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][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][twitter]https://twitter.com/ecmclaughlin/status/1580401721888514048?s=46&t=PO2HDlOi-K4iD5H9ZSbrcg[/twitter][/quote]

So, what does this mean? You know, in real life? Any charges coming?[/quote]
My gut is that DOJ is going to indict Trump, in DC and not Florida, after the midterms. [/quote]

My bet is one thing they are working on is how to get venue in DC, or at least not SDFL.  Putting this case in front of Cannon would be a disaster.  They also still have a bunch of their evidence locked up in front of the SM.  It’s all the unclassified stuff, so while not the most important, there’s still likely relevant stuff there they want to review first.[/quote]

The crimes all began on Federal property in the Federal city so why wouldn't DC be the venue?[/quote]

That's not true.  The obstruction charge would be based entirely on conduct in Florida.  The feds will likely try to link that to DC because the agencies/GJ being obstructed are in DC.  I don't know if that will be good enough.  The espionage charge might have started in DC, but it depends on whether he moved those boxes from DC before or after he was president.  If they were originally moved while he was still president, it will be very hard for DOJ to say that was part of the crime- the president is certainly authorized to move boxes of government documents around.  The crime they will charge will be unauthorized retention, not unauthorized removal.[/quote]

A president cannot move boxes around for an unlawful purpose, such as concealing evidence of a crime or converting government property to his personal use (aka theft). Much of this links back to the Crossfire Hurricane investigation of the substantiated links between the campaign snd Russia, which itself implicated a conspiracy implicating Trump’s actions as a private citizen/candidate. Trump had the constitutional duty to take care that laws were faithfully executed and issues of possible venue will have to await development of facts relating to the scope of the conspiracy(ies). Kash Patel is linking the shenanigans with “declassification” back to 12/2020. It certainly was foremost in Trump’s mind on the morning of 1/20/2021. [/quote]

It's nice that you think that, but 1) that's not what the Espionage Act criminalizes, and 2) there is no chance in hell that DOJ (i.e. the executive branch) is going to make arguments constraining the president's authority over government records.  [/quote]

Conveniently overlooking the fact that obstruction of a federal investigation is itself a crime separate snd apart from any violation of the Espionage Act died t mske it go away. The same is true of 18 USC sec. 1519. Thanks for your contribution. [/quote]

I’m not overlooking that.  But the obstruction happened in Florida.  This whole discussion is about where DOJ can charge.  DOJ has to show that part of the crime happened in DC in order to charge it there.[/quote]

A conspiracy to obstruct could have multiple loci. It could have been initiated from instructions issued at Trump Tower, Bedminster or MAL, among other places. It also likely encompasses documents at all of these sites, or even documents driven in a minivan from Crystal City (EDVa) to Florida in early March 2021. DC doesn’t seem like a proper venue unless DOJ can tie the scheme back to the large binders of classified crossfire Hurricane docs it provided in late December 2020. Let’s see how vulnerable useful idiots Kash Patel and John Solomon are feeling. [/quote]

True.  Lots of facts we don’t know at this point.  DOJ will likely want to charge all the crimes in a single district though, but they need to establish proper venue for each charge.  I don’t see them charging obstruction in SDNY and then Espionage in SDFL.[/quote]

There would be advantages to trying charges separately in terms of simplicity and limiting defenses. [/quote]

Obstruction will be easier to prove. I vote for NY or NJ.
Espionage...hmmm. Depends on evidence. 
[/quote]

I guess I could DOJ just charging obstruction to get favorable venue and an easier case.  But the public optics of leaving off the substantive espionage charge seem bad.  [/quote]

Optics?
TFG needs an orange jumpsuit.
I don't care if he gets sent up the river for tax fraud -- anything! Put that criminal in jail!!![/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