Legal Charges Against Trump

**S Landreth** · 02-12-2022, 11:29 AM

Originally Posted by Buckaroo Banzai

Nonsense !!
it s another small win for trump. His special master gambit was simply another delaying tactic

wrong

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

And of course you're correct, just another baldy delaying tactic.

Silly school girl is wrong also

___________

There’s nothing about a delay in the article below.......

11th Circuit Ends Trump Special Master in Mar-a-Lago Case

‘The Answer Is No’: Conservative 11th Circuit Panel, Including Two Judges Trump Appointed, Puts a Stop to Special Master’s Mar-a-Lago Review

Just like any other subject of a criminal investigation, former President Donald Trump does not have a right to have a special master determine whether the files seized by the FBI are privileged, the 11th Circuit ruled Thursday.

“This appeal requires us to consider whether the district court had jurisdiction to block the United States from using lawfully seized records in a criminal investigation. The answer is no,” the per curiam opinion began.

The panel said it would not create a new rule for former presidents.

“In considering these arguments, we are faced with a choice: apply our usual test; drastically expand the availability of equitable jurisdiction for every subject of a search warrant; or carve out an unprecedented exception in our law for former presidents,” the opinion said. “We choose the first option. So the case must be dismissed.”

The unanimous ruling came from about as friendly territory that Trump could have hoped for: All three of the judges were appointed by Republican presidents, including two whom he personally selected. The per curiam opinion means that they rendered their lacerating judgment in one voice, with no lead author.

All of them agreed that Trump-appointed U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon did not have jurisdiction to hear Trump’s case, let alone issue a sweeping ruling forbidding federal authorities from using thousands of seized files in an ongoing criminal investigation pending the completion of a special master’s review. The 11th Circuit’s ruling voids the special master process in its entirely, relieving Senior U.S. District Judge Raymond Dearie of his duties.

From the 11th Circuit:

The law is clear. We cannot write a rule that allows any subject of a search warrant to block government investigations after the execution of the warrant. Nor can we write a rule that allows only former presidents to do so. Either approach would be a radical reordering of our caselaw limiting the federal courts’ involvement in criminal investigations. And both would violate bedrock separation-of-powers limitations. Accordingly, we agree with the government that the district court improperly exercised equitable jurisdiction, and that dismissal of the entire proceeding is required.

The district court improperly exercised equitable jurisdiction in this case. For that reason, we VACATE the September 5 order on appeal and REMAND with instructions for the district court to DISMISS the underlying civil action.

Another 11th Circuit panel previously reversed Cannon’s ruling temporarily barring the government from using the more than 100 documents with classified markings found at Mar-a-Lago for their criminal investigation. A warrant justifying the search said that federal authorities suspect possible violations of the Espionage Act, obstruction of justice, and concealment and removal of government records.

Trump’s swift and decisive defeat before the 11th Circuit was expected after his attorney James Trusty faced bruising questioning during oral arguments. One of the panelists, U.S. Circuit Judge Elizabeth “Britt” Cagle Grant, corrected Trusty when he referred to the court-authorized search of Mar-a-Lago as a raid.

“Do you think that ‘raid’ is the right term for execution of a warrant?” she asked, pointedly.

Chief Judge William H. Pryor Jr., the sole George W. Bush appointee on the panel, pushed back at Trusty’s characterization of the document authorizing the search as a “general warrant.”

“You didn’t establish that it was a general warrant,” he said.

When Trusty acknowledged that Trump couldn’t prove unlawful actions by the FBI during the raid, Pryor asked bluntly: “If you can’t establish that, then what are we doing here?”

The other member of the panel, U.S. Circuit Judge Andrew L. Brasher, and Grant were Trump appointees.

For the panel, Trump’s concession that no unlawful actions had been proven was crucial because federal courts only have equitable jurisdiction to hear such a challenge when there has been a showing of a “callous disregard” for constitutional rights.

“Because the vast majority of subjects of a search warrant have not experienced a ‘callous disregard’ of their constitutional rights, this factor ensures that equitable jurisdiction remains extraordinary,” the opinion note. “Otherwise, ‘a flood of disruptive civil litigation’ would surely follow. […] This restraint guards against needless judicial intrusion into the course of criminal investigations — a sphere of power committed to the executive branch.”

Every party, including Trump, the Justice Department, and Judge Cannon, agreed that there was not such a showing.

