DOJ pushing to keep Trump from blocking release of classified docs report on immunity grounds

[BumRushDaShow]

Source: ABC News

January 16, 2025, 5:52 PM


Using President-elect Donald Trump's claim of presidential immunity to prevent members of Congress from viewing special counsel Jack Smith's final report on Trump's alleged retention of classified documents would be a "significant and unprecedented extension" of the Supreme Court's presidential immunity doctrine, federal prosecutors told a federal judge in Florida on Thursday.

Justice Department lawyers urged U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon to reject Trump's request to block the release of the report -- which she is set to consider at an afternoon hearing on Friday -- because Trump failed to provide a legal authority for a Florida judge to block members of Congress from seeing the report.

"The President-elect cites no authority for the proposition that immunity shields the President-elect from the mere review, by the Chairmen and Ranking Members of the Department's committees of jurisdiction, of a report regarding his conduct," the DOJ's filing said.

Trump pleaded not guilty in 2023 to 40 criminal counts related to his handling of classified materials after leaving the White House, after prosecutors said he repeatedly refused to return hundreds of documents containing classified information and took steps to thwart the government's efforts to get the documents back.

Read more: https://abcnews.go.com/US/doj-pushing-trump-blocking-release-classified-docs-report/story?id=117766813

[Think. Again.]

1. Sure...

...this is a perfect example of how garland runs out the clock for trump.

garland himself has already stated cannon has no authority over those cases right now and yet, he's asking her, on the last day possible, to lift the blockade he said she had no jurisdiction to set.

[BumRushDaShow]

2. "garland himself has already stated cannon has no authority over those cases right now"

She has NO AUTHORITY over the J6 case which is under the D.C. District and had been assigned to D.C. District Court Judge Tanya Chutkan.

Remember there are 2 cases. The unfortunate method for designating ( "naming" ) the reports for both of these cases using the terminology of "Volume 1" and "Volume 2", with one referencing J6 (under the D.C. District) and the other referencing the Classified Docs (which is under Southern District of Florida) has confused much of DU, and so the misinformation continues to fly.

The J6 "volume" WAS released and seemed to land with a silent thud on DU, because people had mentally assumed it would never come out, Because. Garland. And so in their minds it still hasn't. The 174 pages of it is available for anyone to read and the cognitive dissonance is there for all to see.

[Think. Again.]

3. The case discussed in this article ...

...is the "documents" case, which is currently in the appellate division due to co-defendants appeals, and since it is in the appellate division and not in cannon's court, cannon has no jurisdiction to block anything.

The report on the J6 case has been thoroughly discussed on DU but unfortunately, some posters have tried to insist on overlooking the fact that Smith did not write in it anything about the first 2 years that garland was inactive.

[BumRushDaShow]

4. I just quoted you and but here is the rest of what you wrote

and yet, he's asking her, on the last day possible, to lift the blockade he said she had no jurisdiction to set.

And that is why I wrote what I wrote.

The report on the J6 case has been thoroughly discussed on DU

Not hardly. It was literally anti-climatic and a let down.

but unfortunately, some posters have tried to insist on overlooking the fact that Smith did not write in it anything about the first 2 years that garland was inactive.

And some posters have posted the ACTUAL timelines that refute the nonsensical talking point that the J6 investigation was "inactive" for 2 years, and naturally that continues to get ignored because it doesn't fit the narrative.

There are still people who continue to claim that he was "never prosecuted", insisting that he was never arrested nor charged (meaning the Grand jury never happened nor did the indictments, which ARE "charges" ).

Also from here - https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=3366331

Mon Aug 8, 2022, 06:02 PM

(CNN)The FBI executed a search warrant on Monday at Donald Trump's Mar-a-Lago resort in Palm Beach, Florida, as part of an investigation into the handling of presidential documents, including classified documents, that may have been brought to Florida, three people familiar with the situation say.

Trump confirmed that FBI agents were at Mar-a-Lago and said "they even broke into my safe." "My beautiful home, Mar-A-Lago in Palm Beach, Florida, is currently under siege, raided, and occupied by a large group of FBI agents," he said in a statement Monday evening. The former President was not in Florida at the time that the search warrant was executed.

The search began early Monday morning and law enforcement personnel appeared to be focused on the area of the club where Trump's offices and personal quarters are, according to a person familiar with the matter. The Justice Department declined to comment to CNN, as did the White House. A White House official said it was not notified about the search. CNN has reached out to the FBI for comment.

The Justice Department has two known active investigations connected to the former President, one on the effort to overturn the 2020 presidential election and January 6, 2021, and the other involving the handling of classified documents. The National Archives, charged with collecting and sorting presidential material, has previously said at least 15 boxes of White House records were recovered from Trump's Mar-a-Lago resort -- including some that were classified. In April and May, aides to Trump at Mar-a-Lago were interviewed by the FBI as part of the probe into the handling of presidential records, according to a source familiar with the matter.

When 45 announced that he was probably going to run, THEN that is when DOJ went with a SC to wall the department off and allow the investigation to continue and ramp up further. Of course the RW loon Cannon believe the idiocy of Thomas that Smith was not "legal" as a Special Counsel and has used that excuse to further gum up the works and eventually throw the classified docs case out.

Attorney General Merrick Garland names Jack Smith special counsel in Trump criminal probes

Fri Nov 18, 2022, 01:29 PM

U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland on Friday named former federal prosecutor Jack Smith as special counsel for two ongoing criminal investigations by the Department of Justice of former President Donald Trump.

