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

Forum Index » Political Discussion

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

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Whatever happens Supreme Court will rollover for DT. 
Justice Roberts are you ready???[/quote]

It will never get there.  They are going by the book.  [/quote]

Trump will litigate the issue of his right to assert “executive privilege” for as long as he can. [/quote]

It is settled law, it’s not going anywhere.  You can’t exercise executive privilege if you’re no longer the executive.  He is trying to claim that he was entitled to move the documents to FL while he was still POTUS, and that may be true. He wasn’t allowed to KEEP them. There is not a single coherent legal theory I’ve seen anywhere about that. .[/quote]

It is far from “well-settled.” US v. Nixon involved a balancing of competing interests utilized prior to enactment of the PRA. That is why the statute sets forth the specified criteria by which the executive branch of axsitting administration can obtain access under certain enumerated circumstances to records of a prior administration for which there is a claim of privilege and why Congress vested the district court in DC with jurisdiction to adjudicate any resulting disputes. This doesn’t mean that Trump has an argument that will carry the day, it just means he has at least a colorable right to assert a claim of privilege that can be overruled by the current exrcutive (the Archivist in this instance). [/quote]

None of that lets him keep the documents. Saying they are privileged just means the archivist guards access to them. They still belong to the Archives. [/quote]

Where did PP assert that TFG gets to keep presidential records? No rational person can make this argument. And yet TFG reportedly stormed around the Oval Office raging about “my documents” and left them on the floor of a closet in his personal office. No need to conflate the issues.[/quote]

So why keep arguing about Executive Privilege if it makes no difference? PP and others keep saying EP is not settled, but Trump is arguing for EP as justification for having the documents. What is PP’s point? EP is irrelevant. [/quote]

You seem to be missing the forest for the trees to some degree. Trump does not argue explicitly in his motion that he gets to keep any documents on the basis of a claim of executive privilege, whether under an expansive theory of executive privilege or otherwise. The supplemental brief makes no mention of executive privilege whatsoever.

His principal argument is that the DOJ should be ordered to stop reviewing “presumptively privileged” presidential and other siezed materials and that a Special Master be appointed to conduct the review. While I have admittedly only skimmed the motion and supplemental filing, Trump is asking for the following relief:

(1) for the Master to identify privileged materials and/or attorney-client communications (the FBI reportedly segregated five boxes for review by the privilege review team in accordance with the warrant) because a taint team review does not adequately safeguard his Fourth Amendment rights,

(2) for the Master to return any materials outside the scope of the warrant (there are repeated references to passports that already have been returned as well as “personal papers”),

(3) for DOJ to file a more detailed receipt for the siezed materials (Trump notes generic descriptions of “photos” and “handwritten notes”) that could enable him to seek the return of property pursuant to FRCrimP 41, and

(4) a more fulsome explanation as to the warrant was sought because, at least in his mind, he was being entirely cooperative and in any event the execution of a warrant at a place used as a residence by a former president is unprecedented.

It is possible to infer that Trump might want the Master to return materials found to be outside the scope of the warrant, even if they are presidential records, but I didn’t read the papers as advocating for this.

The presumed endgame here is to gather as much information as possible to attack the warrant as a Fourth Amendment violation and then assert that the materials should have been protected based on the assertion of a latent claim of executive privilege. This would be the crux of a subsequent Rule 41 motion envisioned by Trump. Some may dismiss assertion of a latent claim of executive privilege as DOA, and they very well may be proven correct, but the Presidential Records Act vests a former executive with a statutory right to raise this exact type of legal challenge.

We will all wait to see how it plays out. [/quote]

PRA says that challenge has to be in DC.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics