US Politics: Hey wanna come to my office and see some Top Secret Eyes only documents?

[DMC]

1 minute ago, KalVsWade said:

Yes, what a ridiculous idea to think that a bullshit decision would be used to maximal bullshittery, no reason to jump to the conclusion that the request by Trump to get something would be used to benefit him

 

You don't even know who the special master is going to be yet.  And there are legitimate grounds in terms of privacy concerns to appoint one:

Quote

She noted that a still-sealed report of items seized by a Justice Department “filter team” — tasked with screening out attorney-client-privileged material — said that “medical documents, correspondence related to taxes, and accounting information” were among them.

So, yeah, you're jumping to conclusions, as per usual.

[Wade1865]

10 minutes ago, DireWolfSpirit said:

You are far more optimistic than i am. I have very little faith we can pull off a free/fair election against the group that is unwilling to abide by a system of majority rules. They will not be deterred by simply having less votes.

DireWolfSpirit -- I’m confident it’ll be mostly free and fair (2020 proves it, don’t you think?). Correspondingly, when Uncle Joe wins, the minority will have to accept the outcome (e.g., the heavy-handed punishments against the J6 actors) or suffer severely.

The God Emperor’s supporters live adequate lives, not worth throwing away. I can’t see but a few who might go off the rails, and even then they’d have no success at changing outcomes.

[mormont]

26 minutes ago, DireWolfSpirit said:

You are far more optimistic than i am. I have very little faith we can pull off a free/fair election against the group that is unwilling to abide by a system of majority rules. They will not be deterred by simply having less votes.

You're not really getting to grips with the cynical disingenuousness of the original comment. Wade knows full well that the voters already did hold Trump to account in 2019. They kicked him out. They did their bit. To suggest that voters are the backstop here is nonsense, smokescreen stuff. This isn't about democratic accountability. It's about the law.

[Wade1865]

2 minutes ago, mormont said:

You're not really getting to grips with the cynical disingenuousness of the original comment. Wade knows full well that the voters already did hold Trump to account in 2019. They kicked him out. They did their bit. To suggest that voters are the backstop here is nonsense, smokescreen stuff. This isn't about democratic accountability. It's about the law.

mormont -- 2020 reinforces my thoughts on 2024. And that’s why the God Emperor will lose. The irony is that I’m more confident (not cynical) than the left wing, hahaha.

Nah, it’s not about the law. It’s about politics, informed by money. Don’t be gullible.

[DireWolfSpirit]

Knowing that this Trump appointed judge will be tasked with appointing the Special Master, a position that is supposed to be neutral, is cause enough for concern.

Cause enough for concern in light of the recent past history over how the Mueller investigation has proven to a stacked deck that the A.G. simply squashed and ensured Trump would face no consequences.

Its not jumping to conclusion to doubt fair play or neutrality will be practiced when weve already been through previous slow motion train wrecks of Trumps impeachment and obstruction crimes being rubber stamped innocent by a Government/system that is proving unwilling/unable to hold him accountable.

We want to whine over Russian interference, we have far worse domestic enemies right in our highest reaches of government.

[DMC]

2 minutes ago, DireWolfSpirit said:

Its not jumping to conclusion to doubt fair play or neutrality will be practiced when weve already been through previous slow motion train wrecks of Trumps impeachment and obstruction crimes being rubber stamped innocent by a Government/system that is proving unwilling/unable to hold him accountable.

Plenty of people within the FBI/DOJ are already familiar with the contents of these documents.  Moreover, based on Cannon's own order today, Haines and the "intelligence community" will be assessing the documents as well (which really doesn't make sense considering her worry was about leaks, but whatever).  Cannon granting the special master request is clear bias, but hardly out of her purview. 

Appointing a special master that will then effectively obstruct justice - all the while knowing the DOJ and the intelligence community could prove you're obstructing justice - is a pretty big huge leap from simply allowing Trump to delay the investigation based on privacy/privilege grounds.  And let's not act like the judiciary - including Trump appointees - haven't routinely rebuffed Trump's ridiculous legal claims across the country literally since Election Day 2020.  Just because he won 1 out of, like, hundreds doesn't mean we have to get all grassy knoll about it.