Smith’s appointment came three days after Trump, a Republican, announced plans to run for president in 2024. Trump’s move directly led to Garland’s decison to appoint a special counsel, who will recommend whether criminal charges should be lodged against the ex-president.

The attorney general himself was appointed by Biden, a Democrat who defeated Trump in his 2020 re-election bid. Biden could again face Trump again in the 2024 election, although the president has not yet made a final decision on becoming a candidate.

The first investigation that Smith will begin immediately handling is looking into whether any person, including Trump, unlawfully interferred with the transfer of presidential power following the 2020 election, or the certification of the Electoral College vote in President Joe Biden’s favor on Jan. 6, 2021.

Read more: https://www.cnbc.com/2022/11/18/attorney-general-merrick-garland-to-name-special-counsel-in-trump-criminal-probe-report-says.html

The MLK quote in my sig sums it up -

"Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity".

[HereForTheParty]

5. That's a whole lot of spaghetti sliding off the wall, Bum

None of it justifies Garland not releasing the documents case report.

In private, Biden has also said he should have picked someone other than Merrick Garland as attorney general, complaining about the Justice Department’s slowness under Garland in prosecuting Trump...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/12/28/bidens-lonely-battle-to-sell-american-democracy/

Joe himself sees it. Not sure why anyone is taking up for the guy at this point. No reason to imply "sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity" toward those who see it differently.

[BumRushDaShow]

8. There are 2 others who were charged in that case

and there has apparently been a debate as to whether to continue to charge Nauta and De Oliveira because THEY helped 45 OBSTRUCT JUSTICE by moving boxes around and lying to the investigators.

The original plan was the appeal to at least get their charges reinstated (or at least put on ice).

But you *knew* that right?

Trump’s co-defendants in classified documents case ask judge to dismiss charges against them

By STEPHANY MATAT and ERIC TUCKER
Updated 5:30 PM EST, April 12, 2024


FORT PIERCE, Fla. (AP) — Lawyers for two co-defendants of former President Donald Trump in the classified documents case asked a judge on Friday to dismiss charges against them.

Trump valet Walt Nauta and Mar-a-Lago property manager Carlos De Oliveira are charged with conspiring with Trump to obstruct an FBI investigation into the hoarding of classified documents at the former president’s Palm Beach estate. All three have pleaded not guilty.

Lawyers for Nauta and De Oliveira asked U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon during a Friday afternoon hearing to throw out the charges they face, a request opposed by special counsel Jack Smith’s team, which brought charges against them and Trump. The judge did not immediately rule.

The two Trump aides are not charged with illegally storing the documents but rather with helping Trump obstruct government efforts to get them back.

(snip)

DUers demand that DOJ get "everyone" who was part of this... until they don't.

And again -

"sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity"

Seeing things "differently" when one is presented with FACTS, can often become doing a Kellyanne Conway and pushing "alternative facts".

[HereForTheParty]

10. Did I hit a nerve?

It's just a discussion. No need for a Kellyanne Conway jab to be thrown on the pile.

As for those two defendants, does Garland plan on putting them away in the next few days? DUers wanted them prosecuted, sure. Your article is nine months old. But now they're off as free as Trump come January 20. If you have to drop the charges to release the report, drop them.

[BumRushDaShow]

13. I prefer to provide FACTS

But if those "facts" keep getting shunted aside, then one's patience gets worn thin.

Because DU's "LBN" is one of the primary reasons I joined this site almost 17 years ago, as a "newsie" (I am reading and listening to "news" quite a bit), as a realist, I know there is no way that everyone can "catch" it all.

But if/when I find stuff, I post it and that includes the goings-on with these multiple cases - literally from day one.

I am not perfect but I have been keeping up with this because it is "news" AND as a retired federal worker, I am aware of DOJ's role and how they interact with other agencies... and some of the stuff that I see posted here about what DOJ does or doesn't do is just way off the mark.

As for those two defendants, does Garland plan on putting them away in the next few days? DUers wanted them prosecuted, sure. Your article is nine months old. But now they're off as free as Trump come January 20. If you have to drop the charges to release the report, drop them.

I am sure ANY prosecutor would want to "put them away" but why DUers keep forgetting that there is a CO-EQUAL BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT - "the JUDICIAL BRANCH" is scary.

THREE BRANCHES

EXECUTIVE BRANCH (e.g., DOJ)
LEGISLATIVE BRANCH (Congress)
JUDICIAL BRANCH (District Courts/Circuit Appellate Courts/SCOTUS)

DOJ had EVERY duck in a row, "i"'s dotted and "t"'s crossed and the lunatic Cannon AND the SCOTUS - THE JUDICIAL BRANCH - BLOCKED IT ALL. It's as simple as that.

Why is this so hard to get????

[choie]

37. Garland should have dropped the charges on Nauta and Deoliver (or whatever this criminal's name is)

and release the documents case report. Period. He didn't. And now it will never be released, it will be destroyed. You can count on it. Is that justice? Is that what an AG is supposed to? No. He fucked up on purpose.

[Think. Again.]

9. Yes, that reply does seem like a lot of diversion and obfuscation...

....doesn't it?

I don't understand the seemingly desperate effort to build and continue a smokescreen defense for garland here on DU, but there it is.

[Think. Again.]

6. Yes, we know that garland didn't appoint Smith until...

...late in 2022, almost 2 years after the crimes were commited live on television.

But anyway, this article is focused on the "documents" case, which is in appellate court, not cannon's court, so she has no jurisdiction to set a blockade in the first place.