“The callous disregard standard has not been met here, and no one argues otherwise,” the ruling continues. “The district court’s entire reasoning about this factor was that it ‘agrees with the Government that, at least based on the record to date, there has not been a compelling showing of callous disregard for Plaintiff’s constitutional rights.’ None of Plaintiff’s filings here or in the district court contest this finding.”

At one part of the opinion, the panel even dinged Trump’s “alternative framing” and arguments as a “sideshow.”

Plaintiff’s alternative framing of his grievance is that he needs a special master and an injunction to protect documents that he designated as personal under the Presidential Records Act. But as we have said, the status of a document as personal or presidential does not alter the authority of the government to seize it under a warrant supported by probable cause; search warrants authorize the seizure of personal records as a matter of course. The Department of Justice has the documents because they were seized with a search warrant, not because of their status under the Presidential Records Act. So Plaintiff’s suggestion that “whether the Government is entitled to retain some or all the seized documents has not been determined by any court” is incorrect. The magistrate judge decided that issue when approving the warrant. To the extent that the categorization of these documents has legal relevance in future proceedings, the issue can be raised at that time.

All these arguments are a sideshow. The real question that guides our analysis is this—adequate remedy for what? The answer is the same as it was in Chapman: “No weight can be assigned to this factor because [Plaintiff] did not assert that any rights had been violated, i.e., that there has been a callous disregard for his constitutional rights or that a substantial interest in property is jeopardized.” 559 F.2d at 407. If there has been no constitutional violation—much less a serious one—then there is no harm to be remediated in the first place. This factor also weighs against exercising equitable jurisdiction.

https://s3.documentcloud.org/documen...h-c-vacate.pdf

**harrybarracuda** · 02-12-2022, 11:58 AM

Looks like they've borrowed Amber Heard's lawyers again...

Closing arguments at the Trump Organisation’s criminal tax fraud trial got off to a rocky start as a lawyer for the company was caught showing jurors portions of witness evidence that had previously been struck from the official court record.
Prosecutors objected to the display about an hour into lawyer Susan Necheles’ presentation, and Judge Juan Manuel Merchan admonished Ms Necheles and halted arguments so she could remove any other precluded evidence from a slideshow she was showing to jurors.
Ms Necheles said she did not intend to show any evidence that had been struck out as a result of a sustained objection. Judge Merchan noted that the objections themselves had been removed from the excerpts Ms Necheles showed, but not the objectionable evidence.
The lawyer resumed her closing argument after a half-hour break. Judge Merchan briefly discussed the transcript issue with jurors and Ms Necheles proceeded to show them the correct version, prefacing her remarks with a mea culpa: “Ladies and gentlemen, I apologise for that error.”

https://www.irishexaminer.com/world/arid-41019623.html

Meanwhile baldy continues to bleat:

The former US president Donald Trump “knew exactly what was going on” with top Trump Organisation executives who schemed for years to dodge taxes on company-paid perks, a prosecutor says, challenging defence claims that the former president was unaware of the plot at the heart of the company’s tax fraud case.
Manhattan prosecutor Joshua Steinglass lobbed the bombshell allegation during closing arguments. He promised to share more details when he resumes tomorrow, buoyed by the judge’s decision to grant prosecutors permission to veer into territory that had been considered off-limits because Trump is not on trial.
The tax fraud case is the only trial to arise from the three-year investigation of Trump and his business practices by the Manhattan district attorney’s office. Today’s closing arguments were the last chance for prosecutors and defence lawyers to sway jurors before they deliberate next week.
Judge Juan Manuel Merchan, overruling a defence objection after the jury had left court, said the company’s lawyers opened the door by asserting in their closing arguments that Trump was ignorant of the scheme, hatched by his longtime finance chief just steps from his Trump Tower office.

“It was the defence who invoked the name Donald Trump numerous times,” Merchan said, setting up a potentially explosive final day of arguments before jurors deliberate next week.
Prosecutors had given mixed signals about Trump’s importance to the case, telling a judge early on, “this case is not about Donald Trump”, but then repeatedly asking witnesses about him; showing a witness copies of Trump’s tax returns and, ultimately, seeking to connect the dots to him in closing arguments.
Trump has denied any knowledge of the scheme, writing earlier this week on his Truth Social platform: “There was no gain for ‘Trump’, and we had no knowledge of it.”

