ZeroHedge
ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero
www.zerohedge.com
Judicial Watch take on the DOJ release
- Thread starter TigerRagRob
- Start date
www.zerohedge.com
Good points, but i all evidence and reports thus far, including the itemization from the FBI, is that these are top secret documents, confidential docs, sensitive docs, and military secrets. It all depends on Garland, but he is going to face a court system this time, not a Republican Congress. And he knows it. His behavior will only grow more bizarre and brazen the rest of the way.
I got to admit, I'm con
YOU? Asking for a source? REALLY? OK. That's a direct quote from NARA with nothing added, I didn't think it needed to be sourced.
BUT when I saw that quote on liberal CNN and MSNBC, you know what I did? I went to the actual source and got the quote, b/c CNN and MSNBC are not reliable sources. So here you are, a real primary source:
Press Statements in Response to Media Queries About Presidential Records
In response to recent media reports that generated a large number of queries about presidential records, we issued the following statements to the media: January 17, 2024, statement December 4, 2023, statement September 2, 2023, statement August 11, 2023, statement June 9, 2023, statement April...
www.archives.gov
I got to admit, I'm con
YOU? Asking for a source? REALLY? OK. That's a direct quote from NARA with nothing added, I didn't think it needed to be sourced.
BUT when I saw that quote on liberal CNN and MSNBC, you know what I did? I went to the actual source and got the quote, b/c CNN and MSNBC are not reliable sources. So here you are, a real primary source:
Press Statements in Response to Media Queries About Presidential Records
In response to recent media reports that generated a large number of queries about presidential records, we issued the following statements to the media: January 17, 2024, statement December 4, 2023, statement September 2, 2023, statement August 11, 2023, statement June 9, 2023, statement April...
QUESTIONABLE SOURCE
A questionable source exhibits one or more of the following: extreme bias, consistent promotion of propaganda/conspiracies, poor or no sourcing to credible information, a complete lack of transparency, and/or is fake news. Fake News is the deliberate attempt to publish hoaxes and/or disinformation for profit or influence (Learn More). Sources listed in the Questionable Category may be very untrustworthy and should be fact-checked on a per-article basis. Please note sources on this list are not considered fake news unless specifically written in the reasoning section for that source.
Before FBI seized privileged Trump memos, DOJ filter teams already tainted by legal controversy
U.S. Supreme Court considering ruling on legality of taint teams, while other courts wince, feds admit to a major blunder and some lawyers see a "fox in the privilege henhouse."
justthenews.com
Before FBI seized privileged Trump memos, DOJ filter teams already tainted by legal controversy
U.S. Supreme Court considering ruling on legality of taint teams, while other courts wince, feds admit to a major blunder and some lawyers see a "fox in the privilege henhouse."By John Solomon
Updated: August 29, 2022 - 11:00pm
The Justice Department's admission Monday it improperly collected attorney-client privileged documents during a court-ordered search of Donald Trump's Florida estate was quickly followed by assurances it was no big deal because the department has a process to segregate privileged material.
But that process — known as filter teams or "taint" teams — has itself been tainted by a string of recent legal controversies over the seizure of attorney-client privilege protected materials in other cases.
Distrust among defense lawyers — including the firm that once employed Hunter Biden — about the honor system that federal law enforcement claims to use to protect privileged evidence has led to a pending writ of certiorari asking the U.S. Supreme Court to rule on the legality of such teams.
The filter/taint team procedure "needlessly and harmfully exposes assertedly privileged communications to the government's eyes," lawyers for defendant Mordechai Korf and others argue in asking the nation's nine justices to consider the case. "It undermines essential protections for the adversary system. And it jeopardizes the confidentiality needed for the applicable privileges to serve their vital purposes."
File
20220418134323040_Petition for Writ of Certiorari.pdf
While the justices weigh whether to take the Korf case, at least three other federals appeals courts have already raised concerns about the teams in other cases.
And the Securities and Exchange Commission — which often investigates financial crimes alongside the FBI — recently admitted to significant breaches in two cases where its computer systems mistakenly allowed criminal investigators to have access to potentially privileged documents from its administrative regulatory side. The agency blamed the mistakes on a "control deficiency."
"We deeply regret that the Commission's systems lacked sufficient safeguards surrounding access to Adjudication memoranda," the agency said in a rare statement of apology. "We have great faith in the professionalism of all of our staff and will work to ensure that, going forward, we better protect the separation of adjudicatory work-product within our system for administrative adjudications, including by enhancing our systems for controlling access to Adjudication memoranda. We take this lapse in controls very seriously and are working hard to make sure nothing like it happens again."
The apology, while applauded, only further heightened defense lawyers' concerns that the government's regard for protecting privileged materials is waning or non-existent.