[BumRushDaShow]

11. But here is the problem with this continued argument

The "documents" case WAS assigned to be her case. You do realize her court in the Southern District of Florida - IS under the 11th Circuit who would be hearing the appeal), right?

If the appeal had been in DOJ's favor, the case would most likely have been sent BACK TO HER.

The "jurisdiction" argument and snafu was with her overreach to the J6 case (volume) that she had no jurisdiction over and was under Judge Tanya Chutkan.

When she "relented" - it was for the J6 case -

Judge Cannon OKs release of special counsel’s report into Trump and election subversion

By Tierney Sneed, CNN
4 minute read
Updated 11:44 PM EST, Mon January 13, 2025


CNN — Judge Aileen Cannon said Monday she would not block the release of special counsel Jack Smith’s report on his investigation into Donald Trump and efforts to overturn the 2020 election.

However, Cannon scheduled a court hearing later this week on Attorney General Merrick Garland’s plan to share with some lawmakers the part of Smith’s report dealing with the classified documents probe. In the meantime, she is continuing to halt the department from disclosing that aspect of the report to anyone outside of the agency.

Trump asked the judge late Monday to rethink her order clearing the way for the release of the portion dealing with the 2020 election probe, arguing it should remain on hold so that he could put forward his arguments for blocking the report’s entire release at the Friday hearing.

Cannon rejected the Trump team’s last-minute attempt to delay the Justice Department’s release of the election subversion volume of the report, leaving an earlier hold on it to lift at midnight.

And this -

. Yes, we know that garland didn't appoint Smith until...
...late in 2022, almost 2 years after the crimes were commited live on television.

And this continues to ignore the timeline that I have provided over and over including to you here - https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=3308534

AGAIN - the timeline - A Press release happened 9 days after January 6, 3 months BEFORE Merrick Garland was even confirmed -

DOJ OIG Announces Initiation of Review

Department of Justice (DOJ) Inspector General Michael E. Horowitz announced today that:

The DOJ Office of the Inspector General (OIG) is initiating a review to examine the role and activity of DOJ and its components in preparing for and responding to the events at the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021. The DOJ OIG will coordinate its review with reviews also being conducted by the Offices of Inspector General of the Department of Defense, the Department of Homeland Security, and the Department of the Interior. The DOJ OIG review will include examining information relevant to the January 6 events that was available to DOJ and its components in advance of January 6; the extent to which such information was shared by DOJ and its components with the U.S. Capitol Police and other federal, state, and local agencies; and the role of DOJ personnel in responding to the events at the U.S. Capitol on January 6. The DOJ OIG also will assess whether there are any weaknesses in DOJ protocols, policies, or procedures that adversely affected the ability of DOJ or its components to prepare effectively for and respond to the events at the U.S. Capitol on January 6. If circumstances warrant, the DOJ OIG will consider examining other issues that may arise during the review.

The DOJ OIG is mindful of the sensitive nature of the ongoing criminal investigations and prosecutions related to the events of January 6. Consistent with long-standing OIG practice, in conducting this review, the DOJ OIG will take care to ensure that the review does not interfere with these investigations or prosecutions.

Posted Date January 15, 2021

(snip)

https://oig.justice.gov/news/doj-oig-announces-initiation-review-1

Transcript of January 15, 2021 DOJ PRESS CONFERENCE (PDF) - Press Conference Friday, January 15, 2021, 1:00 PM Eastern

United States Department of Justice
Press Conference
Friday, January 15, 2021, 1:00 PM Eastern

PARTICIPANTS

Marc Raimondi - Spokesman

Michael Sherwin - Interim United States Attorney for the District of
Columbia

Steven D'Antuono - FBI Assistant Director in Charge of Washington Field
Officer

Ashan Benedict - Special Agent in Charge of ATF Office in Washington


PRESENTATION

Operator
Good day, and welcome to the Department of Justice media call. All participants will be in listen-
only mode. Should you need assistance, please signal a conference specialist by pressing "*"
followed by "0". After today's presentation, there will be an opportunity to ask questions. You
may join the queue at any time during the presentation by pressing "*" then "1" on your
touchtone phone. To withdraw your question, please press "*" then "2". Please note this event is
being recorded.

I would now like to turn the conference over to Marc Raimondi. Please go ahead.

Marc Raimondi
Thank you, and thank you all for joining us. We are a few minutes late because we wanted to
wait until the mayor of DC was able to finish her press conference because I think hers went a
little late.

We have three speakers today that will give brief remarks, and then we have time for a few
questions, and then we will let these guys that are leading the investigations and the
prosecutions get back to work. The first that is going to speak is the Acting U.S. Attorney for the
District of Washington, Michael Sherwin. He is going to be followed by the FBI Assistant
Director in Charge of the Washington Field Office Steven D'Antuono, and then we have an
individual, Ashan Benedict, who is the Special Agent in Charge of the ATF Office here in
Washington. Again he hasn't been one on these calls previously. It is Ashan, A-S-H-A-N
Benedict, B-E-N-E-D-I-C-T.

Without further ado, I'm going to turn it over to Michael Sherwin, but I would ask that if you do
think you're going to ask a question, start queuing up now, I believe it is "*" "1" to queue up so
we can get right into the Q&A phase and then let these guys get back to their day job. Thank
you. Go ahead.

Michael Sherwin
So hello, everyone. It is Mike Sherwin here. So a quick update with where we are at in terms of
prosecution and the investigation, and then I will turn it over to my colleagues here with the
Bureau and ATF.

