DOJ Strikes Back

Uncategorized 1 Minute

https://tinyurl.com/2p85wb2j

The link is to the DOJ’s formal response to Trump’s filing for the appointment of a Special Master and other relief. In addition to compelling legal arguments – raising questions about the basic competence of Trump’s lawyers – it also includes a detailed timeline of events which makes for very interesting reading. It addresses and rebuts the lies being spread in defense of Trump’s behavior on many points.

For example, when government agents visited Mar-a-Lago to collect subpoenaed material they were explicitly denied permission to look inside any of the boxes held in the storage closet. So much for “full access” as some here have claimed.

Published by Paul Murphy

Published

31 thoughts on “DOJ Strikes Back”

  1. I haven’t read it, but I did stay up last night to hear the DOJ’s decision on Trump’s and his legal team’s nonsensical attempt at further stalling this outcome. I don’t even care what DT’s rantings will be today; just more blathering craziness I predict.

    Liked by 3 people

    Reply

  2. Been reading this morning’s tweets about this document that was released last night.  Some people are asking interesting questions.  e.g. Why did Trump need the “originals?”  If it was stuff he meant to sell or use for blackmail, he could have xeroxed them and returned the originals the first time he was asked.

    The only reason I can think of was the originals held incriminating evidence against him for crimes we haven’t even heard about yet.  Maybe it was transcripts from his “perfect call” extorting the President of Ukraine.  Or transcripts from his meetings with Putin and/or Kim?  Or calls to governors asking them to “find votes.” He might not want to destroy those because they could be of future use to him, but he wouldn’t want anybody outside of his cult to know what they said.  If that’s what they are, he saved the government years of research to pick out the incriminating documents from the lot… and now the FBI has them… and NARA has organized them so the DOJ won’t have to spend a lot of time sifting through them. 

    Michael Cohen also had an interesting observation: “The second they would put him in handcuffs, he would turn around and say, I have the documentation showing, for example, where our nuclear launchpads are. This is what I believe: he would use it and say, if you proceed with this, I’m telling you right now, there are 20 of my loyal supporters, you don’t know who they are, but we will release that information to Russia, to Iran, to whoever it might be.”

    The best case scenario I can think of is, Trump was too stupid to realize that NARA, not former Presidents, build Presidential libraries, and he took random stuff he thought he’d need to build his library. But he was too disorganized to handle the documents and he lost or misplaced hundreds of classified documents because he was careless and just didn’t give a damn. When he was asked for them, he really didn’t have a clue what he had or where it was stored. “Stupid” is his best defense.

    Liked by 3 people

    Reply

  3. DOJ is having a hard time with this case.

    Its main argument against appointment of a Special Master seems to be: Too late! Our investigators have already reviewed all the material, and, besides, national security. But this is a tacit admission that DOJ’s document seizures were conducted in bad faith.

    Further, DOJ hints at obstruction but in the process describes several voluntary releases of presidential records.

    I won’t be surprised if this story fizzles out.

    Like

    Reply

    1. “But this is a tacit admission that DOJ’s document seizures were conducted in bad faith.”

      That is nonsense. I recommend you read the DOJ filing I put in a separate post this morning. If you keep parroting Trump’s bullshit after reading it, you have a serious cult-blindness problem. IMHO

      Liked by 3 people

      Reply

      1. RE: “I recommend you read the DOJ filing…”

        I read the DOJ filing you posted at the top of this thread. My comments are based on it.

        Like

        Reply

        1. Whoops. I thought – when I replied – that your comment was on another thread and you had not read this detailed and illuminating time-line of events and devastating legal arguments. My bad.

          Now that I understand that you HAVE read it and from it conclude that the “DOJ is having a hard time with this case” I have to stand by my comment above – extreme willful blindness on display. It really seems that you people have an extraordinary ability to convince yourselves that up is down.

          Liked by 3 people

          Reply

          1. “Legal arguments against the appointment of a Special Master are “devastating” — to what?”

            Actually, I was referring to all the bullshit claims Trump and his cult have been making. His ownership of the records, his claims of privilege, his claims of magical declassification powers, his claims of full cooperation, his claims of persecution, etc., etc.

            But to answer this question – they are devastating to the claim that a Special Master is needed. And they provide a list of legally compelling reasons.

            Liked by 1 person

          2. RE: “Actually, I was referring to all the bullshit claims Trump and his cult have been making.”

            Then you are talking to someone else, not me.

            Like

          3. “Then you are talking to someone else, not me.”

            Of course! You would NEVER push bullshit claims about Trump’s declassification powers, or how secure Mar-a-Lago is, or how he fully cooperated with NARA, or how Trump’s rights were violated, or that there was no reasonable basis for the search warrant. NEVER in a million years.

            Liked by 1 person

    2. With the trove of TS and SCI documents found during the search, I find it interesting you still give him a pass.

      As far as “several voluntary releases” go, you should look a little deeper into the fact as to WHY they had to execute the search warrant. They also indicate that documents were NOT turned over and that the June 3 letter from the attorney’s said that ALL classified material had been turned over, when it was not.

      Liked by 3 people

      Reply

      1. RE: “With the trove of TS and SCI documents found during the search, I find it interesting you still give him a pass.”

