Wrecks Quan Dough said:

---

quash said:

---

Wrecks Quan Dough said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Barr went on to take a flamethrower to Trump's claims that he is being politically persecuted.

"This idea of presenting Trump as a victim here or a victim of a witch hunt is ridiculous," Barr said. "Yes, he's been a victim in the past. His adversaries have obsessively pursued him with phony claims. And I've been at his side defending against them when he is a victim. But this is much different. He's not a victim here. He was totally wrong that he had the right to have those documents. Those documents are among the most sensitive secrets that the country has. They have to be in the custody of the archivist. He had no right to maintain them and retain them."

---

Cannot wait to find out what information was in these documents. The government will have to talk about the information if it goes to trial. The world will find out. Are we really going to do this as a country? As a government?

---

Nothing a motion in limine can't fix, happens all the time.

---

Go read some articles on how these cases are tried. They are going to be talking about these documents in front of a jury.

---

How does that change that Trump has NSC documents that the Govt wanted back and he said no? Also, how is our and our allies nuclear response docs from NSC "personal"?


The particulars will be redacted, happens all the time. No issue for a jury, they won't be told the specifics to make a determination if he is guilty.

Osodecentx said:

---

Wrecks Quan Dough said:

---

quash said:

---

Wrecks Quan Dough said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Barr went on to take a flamethrower to Trump's claims that he is being politically persecuted.

"This idea of presenting Trump as a victim here or a victim of a witch hunt is ridiculous," Barr said. "Yes, he's been a victim in the past. His adversaries have obsessively pursued him with phony claims. And I've been at his side defending against them when he is a victim. But this is much different. He's not a victim here. He was totally wrong that he had the right to have those documents. Those documents are among the most sensitive secrets that the country has. They have to be in the custody of the archivist. He had no right to maintain them and retain them."

---

Cannot wait to find out what information was in these documents. The government will have to talk about the information if it goes to trial. The world will find out. Are we really going to do this as a country? As a government?

---

Nothing a motion in limine can't fix, happens all the time.

---

Go read some articles on how these cases are tried. They are going to be talking about these documents in front of a jury.

---

1. Trump talked about these documents to political operatives, but we can'[t tell a jury?
2. Remember, Trump declassified all of these documents by virtue of taking them. If they are declassified, what harm is there in showing to a jury? If they are top secret, why are they stored in a ballroom and a bathroom?
3. He also declassified all of the docs in his mind and just forgot to tell anyone. Let's tell a jury

4. Or the prosecution selected the least harmful of the Trump docs.

---

Since the judge has ordered both counsels to verify their security clearance, I do not think the jury will be allowed to see the actual material.

Osodecentx said:

---

Wrecks Quan Dough said:

---

quash said:

---

Wrecks Quan Dough said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Barr went on to take a flamethrower to Trump's claims that he is being politically persecuted.

"This idea of presenting Trump as a victim here or a victim of a witch hunt is ridiculous," Barr said. "Yes, he's been a victim in the past. His adversaries have obsessively pursued him with phony claims. And I've been at his side defending against them when he is a victim. But this is much different. He's not a victim here. He was totally wrong that he had the right to have those documents. Those documents are among the most sensitive secrets that the country has. They have to be in the custody of the archivist. He had no right to maintain them and retain them."

---

Cannot wait to find out what information was in these documents. The government will have to talk about the information if it goes to trial. The world will find out. Are we really going to do this as a country? As a government?

---

Nothing a motion in limine can't fix, happens all the time.

---

Go read some articles on how these cases are tried. They are going to be talking about these documents in front of a jury.

---

1. Trump talked about these documents to political operatives, but we can'[t tell a jury?
2. Remember, Trump declassified all of these documents by virtue of taking them. If they are declassified, what harm is there in showing to a jury? If they are top secret, why are they stored in a ballroom and a bathroom?
3. He also declassified all of the docs in his mind and just forgot to tell anyone. Let's tell a jury

4. Or the prosecution selected the least harmful of the Trump docs.

---

This is a possibility I haven't seen much discussion of, and it probably won't gain any traction in here for obvious reasons, but it plausibly exists. As bad as the conduct in the indictment is, there's a very real possibility that the reality is even worse than what we know already.

HuMcK said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Wrecks Quan Dough said:

---

quash said:

---

Wrecks Quan Dough said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Barr went on to take a flamethrower to Trump's claims that he is being politically persecuted.

"This idea of presenting Trump as a victim here or a victim of a witch hunt is ridiculous," Barr said. "Yes, he's been a victim in the past. His adversaries have obsessively pursued him with phony claims. And I've been at his side defending against them when he is a victim. But this is much different. He's not a victim here. He was totally wrong that he had the right to have those documents. Those documents are among the most sensitive secrets that the country has. They have to be in the custody of the archivist. He had no right to maintain them and retain them."