So as of this morning 8 AM, we have currently 175 open investigations that are subjects that we
are currently looking at related to the violence in the capital. That would include cases of
violence outside the Capitol and also on the Capitol grounds, and also inside the Capitol. Of--as
related to those 275 open investigations, we anticipate that that is going to grow easily past 300
probably by the end of the day and then exponentially increase into the weekend and next
week.

So again, as of 8 AM this morning, in terms of cases, prosecutions we have opened 98 criminal
cases in terms of criminal cases that have been filed, and the majority of those cases are
federal felony cases, so I think I tried to articulate this earlier this week that, initially, we were
looking to fix, fine and charge the low hanging fruit, the individuals that we could easily roundup
in charge. A great bulk of those were misdemeanor cases, but as the investigation continues, as
the days and weeks progress, we are looking at more significant federal felony charges, and
that is exactly what we are doing in partnership with our local and federal partners.

So some of the cases that I think want to just highlight, they are emblematic of what we are
trying to do here are the following in terms of trying to really focus on some of the violent
offenders both inside and outside the Capitol. Some of these cases include Mr. Peter Stager;
this was the individual out of Arkansas. He was charged with a federal felony and arrested
yesterday in Arkansas, and this was the individual I think that's really the height of hypocrisy
that was beating an MPD officer with a flagpole, and at the other end of that flagpole was
attached the American flag and look as a veteran I found that case even more egregious, the
act of again just the hypocrisy of Mr. Stager's actions.

Another case focusing on violence that was Mr. Steger's case was violence on law
enforcement, and we are specifically focusing on that but also, unfortunately, as this case goes
on, we are seeing indications that law enforcement officers, both former and current, may have
been off duty and participating in this riot activity and I think as we said earlier, we don't care
what your profession is, who you are, who you are affiliated with if you were conducting or
engaged in criminal activity we will charge you, and you will be arrested, and that is exactly what
we are doing.

(snip)

Much more in PDF...

And your response? It was this - https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=3308540

Think. Again. (19,884 posts)
33. Thanks, but not interested in the timeline... Tue Sep 17, 2024, 12:03 PM

I'm interested in the current doj bringing charges against the crimes committed by trump and associates.

The trespassing and such arrests of trump's pawns were a good start, but the real serious crimes need to be addressed by the only agency that has the responsibility to do that.

"They insult us in an attempt to gaslight us and we will not stand for it.” -VP Harris

^^^emphasis mine

TO REPEAT

"I'm interested in the current doj bringing charges".

"'Indictments' = 'charges'"

"sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity"

[Think. Again.]

12. One more time and then I gotta go...

The documents case is currently in an appeals court, cannon has no jurisdiction over it at the moment.

Also, whatever work garland scuttled when he appointed Smith 2 years after Jan. 6 was just that, scuttled. Smith began his work 2 years after Jan. 6., bringing his time-frame to convict down to 1 year and 3 months before the election.

I'm assuming garland has some idea of how long a case like this would need.

Edit to add:

And yes, I am still not interested in the cases against the Capital mob.

[BumRushDaShow]

14. And one more time

That is under HER jurisdiction - her Court is under the 11th Circuit.

And yes, I am still not interested in the cases against the Capital mob.

I have posted this as well (which will be ignored because it doesn't fit "the narrative" ) - https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=3243366

Inside Garland’s Effort to Prosecute Trump


By Glenn Thrush and Adam Goldman

Reporting from Washington

Published March 22, 2024 Updated March 27, 2024

After being sworn in as attorney general in March 2021, Merrick B. Garland gathered his closest aides to discuss a topic too sensitive to broach in bigger groups: the possibility that evidence from the far-ranging Jan. 6 investigation could quickly lead to former President Donald J. Trump and his inner circle. At the time, some in the Justice Department were pushing for the chance to look at ties between pro-Trump rioters who assaulted the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, his allies who had camped out at the Willard Hotel, and possibly Mr. Trump himself.

Mr. Garland said he would place no restrictions on their work, even if the “evidence leads to Trump,” according to people with knowledge of several conversations held over his first months in office. “Follow the connective tissue upward,” said Mr. Garland, adding a directive that would eventually lead to a dead end: “Follow the money.” With that, he set the course of a determined and methodical, if at times dysfunctional and maddeningly slow, investigation that would yield the indictment of Mr. Trump on four counts of election interference in August 2023.

(snip)

People around Mr. Garland, who like others interviewed for this article spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss Justice Department affairs, say there would be no case against Mr. Trump had Mr. Garland not acted decisively. And any perception that the department had made Mr. Trump a target from the outset, without exploring other avenues, would have doomed the investigation. “Don’t confuse thoughtful with unduly cautious,” said a former deputy attorney general, Jamie S. Gorelick, who sent Mr. Garland, then her top aide, to oversee the prosecution of the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing. “He was fearless. You could see it then, and you could see it when he authorized the search at Mar-a-Lago.”

Mr. Garland’s allies point to how, by the summer of 2021, the attorney general and his powerful deputy, Lisa O. Monaco, were so frustrated with the pace of the work that they created a team to investigate Trump allies who gathered at the Willard Hotel ahead of Jan. 6 — John Eastman, Boris Epshteyn, Rudolph W. Giuliani and Roger J. Stone Jr. — and possible connections to the Trump White House, according to former officials. That team would lay the groundwork for the investigation that Mr. Smith would take over as special counsel a year and a half later. But a host of factors, some in Mr. Garland’s control, others not, slowed things down.

