The Omnibus P01135809 Criminal Investigation Thread

Okay so how does this work, if Trump's lawyer confirms that she's a witness to the crimes? Can the DOJ force her to take the stand about things she talked about on Fox News?

Ex-Trump Aides Say He Probably Has More Sensitive Documents At Other Properties
Michael Cohen and John Bolton said they suspect Trump could have more classified documents stored in Bedminster, New Jersey, and elsewhere.

I don’t think they can force her, 5th amendment and all, but they can coerce her. Trump’s lawyers need lawyers.

And of course Orange Biff Tannen would have carpet that looks like that.

Also Nigel Farage (UK political shitwaffle), Holly Valance (WTF?) and Charlie Kirk (fundy twat). Apart from Valance, I wouldn't trust any of those not to sneak a peek. Farage's Brexit campaign benefited heavily from Russian disinformation.

Orange Biff Tannen

Just because someone was in the room, doesn't mean the documents were in the room at the same time. It also doesn't mean they saw the docs.

That's the point. Classified docs are NOT meant to be left in a position where we 1) don't know where they are and 2) don't know who might have seen them.

Fair.

Indeed. That's why it's ILLEGAL to take SCI outside of secure facilities.

Anybody other than Biff who did something like this would've been cuffed and hauled off looooong ago.

He's been shown extraordinary deference and still he cries like the 300lb toddler that he is.

So I started watching super liberal Beau and he suggests that the reason Trump hasn't been cuffed yet is because the FBI has a lot of more work to do and they're still building a much bigger case so these things take time.

The fact that the original communication came from Jay Bratt, head of Counterintelligence and Export Control, should have clued in Trump and company that the DOJ is looking at whether any of this information has been disseminated.

The fact that they overtly lied to him while hiding over a hundred documents after signing that they had turned over all pertinent files marked classified informs Garland that almost certainly they have been.

At best Fearless Leader was using stuff like a possible Macron dossier as personal wank material and sharing it with buddies like Matt Gaetz and Charlie Kirk. At worst he was actively engaged in treason. There's some middle ground to be sure, but those strike me as the top two possibilities.

There's also a possibility where he never really gave a shit what was in any of the documents, he was just basically stomping around going "MINE MINE MINE MINE MINE!" and wanted some important-looking folders to wave around as props.

I wouldn't rule that out, though it'd be fairly easy to placate him if that was the case given the guy literally had photoshopped TIME covers framed on his wall - when he's ACTUALLY been on the cover of TIME.

In I'm sure totally unrelated news, the FBI and DOJ raid multiple properties in New York of Russian oligarch Victor Veskelberg today.

Also, Judge Cannon rules that DOJ can unseal a detailed inventory of what was taken from Mar a Largo by FBI in contravention of Trump's legal teams request for it to remain sealed.

Also, Lindsey Graham loses yet another bid to squash subpoena to avoid testifying in Fulton County election tampering probe.

Nah, I don't like this line of thinking.

A emotionally unstable narcissist stomping around like a toddler after getting evicted from his home office isn't going to obsess over documents that should have been under lock and key and out of sight in the first place, he's going to obsess over paintings and statues and furniture and other flashy symbols of status and wealth that he's always been obsessed with.

If he stole classified original documents and then went to the trouble of hiding them from the authorities, it's because he saw a political or financial advantage to possessing them. His old buddy Jeffrey Epstein surely taught him the value of possessing extensive blackmail files on wealthy and important people.

Let's not minimize the deeply sinister actions of this man by saying "oh, he was just being childish." Don't let him off that easily.

He's always going to have some supporters who defend him no matter what, but taking the time to build a very robust case is also important for justifying the action to those whose first reaction is to assume it must be politically motivated.

I also think it’s a bit simpler of a scandal to understand, and a bit easier for prosecutors to move forward than on some of these more elaborate cases. Think about some classic Trump scandals: Russiagate is all over the place. There’s all this miasma of confusion about where Trump is involved. Or January 6: There’s a running debate about whether Trump himself incited the riot, or what role he had. But this one is really simple: Either you took records or you didn’t. Either they’re top secret or they’re not. And either you turned them over or you didn’t. And what we see here is: He took the documents; they’re top secret; he didn’t turn them over.

That's why they're using the espionage act, you don't need intent.

Has it been mentioned that in Trump’s legal team’s response to the DOJ’s 37 page response to their request for a Special Master not only did they A) make no claim that the documents had already been declassified and B) later on when laying out the qualifications the Special Master would have to have explicitly stated that extraordinarily high security clearances would be required?

This article takes the case way too seriously. The court doesn’t have jurisdiction, the filing doesn’t cite any reason that the court should take anomalous jurisdiction, and the DOJ already has a taint team, so there’s no reason for a special master.

I think the judge's comment that they were "leaning toward" appointing a special master was just ass-covering for Trumplandia. If there was any possible merit to the request appointing a special master could head off a potential appeal issue, but I think the DOJ's filing and picture took care of that.

The crime-fraud exception means that the attorney-client privilege likely won't apply. However, the lawyers likely would be entitled to plead the 5th Amendment if they wanted to. However, the attorneys could also decide that discretion is the better part of valor and try to cut a deal with the feds.

Trump claims that the FBI was looking for Hillary’s emails when they searched Mar-a-Largo. https://twitter.com/ronfilipkowski/status/1565357420108455938?s=21&t=rw-SQsUvrUPQTVH-tshMlA

So, he's admitting to having stolen documents that were a focus of a criminal investigation now?

It really is hilarious how every excuse they come up with reveals the previous one to have been a lie.

American middle-aged and elderly angry white men with beer guts are going to provide the rest of us with years of entertainment.