The Commish
Footballguy
Presidential Records Act of 1978....unless people are claiming that law is unconstitutional.
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
****Official DOJ Investigation into Trump, Fake Electors, Fraud, Etc.**** (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter dozer
- Start date
Sunshine6854
Footballguy
You see this parroted on alt right message boards. Like Trump can just declassify something and no one else has to know. These folks jump in and defend defend defend, damn the logic.
moleculo
Footballguy
in lieu of recent discussions, it's probably important to brush up on the Presidential Records Act:
I highlighted what I think may be a key portion above in red - we all know Trump has been stone-walling the J6 investigation and based on the above, that stone-walling appears to be illegal. In short, Trump was illegally possessing material crucial to the J6 investigation, which we all know is time sensitive. that's why this was a raid and not a drawn-out legal proceeding (as is Trump's custom).
ETA: as I recall, the Trump org has not turned over call or visitor logs on January 6. link
in short, all notes, documents, etc that Trump procured while in office are the property of the government, not the individual.
I highlighted what I think may be a key portion above in red - we all know Trump has been stone-walling the J6 investigation and based on the above, that stone-walling appears to be illegal. In short, Trump was illegally possessing material crucial to the J6 investigation, which we all know is time sensitive. that's why this was a raid and not a drawn-out legal proceeding (as is Trump's custom).
ETA: as I recall, the Trump org has not turned over call or visitor logs on January 6. link
sho nuff
Footballguy
Somehow again this won’t be bumped by those who typically post in the media criticism thread.
roadkill1292
Footballguy
Donald has always violated the norms of presidential visitor and call logs. Criminals can't do their best work out in the light of public scrutiny.
Do you think the Presidential Records Act supersedes the powers conveyed to him in the Constitution? What case law has there been on this issue?
sho nuff
Footballguy
What powers? When did he declassify? Do you believe he can wherever he wants after he leaves office?
Toby2ElectricBugaloo
Footballguy
Can you unpack this for me a little bit? What constitutional provision do you think authorizes the president to designate classified material in his own mind?
Amused to Death
Footballguy
If Trump did declassify the documents (and I'm not sure that even matters, the docs belong to NARA) why then haven't his lawyers made that claim in the meetings? Why is Trump not on conservative media outlets making that claim? I only see that hypothetical coming from his supporters.
Has Trump himself made that claim?
The Commish
Footballguy
If the PRA goes against the Constitution, then the PRA is unconstitutional. If not, it's the law of the land and within the parameters of the Constitution. I am unaware of any case law saying the PRA is unconstitutional and it's been on the books for 40+ years. Should also be noted that I don't think the PRA deals with the "how" of classification of documents etc which is what you were talking about before. Classification is a rabbit hole.
Amused to Death
Footballguy
Here's a Fox News article discussing the warrant and Trump's reaction. Nowhere does anyone, including Trump, make a claim that the docs were declassified. I only hear a bunch of "what ifs" from you.
GOP Rep. Banks says Trump 'fired up' after FBI raid, 'made up his mind' on 2024: 'Going to like his decision'
Toby2ElectricBugaloo
Footballguy
Absolutely amazing that we have two active threads on investigations into obvious criminal behavior by the former president and he just pled the Fifth in a matter unrelated to either of them.
He's is to crime what Rick Rubin is to music.
He's is to crime what Rick Rubin is to music.
Toby2ElectricBugaloo
Footballguy
moleculo
Footballguy
Not a lawyer, but even if it's unconstitutional, it's the law of the land until constitutionality is challenged in court. In order to challenge the law, you have to have standing. The only people with standing to challenge the law have been ex-presidents and their staff - no one has challenged that since the law was written.
I doubt it as the constitution specifically assigned the legislature checks and balances over the executive. Arguing against is a claim of executive supremacy. Coincidentally, that's a position William Barr holds, and why he was named AG.
Don’t get me wrong - I’m not saying what Trump did was ok. Not at all. I am just questioning whether it rises to the level of something that:
1. Warrants a raid by 30-37 FBI agents
2. Can be prosecuted successfully
Seems like they used a cruise missile to kill a fly. Is it worth all the damage it’s doing to an already fractured country? Is it worth the political risk of getting Trump elected? Prosecutorial discretion is an important and delicate issue, and a lot of people in the country think it has been politicized.