---

Cannot wait to find out what information was in these documents. The government will have to talk about the information if it goes to trial. The world will find out. Are we really going to do this as a country? As a government?

---

Nothing a motion in limine can't fix, happens all the time.

---

Go read some articles on how these cases are tried. They are going to be talking about these documents in front of a jury.

---

1. Trump talked about these documents to political operatives, but we can'[t tell a jury?
2. Remember, Trump declassified all of these documents by virtue of taking them. If they are declassified, what harm is there in showing to a jury? If they are top secret, why are they stored in a ballroom and a bathroom?
3. He also declassified all of the docs in his mind and just forgot to tell anyone. Let's tell a jury

4. Or the prosecution selected the least harmful of the Trump docs.

---

This is a possibility I haven't seen much discussion of, and it probably won't gain any traction in here for obvious reasons, but it plausibly exists. As bad as the conduct in the indictment is, there's a very real possibility that the reality is even worse than what we know already.

---

Now that you bring it up and the Government's actions in this case, I think you may be right.

The simplest reason for the FBI raid, the way it was carried out, was that there was something very critical there. Now, that won't fly with the conspiracy folk that believe this is ALL political. But, it is the simplest explanation.

On an off topic, just finished "Spy Among Friends" definitely worth watching, excellent. Very well done.

HuMcK said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Wrecks Quan Dough said:

---

quash said:

---

Wrecks Quan Dough said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Barr went on to take a flamethrower to Trump's claims that he is being politically persecuted.

"This idea of presenting Trump as a victim here or a victim of a witch hunt is ridiculous," Barr said. "Yes, he's been a victim in the past. His adversaries have obsessively pursued him with phony claims. And I've been at his side defending against them when he is a victim. But this is much different. He's not a victim here. He was totally wrong that he had the right to have those documents. Those documents are among the most sensitive secrets that the country has. They have to be in the custody of the archivist. He had no right to maintain them and retain them."

---

Cannot wait to find out what information was in these documents. The government will have to talk about the information if it goes to trial. The world will find out. Are we really going to do this as a country? As a government?

---

Nothing a motion in limine can't fix, happens all the time.

---

Go read some articles on how these cases are tried. They are going to be talking about these documents in front of a jury.

---

1. Trump talked about these documents to political operatives, but we can'[t tell a jury?
2. Remember, Trump declassified all of these documents by virtue of taking them. If they are declassified, what harm is there in showing to a jury? If they are top secret, why are they stored in a ballroom and a bathroom?
3. He also declassified all of the docs in his mind and just forgot to tell anyone. Let's tell a jury

4. Or the prosecution selected the least harmful of the Trump docs.

---

This is a possibility I haven't seen much discussion of, and it probably won't gain any traction in here for obvious reasons, but it plausibly exists. As bad as the conduct in the indictment is, there's a very real possibility that the reality is even worse than what we know already.

---

Unfortunately, it's also "plausible" that the prosecution is politically motivated. The DOJ's history with Trump is not one that inspires confidence, and I say this as someone who never liked Trump, never voted for him and never will vote for him.

Osodecentx said:

---

Wrecks Quan Dough said:

---

quash said:

---

Wrecks Quan Dough said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Barr went on to take a flamethrower to Trump's claims that he is being politically persecuted.

"This idea of presenting Trump as a victim here or a victim of a witch hunt is ridiculous," Barr said. "Yes, he's been a victim in the past. His adversaries have obsessively pursued him with phony claims. And I've been at his side defending against them when he is a victim. But this is much different. He's not a victim here. He was totally wrong that he had the right to have those documents. Those documents are among the most sensitive secrets that the country has. They have to be in the custody of the archivist. He had no right to maintain them and retain them."

---

Cannot wait to find out what information was in these documents. The government will have to talk about the information if it goes to trial. The world will find out. Are we really going to do this as a country? As a government?

---

Nothing a motion in limine can't fix, happens all the time.

---

Go read some articles on how these cases are tried. They are going to be talking about these documents in front of a jury.

---

1. Trump talked about these documents to political operatives, but we can'[t tell a jury?

---

How could you have possible got that from what I wrote?

Wrecks Quan Dough said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Wrecks Quan Dough said:

---

quash said:

---

Wrecks Quan Dough said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Barr went on to take a flamethrower to Trump's claims that he is being politically persecuted.