(snip)

Much more... https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/22/us/politics/trump-jan-6-merrick-garland.html

No paywall (gift link)

If you didn't even know that "indictments" ARE "charges" and pooh-pooh it when someone tries to help you with that, then how can you understand anything else related to the legal things going on with any of these cases?

I'm at the point of Flava Flav -

[Think. Again.]

15. those cases are not in her court.

[BumRushDaShow]

17. You keep saying "cases"

which again just proves my point.

The J6 "case" is NOT "in her court" but the "classified docs" case IS under the jurisdiction of, and had originally been brought under the Southern District of FL, where her court is (she sits in Ft. Pierce where it was sent - that had a tornado rip through the town - instead of Miami, which is probably where it SHOULD have gone).

I posted the obviously-ignored article where she relented to NOT having jurisdiction over the J6 case and so that report document WAS RELEASED to much anti-climatic non-fanfare here on DU.

When the 11th Circuit Appellate Court had slapped her down to even get to that point, it got a yawn - https://www.democraticunderground.com/10143370061

And what was your response in that thread?

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=3370095

Think. Again. (19,888 posts)
5. We'll see trump's taxes before we ever see this report. Thu Jan 9, 2025, 08:29 PM

So, never.

"They insult us in an attempt to gaslight us and we will not stand for it.” -VP Harris

And when that J6 report was RELEASED, you were of course completely missing out of that thread -

Special Counsel Report Says Trump Would Have Been Convicted in Election Case

[Think. Again.]

18. Obviously I'm referring to...

...the two co-defendent's cases that are not in cannon's court and therefore are not under her jurisdiction.

[BumRushDaShow]

19. No it's not "obvious"

because the 2 defendants are both charged under ONE CASE. And that ONE CASE was the one where 45 was the 3rd defendant and 11th Circuit dropped the charges against him (that you indicated didn't even exist because (Garland) wasn't "bringing any charges").

(You keep putting foot in mouth - STOP. You created a "narrative" that is fiction)

[Think. Again.]

21. The defendants who are appealing...

...are appealing cases that were dropped?

That's an interesting misunderstanding on your part!

[BumRushDaShow]

22. You are STILL not reading nor comprehending (perhaps on purpose)

"CHARGES WERE DROPPED" for 45 from the ONE CASE (Classified Documents).

But the CHARGES HAVE NOT BEEN DROPPED FOR NAUTA AND DE OLIVEIRA who were ALSO on that ONE CASE.

THAT is the debate.

DOJ had wanted to continue to pursue a trial for the roles of the above two defendants and "Democrats" (in quotes - as it is a mix of many from Congress and other politicos and legal analysts) are pushing DOJ to drop those charges against those 2, with the assumption that doing so would clear a hurdle for releasing the report.

HERE was the announcement of the original indictments for this case - https://www.democraticunderground.com/10143085552

[Think. Again.]

23. Correct, the cases against the co-defendants were not dropped...

...and they are being appealed by those 2 defendants, which moved them out of cannon's court and out of her jurisdiction.

[BumRushDaShow]

24. There are no "cases" against

It's ONE CASE with MULTIPLE CHARGES.

And as a FYI - she is having her hearing THIS AFTERNOON -

Cannon holds hearing on Trump documents report as Democrats urge its release

January 17, 2025 at 12:03 p.m. EST Today at 12:03 p.m. EST

By Jeremy Roebuck and Perry Stein


FORT PIERCE, Florida — A federal judge on Friday will consider whether to block the Justice Department from sharing with key congressional leaders a report by special counsel Jack Smith on the classified documents investigation involving President-elect Donald Trump.

Trump’s lawyers want to keep Judiciary committee leaders from getting the report at least until Monday’s inauguration — and perhaps, as a result, for good.

U.S. District Judge Aileen M. Cannon has scheduled an afternoon hearing to weigh their arguments that prosecutors’ plans for a limited disclosure of Smith’s findings into Trump’s alleged mishandling of classified documents and obstruction of efforts to retrieve them would undermine his presidential transition “and his ability to govern our nation going forward.”

The court battle comes after Cannon’s controversial decision last year to dismiss charges Smith’s office brought against Trump and two co-defendants over those allegations and just days after Attorney General Merrick Garland made public another portion of the special counsel’s report. That volume detailed what Smith described as Trump’s “unprecedented criminal effort” to overturn the results of the 2020 election.

(snip)

And if they decide to NOT drop those charges and the 11th rules in their favor, it would go RIGHT BACK TO HER.

When she blocked release of BOTH REPORTS, the 11th Circuit DENIED the block of the J6 report, but did not rule on the Classified docs report. This is why you had this - https://www.courthousenews.com/11th-circuit-rejects-trump-effort-to-block-special-counsel-report-on-federal-cases/

(snip)

In the filing, Garland asked the 11th Circuit to make clear when denying the motion that the decision is the final resolution and “should be the last word” unless the full appellate court or Supreme Court intervene.

Additionally, Garland asked that Cannon’s three-day ban be vacated and allow the election subversion report be released immediately.

The appellate court’s decision Thursday leaves Cannon’s order in place, and made it clear it was not the final word on the issue.

Her decisions are what are being appealed (unless they decide to drop that too).

The bigger issue here is whether a "new DOJ" would drop everything once they get sworn in, but there seems to be an attempt to be able to somehow put that case on ice to resurrect later (assuming there is an election in our favor in 2028).

[Think. Again.]