"Although the recently-revealed SEC mishap appears to have been limited to its own materials, the inappropriate access to privileged materials is an ongoing problem that exists across prosecutorial and enforcement agencies and institutions," attorney Robert J. Anelo wrote in a recent Forbes article.
The problem with taint teams, he stated, is that the reviewing team lacks independence. "This team comprises the prosecutors' colleagues and is conducted within the agency that is responsible for prosecuting the matter," Anelo wrote.
Prominent defense attorney Matthew J. Schwartz, the managing partner at the same Boies Schiller Flexner law firm where Hunter Biden worked for years, wrote a rebuke of DOJ's use of taint teams in an article in March involving the case of an investor on trial in New York.
The use of taint teams "clearly raises a host of risks and concerns," Schwartz wrote, adding that he did not think DOJ was open to the sort of "sorely needed" reforms that would truly protect privilege. "We are not particularly hopeful that the DOJ will relinquish its unilateral role in making privilege determinations," he said.
Trump's legal team has asked a federal judge in Florida to remove the FBI taint teams and appoint a special master to oversee the review of evidence taken from his Mar-a-Lago estate during the Aug. 8 raid. That request took on new significance when DOJ disclosed in court that the FBI grabbed some attorney-client privileged memos as well as the former president's expired and current passports in a clear overcollection of evidence.
DOJ is opposing Trump's request for the special master, arguing its own filter team has already reviewed the entire evidence and identified the privileged documents prosecutors should not be allowed to use in their investigation.
But that argument is flying into the headwinds of growing court concerns about the way such teams conduct themselves and whether they are even a legal solution to protecting defendants' and suspects' privileges and rights.
In Mississippi, for example, a federal judge concluded in June that the government's protocols for taint teams were so lax that they were likely to cause "irreparable harm" to a defendant whose evidence was raided. That ruling has reverberated in legal circles, leading some to suggest the DOJ simply wants a "fox in the privilege henhouse."
File
Ritchey-Opinion.pdf
At least three federal appeals courts in the last three years have similarly expressed concern about DOJ's taint teams. The most direct ruling came in 2019 by the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in a Maryland case in which federal prosecutors got a magistrate judge to approve a raid on a law firm. The appellate judges concluded the use of a DOJ taint team to determine which privileges to protect for the law firm "inappropriately assigned judicial functions to the executive branch."
In 2020, in response to the appeals court rebukes, the Justice Department announced some reforms, creating a Special Matters Unit to supervise taint teams and create an additional watchdog for a process defense lawyers had begun howling about. The changes did not improve confidence much in the courts.
File
fraud-section-2020-year-in-review.pdf
In 2021, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rebuked federal prosecutors in a new case in Texas for their conduct with a taint team, ultimately concluding the government appeared to have "no intent to respect [the target's] interest in the privacy of its privileged materials as the investigation unfolds."
In Ohio, defense lawyers were able to force changes to the taint team procedures over concerns about protecting privilege in a case that ultimately reached the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The appeals court only approved the taint team approach after significant changes were made.
Katie Sullivan, a former deputy assistant attorney general in the Trump Justice Department, told Just the News on Monday that the courts would benefit from the U.S. Supreme Court weighing in on the legality of filter teams and the proper procedures for them.
"I think it would provide a lot of guidance. ... This is a fairly new, fairly recent development of a procedure and protocol," Sullivan said. "I think it just goes to show how great or how big our government has grown, how big the FBI has grown."
John Solomon Reports
Kash Patel: DOJ ‘intentionally’ left my name unredacted to 'threaten me,' politicalize Trump affidavitKash Patel: DOJ ‘intentionally’ left my name unredacted to 'threaten me,' politicalize Trump affidavit
Tom Fitton, the president of Judicial Watch, which sued to force the release of the search warrant affidavit in the Trump case, said the FBI's recent misconduct in several cases makes any system that relies on an honor system suspect to millions of Americans.
"Whether it be taint teams or other misconduct, the FBI and the Justice Department have poor records of telling anybody anything about what they've done wrong," he said. "And usually it only comes out after they're caught red-handed in something the accountability for which they can't hide."
Just because docs still have markings on them doesnt mean much. If a doc was once classified and has since been declassified its no longer classified. So the real question is and nothing has been presented yet, are those docs still classified or not. We are talking about Crossfire Hurricane docs after all. The same group behind that attempted coup was also the group that did the raid. Archive docs is not what that unit deals with. Trump declassified those docs and took them with him. They want those docs back since it will expose a whole lot of shit that may affect certain people in both parties and the 3 letter agencies. We are talking treason against a sitting POTUS from 2016-2020....