2Squirrels1Nut
Footballguy
They would argue that their opinion that the moon is delicious is every bit as valid and anyone disagreeing with them is more cancel culture, censorship and against their 1A rights.
Sadly I'm getting too good at this. I never thought I would have liked it better when both parties bent over backwards for lobbyists and their corporate overlords.
The Commish
Footballguy
I still have no idea how many people were there. Not seen anything reliable on it anywhere, but let's say it was 50 for the sake of argument. With that many people there, it STILL took 10 hours to go through everything. They'd be there weeks if it was a mere 4-5 people.
Amused to Death
Footballguy
Yeah I don't know why the number of agents involved would matter. We have no idea the amount of documents they were looking for or the size of the area needed to be covered. And as pointed out, it still took 10 hours.
Also, since we have no idea what the subject matter is of the missing docs we don't know if this was overkill or not. Pure speculation from people who are suddenly concerned with the way we treat criminal suspects. For the sake of creating a hypothetical, what if the missing documents contained items of national security? How many agents should they sent then? Yes, prosecutorial discretion is an important issue, so I'll give the pros the benefit of the doubt until we have enough info that suggests otherwise.
We're all just speculating.
From today’s Wall St. Journal:
Updated Aug. 10, 2022 9:45 am ET
Monday’s unannounced Federal Bureau of Investigation search of Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home isn’t a moment for anyone to cheer. The Justice Department is unleashing political furies it can’t control and may not understand, and the risks for the department and the country are as great as they are for Mr. Trump.
As everyone knows by now, an FBI law-enforcement action of this kind against a former American President is unprecedented. Monday’s search needed a judicial warrant in service of probable cause in a criminal probe. The Justice Department has provided few details beyond what has been leaked to reporters, so it is hard to judge what the FBI was looking for.
The media leaks say the search is related to potential mishandling of classified documents or violations of the Presidential Records Act. If that is true, then the raid looks like prosecutorial overkill and a bad mistake. Document disputes are typically settled in negotiation, and that is how Mr. Trump’s disagreement with the National Archives had been proceeding.
Mr. Trump has already returned 15 boxes of documents, but the National Archives wants to know if the former President retained classified material he shouldn’t have. This is what appears to have triggered the FBI search, but it’s far from clear why this couldn’t be settled cooperatively, or at most with a subpoena.
Didn’t someone at Justice point out that a search in this case would draw comparisons to Hillary Clinton’s mishandling of classified information before her 2016 presidential campaign? She was never prosecuted, as Mr. Trump was quick to point out. Unless Mr. Trump’s offense involves a serious risk to national security, half of America may see the Trump search as an example of unequal justice.
On the public evidence so far, a Jan. 6 indictment would be a legal stretch. Political responsibility isn’t the same as criminal liability. In our view, the evidence would have to show that Mr. Trump was criminally complicit in that day’s violence at the Capitol.
Given its inherently political nature, the burden of proof is especially high for indicting a former President, all the more so for an Administration of the opposition party. The evidence had better be overwhelming—not merely enough to convince a 12-person jury in the District of Columbia, but enough to convince a majority of the American public.
Then there is the fraught history between Mr. Trump and the FBI and Justice. The Russia collusion probe was a fiasco of FBI abuse of process and public deception. Current FBI director Christopher Wraywas Mr. Trump’s choice to succeed the disastrous James Comey, but the bureau still has a serious credibility problem.
That the Mar-a-Lago raid occurred only about 90 days from a national election also increases the political suspicion. Democrats want to keep Mr. Trump front and center in the midterm campaign, which is why the Jan. 6 committee is continuing into the autumn.
Anyone who thinks an indictment and trial of Mr. Trump would go smoothly is in for a rude surprise. Millions of his supporters will see this as vindication of his charges against the “deep state,” and who knows how they will respond. Has Mr. Garland considered all of this?
Democrats may also be wrong in their calculation about how a prosecution would affect Mr. Trump’s future. The FBI search alone makes it more likely that Mr. Trump will run again for President, if only to vindicate himself. He will run as a martyr, and even Republicans who want to turn the page on the former President may be repelled by what they see as a political prosecution.