25. Yes, she is having a hearing over...

...a blockade she had no jurisdiction to set.

And garland is going along with it.

[BumRushDaShow]

27. So should a Bailiff go into her Courtroom, haul her out in handcuffs, and lock her up for judicial misconduct

because she is "illegally holding a hearing on this case??"

This is the type of thing I'm talking about.

"sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity"

there are none so blind as those who will not see

[Think. Again.]

29. She SHOULD have recused herself before any of these cases started.

[BumRushDaShow]

31. That's IRRELEVANT

DU wants "authoritarian" governance and although I "get that", "authoritarianism" is NOT a "democracy".

For centuries, "criminal justice reform" has been the hue and cry by many who were negatively impacted by this damn "judicial system" - notably AAs dragged here against their will.

Day after day we have seen this type of "justice" and it is exactly why you saw the term coined for how it was applied - "JUST-US".

[Think. Again.]

33. huh, thanks for your input.

[travelingthrulife]

7. There is no case for immunity. He wasn't in office then. Unless they are able

to show him wheeling and dealing with state secrets before he left office.

Why is our legal system playing dumb?

[republianmushroom]

16. Why not just give the report to President Biden and let him release it.

If he would release it he has immunity and supposedly is for open govt..

Biden is the top dog right now, today.

[BumRushDaShow]

20. Well interestingly enough, Biden just deemed the ERA "ratified"

so we'll see how the SCOTUS deals with that.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/10143375058

What happens next with the above will be instructive on how the SCOTUS would handle what Biden does (if he even did as you suggest) vs what 45 does (and we all know that there is a good chance that it would be like day and night).

[Attilatheblond]

26. DOJ should just release everything now and not worry about being stopped by TCF later

[3auld6phart]

28. Just

Fuckin release the gawd damn thing, yo have got a couple of days left. gutless bastards, are you all afraid of that orange abomination?

[Think. Again.]

30. Not afraid, complicit.

[BumRushDaShow]

32. They are under a COURT ORDER

The hearing for it is going on about it this afternoon -

Cannon holds hearing on Trump documents report as Democrats urge its release

January 17, 2025 at 12:03 p.m. EST Today at 12:03 p.m. EST

By Jeremy Roebuck and Perry Stein


FORT PIERCE, Florida — A federal judge on Friday will consider whether to block the Justice Department from sharing with key congressional leaders a report by special counsel Jack Smith on the classified documents investigation involving President-elect Donald Trump.

Trump’s lawyers want to keep Judiciary committee leaders from getting the report at least until Monday’s inauguration — and perhaps, as a result, for good.

U.S. District Judge Aileen M. Cannon has scheduled an afternoon hearing to weigh their arguments that prosecutors’ plans for a limited disclosure of Smith’s findings into Trump’s alleged mishandling of classified documents and obstruction of efforts to retrieve them would undermine his presidential transition “and his ability to govern our nation going forward.”

The court battle comes after Cannon’s controversial decision last year to dismiss charges Smith’s office brought against Trump and two co-defendants over those allegations and just days after Attorney General Merrick Garland made public another portion of the special counsel’s report. That volume detailed what Smith described as Trump’s “unprecedented criminal effort” to overturn the results of the 2020 election.

(snip)

[gab13by13]

34. I thought I was done with Garland, but I can't sit back.

Garland investigated a lot those 1st 2 years, took people's phones, then gave them back. let's look at results:

Robert Mueller couldn't go after Trump because he was a sitting president, but Mueller went after the people directly working for Trump.

Mueller indicted or got guilty pleas from:

George Popadopoulas
Paul Manafort
Rick Gates
Michael Flynn
Richard Pinedo
Alex van der Zwaan
Michael Cohen
Roger Stone
Sam Patten

Mueller did this working under the Trump administration. Mueller also teed up evidence for Garland to prosecute Trump for 10 obstruction of justice charges, and individual one, which Garland passed on and Alvin Bragg stepped up.

Merrick Garland convicted Peter Navarro (not sure he would have without the criminal referral from the J6 committee)
Steve Bannon was not working for Trump but Garland did convict him.

Regarding the documents case:

Mark Meadows and Kash Patel helped Trump steal the classified documents, neither one of them was president. Just imagine if Garland had prosecuted those 2 people early on, year 1. Kash Patel may be in prison instead of becoming our next FBI Director. Also if Garland had prosecuted Trump's inner circle early on it would have created a different climate which may have deterred the Supreme Court from intervening.

[BumRushDaShow]

35. Do you remember this -

Judge says several Trump aides, including former chief of staff, must testify to Jan. 6 grand jury

Get To Know the Six Likely Co-Conspirators in Trump’s Jan. 6 Indictment

By Paige Anderholm

August 9, 2023


Former President Donald Trump’s most recent indictment includes six unnamed co-conspirators, who were “enlisted…to assist him in his criminal efforts to overturn the legitimate results of the 2020 presidential election and retain power.”

Based on the details provided in the indictment, the co-conspirators listed as attorneys are presumed to be: (1) Rudy Giuliani, (2) John Eastman, (3) Sidney Powell, (4) Jeffrey Clark and (5) Kenneth Chesebro. The sixth is more speculative than the others, but details in the indictment suggest it may be political operative Boris Epshteyn.