"This idea of presenting Trump as a victim here or a victim of a witch hunt is ridiculous," Barr said. "Yes, he's been a victim in the past. His adversaries have obsessively pursued him with phony claims. And I've been at his side defending against them when he is a victim. But this is much different. He's not a victim here. He was totally wrong that he had the right to have those documents. Those documents are among the most sensitive secrets that the country has. They have to be in the custody of the archivist. He had no right to maintain them and retain them."

---

Cannot wait to find out what information was in these documents. The government will have to talk about the information if it goes to trial. The world will find out. Are we really going to do this as a country? As a government?

---

Nothing a motion in limine can't fix, happens all the time.

---

Go read some articles on how these cases are tried. They are going to be talking about these documents in front of a jury.

---

1. Trump talked about these documents to political operatives, but we can'[t tell a jury?

---

How could you have possible got that from what I wrote?

---

Well, how are these cases tried? I thought the government was reluctant to bring cases like this (classified docs) because they didn't want to disclose classified documents. Clearly, in this case, they aren't.

D. C. Bear said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Wrecks Quan Dough said:

---

quash said:

---

Wrecks Quan Dough said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Barr went on to take a flamethrower to Trump's claims that he is being politically persecuted.

"This idea of presenting Trump as a victim here or a victim of a witch hunt is ridiculous," Barr said. "Yes, he's been a victim in the past. His adversaries have obsessively pursued him with phony claims. And I've been at his side defending against them when he is a victim. But this is much different. He's not a victim here. He was totally wrong that he had the right to have those documents. Those documents are among the most sensitive secrets that the country has. They have to be in the custody of the archivist. He had no right to maintain them and retain them."

---

Cannot wait to find out what information was in these documents. The government will have to talk about the information if it goes to trial. The world will find out. Are we really going to do this as a country? As a government?

---

Nothing a motion in limine can't fix, happens all the time.

---

Go read some articles on how these cases are tried. They are going to be talking about these documents in front of a jury.

---

1. Trump talked about these documents to political operatives, but we can'[t tell a jury?
2. Remember, Trump declassified all of these documents by virtue of taking them. If they are declassified, what harm is there in showing to a jury? If they are top secret, why are they stored in a ballroom and a bathroom?
3. He also declassified all of the docs in his mind and just forgot to tell anyone. Let's tell a jury

4. Or the prosecution selected the least harmful of the Trump docs.

---

This is a possibility I haven't seen much discussion of, and it probably won't gain any traction in here for obvious reasons, but it plausibly exists. As bad as the conduct in the indictment is, there's a very real possibility that the reality is even worse than what we know already.

---

Unfortunately, it's also "plausible" that the prosecution is politically motivated. The DOJ's history with Trump is not one that inspires confidence, and I say this as someone who never liked Trump, never voted for him and never will vote for him.

---

We've done the song and dance on that issue before, and we will just have to agree to disagree.

The reality I see is one where authorities have constantly treated Trump with far more deference than he deserves, and handled him with kid gloves. You'd think that after hearing Trump call this current situation a "hoax", and your own acknowledgment that it is in fact very real and very serious, that would cause some self-reflection and re-examination about the previous investigations he also called "hoaxes". This investigation isn't a hoax, and neither was the other big one (I assume you are referring to the Russia investigation).

There is literally a WaPo article out today detailing how the (overwhelmingly conservative) FBI stonewalled investigating Trump people (not even Trump himself) about 1/6 for over a year, because they were afraid to piss off Trump. At every step since he was a candidate, the FBI has only investigated Trump when things became painfully obvious enough to force the issue, and we are all worse off for it.

Osodecentx said:

---

Wrecks Quan Dough said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Wrecks Quan Dough said:

---

quash said:

---

Wrecks Quan Dough said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Barr went on to take a flamethrower to Trump's claims that he is being politically persecuted.

"This idea of presenting Trump as a victim here or a victim of a witch hunt is ridiculous," Barr said. "Yes, he's been a victim in the past. His adversaries have obsessively pursued him with phony claims. And I've been at his side defending against them when he is a victim. But this is much different. He's not a victim here. He was totally wrong that he had the right to have those documents. Those documents are among the most sensitive secrets that the country has. They have to be in the custody of the archivist. He had no right to maintain them and retain them."

---

Cannot wait to find out what information was in these documents. The government will have to talk about the information if it goes to trial. The world will find out. Are we really going to do this as a country? As a government?

---

Nothing a motion in limine can't fix, happens all the time.

---

Go read some articles on how these cases are tried. They are going to be talking about these documents in front of a jury.

---

1. Trump talked about these documents to political operatives, but we can'[t tell a jury?

---

How could you have possible got that from what I wrote?

---

Well, how are these cases tried? I thought the government was reluctant to bring cases like this (classified docs) because they didn't want to disclose classified documents. Clearly, in this case, they aren't.

