- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 10/27/23 at 4:04 pm to Wednesday
quote:
Trump’s defense is- “everything I said about the election being rigged was supported by intelligence.”
Trump’s lawyers argument is essentially that - you can’t prevent Trump from raising his defense by contending that information he knew about was classified. He still knew about it. So how can you say his statements were false and had no basis in reality? When there is a basis in reality, you’re just saying he can’t discuss it.
So he waited until after he left the presidency and he was indicted. And this info was available, but his non-crazy advisors, cabinet told him there was no evidence.
Ok.
Posted on 10/27/23 at 4:07 pm to cwill
quote:
So he waited until after he left the presidency and he was indicted. And this info was available, but his non-crazy advisors, cabinet told him there was no evidence.
Ok.
So you wanted him to divulge classified information when his lawyers had yet to obtain clearance to view the information?
Posted on 10/27/23 at 4:09 pm to GumboPot
quote:
So you wanted him to divulge classified information when his lawyers had yet to obtain clearance to view the information?
Fixing elections is classified information? He couldn’t have his doj bring charges when he was president and had said info? This is counter to all reporting and comments by his people and counter to reality. But ok.
Posted on 10/27/23 at 4:12 pm to GumboPot
Personally, I think it's a move by Trump's team to have the indictment and trial of a former sitting president squashed. I think Trump lawyers are expecting the judges to rule against them and then they will say the court is not allowing a proper defense.
There is no way classified documents can be exposed so now the court suddenly becomes a secret court and that only adds even more conflict to the already contentious indictment and trial.
The DOJ created a mess that is only getting messier by the day and they have no exit strategy to save face.
There is no way classified documents can be exposed so now the court suddenly becomes a secret court and that only adds even more conflict to the already contentious indictment and trial.
The DOJ created a mess that is only getting messier by the day and they have no exit strategy to save face.
Posted on 10/27/23 at 4:13 pm to fwtex
quote:
Personally, I think it's a move by Trump's team to have the indictment and trial of a former sitting president squashed. I think Trump lawyers are expecting the judges to rule against them and then they will say the court is not allowing a proper defense.
There is no way classified documents can be exposed so now the court suddenly becomes a secret court and that only adds even more conflict to the already contentious indictment and trial.
The DOJ created a mess that is only getting messier by the day and they have no exit strategy to save face.
This will not happen.
Posted on 10/27/23 at 4:16 pm to cwill
quote:
Fixing elections is classified information?
Your question does not make sense as it pertains to the filing posted in the OP.
quote:
He couldn’t have his doj bring charges when he was president and had said info?
Barr probably said no. Remember all that when Barr disagreed with Trump?
quote:
This is counter to all reporting and comments by his people and counter to reality.
We can use that info to speculate and politic but the court won't rely on "all reporting and comments by his people counter to reality" unless it is presented and admitted in court.
Posted on 10/27/23 at 4:23 pm to cwill
quote:
cabinet told him there was no evidence.
There was evidence. Most of the cases brought against the election were never heard by judges. 3 of the 5 cases that were heard it was ruled there was election interference.
The fact that the FBI/DOJ labeled Hunters laptop as Russian propaganda is fricking interference.
The counts that were stopped in key states, at the same times where Trump was leading, yet when they reopen, Biden ha she lead. Get your head outta ur arse. Geez. TDS afflicted fools.
Posted on 10/27/23 at 4:40 pm to lake chuck fan
quote:
TDS afflicted fools.
It is much worse than that with him.
Posted on 10/27/23 at 5:00 pm to cwill
quote:
Fixing elections is classified information? He couldn’t have his doj bring charges when he was president and had said info? This is counter to all reporting and comments by his people and counter to reality. But ok.
Good lord. Read the pleading.
Posted on 10/27/23 at 5:43 pm to BBONDS25
quote:
Good lord. Read the pleading.
Coming from you?