Trump Organisation lawyer presents ruled-out evidence in tax fraud case

Of course he fucking knew about it, the lying baldy orange cunto.

**Buckaroo Banzai** · 02-12-2022, 12:22 PM

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

You're arguing with a cut and paste moron that lacks the capacity for original thought. And of course you're correct, just another baldy delaying tactic.

If not to stimulate discussion, May I ask the reason you you post these articles?

**harrybarracuda** · 02-12-2022, 12:44 PM

Originally Posted by Buckaroo Banzai

If not to stimulate discussion, May I ask the reason you you post these articles?

Usually because they've caught my eye and I wish to comment on them.

This is, after all, Speakers. Otherwise I'd post them in a News thread without comment.

The facts, as you correctly state, are that baldy continually attempts to bury anything that might harm him in a legal morass, while simultaneously denying his involvement in anything illegal.

cf. Theft of classified documents, Tax fraud, Banking fraud, Insurrection, etc.

How the fuck this fat orange wanker is not already doing the perp walk is an indictment of the US legal system.

**aging one** · 02-12-2022, 01:46 PM

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

How the fuck this fat orange wanker is not already doing the perp walk is an indictment of the US legal system.

No its not the case is being built and Trump is being caught out and losing more each day.

Appeals court halts special master review of documents seized at Mar-a-Lago in major defeat for Trump

https://edition.cnn.com/2022/12/01/politics/mar-a-lago-special-master/index.html

Harry you should use the acronym IMHO. As you so often dont know much about the American legal or political system. Google is not always your friend.

Care is of the essence in getting this asshole and seeing his lying corrupt ass in jail.

le

**harrybarracuda** · 02-12-2022, 01:59 PM

Originally Posted by aging one

No its not the case is being built and Trump is being caught out and losing more each day.

Appeals court halts special master review of documents seized at Mar-a-Lago in major defeat for Trump

https://edition.cnn.com/2022/12/01/politics/mar-a-lago-special-master/index.html

Harry you should use the acronym IMHO. As you so often dont know much about the American legal or political system. Google is not always your friend.

Care is of the essence in getting this asshole and seeing his lying corrupt ass in jail.

le

So Grandpa Smug, which one of these 56 criminal accusations do you think will lead to his incarceration (and they're only the ones since 2015):

President Trump's staggering record of uncharged crimes - CREW | Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington

Note, since it might make it easier for you to get the point:

The “deadline to file charges” column is colored according to the deadline status. Red means the deadline has passed or will likely pass soon.

**S Landreth** · 02-12-2022, 02:59 PM

Originally Posted by aging one

Harry you should use the acronym IMHO. As you so often dont know much about the American legal or political system. Google is not always your friend.

careful the silly school girl will place you on ignore and start posting articles that have already been covered with his one-liners just to draw attention away from his ignorance

**Buckaroo Banzai** · 02-12-2022, 03:23 PM

My apologies ...
I meant to respond to Lardbreath with that reply and not to you.

**S Landreth** · 02-12-2022, 03:34 PM

^You still upset for supporting some wacko and you not receiving your 1,000.00/month?

Biden won and will win again if he runs. Get over it

Originally Posted by Buckaroo Banzai

Nonsense !!
it s another small win for trump. His special master gambit was simply another delaying tactic,.......

and by the way,.........you're dead wrong

**aging one** · 02-12-2022, 04:04 PM

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

So Grandpa Smug,

Kind of rich coming from the Google King.

**harrybarracuda** · 02-12-2022, 04:15 PM

Originally Posted by aging one

Kind of rich coming from the Google King.

Oh look, grandpa can't answer the question so posts what he thinks is an amusing picture.

Really showing you know your stuff, eh?

**Buckaroo Banzai** · 02-12-2022, 04:16 PM

Originally Posted by S Landreth

^You still upset for supporting some wacko and you not receiving your 1,000.00/month?

Biden won and will win again if he runs. Get over it

I really like to know what you are smocking, I would like some !

What wacko am i supporting?

Originally Posted by S Landreth

and by the way,.........you're dead wrong

and by the way ,......you still have not told me how.
I know you might not think so , but I got news for you, saying that I am wrong does not make it so,
So....

**harrybarracuda** · 02-12-2022, 04:16 PM

Originally Posted by Buckaroo Banzai

My apologies ...
I meant to respond to Lardbreath with that reply and not to you.

It's a valid question. Not one he'd be able to answer mind you. He's a bit of a whiny little bitch.