---

They will file charges. That is not the same as having a public trial. Does DJT get a public trial and a right to confront his accusers? Or is he different just because?

Funny how HuMcK thinks we believe senior FBI is 'conservative' since 2010 ...

Wrecks Quan Dough said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Wrecks Quan Dough said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Wrecks Quan Dough said:

---

quash said:

---

Wrecks Quan Dough said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Barr went on to take a flamethrower to Trump's claims that he is being politically persecuted.

"This idea of presenting Trump as a victim here or a victim of a witch hunt is ridiculous," Barr said. "Yes, he's been a victim in the past. His adversaries have obsessively pursued him with phony claims. And I've been at his side defending against them when he is a victim. But this is much different. He's not a victim here. He was totally wrong that he had the right to have those documents. Those documents are among the most sensitive secrets that the country has. They have to be in the custody of the archivist. He had no right to maintain them and retain them."

---

Cannot wait to find out what information was in these documents. The government will have to talk about the information if it goes to trial. The world will find out. Are we really going to do this as a country? As a government?

---

Nothing a motion in limine can't fix, happens all the time.

---

Go read some articles on how these cases are tried. They are going to be talking about these documents in front of a jury.

---

1. Trump talked about these documents to political operatives, but we can'[t tell a jury?

---

How could you have possible got that from what I wrote?

---

Well, how are these cases tried? I thought the government was reluctant to bring cases like this (classified docs) because they didn't want to disclose classified documents. Clearly, in this case, they aren't.

---

They will file charges. That is not the same as having a public trial. Does DJT get a public trial and a right to confront his accusers? Or is he different just because?

---

Are you saying there won't be a trial?

HuMcK said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Wrecks Quan Dough said:

---

quash said:

---

Wrecks Quan Dough said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Barr went on to take a flamethrower to Trump's claims that he is being politically persecuted.

"This idea of presenting Trump as a victim here or a victim of a witch hunt is ridiculous," Barr said. "Yes, he's been a victim in the past. His adversaries have obsessively pursued him with phony claims. And I've been at his side defending against them when he is a victim. But this is much different. He's not a victim here. He was totally wrong that he had the right to have those documents. Those documents are among the most sensitive secrets that the country has. They have to be in the custody of the archivist. He had no right to maintain them and retain them."

---

Cannot wait to find out what information was in these documents. The government will have to talk about the information if it goes to trial. The world will find out. Are we really going to do this as a country? As a government?

---

Nothing a motion in limine can't fix, happens all the time.

---

Go read some articles on how these cases are tried. They are going to be talking about these documents in front of a jury.

---

1. Trump talked about these documents to political operatives, but we can'[t tell a jury?
2. Remember, Trump declassified all of these documents by virtue of taking them. If they are declassified, what harm is there in showing to a jury? If they are top secret, why are they stored in a ballroom and a bathroom?
3. He also declassified all of the docs in his mind and just forgot to tell anyone. Let's tell a jury

4. Or the prosecution selected the least harmful of the Trump docs.

---

This is a possibility I haven't seen much discussion of, and it probably won't gain any traction in here for obvious reasons, but it plausibly exists. As bad as the conduct in the indictment is, there's a very real possibility that the reality is even worse than what we know already.

---

Unfortunately, it's also "plausible" that the prosecution is politically motivated. The DOJ's history with Trump is not one that inspires confidence, and I say this as someone who never liked Trump, never voted for him and never will vote for him.

---

We've done the song and dance on that issue before, and we will just have to agree to disagree.

The reality I see is one where authorities have constantly treated Trump with far more deference than he deserves, and handled him with kid gloves. You'd think that after hearing Trump call this current situation a "hoax", and your own acknowledgment that it is in fact very real and very serious, that would cause some self-reflection and re-examination about the previous investigations he also called "hoaxes". This investigation isn't a hoax, and neither was the other big one (I assume you are referring to the Russia investigation).

There is literally a WaPo article out today detailing how the (overwhelmingly conservative) FBI stonewalled investigating Trump people (not even Trump himself) about 1/6 for over a year, because they were afraid to piss off Trump. At every step since he was a candidate, the FBI has only investigated Trump when things became painfully obvious enough to force the issue, and we are all worse off for it.

---

So when ann FBI lawyer altered information to get a warrant, this was one of those instances "when things became painfully obvious enough to force the issue?"

You seem to think that when Barr calls something a "politicized hit job," he's wrong, but when he says Trump is totally in the wrong, he's right. The problem is, and you can't see it perhaps because of your partisan blinders, is that the Barr is likely correct in both instances. However, there are a lot of people who will not trust the current indictment as legitimate because of the past history of the good old "politicized hit job." This is why integrity matters, even if the other guy does not have it.

