: matafuchs

The Left/Right Battle Continues...........The Right is getting a Little More Pissed Off by the Day I Imagine..........*)

The DOJ submitted their rebuttal to Trump's request to delay a trial until after the election. A few snippets:

As for the impact of the Presidential Records Act on this prosecution, any argument that it mandates dismissal of the Indictment or forms a defense to the charges here borders on frivolous. The PRA is not a criminal statute, and in no way purports to address the retention of national security information. The Defendants are, of course, free to make whatever arguments they like for dismissal of the Indictment, and the Government will respond promptly. But they should not be permitted to gesture at a baseless legal argument, call it “novel,” and then claim that the Court will require an indefinite continuance in order to resolve it.

Defendants’ alleged inability to use contract personnel to assist in unclassified document review is puzzling. They claim the reason is that “all the discovery materials are sensitive and high-profile,” (Resp. at 5) but discovery materials are sensitive in any criminal case, and courts routinely enter protective orders covering defense document reviewers. Magistrate Judge Reinhart entered such an Order here, with no opposition from the Defendants. ECF No. 27. The Order specifically authorizes disclosure to “persons employed to assist in the defense,” id. at 2, and Defendants offer no explanation of why they could not engage such personnel here.

The need for CIPA proceedings is also not a justification for a period of uncertain delay. The Government’s proposed CIPA schedule (Exhibit B to ECF No. 34) remains viable, even with the delay caused by counsel’s late submissions of their SF-86 Forms. Counsel will have almost two months to review the initial production of classified discovery before having to file any notices under CIPA Section 5. The two cases Defendants reference as examples of cases involving CIPA that had trial dates further from arraignment do not support their position.

DOJ filing pdf

a reply to: frogs453

As expected. There's no grounds or precedent to indefinitely postpone a trial.

a reply to: Threadbare

Yes,just wait for the ruling and see, I suppose.

originally posted by: Threadbare
a reply to: frogs453

As expected. There's no grounds or precedent to indefinitely postpone a trial.

If grounz and precedent were important to you, you wouldnt find yourself rooting for a demomstrably corrupt government

a reply to: jrod

Maybe its just me but calling another ATS member a 'pathetic Trump cultist' might be considered mud slinging?

a reply to: JinMI

If law and order were important to you, you wouldn't find yourself rooting for a demonstrably criminal former President.

originally posted by: Threadbare
a reply to: JinMI

If law and order were important to you, you wouldn't find yourself rooting for a demonstrably criminal former President.

Proof of your demonstration required.

Would you like to see the long history of my claim?

Sounds like the employee that helped Nauta move boxes and tried to flood the server room that stored the surveillance footage is going to be indicted soon.

Target letter to Trump Organization staffer signals new push in classified docs probe: Sources

a reply to: Threadbare

Trying to find someone else who will flip huh? Usually they do that BEFORE an indictment. They...have...nothing.

a reply to: Threadbare

A second employee has been notified they're a target.

originally posted by: matafuchs
a reply to: Threadbare

Trying to find someone else who will flip huh? Usually they do that BEFORE an indictment. They...have...nothing.

They did....

Jared and Ivanka were the MAGA moles in the WH; And are now working with the prosecution.


www.businessinsider.com...

The person....

The target letter is aimed at a low-level employee of Trump’s family business who had dealings at Mar-a-Lago, the former president’s Florida home and private club. The worker is not an executive or someone with significant decision-making authority, said the person, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss an ongoing investigation.

Link

Is this the guy who brought him his cheeseburgers?

a reply to: olaru12

Jared and Ivanka were the MAGA moles in the WH; And are now working with the prosecution.

Just because someone speculates something, doesn't make it true.

Good Lord

After this Biden Cocaine debauchery / keystone cop routine ... I wonder if they have Dna or Fingerprints on them there documents ... CSI in da house ?



hmmm

Judge Cannon has instructed lawyers to come prepared to discuss the trial date during tomorrow's Section 2 hearing.

a reply to: Threadbare

And the Georgia Supreme Court has DISMISSED Donald Trump’s petition that asked the high court to scrap Fani Willis’s investigation into efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 election in Georgia.

Bad Monday for the Donald.