**Buckaroo Banzai** · 02-12-2022, 04:25 PM

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Oh look, grandpa can't answer the question so posts what he thinks is an amusing picture.

Really showing you know your stuff, eh?

And the funny thing is, that it's something he cut and pasted from Google

MY wife is making fun of me for the faces I make while writing these replies. LOL
I'll tell you , I might not agree with you all ,all of the time , but I got to say, I do love you all.

**S Landreth** · 02-12-2022, 04:52 PM

Originally Posted by Buckaroo Banzai

and by the way ,......you still have not told me how.
I know you might not think so , but I got news for you, saying that I am wrong does not make it so,

No I know, as the first post on this page explains

Just like any other subject of a criminal investigation, former President Donald Trump does not have a right to have a special master determine whether the files seized by the FBI are privileged, the 11th Circuit ruled Thursday.

The panel said it would not create a new rule for former presidents.

It’s nothing about a delay, it’s about nobody being above the law. And again,.........you’re dead wrong.

Originally Posted by Buckaroo Banzai

What wacko am i supporting?

I shouldn’t come down on you too hard. You’re a bit slow. Open the link below

Originally Posted by S Landreth

You still upset for supporting some wacko and you not receiving your 1,000.00/month?

**Buckaroo Banzai** · 02-12-2022, 05:07 PM

Originally Posted by S Landreth

I shouldn’t come down on you too hard. You’re a bit slow. Open the link below

I am slow?
First I told you i disagree with the quote from your page I reacted to , and you say I am "wrong" , which I might very well be, but when I ask you how I am wrong you say that I should read the item I disagree with .
I obviously i read it, otherwise how would I disagree with it?
Then you say I support some wacko , and when I ask who and how, you told me to open some link.
Is your strategy to infect my computer with some viruses contained in that link? LOL
Be a men and own what you post rather than referring me to others to fight your battles will you?

**S Landreth** · 02-12-2022, 05:23 PM

Originally Posted by Buckaroo Banzai

you say I am "wrong" , which I might very well be,......

Might be?

No, you’re dead wrong. It’s crystal clear, the court’s decision/trump’s attempt to try to convince the court he had some type of special privilege has absolutely nothing to do with a delay.

Just like any other subject of a criminal investigation, former President Donald Trump does not have a right to have a special master determine whether the files seized by the FBI are privileged, the 11th Circuit ruled Thursday.

The panel said it would not create a new rule for former presidents.

**Buckaroo Banzai** · 02-12-2022, 05:46 PM

Originally Posted by S Landreth

Might be?

No, you’re dead wrong. It’s crystal clear, the court’s decision/trump’s attempt to try to convince the court he had some type of special privilege has absolutely nothing to do with a delay.

All that might very well be , but it does not change the fact that the investigation was delayed until after the midterms , and you can tell me that trump did not want the investigation , if not go away, certainly delayed as long as possible, and at the very least until after the midterms.
Which it did a, and as such a small victory by him.
Of course everyone would like to spin this in the way thar best supports their agenda, buy facts are facts
and the fact that the investigation was delayed until after the did terms is undeniable.
At this point I feel we are

and will say no more on the subject, but feel free to call me names if it makes you fell better.

**S Landreth** · 02-12-2022, 05:50 PM

^again, you're dead wrong. Decision had nothing to do with a delay and had everything to do with trump wanting special treatment.

No one is above the law.

**Norton** · 02-12-2022, 05:57 PM

Originally Posted by S Landreth

No one is above the law.

“All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.”
George Orwell

**Buckaroo Banzai** · 02-12-2022, 06:01 PM

Originally Posted by S Landreth

^again, you're dead wrong. Decision had nothing to do with a delay and had everything to do with trump wanting special treatment.

No one is above the law.

Sure, sure..
but can you at least tell us what you are smoking?

**S Landreth** · 02-12-2022, 06:18 PM

I don’t smoke. Happy you’ve recognized your misunderstanding of the court’s ruling yesterday.

**pickel** · 03-12-2022, 04:30 AM

Originally Posted by S Landreth

The panel said it would not create a new rule for former presidents.

Any other person caught with classified documents illegaly in their possession would immediately be jailed without bail until a trial is held.