D. C. Bear said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Wrecks Quan Dough said:

---

quash said:

---

Wrecks Quan Dough said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Barr went on to take a flamethrower to Trump's claims that he is being politically persecuted.

"This idea of presenting Trump as a victim here or a victim of a witch hunt is ridiculous," Barr said. "Yes, he's been a victim in the past. His adversaries have obsessively pursued him with phony claims. And I've been at his side defending against them when he is a victim. But this is much different. He's not a victim here. He was totally wrong that he had the right to have those documents. Those documents are among the most sensitive secrets that the country has. They have to be in the custody of the archivist. He had no right to maintain them and retain them."

---

Cannot wait to find out what information was in these documents. The government will have to talk about the information if it goes to trial. The world will find out. Are we really going to do this as a country? As a government?

---

Nothing a motion in limine can't fix, happens all the time.

---

Go read some articles on how these cases are tried. They are going to be talking about these documents in front of a jury.

---

1. Trump talked about these documents to political operatives, but we can'[t tell a jury?
2. Remember, Trump declassified all of these documents by virtue of taking them. If they are declassified, what harm is there in showing to a jury? If they are top secret, why are they stored in a ballroom and a bathroom?
3. He also declassified all of the docs in his mind and just forgot to tell anyone. Let's tell a jury

4. Or the prosecution selected the least harmful of the Trump docs.

---

This is a possibility I haven't seen much discussion of, and it probably won't gain any traction in here for obvious reasons, but it plausibly exists. As bad as the conduct in the indictment is, there's a very real possibility that the reality is even worse than what we know already.

---

Unfortunately, it's also "plausible" that the prosecution is politically motivated. The DOJ's history with Trump is not one that inspires confidence, and I say this as someone who never liked Trump, never voted for him and never will vote for him.

---

We've done the song and dance on that issue before, and we will just have to agree to disagree.

The reality I see is one where authorities have constantly treated Trump with far more deference than he deserves, and handled him with kid gloves. You'd think that after hearing Trump call this current situation a "hoax", and your own acknowledgment that it is in fact very real and very serious, that would cause some self-reflection and re-examination about the previous investigations he also called "hoaxes". This investigation isn't a hoax, and neither was the other big one (I assume you are referring to the Russia investigation).

There is literally a WaPo article out today detailing how the (overwhelmingly conservative) FBI stonewalled investigating Trump people (not even Trump himself) about 1/6 for over a year, because they were afraid to piss off Trump. At every step since he was a candidate, the FBI has only investigated Trump when things became painfully obvious enough to force the issue, and we are all worse off for it.

---

So when ann FBI lawyer altered information to get a warrant, this was one of those instances "when things became painfully obvious enough to force the issue?"

You seem to think that when Barr calls something a "politicized hit job," he's wrong, but when he says Trump is totally in the wrong, he's right. The problem is, and you can't see it perhaps because of your partisan blinders, is that the Barr is likely correct in both instances. However, there are a lot of people who will not trust the current indictment as legitimate because of the past history of the good old "politicized hit job." This is why integrity matters, even if the other guy does not have it.

---

The fact that Sussman is all you can point to kind of demonstrates my point.

Multiple redundant investigations went through the whole shebang with atomic level microscopes (weaponized DOJ??), they even leaked FBI officials personal affairs and went after multiple personal lives outside of their work. But all they ever got was one guy adding "[Carter Page was a] subsource, not a source" to an email on a warrant renewal (not original), a semantic bungle on an investigative thread that didn't even matter. A warrant, by the way, that had nothing to do do with Trump because they purposefully waited until Page left the campaign to seek it (the kid gloves treatment...).

Things became painfully obvious when Trump asked the FBI director for personal loyalty, then fired him when he didn't like the answer, something so obvious that Hollywood would call it bad writing. The email exchange between Don Jr and a rep for a Russian billionaire, where Jr was offered and accepted help from "Russia and its government" was also a pretty big clue once it became public.

Osodecentx said:

---

Wrecks Quan Dough said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Wrecks Quan Dough said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Wrecks Quan Dough said:

---

quash said:

---

Wrecks Quan Dough said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Barr went on to take a flamethrower to Trump's claims that he is being politically persecuted.

"This idea of presenting Trump as a victim here or a victim of a witch hunt is ridiculous," Barr said. "Yes, he's been a victim in the past. His adversaries have obsessively pursued him with phony claims. And I've been at his side defending against them when he is a victim. But this is much different. He's not a victim here. He was totally wrong that he had the right to have those documents. Those documents are among the most sensitive secrets that the country has. They have to be in the custody of the archivist. He had no right to maintain them and retain them."