All of this risks compounding the baleful pattern of the last six years. Mr. Trump is accused of violating political norms—sometimes fairly, sometimes not—and the left violates norms in response. Polarization increases, and public faith in institutions and the peaceful settlement of political difference erodes further.
The FBI search on Mr. Trump suggests that Mr. Garland may be committed to pursuing and indicting Mr. Trump. If so, he is taking the country on a perilous road. There is much ruin in a nation, but no one should want to test the limits of that ruin in America.
The FBI’s Dangerous Search at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago
Merrick Garland is taking the U.S. down a perilous path.
By The Editorial BoardUpdated Aug. 10, 2022 9:45 am ET
Monday’s unannounced Federal Bureau of Investigation search of Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home isn’t a moment for anyone to cheer. The Justice Department is unleashing political furies it can’t control and may not understand, and the risks for the department and the country are as great as they are for Mr. Trump.
As everyone knows by now, an FBI law-enforcement action of this kind against a former American President is unprecedented. Monday’s search needed a judicial warrant in service of probable cause in a criminal probe. The Justice Department has provided few details beyond what has been leaked to reporters, so it is hard to judge what the FBI was looking for.
The media leaks say the search is related to potential mishandling of classified documents or violations of the Presidential Records Act. If that is true, then the raid looks like prosecutorial overkill and a bad mistake. Document disputes are typically settled in negotiation, and that is how Mr. Trump’s disagreement with the National Archives had been proceeding.
Mr. Trump has already returned 15 boxes of documents, but the National Archives wants to know if the former President retained classified material he shouldn’t have. This is what appears to have triggered the FBI search, but it’s far from clear why this couldn’t be settled cooperatively, or at most with a subpoena.
Didn’t someone at Justice point out that a search in this case would draw comparisons to Hillary Clinton’s mishandling of classified information before her 2016 presidential campaign? She was never prosecuted, as Mr. Trump was quick to point out. Unless Mr. Trump’s offense involves a serious risk to national security, half of America may see the Trump search as an example of unequal justice.
***
This may not be the full FBI story. Multiple media reports suggest that Justice has opened a grand jury probe into the events of Jan. 6, 2021, and Mr. Trump may be a target of that investigation. The House committee investigating Jan. 6 has been cheering for a prosecution, and the political and media pressure is intense on Attorney General Merrick Garland to indict Mr. Trump. The FBI search may be a fishing expedition to find evidence related to Jan. 6.On the public evidence so far, a Jan. 6 indictment would be a legal stretch. Political responsibility isn’t the same as criminal liability. In our view, the evidence would have to show that Mr. Trump was criminally complicit in that day’s violence at the Capitol.
Given its inherently political nature, the burden of proof is especially high for indicting a former President, all the more so for an Administration of the opposition party. The evidence had better be overwhelming—not merely enough to convince a 12-person jury in the District of Columbia, but enough to convince a majority of the American public.
Then there is the fraught history between Mr. Trump and the FBI and Justice. The Russia collusion probe was a fiasco of FBI abuse of process and public deception. Current FBI director Christopher Wraywas Mr. Trump’s choice to succeed the disastrous James Comey, but the bureau still has a serious credibility problem.
That the Mar-a-Lago raid occurred only about 90 days from a national election also increases the political suspicion. Democrats want to keep Mr. Trump front and center in the midterm campaign, which is why the Jan. 6 committee is continuing into the autumn.
Anyone who thinks an indictment and trial of Mr. Trump would go smoothly is in for a rude surprise. Millions of his supporters will see this as vindication of his charges against the “deep state,” and who knows how they will respond. Has Mr. Garland considered all of this?
***
Worse in the long term is the precedent being set and the payback it is likely to inspire. Once the Rubicon of prosecuting a former President has been crossed—especially if the alleged offense and evidence are less than compelling—every future President will be a target. William Barr, Mr. Trump’s second AG, wisely resisted pressure to indict political actors without a very strong case. The next Republican AG will not be as scrupulous.Democrats may also be wrong in their calculation about how a prosecution would affect Mr. Trump’s future. The FBI search alone makes it more likely that Mr. Trump will run again for President, if only to vindicate himself. He will run as a martyr, and even Republicans who want to turn the page on the former President may be repelled by what they see as a political prosecution.