Posted on 10/27/23 at 6:14 pm to cwill
quote:
Coming from you?
dude. If you had just read the pleading you wouldn’t have made a fool of yourself….yet again. Posted on 10/27/23 at 6:24 pm to BBONDS25
He a commie cuck just like SFP and that other retard BugC.
Posted on 10/27/23 at 6:31 pm to BBONDS25
quote:
If you had just read the pleading you wouldn’t have made a fool of yourself….yet again.
You're the perfect maga, dishonest and self-deluding. You can't even follow the damn thread and think you have some gotcha. Recall, you don't read pleadings before opining (Guiliana Stipulation) or can't read contracts.
This post was edited on 10/27/23 at 6:35 pm
Posted on 10/27/23 at 6:40 pm to cwill
quote:
You're the perfect maga, dishonest and self-deluding. You can't even follow the damn thread and think you have some gotcha. Recall, you don't read pleadings before opining (Guiliana Stipulation) or can't read contracts.
you asked a really dumb question in this very thread that you got called out on by several posters. You made a fool of yourself. You’re not an attorney. You’re a moron who posts with arrogance from a place of complete ignorance. You’re a cheap version of texridder. Congrats!
Posted on 10/27/23 at 6:48 pm to BBONDS25
quote:
you asked a really dumb question in this very thread that you got called out on by several posters. You made a fool of yourself.
You're dumb enough to think I was addressing the pleading.
quote:
You’re not an attorney.
Who knows...I think you think that your claim of being an attorney somehow makes you "right", but there's countless threads of you being outright wrong or arguing in bad faith for ego protection.
quote:
BBOND25 posts with arrogance from a place of complete ignorance.
FIFY...do we need to link all the threads on Twitter and the Guiliani stipulation. Your a dishonest person.
Posted on 10/27/23 at 6:51 pm to GumboPot
quote:
I'm not a lawyer but I grew up in a family of lawyers. It means an appeal during the intermediate stages of the trial, I think
Yes— usually a party has to wait until the end of trial to contest a ruling and do it all on appeal. CIPA creates procedural rules when dealing with classified information
Trump had until 10/26 to fine the notice that he would use classified info. He tried to extend it further because there were access issues from when the government made their initial disclosures
There was a lot of motion practice on this one, but I had thought the court had already ordered a CIPA hearing ( re docket item 64), and that was the reason the notice included objections
If that wasn’t the case, the government would be the next party to request a hearing via motion after a rule 5 disclosure
At the hearing, the government can request substitutions or redactions. If they don’t like the ruling they can immediately appeal (Trump cannot by CIpA rules) and the appeals court would hear on an expedited fashion
Tgat was the nature of my earlier question— there doesn’t seem to be a CIPA avenue for a motion by Trump The court has already ruled on a hearing and the rules of procedure seem to be laid out. Thus, I wasn’t sure of the underlying point on the distinction
Posted on 10/27/23 at 6:56 pm to dukkbill
Obviously, the Court will not allow anything Trump asks for. What in your opinion does it look like for an appeal? Is there a solid basis for it?
Posted on 10/27/23 at 7:02 pm to Jax-Tiger
quote:
Why should information about election interference be redacted and secret.
In principal, I agree with you. All government likes to hide behind rules that prevent disclosure. Nevertheless, we could probably all find some situation where we would agree with redactions. For instance if the document lists the name of a current undercover operative, we could agree with calling them Operative A instead of their real name
Since we don’t have access to what the government disclosed, we don’t know how crazy they went with redactions. We just know they went further than the defense would like. The perhaps good news is that CIpA doesn’t replace the normal rules of evidence on relevancy, it just creates procedural rules on when those items are decided. I’d hope that a judge would err on the side of allowing Trump to put on a case
I haven’t seen any items yet on strategy, but one thing that is possible is “a silent witness rule”. This gives the jury the full view of the documents but testimonislly would just require the party’s to say “operative A” or “the fall memo”
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News