---

Cannot wait to find out what information was in these documents. The government will have to talk about the information if it goes to trial. The world will find out. Are we really going to do this as a country? As a government?

---

Nothing a motion in limine can't fix, happens all the time.

---

Go read some articles on how these cases are tried. They are going to be talking about these documents in front of a jury.

---

1. Trump talked about these documents to political operatives, but we can'[t tell a jury?

---

How could you have possible got that from what I wrote?

---

Well, how are these cases tried? I thought the government was reluctant to bring cases like this (classified docs) because they didn't want to disclose classified documents. Clearly, in this case, they aren't.

---

They will file charges. That is not the same as having a public trial. Does DJT get a public trial and a right to confront his accusers? Or is he different just because?

---

Are you saying there won't be a trial?

---

Yep. I have said so earlier in this thread.

Wrecks Quan Dough said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Wrecks Quan Dough said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Wrecks Quan Dough said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Wrecks Quan Dough said:

---

quash said:

---

Wrecks Quan Dough said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Barr went on to take a flamethrower to Trump's claims that he is being politically persecuted.

"This idea of presenting Trump as a victim here or a victim of a witch hunt is ridiculous," Barr said. "Yes, he's been a victim in the past. His adversaries have obsessively pursued him with phony claims. And I've been at his side defending against them when he is a victim. But this is much different. He's not a victim here. He was totally wrong that he had the right to have those documents. Those documents are among the most sensitive secrets that the country has. They have to be in the custody of the archivist. He had no right to maintain them and retain them."

---

Cannot wait to find out what information was in these documents. The government will have to talk about the information if it goes to trial. The world will find out. Are we really going to do this as a country? As a government?

---

Nothing a motion in limine can't fix, happens all the time.

---

Go read some articles on how these cases are tried. They are going to be talking about these documents in front of a jury.

---

1. Trump talked about these documents to political operatives, but we can'[t tell a jury?

---

How could you have possible got that from what I wrote?

---

Well, how are these cases tried? I thought the government was reluctant to bring cases like this (classified docs) because they didn't want to disclose classified documents. Clearly, in this case, they aren't.

---

They will file charges. That is not the same as having a public trial. Does DJT get a public trial and a right to confront his accusers? Or is he different just because?

---

Are you saying there won't be a trial?

---

Yep. I have said so earlier in this thread.

---

How do you think it ends? Pardon? Dismissal?

Osodecentx said:

---

Wrecks Quan Dough said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Wrecks Quan Dough said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Wrecks Quan Dough said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Wrecks Quan Dough said:

---

quash said:

---

Wrecks Quan Dough said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Barr went on to take a flamethrower to Trump's claims that he is being politically persecuted.

"This idea of presenting Trump as a victim here or a victim of a witch hunt is ridiculous," Barr said. "Yes, he's been a victim in the past. His adversaries have obsessively pursued him with phony claims. And I've been at his side defending against them when he is a victim. But this is much different. He's not a victim here. He was totally wrong that he had the right to have those documents. Those documents are among the most sensitive secrets that the country has. They have to be in the custody of the archivist. He had no right to maintain them and retain them."

---

Cannot wait to find out what information was in these documents. The government will have to talk about the information if it goes to trial. The world will find out. Are we really going to do this as a country? As a government?

---

Nothing a motion in limine can't fix, happens all the time.

---

Go read some articles on how these cases are tried. They are going to be talking about these documents in front of a jury.

---

1. Trump talked about these documents to political operatives, but we can'[t tell a jury?

---

How could you have possible got that from what I wrote?

---

Well, how are these cases tried? I thought the government was reluctant to bring cases like this (classified docs) because they didn't want to disclose classified documents. Clearly, in this case, they aren't.

---

They will file charges. That is not the same as having a public trial. Does DJT get a public trial and a right to confront his accusers? Or is he different just because?

---

Are you saying there won't be a trial?

---

Yep. I have said so earlier in this thread.

---

How do you think it ends? Pardon? Dismissal?

---

Dismissed. This is a disaster for a lot of reasons.

HuMcK said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Wrecks Quan Dough said:

---

quash said:

---

Wrecks Quan Dough said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Barr went on to take a flamethrower to Trump's claims that he is being politically persecuted.

"This idea of presenting Trump as a victim here or a victim of a witch hunt is ridiculous," Barr said. "Yes, he's been a victim in the past. His adversaries have obsessively pursued him with phony claims. And I've been at his side defending against them when he is a victim. But this is much different. He's not a victim here. He was totally wrong that he had the right to have those documents. Those documents are among the most sensitive secrets that the country has. They have to be in the custody of the archivist. He had no right to maintain them and retain them."

