DiscussMormonism.com

Binger wrote: ↑

Tue Sep 20, 2022 7:00 pm

No. I do not have a law degree. I don't need one to address what you claim others should fear. I did not see Tribe's or Lacovara's prediction that an ideologue and sycophant was at the top of the list for Supreme Court nominees. Where did they say this and are their claims the basis of what you fear and what you prescribe that the rest of us should fear?

They may not have explicitly predicted that Cannon or any other specified Trump sycophant is at the top of the list of Trump's preferred Supreme Court nominees, but it is clear that they acknowledge that she does indeed appear to be a Trump sycophant who was clearly chosen by Trump for precisely that reason. As they said:

Twice this year the supreme court reaffirmed this doctrine that determination whether information constitutes “state secrets” is vested exclusively in the designated executive branch officials, and courts may not legitimately second-guess that determination.

Yet that is precisely what Judge Cannon is seeking to do in her zeal to protect what she views as the ex-president’s prerogatives, defying established law and usurping responsibilities that belong elsewhere.

This is what happens when presidents pursue a policy of appointing inexperienced ideologues to lifetime judgeships. The country is paying a very high price for accepting nominees like Judge Cannon.

Can there really be any serious doubt that she would be near or at the top of the list of Trump's preferences for future Supreme Court nominees if, partially because of her corrupt machinations on his behalf, Trump manages escape Scott free from prosecution for the accusations against him, and consequently succeeds in regaining the Presidency?

Gunnar wrote: ↑

Tue Sep 20, 2022 7:28 pm

This is what happens when presidents pursue a policy of appointing inexperienced ideologues

Who are the other presidents they are referring to in this portion of your quote?

Binger wrote: ↑

Tue Sep 20, 2022 7:31 pm

Who are the other presidents they are referring to in this portion of your quote?

Irrelevant.

Oh dear, Dearie was not having it from team Trump. He said since the documents are marked classified that’s basically it, unless Trump, or his lawyers, want to explain what has been declassified. His lawyers declined again since they don’t want to reveal their top secret defense yet. Before Trump’s team had filed that they were cool with things taking as long as they needed to, but it looks like Dearie is going to speed things along.

Dwight wrote: ↑

Tue Sep 20, 2022 8:56 pm

Oh dear, Dearie was not having it from team Trump. He said since the documents are marked classified that’s basically it, unless Trump, or his lawyers, want to explain what has been declassified. His lawyers declined again since they don’t want to reveal their top secret defense yet. Before Trump’s team had filed that they were cool with things taking as long as they needed to, but it looks like Dearie is going to speed things along.

From what I’ve read, Dearie did a nice job. He’s got decades of experience, knows how long a privilege review should take, and put the parties on notice that he’s going to move things along.

The issue of whether the documents marked classified are actually classified is, I think, gumming up the works. The judge didn’t direct the SM to examine that issue, and Trump’s lawyers are just tap dancing in the hopes that they can get a look at the documents marked classified before committing to a position. I’m guessing that, once they see the documents, they hope Trump will be able to concoct a story about declassification that isn’t inconsistent with the documents he took.

The SM seems to be thinking that, if Trump isn’t willing to claim he declassified documents at this stage, he doesn’t have to look at the documents marked classified. He may not with respect to whether Trump is entitled to retain the documents: Trump has yet to offer how any documents that was classified at any time could be considered a “personal record” under the PRA. But he may still need to review them for privilege — especially executive privilege.

Trump’s lawyers finally discovered their best argument on executive privilege and the documents marked classified. The most detailed version of the inventory says that at least a couple of the documents marked classified include “notes.” Notes written on or fastened to a classified document could be covered by executive privilege. Trump’s lawyers referred to this in the opposition to the government’s motion to stay filled with the 11th Cir, although they buried it in a footnote. Because, of course they did.

Even then, the SM may only be required to review any notes, as opposed to documents prepared by others. But, if he sticks to the position he appeared to take at the hearing, we may see a motion for clarification from Trump in the next few days.

Dearie wanting to know what Trump declassified puts the burden on the Trump team to furnish a lie, which once established as a lie becomes prosecutable.

Moksha wrote: ↑

Wed Sep 21, 2022 7:07 am

Dearie wanting to know what Trump declassified puts the burden on the Trump team to furnish a lie, which once established as a lie becomes prosecutable.

Trump's team has announced that they refuse to answer since the declassification answer will be reserved for Trump's criminal trial.

My guess is that the Republican plan for a civil war will commence prior to that bogus answer being necessary.

Because you’re sending it to Mar-a-Lago or to wherever you’re sending it. And, there doesn’t have to be a process. There can be a process, but there doesn’t have to be. You’re the president. You make that decision. So, when you send it, it’s declassified. - Trump on Fox News

1) Absolute horse crap.

2) What do you mean “wherever you’re sending it?” Where was “it” sent?

3) WTF was “sent?”

How in the “F” did the Republican party get here?

eta: This is what a confession looks like, by the way.

- Doc

Doctor CamNC4Me wrote: ↑

Thu Sep 22, 2022 8:32 pm

Because you’re sending it to Mar-a-Lago or to wherever you’re sending it. And, there doesn’t have to be a process. There can be a process, but there doesn’t have to be. You’re the president. You make that decision. So, when you send it, it’s declassified. - Trump on Fox News

1) Absolute horse crap.

2) What do you mean “wherever you’re sending it?” Where was “it” sent?

3) WTF was “sent?”

How in the “F” did the Republican party get here?

eta: This is what a confession looks like, by the way.

- Doc

Wowza, that Hannity interview has some gems.

Stable Genius wrote:If you're the president of the United States you can declassify just by saying: ‘It’s declassified.' Even by thinking about it.

Ladies and gentlemen, the President of the United States can declassify documents "by thinking about it."

I wish Billy West was still doing his Zapp Brannigan stuff with Trump quotes.

Doctor Steuss wrote: ↑

Thu Sep 22, 2022 9:13 pm

Ladies and gentlemen, the President of the United States can declassify documents "by thinking about it."

I think Trump could have been grandstanding to impress gullible Fox viewers with his superpowers.
Anyway, Ajax will probably conclude with, "See there, I told you he could do anything".

Many Evangelicals will wish to include this in the Book of Revelations, while many Mormons will seek its addition to the D&C.