        No pass. The presence of TS/SCI documents at Mar-a-Lago doesn’t concern me, unless there is good reason to believe an unauthorized disclosure occurred. The facts here are similar to Hillary Clinton’s possession of TS/SCI documents, but in her case the materials were stored on an non-secure, internet accessible server, even transmitted in the clear by email.

        RE: “They also indicate that documents were NOT turned over and that the June 3 letter from the attorney’s said that ALL classified material had been turned over, when it was not.”

        I’m aware of those statements by the DOJ. The present document doesn’t tell us enough to accuse anyone of obstruction.

        Like

        Reply

        1. “The presence of TS/SCI documents at Mar-a-Lago doesn’t concern me,”…

          Of course it doesn’t. You have complete and total faith in the patriotism and honor of TFG. Your a bit gullible in that respect. But, hey, your boy can do no wrong.

          “The present document doesn’t tell us enough to accuse anyone of obstruction.”

          You really don’t WANT to see the truth because it would lay every bit of your pro-Trump sentiments to waste. Documents were removed from storage and “hidden” in a desk in an unsecured office. They were NOT turned over to NARA or DOJ when requested even though lawyers for TFG stated unequivocally via letter on June 3, that ALL classified documents shad been turned over properly.

          Indications of obstruction are all over the filing. But YOU refuse to believe the probable in lieu of the extremely improbable.

          Liked by 1 person

          Reply

  4. I agree, somebody is having a hard time with this case. But it’s not the DOJ. And obstruction is more than hinted at. However, obstruction is the least thing Trump has to worry about.

    Liked by 3 people

    Reply

          1. “If not for obstruction, then for what?”

            Okay, it was a gag referring to the fact that the prosecutor investigating Trump’s criminal attempts to subvert the Georgia election in 2020 is closing in on him. See, its a picture of the Georgia State Penitentiary where convicted felons get to be guests of the state.

            Liked by 1 person

  5. Trying to do too many things at once this morning. I thought I posted a reply about why obstruction is the least of Trump’s worries, but it’s not showing up here.

    The answer is, the FBI didn’t go to all the trouble of raiding MAL to get back some documents so they could prove obstruction. Those were not library books Trump was hiding. Those things had classifications of Top Secret and SCI. The FBI is now investigating “damage to national security.” That’s as serious as it gets. If you look at closeups of the covers on the documents the FBI released, some of them are marked “human intelligence”… they could be lists of our spies in foreign governments. Trump has ZERO excuse for having those in his own private house. If those should fall into the wrong hands, people will die. No jury will take something like that lightly.

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

    1. RE: “Trump has ZERO excuse for having those in his own private house.”

      Maybe not, but DOJ has neither alleged nor proven that their presence at Mar-a-Lago violated any laws or standards.

      Like

      Reply

      1. “Maybe not, but DOJ has neither alleged nor proven that their presence at Mar-a-Lago violated any laws or standards.”

        They have done both. That is how they got the search warrant to look for them. Duh!

        Like

        Reply

    1. “Teh DOJ’s assertions are not evidence”

      Actually, they are especially when they can be corroborated by multiple people.

      For example, you have been spreading the LIE that NARA had full access to what was in the boxes. This document says that was not true. That, in fact, permission to review the contents of the boxes was expressly forbidden by Trump’s legal team. There were three FBI agents and a NARA lawyer who are witnesses to what transpired. That fact was in this sworn affidavit. It IS evidence.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

      2. In the sworn affidavit? In one of the redacted parts?

        The FBI asserts that Trump had no standing to demand return of any of the documents taken because they were not his. And then further on that they had already sorted out the privileged documents Those are most certainly his.

        So, which statement was the lie?

        Like

        Reply

        1. “In the sworn affidavit? In one of the redacted parts?”

          No, in last night’s filing labelled. . .

          “UNITED STATES’ RESPONSE TO MOTION FOR JUDICIAL OVERSIGHT AND ADDITIONAL RELIEF” linked to at the beginning.

          None of it is redacted. Maybe you should read it?

          Your “which statement was a lie argument” could not be more childish. You are deliberately and, I think, dishonestly misconstruing which documents Trump has no standing to demand. Here is the argument from last night’s brief . . .

          “As an initial matter, the former President lacks standing to seek judicial relief or oversight as to Presidential records because those records do not belong to him. The Presidential Records Act makes clear that “[t]he United States” has “complete ownership, possession, and control”

          Like

          Reply

          1. The DOJ filing is NOT a sworn affidavit, it is their argument.

            Note the picture that accompanies the article, Are the framed TIME covers Presidential records or personal souvenirs? But the DOJ asserts that none of what they took belongs to Trump.

            Does the picture tell you what’s inside those cover sheets? Is there anything at all? Documents Trump declassified but kept the originals as evidence for future legal action?

            I don’t know, neither do you.

            That isn’t evidence. It’s not even a court filing. It’s PR

            Like

          2. “The DOJ filing is NOT a sworn affidavit, it is their argument.”

            I accept that correction, but the point stands. Any fact offered in it is offered under severe penalties if it is not true.

            “But the DOJ asserts that none of what they took belongs to Trump.”
            That is false. Their assertion is that Presidential records do not belong to Trump. Read the brief.

            Again and again you assert Trump has magical powers to declassify documents. He does not. He would have had to document any declassifications he did on each document BEFORE he left office. He is far too lazy and stupid to have actually done that.

            Like

Leave a comment