Experts believe that their names were kept out of last week’s indictment to avoid scheduling conflicts and time delays that come with multiple co-defendants. It also may be a tactic to encourage cooperation from the co-conspirators in exchange for avoiding their own charges. Or, it could be that special counsel Jack Smith’s office believes that while they have enough evidence to prove Trump is guilty beyond reasonable doubt, they may not have evidence to sustain convictions for the other six. It is speculated that if separate indictments for the co-conspirators are to be returned, it will happen in the coming days ahead of the scheduling hearing in the case that is set for Aug. 28.

(snip)

^^^the above was done by Marc Elias's group "Democracy Docket" but you are more than welcome to throw them under the bus

Smith operated using the KISS principle with the assumption that "superseding indictments" could easily come to add the others.

Don't worry though... "figurehead Garland" will soon be out of your hair.

[gab13by13]

36. You are missing my point,

I am talking about Meadows and Patel being investigated as defendants in year 1. I am talking about Garland prosecuting Trump's inner circle, year 1 just like Robert Mueller did in less time.

Kash Patel and Mark Meadows should have been investigated and prosecuted by Garland early on in year one, or don't you believe that the theft of military/nuclear top secret classified documents was important enough?

How long did it take before the FBI searched Mar-a-Lago? It took 5 days for the FBI to search Joe's home.

It took Robert Mueller 22 months to indict and convict or get guilty pleas from numerous Trump cronies. Mueller did this during the Trump administration.

[BumRushDaShow]

38. "You are missing my point,"

No YOU all have missed the timelines that were provided over and over - and have done so intentionally. And you are now manufacturing retroactive knowledge of criminality that occurred under a previous administration that should have been clairvoyantly known about by the next one.

I am talking about Meadows and Patel being investigated as defendants in year 1. I am talking about Garland prosecuting Trump's inner circle, year 1 just like Robert Mueller did in less time.

The Mueller investigation took 2 years to finally ATTEMPT to release a report because Bill Barr - someone who DU ignores, delayed it because he planned to sanitize it.

Kash Patel and Mark Meadows should have been investigated and prosecuted by Garland early on in year one, or don't you believe that the theft of military/nuclear top secret classified documents was important enough?

NEWSFLASH - There is a thing called "Records Management" where EVERY AGENCY is responsible for their OWN documents and document disposition. EVERY agency has a "Records Control Schedule" - https://www.archives.gov/records-mgmt/rcs

THAT is NOT DOJ's issue. It is the issue of the agency (or the military branch/division) and if they have problems with their records control that might require a criminal investigation, THEN they will call in DOJ (or in the case of DOD, they probably invoke the UCMJ).

Here are 3 sets (3 sources with overlapping dates) of the classified docs -

Here is the timeline -

A timeline of the investigation into Trump’s Mar-a-Lago docs

By JILL COLVIN and LINDSAY WHITEHURST
Published 10:25 PM EST, August 31, 2022

(snip)

A timeline of notable developments:

JAN. 20, 2021

Then-President Donald Trump left the White House for Florida ahead of President-elect Joe Biden’s inauguration. According to the General Services Administration, members of Trump’s transition team were responsible for packing items into boxes, putting boxes on pallets and shrink-wrapping those pallets so they could be transported. Prior to shipping, GSA said it “required the outgoing transition team to certify in writing that the items being shipped were required to wind down the Office of the Former President and would be utilized as the Office transitioned to its new location in Florida.” GSA did not examine the contents of the boxes and “had no knowledge of the contents prior to shipping,” according to an agency spokesperson. GSA was also not responsible for the former president’s personal belongings, which were transported by a private moving company. Under the Presidential Records Act, presidential records are considered federal property — not private — and are supposed to be turned over to the National Archives and Records Administration. Multiple federal laws govern the handling of classified and sensitive government documents, including statutes that make it a crime to remove such material and retain it at an unauthorized location.

MAY 2021

After NARA realized that documents from Trump’s presidency seemed to be missing from the material that it received as he left office, the agency requested the records from Trump on or about May 6, 2021, according to a heavily redacted affidavit made public last week.

DECEMBER 2021:

NARA “continued to make requests” for records it believed to be missing for several months, according to the affidavit. Around late December 2021, a Trump representative informed the agency that an additional 12 boxes of records that should have been turned over had been found at the former president’s Mar-a-Lago club and residence and were ready to be retrieved.

JAN. 18, 2022

NARA received 15 boxes of presidential records that had been stored at Mar-a-Lago — 14 of which, it would later be revealed, contained classified documents. The documents were found mixed in with an assortment of other material, including newspapers, magazines, photos and personal correspondence. In total, the boxes were found to contain 184 documents with classified markings, including 67 marked confidential, 92 secret and 25 top secret. Agents who inspected the boxes also found special markings suggesting they included information from highly sensitive human sources or the collection of electronic “signals” authorized by a court under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.

FEB. 9, 2022

The special agent in charge of NARA’s Office of the Inspector General sent a referral to the Justice Department via email after a preliminary review of the boxes revealed numerous classified documents.

(snip)

Here is another link showing the timeline with additional dates -

Timeline: The government's efforts to get sensitive documents back from Trump's Mar-a-Lago

By Robert Legare, Arden Farhi, Melissa Quinn

June 9, 2023 / 6:17 PM EDT / CBS News

(snip)

Feb. 9: The Archives' Office of the Inspector General sends a referral to the Justice Department requesting it investigate Trump's handling of records. The referral notes a preliminary review of the 15 boxes taken from Mar-a-Lago indicated they contained newspapers, printed news articles, photos, notes, presidential correspondence and "a lot of classified records." "Of most significant concern was that highly classified records were unfoldered, intermixed with other records, and otherwise unproperly [sic] identified," the referral stated.

