today’s outcome just makes Judge Loose Cannon look even worse than she already did honestly, her ruling was so bad and so prejudiced, she should be removed from the bench and barred from being a judge this especially stuck out to me from the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals “It is indeed extraordinary for a warrant to be executed at the home of a former president – but not in a way that affects our legal analysis or otherwise gives the judiciary license to interfere in an ongoing investigation,” the court said. To create that “special exception,” the 11th Circuit wrote “would defy our Nation’s foundational principle that our law applies ‘to all, without regard to numbers, wealth, or rank.’” even tho this is really all bullsh*t and there is obviously a different set or rules that is played when it comes to justice, it’s nice of them to at least keep up the charade that the law is applied equally if there were just a few more Aileen Cannons out there willing to throw all established case law and precedent out the window, this country would really be fcked
This is why the GOP has been so focused on changing the courts. Aileen Connor repressents many judges confirmed with little or no experience but who's main qualification was ideological.
I am a little surprised at how many Trump appointed judges aren’t willing to go along with the BS when he or 1 of his lackeys shows up in court…I’d have assumed he’d have appointed a lot more unqualified crazies who have no shame like Cannon
Many of the judges appointed to higher up positions such as Appellate and USSC do understand that there are legal principles involved. While they may may go to great lengths to address ideological issues like abortion even they understand that making specific exceptions like Judge Cannon did to benefit Trump is going too far.
Even partisan judges understand legal precedent that can be used in the court of law for the other side as well. Had Cannon been able to get away with what she was trying, it could be used by essentially any lawyer in any case in some way. So partisan 11th circuit judges shouldn’t necessarily be praised for a bout of ethical courage. They are just doing what they can to protect the powers of the judiciary that they enjoy on the prosecutions they personally care about.
Trump's attorneys say no classified documents at Trump Tower, but find more in storage shed Does Trump own a van down by the river? Asking for a friend.
A storage shed, really? Most people would keep a lawn mower or a weed eater in there but the former President of the United States keeps classified documents. These grand juries need to finish up and he needs to be appropriately charged already...it's about 6 years too late but better late than never.
How sloppy is this guy? He’s had months to cover his tracks when it comes to any other classified or top secret documents he may have
I look forward to our republican posters stating these are just McDonalds receipts and we shouldn't make a big deal about it.
Someone on here was pushing the nonsense theory that some of the classified documents could just b Christmas cards. Trump probably plans to reuse it for the holiday season
The U.S. Government Keeps Too Many Secrets American officials classify too much information, from the trivial to the politically inconvenient. The overreliance on secrecy invites abuse. https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2019/10/us-government-has-secrecy-problem/599380/ excerpt: Even U.S. intelligence officials have complained about the overclassification problem. “Everything’s secret,” Michael Hayden, the former director of the CIA and NSA, once lamented. “I mean, I got an email saying, ‘Merry Christmas.’ It carried a Top Secret NSA classification marking.” more at the link. The Hayden anecdote is found in: Obama admits that ‘Top Secret’ is not always so secret https://www.cjr.org/criticism/obama_admits_that_top_secret_is_not_always_so_secret.php excerpt: DURING AN INTERVIEW with Fox News on Sunday, President Obama–perhaps inadvertently–exposed the US classification system for what it really is: completely arbitrary and utterly broken. In the process, he described the hypocritical nature of his administration’s approach to secrecy. “There’s classified, and then there’s classified,” the president told Fox News anchor Chris Wallace in response to a question about the now-classified material on Hillary Clinton’s private email server from when she was Secretary of State. Obama continued: “There’s stuff that is really top-secret Top Secret, and there’s stuff that is being presented to the president or the secretary of state that you might not want on the transom, or going out over the wire, but is basically stuff that you could get in open-source.” So in other words, sometimes “Top-Secret intelligence” is information “which reasonably could be expected to cause exceptionally grave damage to the national security,” as the executive order detailing the classification system describes. And other times, it’s innocuous information you can potentially find on Google. more at that link
well, honestly this statement is pretty much a non sequitur. And this is not a "Republican" or "Democratic" issue--that was the point of citing the Obama article. here are factual premises: (a) classified documents can fall into different categories: seriously "secret" documents and trivially secret documents (b) NOBODY here knows whether the Trump documents fall into the category of seriously secret or trivially secret (c) the media has reported investigators having leaked that they have not found anything that is "seriously secret" that lead to a pretty valid conclusion: (d) there is a non-zero probability that the some, most, or perhaps all of the Trump documents are trivially secret and again, I'll provide the link to the Obama interview cited above: Obama admits that ‘Top Secret’ is not always so secret https://www.cjr.org/criticism/obama_admits_that_top_secret_is_not_always_so_secret.php excerpt: DURING AN INTERVIEW with Fox News on Sunday, President Obama–perhaps inadvertently–exposed the US classification system for what it really is: completely arbitrary and utterly broken. In the process, he described the hypocritical nature of his administration’s approach to secrecy. “There’s classified, and then there’s classified,” the president told Fox News anchor Chris Wallace in response to a question about the now-classified material on Hillary Clinton’s private email server from when she was Secretary of State. Obama continued: “There’s stuff that is really top-secret Top Secret, and there’s stuff that is being presented to the president or the secretary of state that you might not want on the transom, or going out over the wire, but is basically stuff that you could get in open-source.” So in other words, sometimes “Top-Secret intelligence” is information “which reasonably could be expected to cause exceptionally grave damage to the national security,” as the executive order detailing the classification system describes. And other times, it’s innocuous information you can potentially find on Google. more at that link
While all that is most likely true, since you are talking factually, Trump still broke the law by taking documents marked as Top Secret, regardless of what they contained.
Nice attempt at trying to downplay a Trump crime. The actual fact of the matter is the Trump administration went out their way to more harshly pursue classified doc cases. https://www.salon.com/2022/08/11/si...y--now-it-may-come-back-to-haunt-him_partner/ So obviously in 2018, the Republicans thought we needed to be even more tight lipped about our secrets. So blame them for making the laws tighter. With Trump though the documents case has always been about what his intent was and I think that’ll be 95% of what the prosecuting decision is ultimately focused on because that’s what the jury will be focused on. What was he planning to do with these documents? Reality Winner got hard time because her intent was obvious to expose corruption. It wasn’t a case where the intent was skewed because the document had a cell number of someone she was scoring a date with and the document was never released to the public. So intent still matters in jury deliberations which means Jack Smith probably isn’t going to charge if he can’t prove intent. Unfortunately for Trump he won’t stop shutting up on Truth which isn’t helping his case and I believe his Truths are admissible in court. But yeah… please stop trying to downplay Trump committing crimes. A crime is a crime.