**S Landreth** · 03-12-2022, 06:20 AM

^so true

____________

This is a delay tactic (maybe a very short time, if it doesn't go to the full court)

Donald Trump Fights to Keep Mar-a-Lago Case Alive

After the 11th Circuit’s Beatdown, Donald Trump Fights to Keep Moribund Mar-a-Lago Case Alive Until Ruling Takes Effect Next Week

The 11th Circuit’s blistering ruling shutting down former President Donald Trump’s lawsuit and special master review of files the FBI seized at Mar-a-Lago is set to officially take effect next week, but until that time, deadlines in the case remain looming.

On Friday, the Department of Justice asked the judge presiding over the moribund case to pause all proceedings until the case dies, but Trump’s attorneys opposed that plan later in the day — without indicating whether they would lodge an appeal to the Supreme Court.

“The Eleventh Circuit shortened the time to issue the mandate, thereby decreasing the already limited time available to President Trump to pursue legal options,” Trump’s lawyer Lindsey Halligan wrote. “President Trump opposes modification of the current case management order at this time.”

The federal appellate court plans to issue its mandate on Thursday, Dec. 8, meaning that — absent any stay from a higher court — Trump’s lawsuit will breathe its last breath. So will Raymond Dearie’s special master review that Trump requested to inspect tens of thousands of documents the FBI seized from Mar-a-Lago for attorney-client privilege or executive privilege.

Until that time, Trump’s legal team wants to prolong the proceedings and keep up the current schedule. They asked U.S. District Aileen Cannon, at minimum, to grant hold a telephone conference two days before the drop dead date to discuss how to proceed.

Rebuking Trump’s legal arguments as a “sideshow,” the 11th Circuit panel — comprised of two Trump appointees and one George W. Bush appointee — was equally lacerating toward Cannon’s rulings in the former president’s favor. The panel, speaking in one voice in a per curiam opinion, indirectly called Cannon’s ruling a “radical” rewriting of U.S. criminal law that would carve out a special exception for former presidents.

Former federal prosecutor Mitchell Epner, now a partner at the firm Rottenberg Lipman Rich PC, predicted that Trump’s luck before Cannon, one of his appointees, would likely run out.

“I cannot imagine Judge Cannon forcing the parties to continue with the Special Master process while awaiting mandate to issue,” Epner told Law&Crime. “I am virtually certain that once the mandate issues, Judge Cannon will immediately dismiss.”

Special Counsel Jack Smith reminded Cannon that the case meanwhile hangs in limbo.

“Pending the issuance of the Eleventh Circuit’s mandate, the parties and Special Master have deadlines and work that will be rendered moot when the mandate issues,” his filing states, noting that the government’s deadline to a response to Trump’s motion to unseal the search warrant application is due next Tuesday.

Trump’s lawyers notably did not specify what, if any, plans they have to appeal, but experts like Epner note the former president’s habit of dragging out appeals.

“I also am virtually certain the FPOTUS will seek discretionary review by the Supreme Court,” Epner said, using the abbreviation for former President of the United States. “I am highly confident it will be denied. My only real uncertainty is whether Justice Thomas (in his capacity receiving motions from the 11th Circuit) will unilaterally deny it or refer it to the full Court for consideration.”

Clarence Thomas is the circuit justice for the 11th Circuit.

Trump’s decision to seek Supreme Court review of the D.C. Circuit’s decision affirm the release of his tax records to the House got him about two weeks of delay, Epner added.

**harrybarracuda** · 03-12-2022, 09:40 AM

You can't find decent bent judges any more, can you?

Remember how liberals claimed that Donald Trump’s judicial appointees would serve as legal bodyguards, shielding him in his post-Presidency? Sorry to disappoint.

On Thursday an Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals three-judge panel dismissed Mr. Trump’s objections to the FBI’s Mar-a-Lago search and district Judge Aileen Cannon’s appointment of a special master to review seized documents. The panel included Chief Judge William Pryor, who was appointed by George W. Bush, and Trump-appointees Britt Grant and Andrew Brasher.

“The law is clear. We cannot write a rule that allows any subject of a search warrant to block government investigations after the execution of the warrant,” the panel wrote. “Nor can we write a rule that allows only former presidents to do so. Either approach would be a radical reordering of our caselaw limiting the federal courts’ involvement in criminal investigations. And both would violate bedrock separation-of-powers limitations.”

Trump Strikes Out Before His Judges - WSJ

Thread: Legal Charges Against Trump

Thread Tools

Display

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

Posting Permissions