---

Cannot wait to find out what information was in these documents. The government will have to talk about the information if it goes to trial. The world will find out. Are we really going to do this as a country? As a government?

---

Nothing a motion in limine can't fix, happens all the time.

---

Go read some articles on how these cases are tried. They are going to be talking about these documents in front of a jury.

---

1. Trump talked about these documents to political operatives, but we can'[t tell a jury?
2. Remember, Trump declassified all of these documents by virtue of taking them. If they are declassified, what harm is there in showing to a jury? If they are top secret, why are they stored in a ballroom and a bathroom?
3. He also declassified all of the docs in his mind and just forgot to tell anyone. Let's tell a jury

4. Or the prosecution selected the least harmful of the Trump docs.

---

This is a possibility I haven't seen much discussion of, and it probably won't gain any traction in here for obvious reasons, but it plausibly exists. As bad as the conduct in the indictment is, there's a very real possibility that the reality is even worse than what we know already.

---

Unfortunately, it's also "plausible" that the prosecution is politically motivated. The DOJ's history with Trump is not one that inspires confidence, and I say this as someone who never liked Trump, never voted for him and never will vote for him.

---

We've done the song and dance on that issue before, and we will just have to agree to disagree.

The reality I see is one where authorities have constantly treated Trump with far more deference than he deserves, and handled him with kid gloves. You'd think that after hearing Trump call this current situation a "hoax", and your own acknowledgment that it is in fact very real and very serious, that would cause some self-reflection and re-examination about the previous investigations he also called "hoaxes". This investigation isn't a hoax, and neither was the other big one (I assume you are referring to the Russia investigation).

There is literally a WaPo article out today detailing how the (overwhelmingly conservative) FBI stonewalled investigating Trump people (not even Trump himself) about 1/6 for over a year, because they were afraid to piss off Trump. At every step since he was a candidate, the FBI has only investigated Trump when things became painfully obvious enough to force the issue, and we are all worse off for it.

---

So when ann FBI lawyer altered information to get a warrant, this was one of those instances "when things became painfully obvious enough to force the issue?"

You seem to think that when Barr calls something a "politicized hit job," he's wrong, but when he says Trump is totally in the wrong, he's right. The problem is, and you can't see it perhaps because of your partisan blinders, is that the Barr is likely correct in both instances. However, there are a lot of people who will not trust the current indictment as legitimate because of the past history of the good old "politicized hit job." This is why integrity matters, even if the other guy does not have it.

---

The fact that Sussman is all you can point to kind of demonstrates my point.

Multiple redundant investigations went through the whole shebang with atomic level microscopes (weaponized DOJ??), they even leaked FBI officials personal affairs and went after multiple personal lives outside of their work. But all they ever got was one guy adding "[Carter Page was a] subsource, not a source" to an email on a warrant renewal (not original), a semantic bungle on an investigative thread that didn't even matter. A warrant, by the way, that had nothing to do do with Trump because they purposefully waited until Page left the campaign to seek it (the kid gloves treatment...).

Things became painfully obvious when Trump asked the FBI director for personal loyalty, then fired him when he didn't like the answer, something so obvious that Hollywood would call it bad writing. The email exchange between Don Jr and a rep for a Russian billionaire, where Jr was offered and accepted help from "Russia and its government" was also a pretty big clue once it became public.

---

I'm not "pointing to Sussman," I am pointing to Barr. Things he characterizes as false or as political hit jobs you promoted and clung to, and cling to, like flotsam from the Titanic.

Suddenly, when he says Trump screwed up big time, you act like he has integrity, but you ignore that he found the stuff you promote to be nothing.

I suspect he has a high degree of integrity and is correct in both instances, but, unlike you, I am not a political hack.

You won't find any instance on here of me defending Barr, not then and not now. He had prosecutors under his watch resign in protest after his direct interference into multiple investigations, he is not an ethical man at all. If Garland stepped in to end any prosecution of Hunter Biden like Barr did for Flynn and Stone, you would be calling for his immediate impeachment.

Barr is a company man through and through, has been since he helped HW Bush put Iran/Contra to bed. He protected Trump then because it was good for the party, just like his criticism now is good for the party.

HuMcK said:

---

You won't find any instance on here of me defending Barr, not then and not now. He had prosecutors under his watch resign in protest after his direct interference into multiple investigations, he is not an ethical man at all. If Garland stepped in to end any prosecution of Hunter Biden like Barr did for Flynn and Stone, you would be calling for his immediate impeachment.

Barr is a company man through and through, has been since he helped HW Bush put Iran/Contra to bed. He protected Trump then because it was good for the party, just like his criticism now is good for the party.

---

I suppose it is not surprising that you would view that actions of others through the lens of a partisan hack. You are not really any different than Trump's defenders in that regard. Party Uber Alles.