Last edited:
Uh...no... That's you man, not me.QUESTIONABLE SOURCE
A questionable source exhibits one or more of the following: extreme bias, consistent promotion of propaganda/conspiracies, poor or no sourcing to credible information, a complete lack of transparency, and/or is fake news. Fake News is the deliberate attempt to publish hoaxes and/or disinformation for profit or influence (Learn More). Sources listed in the Questionable Category may be very untrustworthy and should be fact-checked on a per-article basis. Please note sources on this list are not considered fake news unless specifically written in the reasoning section for that source.
Do presidents have 'the ability to declassify anything'?
The blockbuster article in The Washington Post saying President Donald Trump had "revealed highly classified information
www.politifact.com
This Is What We Know About the President's Power to Declassify
Phillip Klein, Editor of the Conservative National Review, wrote that the standing order argument is “patently absurd.”
www.independentsentinel.com
Last edited:
I sometimes find Trump socially arrogant and offensive but his policies for America are fantastic.
And please fight to the end as I do admire people who have passion and fight for what they believe
I al looking forward to the red wave in November and Trump to retake the White House
I will make an offer to you as when some people are elected there are people saying they are leaving the country
My standing offer to you is when Trump wins I will send you a one way ticket by air to anywhere in the world you want to go and stay to renounce your US citizenship
Bon Voyage
Or I will be just as happy if you will stay and make America safer and more secure, create opportunities and improve literacy and education , improve social relations between all people and work at making America better through civility and compromise protecting peoples individual and group rights
Have a wonderful day as i am doing what i just wrote to you in the real world as
Well done beats well said
Or Put Up or Shut Up
So hoping I can be that positive influence
Hey Paps, crack is whack
I won't need to leave because America won't be stupid enough to elect Shitler again and you're a fool if you believe that.
The bolded above is exactly the opposite of what would happen if Trump re-took the Presidency. If re-elected it would be nothing more than a revenge campaign full of hate, vitriol and likely violence. LMAO that you believe it would improve social relations.
#MAGATears
lol. Hillary was Secretary of state. The only thing that doesn't apply to her is that she didnt have executive priviledge.
Double standard and the people are having it anymore. FBI being outed as democratic henchman more every day that goes by. The SCAM is up.
For the love of all that's holy, do you guys willfully not read. It's called the Presidential Records Act and literally applies to presidential Records.
Why not people were stupid enough to elect a crooked braindead pedo pos that shits himself doesnt know where he is and tries to shake hands with ghost and cant speak. Also so what if Trump goes after these pos that betrayed the country committed treason with multiple coup attempts. All the shit you guys have been doing and getting away with the last 40 years, its about time your chickens came home to roost. This isnt the old republican party that just let you get away with shit. This is the new republican party and this pig wont fly from now on. We will hold you guys to account....
Thanks for reminding us why we shouldn't vote for you. This just motivates us more.
#CorruptMAGAs
This is settled law going back to 2012 when an Obama Judge ruled on it. It doesnt apply to the PONTUS and neither does the Espionage Act since POTUS is the Supreme Authority on what is classified. No agency or other branch of government has any authority over the PONTUS in this manner...
Last edited:
Likewise, we feel the same about you and your beloved establishment politicians who’ve made themselves unbelievably wealthy fleecing the American people
But you do you
You and your hypocrite friends are constantly throwing out whataboutisms while crying about others throwing out whataboutisms. It’s kind of nuts but not at all surprising
Trump’s tax cuts helped billionaires pay less than the working class for first time
Economists calculate richest 400 families in US paid an average tax rate of 23% while the bottom half of households paid a rate of 24.2%
Jared Kushner Theories Swirl Over $2B Saudi Money After Trump Mole Claims
"Was there a bidding war the Saudis won with their $2 billion to Jared?" talk show host Thom Hartmann asked.
www.newsweek.com
Ivanka’s Trademark Requests Were Fast-Tracked In China After Trump Was Elected
The day before she was officially appointed to the White House staff, Ivanka Trump applied for 17 new trademarks in China.
www.forbes.com
I love your poetic grunts. I've never told you this but I have a calligrapher paint your sayings on my wall so I can ponder them. They're so zen!
Dude. You absolutely don't have a clue what you are talking about. He didn't declassify prior to leaving office, that's been pretty well established by everyone in the White House.
Even if all of these documents had been declassified, THEY DON'T BELONG TO HIM. He isn't allowed to take documents from the White House. He doesn't own them, they are property of the government.
He absolutely broke the rules/Law of the Presidential Records Act. It's not even defensible that he didn't.
You and nobody else here knows what he did or didnt classify. Two- again a 2012 ruling by and Obama Judge ruled the PRA doesnt apply to the POTUS. Its SETTLED CASE LAW!!!!! You dont like that law I get it. But its the law....
