Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Judge just ordered a redacted version released. yay!

That's not really true. He ordered DOJ to give him a proposed redacted version with justifications for the redactions. We won't see anything anytime this month, and I think there's at least a 50/50 chance DOJ prevails on him to keep it all sealed.

And apparently either side can ask to have the final decision reviewed by a District Judge. This is still the magistrate.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Judge just ordered a redacted version released. yay!

That's not really true. He ordered DOJ to give him a proposed redacted version with justifications for the redactions. We won't see anything anytime this month, and I think there's at least a 50/50 chance DOJ prevails on him to keep it all sealed.

It's a good theoretical stance, but in practice I hope much of it is redacted to protect all the people who are cooperating with the investigation.

Anonymous wrote:Judge just ordered a redacted version released. yay!

That's not really true. He ordered DOJ to give him a proposed redacted version with justifications for the redactions. We won't see anything anytime this month, and I think there's at least a 50/50 chance DOJ prevails on him to keep it all sealed.

Anonymous wrote:Judge just ordered a redacted version released. yay!

First there will be silence, then as the talking points filter to the fascist boots on the ground, they spray us with them.

Judge just ordered a redacted version released. yay!

Anonymous wrote:

Of course they won't ask the judge to release the affidavit, but they are perfectly willing to whine on TV about how it isn't being released.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:anybody read this: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/18/us/politics/trump-fbi-classified-documents.html

It says he kept the documents because he is just a senile old hoarder. How can anybody want this man as their leader? No discipline, no thoughtfulness. Just an animal, like a dog.

That’s Maggie Haberman’s take, she’s always trying to excuse Trump.

Haberman’s take always sounds like the Ivanka POV.

Anonymous wrote:It means a self incriminating statement

It's more than that though, isn't it? I looked it up. I'm not a lawyer, but I think it allows hearsay to be entered as evidence in some circumstances?

Like if a guy tells his girlfriend "I shot that old man last night in the robbery" the day after the robbery. She can testify against him in court and it is allowed.

Anonymous wrote:What does "statement against penal interest" mean?

It is an incriminating statement by a criminal defendant. It is one of the exceptions to the hearsay rule. Under the hearsay rule, out of court statements are generally excluded. But there are a lot of exceptions. Basically under this one, if you admit to a crime or make a statement implicating yourself out of court, the prosecutor can use that statement in court.

Anonymous wrote:What does "statement against penal interest" mean?

So this was all about obstruction of justice? And it’s an admission that he stole the documents and was definitely not cooperating with NARA and lied about returning everything?

Anonymous wrote:

OMG. I bet he's right. Just like all the strange Russian "suicides". JFC

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:anybody read this: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/18/us/politics/trump-fbi-classified-documents.html

It says he kept the documents because he is just a senile old hoarder. How can anybody want this man as their leader? No discipline, no thoughtfulness. Just an animal, like a dog.

That’s Maggie Haberman’s take, she’s always trying to excuse Trump.

This.

It’s the latest , pathetic, excuse for behavior that at best was so negligent and reckless that he should be barred from public office, and at worst treasonous.

Anonymous wrote:anybody read this: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/18/us/politics/trump-fbi-classified-documents.html

It says he kept the documents because he is just a senile old hoarder. How can anybody want this man as their leader? No discipline, no thoughtfulness. Just an animal, like a dog.

That’s Maggie Haberman’s take, she’s always trying to excuse Trump.