Donnie Dumptruck says Mar-A-Lago's been searched by the FBI

[Anonymous]

People are making too much of this order. I am no Trump supporter and I think it’s stupid that the court is even entertaining this process, but I was surprised that Dearie ordered Trump’s team to provide all of its objections to the accuracy of the inventory without having seen the documents themselves. If an entry says something like “357 government documents/photos without classification markings” but provides no further description even of where they were found within Trump’s office, how are they supposed to determine whether those are all documents they believe were taken from his office, or what, if anything, might be missing from the inventory list? At some point Trump will need to take a position on these issues if he’s going to file a 41(g) motion for return of his property, but this does not seem like the appropriate point to require him to do so.

[Anonymous]

I guess he could just look at the list of documents he has de-classified? Also not a Trump supporter/mental defective.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I guess he could just look at the list of documents he has de-classified? Also not a Trump supporter/mental defective.

The order isn’t just about classification, it’s about whether Trump believes anything that was taken isn’t reflected in the inventory or that there are things listed that he doesn’t believe were actually taken from his office. That can include non-classified documents.

In practical terms, here’s what it might mean. One way the government might seek to prove that Trump knew he still had classified documents in his possession is if they were mixed together with personal items that Trump would have used very recently. So let’s consider an entry that reflects classified documents being taken from the same area with a book. If the book in question were released in 2022 and were found in a drawer of Trump’s desk, that could suggest that Trump was aware he had the documents because he had been in that drawer as recently as 2022. But without knowing the title of the book (let alone where in the office it was found), Trump cannot know if that’s a book he actually owned or if the book listing is an inaccuracy.

I think Trumps claims of planted evidence are total bullshit, but I don’t think Dearie is going about this the right way.

[Anonymous]

More generally, I think it’s important to remember what this proceeding is about. It’s not a criminal proceeding, it’s about seeking the return of his own property that was seized, and asserting any appropriate privileges. Let’s say among the 88 news articles found in one part of his office, Trump knows there is an article about the Yankees signed by Aaron Judge. He really wants that back. But without seeing what’s there, how can he know that it includes his Aaron Judge article? If he doesn’t assert now that it’s missing and it turns out it’s not there because an agent stole it to sell on eBay, will Trump have waived the right to claim it is missing if he doesn’t assert that argument now, before his team sees the documents?

Again, not saying this happened. I have no reason to believe it did. But these are legitimate reasons why Dearie’s process seems problematic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:People are making too much of this order. I am no Trump supporter and I think it’s stupid that the court is even entertaining this process, but I was surprised that Dearie ordered Trump’s team to provide all of its objections to the accuracy of the inventory without having seen the documents themselves. If an entry says something like “357 government documents/photos without classification markings” but provides no further description even of where they were found within Trump’s office, how are they supposed to determine whether those are all documents they believe were taken from his office, or what, if anything, might be missing from the inventory list? At some point Trump will need to take a position on these issues if he’s going to file a 41(g) motion for return of his property, but this does not seem like the appropriate point to require him to do so.

Sounds like you are saying Trump did not take careful notation of what he had. They had boxes stuffed with government documents as well as his own things and no one on his staff had inventoried them? Yikes. Not good records keeping.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People are making too much of this order. I am no Trump supporter and I think it’s stupid that the court is even entertaining this process, but I was surprised that Dearie ordered Trump’s team to provide all of its objections to the accuracy of the inventory without having seen the documents themselves. If an entry says something like “357 government documents/photos without classification markings” but provides no further description even of where they were found within Trump’s office, how are they supposed to determine whether those are all documents they believe were taken from his office, or what, if anything, might be missing from the inventory list? At some point Trump will need to take a position on these issues if he’s going to file a 41(g) motion for return of his property, but this does not seem like the appropriate point to require him to do so.

Sounds like you are saying Trump did not take careful notation of what he had. They had boxes stuffed with government documents as well as his own things and no one on his staff had inventoried them? Yikes. Not good records keeping.

Do you keep a written inventory of every news clipping (or comparable piece of paper) in your house to know whether you had 88 or 89. The verification process is not just about the classified documents. I mean, that’s what actually important here and likely why Trump started this process, but Rule 41(g) isn’t about classified documents, it’s about return of property, and the court needs to treat it that way regardless of Trump’s ulterior motives.

[Anonymous]

I think our national security should take a backseat. I mean Trump was really disorganized but he shouldn’t be penalized for that. He has treasured mementos that must be returned.
Let’s get the priorities straight people!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think our national security should take a backseat. I mean Trump was really disorganized but he shouldn’t be penalized for that. He has treasured mementos that must be returned.
Let’s get the priorities straight people!

No one is saying that. Maybe stop reading hot take on Twitter and taking them as gospel.

[Anonymous]

Yeah! Give TFG back his framed Time Magazine covers!! Those are valuable mementos!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think our national security should take a backseat. I mean Trump was really disorganized but he shouldn’t be penalized for that. He has treasured mementos that must be returned.
Let’s get the priorities straight people!

No one is saying that. Maybe stop reading hot take on Twitter and taking them as gospel.