Ok now do Obama, Bush/Cheney, the Clintons, etcTrump’s tax cuts helped billionaires pay less than the working class for first time
Economists calculate richest 400 families in US paid an average tax rate of 23% while the bottom half of households paid a rate of 24.2%www.theguardian.com
Jared Kushner Theories Swirl Over $2B Saudi Money After Trump Mole Claims
"Was there a bidding war the Saudis won with their $2 billion to Jared?" talk show host Thom Hartmann asked.
Ivanka’s Trademark Requests Were Fast-Tracked In China After Trump Was Elected
The day before she was officially appointed to the White House staff, Ivanka Trump applied for 17 new trademarks in China.
I’ll wait
yes. the fact that you also complain about something you're doing is nuts. the fact that you're whining about it here like it's only happening to you could be the snowflake move of 2022, but not at all surprising.
You apparently aren't smart, let's take this one thing at a time.
1.Are you aware of the Presidential Records Act?
2. Are you aware that all documents that the president uses/creates while president are not his property?
3. While a president has the ability to de-classify anything they want, there is a process they follow to declassify and relabel.
4. There is zero proof, nor anyone who was in the White House who believes that he did any of this.
5. Trump is a bold face liar.
trollin, trollin, trollin, keep those posts a trollin, rawhide !!!
Hmm nope all true. You can go online and look at declassified docs and still see the markings on them.
Here is the key part of the ruling in the 2012 case...Its the Presidents sole discretion if its personal or not...Game-Set-Match
In the Court's view, plaintiff reads too much into this statement. Under the statutory scheme established by the PRA, the decision to segregate personal materials from Presidential records is made by the President, during the President's term and in his sole discretion, see44 U.S.C. § 2203(b), so the Deputy Archivist could not and did not make a classification decision that can be challenged here. When she posited that perhaps the plaintiff was asking NARA “to make a further determination that the materials in question ought to be considered ‘[P]residential records,’ ” she was, if anything, as counsel for the defendant suggested at the hearing, opining on the question of whether there were grounds for the Archivist to choose to invoke the enforcement mechanism embodied in the statute. Tr. at 8; 23–24. But, neither plaintiff nor defendant believes that is a decision that is at issue in this lawsuit, see id., at 8–9, 37, 42, and 50, and, as is discussed below, such a decision would not be reviewable in any event.
In the Court's view, plaintiff reads too much into this statement. Under the statutory scheme established by the PRA, the decision to segregate personal materials from Presidential records is made by the President, during the President's term and in his sole discretion, see44 U.S.C. § 2203(b), so the Deputy Archivist could not and did not make a classification decision that can be challenged here. When she posited that perhaps the plaintiff was asking NARA “to make a further determination that the materials in question ought to be considered ‘[P]residential records,’ ” she was, if anything, as counsel for the defendant suggested at the hearing, opining on the question of whether there were grounds for the Archivist to choose to invoke the enforcement mechanism embodied in the statute. Tr. at 8; 23–24. But, neither plaintiff nor defendant believes that is a decision that is at issue in this lawsuit, see id., at 8–9, 37, 42, and 50, and, as is discussed below, such a decision would not be reviewable in any event.
Last edited:
If this was the case... Why would the Trump team have been actively hiding and moving documents in Mar a Lago?
Also, nobody is debating that the president can declassify documents. There is no proof that he did declassify those documents prior to leaving the White House. His own lawyers aren't making that argument in legal filings.
The bigger reality is that those documents don't belong to him. He has no rights to them.
If you aren't trolling, what is it about this you don't understand? It really feels like you are just trolling.
Make up your minds is he hiding them or are they just laying around not secured and he has lax security? I mean they are kept in a underground locked room guarded by the best security organization in the world The Secret Service 24/7. So I guess hiding them from public view. After all the FBI was there is june and did an inspection and suggested adding another lock, which they themselves added. Ive heard his lawyers say many times the doc were declassified and the FBI has shown any evidence of any wrong doing yet. The biggest reality is you cant handle the truth. Not only did the court affirm records belong to a former president, they are theirs alone. It means they have every right to the records. Because according to the court ruling the president alone has SOLE discretion on whats personal with regards to records. NARA has no authority here as that ruling stated. You dont know any of this since you dont consume any news other than leftist news and leftist sources on twatter... FYI that case was Judicial Watch vs Clinton. The judge was an Obama appointed judge that made that ruling. Judicial Watch was making the same argument as you with regards to records Clinton kept. They made a FOIA request and got denied. So they went to court to for them to give the records up. So now its settled law and it means Trump has every right...
Similar threads