All of this risks compounding the baleful pattern of the last six years. Mr. Trump is accused of violating political norms—sometimes fairly, sometimes not—and the left violates norms in response. Polarization increases, and public faith in institutions and the peaceful settlement of political difference erodes further.
The FBI search on Mr. Trump suggests that Mr. Garland may be committed to pursuing and indicting Mr. Trump. If so, he is taking the country on a perilous road. There is much ruin in a nation, but no one should want to test the limits of that ruin in America.
Toby2ElectricBugaloo
Footballguy
I don't profess to be an expert in evidence gathering. If you are, great. If you're not, I'm gonna go ahead and defer to the FBI's judgment on this one. We as a society defer to law enforcement without question when they shoot people, this seems like a weird time to start operating from an assumption of impropriety.
I could not possibly care less about "political risk" or anything like that. The man broke the law, repeatedly, in ways that damage our nation's interests. I think sending a message that nobody is above the law is far more important than some political risk that I'm not sure exists (95% of the noise about fracturing the country comes from people who have already fractured it beyond short-term repair by standing with Trump). And using prosecutorial discretion to pass on matters that "a lot of people in the country think have been politicized" simply encourages more politicization, idol worship and lawlessness.
According to this podcast -- which I highly recommend to anyone interested in this matter -- thirty agents is not very many for executing a search warrant.
FBI Searches Trump's Home: What Does it Mean?
Listen now | Sarah and David get together for an emergency episode to discuss the FBI’s search of former President Donald Trump’s home at Mar-a-Lago on Monday. What does it all mean? How does a federal investigation of a senior official work, and what happens next? Plus: some possible theories...
advisoryopinions.thedispatch.com
Also, the standard for getting a search warrant, I believe, is that a crime was probably committed -- not that someone can be prosecuted successfully. The latter has a higher bar, and in any case is hard to evaluate before executing a warrant and assessing the evidence recovered.
Amused to Death
Footballguy
Hasn't Donald Trump already tested the limits of what may ruin America? No other president has tested the limits of our norms like Trump. Did Obama take classified material and refuse to give it back? Bush? Reagan? Anyone? Or has been just Trump?
Has any other president devised and then followed through with a scheme to submit fake elector so his VP could violate his Constitutional duties? Or has it been just Trump?
Yes Garland and the DOJ are facing unprecedented actions, but their subject has done unprecedented acts.
As for retaliation - if any Dem breaks the law then by all means investigate and if necessary, prosecute. I don't care who they are. Period.
I think it's completely insane for anybody to purport to judge the merits of the search warrant without even seeing the search warrant (much less the supporting affidavit).
Amused to Death
Footballguy
"But we're going to rant anyway"
moleculo
Footballguy
They tried a fly swatter. They had been in negotiations since January. When stonewalled, should they just give up?
Is Trump so important that rules no longer apply?
roadkill1292
Footballguy
The threats of retaliation are empty ones meant to maintain the pretense that the Dems and their partners in the Deep State are unjustly persecuting Trump for his politics.
This fools the ignorant few but in substance they got nuttin'.
Amused to Death
Footballguy
Oh I get the intent behind the threats. However if any Dem is suspected of wrongdoing, investigated, and charged then by all means prosecute to the fullest.
Weird how Trump supporters, and those who are just concerned he's not being treated fairly, can't say the same thing.
sho nuff
Footballguy
We took 11 investigators and one armed police officer into one small building when we had an investigation I worked on looking for documents. 2 of those were our IT crew pulling hard drives...the rest of us boxing documents and making copies. There were 4 others in another location. And it was a pretty small office we were looking into...and yes that took all of that day...and then sorting through it all took quite a long time.
None of us know the overall scope of the warrant and what they were looking for...so really hard to comment on how many were needed.
Sabertooth
Footballguy
The first post in this thread is awesome. Thank you for putting it together.
Sabertooth
Footballguy
Everyone’s life gets better when they stop talking politics. Yet here we are.
Coach Beard
Footballguy
“A team of computer experts directed by lawyers allied with President Donald Trump copied sensitive data from election systems in Georgia as part of a secretive, multistate effort to access voting equipment that was broader, more organized and more successful than previously reported, according to emails and other records obtained by The Washington Post.”