Feb. 18: David Ferriero, then-archivist of the United States, sends a letter to House Oversight and Reform Committee Chairwoman Carolyn Maloney informing her some of the boxes retrieved by the Archives in mid-January contained items marked as classified national security information, and asked Trump's representatives to continue searching for any additional presidential records that had not been transferred to the Archives. Ferriero tells Maloney that because the Archives identified classified information in the boxes, its staff had been in communication with the Justice Department.

April 11: The White House Counsel's Office formally transmits a request that the Archives provide the FBI access to the 15 boxes retrieved from Mar–a-Lago for its review.

April 12: The Archives says it communicated with Trump's "authorized representative" about the 15 boxes of seized records and told his attorney Evan Corcoran about the Justice Department's "urgency" in needing access to them. The agency also advises Trump's counsel it intended to provide the FBI with the documents the next week. Corcoran later requests the Archives delay the disclosure to the FBI to April 29.

(snip)

And a 3rd timeline source (with some additional info/timeframes not in the other timelines) -

Timeline: The special counsel inquiry into Trump’s handling of classified documents

By Marshall Cohen, Holmes Lybrand and Hannah Rabinowitz, CNN
Updated 7:37 PM EDT, Thu July 27, 2023

(snip)

Here’s a timeline of the important developments in the blockbuster investigation.

(snip)

July 2021

In a taped conversation, Trump acknowledges that he still has a classified Pentagon document about a possible attack against Iran, according to CNN reporting. The recording, which was made at Trump’s golf club in New Jersey, indicates that Trump understood that he retained classified material after leaving the White House. The special counsel later obtained this audiotape, a key piece of evidence in his inquiry.

(snip)

February 9, 2022

NARA asks the Justice Department to investigate Trump’s handling of White House records and whether he violated the Presidential Records Act and other laws related to classified information. The Presidential Records Act requires all records created by a sitting president to be turned over to the National Archives at the end of their administration.

February 18, 2022

NARA informs the Justice Department that some of the documents retrieved from Mar-a-Lago included classified material. NARA also tells the department that, despite being warned it was illegal, Trump occasionally tore up government documents while he was president.

April and May 2022

On April 7, NARA publicly acknowledges for the first time that the Justice Department is involved, and news outlets report that prosecutors have launched a criminal probe into Trump’s mishandling of classified documents. Around this time, FBI agents quietly interview Trump aides at Mar-a-Lago about the handling of presidential records as part of their widening investigation.

(snip)

Once DOJ had this info FROM NARA because THAT is how federal agencies operate, they proceeded to interview and gather info in order to have evidence to create affidavits to support search and seizure warrants... where this happened in August of 2022 -

FBI executes search warrant at Trump's Mar-a-Lago in document investigation

This has some more info on the SEARCH - https://www.democraticunderground.com/10142959720

6 months after DOJ received the referral from NARA, they did their search.

J6 timeline -

Inside Garland’s Effort to Prosecute Trump


By Glenn Thrush and Adam Goldman

Reporting from Washington

Published March 22, 2024 Updated March 27, 2024

After being sworn in as attorney general in March 2021, Merrick B. Garland gathered his closest aides to discuss a topic too sensitive to broach in bigger groups: the possibility that evidence from the far-ranging Jan. 6 investigation could quickly lead to former President Donald J. Trump and his inner circle. At the time, some in the Justice Department were pushing for the chance to look at ties between pro-Trump rioters who assaulted the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, his allies who had camped out at the Willard Hotel, and possibly Mr. Trump himself.

Mr. Garland said he would place no restrictions on their work, even if the “evidence leads to Trump,” according to people with knowledge of several conversations held over his first months in office. “Follow the connective tissue upward,” said Mr. Garland, adding a directive that would eventually lead to a dead end: “Follow the money.” With that, he set the course of a determined and methodical, if at times dysfunctional and maddeningly slow, investigation that would yield the indictment of Mr. Trump on four counts of election interference in August 2023.

(snip)

People around Mr. Garland, who like others interviewed for this article spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss Justice Department affairs, say there would be no case against Mr. Trump had Mr. Garland not acted decisively. And any perception that the department had made Mr. Trump a target from the outset, without exploring other avenues, would have doomed the investigation. “Don’t confuse thoughtful with unduly cautious,” said a former deputy attorney general, Jamie S. Gorelick, who sent Mr. Garland, then her top aide, to oversee the prosecution of the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing. “He was fearless. You could see it then, and you could see it when he authorized the search at Mar-a-Lago.”

Mr. Garland’s allies point to how, by the summer of 2021, the attorney general and his powerful deputy, Lisa O. Monaco, were so frustrated with the pace of the work that they created a team to investigate Trump allies who gathered at the Willard Hotel ahead of Jan. 6 — John Eastman, Boris Epshteyn, Rudolph W. Giuliani and Roger J. Stone Jr. — and possible connections to the Trump White House, according to former officials. That team would lay the groundwork for the investigation that Mr. Smith would take over as special counsel a year and a half later. But a host of factors, some in Mr. Garland’s control, others not, slowed things down.

(snip)

Much more... https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/22/us/politics/trump-jan-6-merrick-garland.html

No paywall (gift link)

[kacekwl]

39. Ha ha ha , today is friday

Monday is a holiday and the day the devil arrives so good luck. Ha ha.

[kacekwl]

40. President Biden

should release them now and say bye bye. trump gonna sue him ? Go ahead and just tie it up in court (we certainly should know how to do that) until they are both dead.