Wrecks Quan Dough said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Wrecks Quan Dough said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Wrecks Quan Dough said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Wrecks Quan Dough said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Wrecks Quan Dough said:

---

quash said:

---

Wrecks Quan Dough said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Barr went on to take a flamethrower to Trump's claims that he is being politically persecuted.

"This idea of presenting Trump as a victim here or a victim of a witch hunt is ridiculous," Barr said. "Yes, he's been a victim in the past. His adversaries have obsessively pursued him with phony claims. And I've been at his side defending against them when he is a victim. But this is much different. He's not a victim here. He was totally wrong that he had the right to have those documents. Those documents are among the most sensitive secrets that the country has. They have to be in the custody of the archivist. He had no right to maintain them and retain them."

---

Cannot wait to find out what information was in these documents. The government will have to talk about the information if it goes to trial. The world will find out. Are we really going to do this as a country? As a government?

---

Nothing a motion in limine can't fix, happens all the time.

---

Go read some articles on how these cases are tried. They are going to be talking about these documents in front of a jury.

---

1. Trump talked about these documents to political operatives, but we can'[t tell a jury?

---

How could you have possible got that from what I wrote?

---

Well, how are these cases tried? I thought the government was reluctant to bring cases like this (classified docs) because they didn't want to disclose classified documents. Clearly, in this case, they aren't.

---

They will file charges. That is not the same as having a public trial. Does DJT get a public trial and a right to confront his accusers? Or is he different just because?

---

Are you saying there won't be a trial?

---

Yep. I have said so earlier in this thread.

---

How do you think it ends? Pardon? Dismissal?

---

Dismissed. This is a disaster for a lot of reasons.

---

After all the work to get indictments against Trump from multiple Grand Juries, no way the Democrats will just dismiss the charges.

For one thing, the Democrats think the case is strong.

For another, even if they believed the case was weak, they would still run the noise all the way through the 2024 Election season.

Wrecks Quan Dough said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Wrecks Quan Dough said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Wrecks Quan Dough said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Wrecks Quan Dough said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Wrecks Quan Dough said:

---

quash said:

---

Wrecks Quan Dough said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Barr went on to take a flamethrower to Trump's claims that he is being politically persecuted.

"This idea of presenting Trump as a victim here or a victim of a witch hunt is ridiculous," Barr said. "Yes, he's been a victim in the past. His adversaries have obsessively pursued him with phony claims. And I've been at his side defending against them when he is a victim. But this is much different. He's not a victim here. He was totally wrong that he had the right to have those documents. Those documents are among the most sensitive secrets that the country has. They have to be in the custody of the archivist. He had no right to maintain them and retain them."

---

Cannot wait to find out what information was in these documents. The government will have to talk about the information if it goes to trial. The world will find out. Are we really going to do this as a country? As a government?

---

Nothing a motion in limine can't fix, happens all the time.

---

Go read some articles on how these cases are tried. They are going to be talking about these documents in front of a jury.

---

1. Trump talked about these documents to political operatives, but we can'[t tell a jury?

---

How could you have possible got that from what I wrote?

---

Well, how are these cases tried? I thought the government was reluctant to bring cases like this (classified docs) because they didn't want to disclose classified documents. Clearly, in this case, they aren't.

---

They will file charges. That is not the same as having a public trial. Does DJT get a public trial and a right to confront his accusers? Or is he different just because?

---

Are you saying there won't be a trial?

---

Yep. I have said so earlier in this thread.

---

How do you think it ends? Pardon? Dismissal?

---

Dismissed. This is a disaster for a lot of reasons.

---

Please explain. You make it sound like you have something better than "but Hillary's emails."

D. C. Bear said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

You won't find any instance on here of me defending Barr, not then and not now. He had prosecutors under his watch resign in protest after his direct interference into multiple investigations, he is not an ethical man at all. If Garland stepped in to end any prosecution of Hunter Biden like Barr did for Flynn and Stone, you would be calling for his immediate impeachment.

Barr is a company man through and through, has been since he helped HW Bush put Iran/Contra to bed. He protected Trump then because it was good for the party, just like his criticism now is good for the party.

---

I suppose it is not surprising that you would view that actions of others through the lens of a partisan hack. You are not really any different than Trump's defenders in that regard. Party Uber Alles.

---

That's interesting coming from someone who had nothing to say about Bill Barr directly interfering in prosecutions, to the extent that multiple prosecutors tendered their resignations in protest of the obvious corruption a la the Ken Paxton affair, all to protect Republicans. Funny how that seems to escape your partisan gaze altogether. That behavior seems, dare I say, very partisan hack-ish...