I think you missed the /s

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yeah! Give TFG back his framed Time Magazine covers!! Those are valuable mementos!!

I can’t tell if you are trying to make a point or just want to disrupt the discussion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think our national security should take a backseat. I mean Trump was really disorganized but he shouldn’t be penalized for that. He has treasured mementos that must be returned.
Let’s get the priorities straight people!

No one is saying that. Maybe stop reading hot take on Twitter and taking them as gospel.

I think you missed the /s

No, I got it. I just think the sarcasm reflects a misunderstanding of the legal proceeding to date.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:More generally, I think it’s important to remember what this proceeding is about. It’s not a criminal proceeding, it’s about seeking the return of his own property that was seized, and asserting any appropriate privileges. Let’s say among the 88 news articles found in one part of his office, Trump knows there is an article about the Yankees signed by Aaron Judge. He really wants that back. But without seeing what’s there, how can he know that it includes his Aaron Judge article? If he doesn’t assert now that it’s missing and it turns out it’s not there because an agent stole it to sell on eBay, will Trump have waived the right to claim it is missing if he doesn’t assert that argument now, before his team sees the documents?

Again, not saying this happened. I have no reason to believe it did. But these are legitimate reasons why Dearie’s process seems problematic.

Exactly. This is not a criminal proceeding - the government first asked nicely for the return of their property and then, when that didn't work, went and got it. When they realized exactly what Trump had kept, it started to get closer to a criminal proceeding - but it didn't start out that way. And btw, Trump's lousy lawyers never properly served the government or even properly filed a complaint? motion? or whatever for this, they just made something up and Judge Cannon indulged them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yeah! Give TFG back his framed Time Magazine covers!! Those are valuable mementos!!

I can’t tell if you are trying to make a point or just want to disrupt the discussion.

The discussion?!
There shouldn't be a discussion
The rest of us would be in jail if this was us.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:More generally, I think it’s important to remember what this proceeding is about. It’s not a criminal proceeding, it’s about seeking the return of his own property that was seized, and asserting any appropriate privileges. Let’s say among the 88 news articles found in one part of his office, Trump knows there is an article about the Yankees signed by Aaron Judge. He really wants that back. But without seeing what’s there, how can he know that it includes his Aaron Judge article? If he doesn’t assert now that it’s missing and it turns out it’s not there because an agent stole it to sell on eBay, will Trump have waived the right to claim it is missing if he doesn’t assert that argument now, before his team sees the documents?

Again, not saying this happened. I have no reason to believe it did. But these are legitimate reasons why Dearie’s process seems problematic.

Exactly. This is not a criminal proceeding - the government first asked nicely for the return of their property and then, when that didn't work, went and got it. When they realized exactly what Trump had kept, it started to get closer to a criminal proceeding - but it didn't start out that way. And btw, Trump's lousy lawyers never properly served the government or even properly filed a complaint? motion? or whatever for this, they just made something up and Judge Cannon indulged them.

DP. You are conflating Cannon's conduct with Dearie's conduct. Cannon's handling of the matter is highly problematic; I won't deny that. But Cannon has delegated specific responsibilities to Dearie and he has to carry them out appropriately or there will be easy grounds for Cannon to ignore his recommendations later. Given the responsibilities delegated and framework set out by Cannon for the special master review, there is zero reason Dearie needs to have Trump's verification before his team can review the documents (because remember, the classified documents are not out of the process). Moreover, nothing in Cannon's appointing order gave Dearie authority to declare that this preliminary verification would be Trump's "final opportunity to raise any factual dispute as to the completeness and accuracy of the Detailed Property Inventory."

Going back to the hypotheticals set forth above, let's say Trump knows he had X number of government documents in a particular drawer, and that is the same number of documents listed in the inventory. He would have no basis to dispute the accuracy and completeness of the inventory, right? But then what happens if, during the review, Trump's team discovers a document that they do not believe was in that drawer, and then also contends that a different document was in the drawer but is not in that set of the produced documents? Can Trump dispute the accuracy of the inventory at that point, or has that ship sailed because he didn't dispute something he did could not have known was up for dispute at the time of his "final opportunity" to raise the issue?

I know someone's first impulse will be to respond that Trump having any government documents is problematic, and I will not dispute that. But for purposes of any future proceedings, including criminal proceedings, which specific documents Trump had may be critically important. So let's set that argument aside for right now.

Moreover, Dearie has not articulated a reason why he needs to proceed in this order and make the verification now rather than after the parties have reviewed the documents. No matter what Dearie might determine now on verification, he still has to allow Trump's team access to all of the seized materials (other than the classified documents) for the privilege review. It does make sense for Dearie to give Trump's team an opportunity to raise any obvious issues with the inventory now because there may be efficiencies to resolving those upfront (particularly if Trump can tell now that something is missing from the inventory), but there is no reason for Dearie to make this Trump's last opportunity to raise those kinds of issues.

The whole process is clearly bullshit, but that makes it all the more important for Dearie to carry out his responsibilities appropriately so that he does not give easy grounds for Cannon to rejects his recommendations and then make it hard for the 11th Circuit to find she abused her discretion in doing so.