Full WaPo article
Full WaPo article
massraider
Footballguy
Trump says he’s ‘very happy’ with legal team as investigations escalate https://t.co/7eoEKqJ3nC
Me too buddy
Me too buddy
Amused to Death
Footballguy
I see Jenna Ellis is next up to testify in the GA grand jury investigation.
ATLANTA — A judge in Colorado on Tuesday ordered a legal adviser for former President Donald Trump’s campaign to travel to Georgia to testify before a special grand jury that’s looking into whether Trump and others illegally tried to influence the 2020 election in Georgia.
Judge Gregory Lammons in Fort Collins, Colorado, made the decision after holding a hearing on a request from Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis to compel testimony from attorney Jenna Ellis. Prosecutors are interested in Ellis’s role in helping to coordinate and plan legislative hearings in Georgia and others states where false allegations of election fraud were pushed, according to testimony in court.
Fulton County prosecutors have purchased plane tickets and made a hotel reservation in preparation for Ellis to testify on Aug. 25.
Trump legal adviser Jenna Ellis ordered to testify in Georgia election probe
The Fulton County district attorney described Ellis as “an attorney for the Trump Campaign’s legal efforts seeking to influence the results of the November 2020 election in Georgia and elsewhere.”ATLANTA — A judge in Colorado on Tuesday ordered a legal adviser for former President Donald Trump’s campaign to travel to Georgia to testify before a special grand jury that’s looking into whether Trump and others illegally tried to influence the 2020 election in Georgia.
Judge Gregory Lammons in Fort Collins, Colorado, made the decision after holding a hearing on a request from Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis to compel testimony from attorney Jenna Ellis. Prosecutors are interested in Ellis’s role in helping to coordinate and plan legislative hearings in Georgia and others states where false allegations of election fraud were pushed, according to testimony in court.
Fulton County prosecutors have purchased plane tickets and made a hotel reservation in preparation for Ellis to testify on Aug. 25.
BladeRunner
Footballguy
WE GOT'EEM NOW!!!!
Sabertooth
Footballguy
Don’t need to get him. He squandered away the Senate, House, and POTUS. I personally don’t care if he sits in jail or not. Hes truly been a gift to liberals. Much like the Jelly of the month club he just keep on giving.
The Commish
Footballguy
<--- My surprised faceThis was a strongly red county for Trump? what gives?
The Z Machine
Footballguy
Pure speculation here but I think they were tryin to sow the seeds of doubt about how easily the systems could be breached.
Chaz McNulty
Footballguy
Imagine if it would have been the other side doing this. It would have been WW3. Look at what happened when someone pulled a box of ballots out that was being stored under a table.
The General
Footballguy
WH Lawyer for Trump Unloads
“Former Trump White House lawyer Ty Cobb called ex-President Donald Trumpa “deeply wounded narcissist” who acted in a “criminal” manner when he pushed then-Vice President Mike Pence to block Congress from certifying President Joe Biden’s 2020 election win.”
“Former Trump White House lawyer Ty Cobb called ex-President Donald Trumpa “deeply wounded narcissist” who acted in a “criminal” manner when he pushed then-Vice President Mike Pence to block Congress from certifying President Joe Biden’s 2020 election win.”
2Squirrels1Nut
Footballguy
Interesting perspective.
The Commish
Footballguy
Going in spikes up
Sabertooth
Footballguy
Asked about Trump’s claims that he actually won the 2020 election, Cobb said, “I believe former President Trump to be a deeply wounded narcissist, and he is often incapable of acting other than in his perceived self-interest or for revenge.”
’“I think those are the two compelling instincts that guide his actions,” Cobb said.
“He doesn’t believe he lost. I believe that,” he said.
’“I think those are the two compelling instincts that guide his actions,” Cobb said.
“He doesn’t believe he lost. I believe that,” he said.
Amused to Death
Footballguy
I think Trump believes he can grift more money from his followers. Just keep them thinking THEY'RE the victims when really they're the mark.
McBokonon
Footballguy
EVERYTHING Trump does, most of which is observable without a media filter or other commentary, supports this basic idea and how people with functioning brains can’t see that is completely dumbfounding.
Sabertooth
Footballguy
Oh absolutely, from the way he pushed aside world leaders to preen to his nasty disposition with anyone he no longer feels can benefit him. It's spot on.
Sabertooth
Footballguy
Why not both?
Similar threads