1 minute ago, Mindwalker said:

If it's jumping to conclusions he'll run out the clock, then so be it.

What clock?  Under their own departmental guidelines the DOJ wouldn't have been able to bring/publicize charges until after the midterms anyway.

[DMC]

Just now, Mindwalker said:

Guidelines are just that, not set in stone. Didn't the FBI have the same guidelines?

Yes!  Which is why what Comey did was so fucked up.  Two wrongs don't make a right, especially if you're complaining about the lack of "the rule of law."

Moreover, substantively, I'm not sure announcing an indictment/whatever would hurt Republicans in the midterms.  Could have just the opposite impact - turn them out when they were otherwise not gonna.

[DMC]

1 minute ago, Mindwalker said:

And guidelines are not the law.

There's no "law" that precludes a special master from being appointed either, but people keep bringing up "the rule of law" as if biased judges are anything new.  

[DMC]

1 minute ago, Mindwalker said:

As I understand it, they refer to executive privilege for a former executive as lawless, as that has been decided already.

It's definitely bullshit - and as I said the implied decision here on executive privilege is indeed the most dangerous part about this (which, ultimately, doesn't really have to do with Trump), but referring to it as "lawless" is more just literary flair.

[Jace, Extat]

1 hour ago, KalVsWade said:

Nope! It turns out that the checks and balances we have are largely political and largely normative - there is massive discretion in practicing them or not. Have the right people in the right places and they simply don't matter. 

The remedies that the US population has at this point are extra legal at this point. 

 

1 hour ago, KalVsWade said:

No, the voters won't matter here either thanks to many of the levers of voting being made obsolete combined with a willingness to use or threaten political violence. 

 

1 hour ago, DireWolfSpirit said:

My formative and prep education has proven to be a fraud.

You are far more optimistic than i am. I have very little faith we can pull off a free/fair election against the group that is unwilling to abide by a system of majority rules. They will not be deterred by simply having less votes.

Yes! YES!!!

THEY want to STEAL your JUSTICE! YOU NEED TO FIGHT LIKE HELL TO SAVE YOUR JUSTICE you need to MAKE JUSTICE. 

CAPITULATION IS NOT NOBLE, IT IS COWARDICE 

Stop watching Batman and the Avengers. Become.

You have REAL enemies. They have REAL power and really powerful allies. Better to know. BETTER TO FIGHT LIKE HELL AND STOP THE STEAL

[Kalbear]

1 hour ago, DMC said:

You don't even know who the special master is going to be yet.  And there are legitimate grounds in terms of privacy concerns to appoint one:

None of those concerns were brought up when asking for it. A big problem is simply the judge granting the request based on their reasoning, period. 

But yes, another problem is that the special master that will be appointed is going to be appointed by the same apparatus that granted it based on said bullshittery; there is no reason to assume that that person will not be incredibly biased.

Otherwise why ask for it at all?

1 hour ago, DMC said:

So, yeah, you're jumping to conclusions, as per usual.

I don't get why any level of optimism here is warranted. As usual you're assuming the best based on some 1960 theory of political discourse and an irrelevant historical basis. Let's try it a different way - Trump wants this. Do you think that it's likely he wants something that is completely irrelevant, or he wants it because it helps his case?

[Squab]

17 hours ago, Larry of the Lake said:

@mcbigskiwhat's so funny?  That you're wrong?  Seriously, look at oil and gas production since Biden took office.  It's been increasing to more or less pre-pandemic levels.  And pretty sure we exported more in 2021 than 2019.

Oil production in the US is still behind 2020 levels (the year of the CCP endorsed lockdowns) and almost 10% behind 2019. This is even worse when you consider that under Trump oil production was increasing by more than 10% each year.

[Kalbear]

Here's a good thread on why the decision is so completely not based on any actual legal grounds, including privacy considerations. If the judge had gone that way maybe it would be slightly better, but they didn't do that; instead they leaned heavily on executive privilege despite the executive in power waiving that entirely. 

 

[Jaxom 1974]

Was literally about to post that thread.  Katyal truly can help basic understanding of the law....

[DMC]

18 minutes ago, KalVsWade said:

None of those concerns were brought up when asking for it. A big problem is simply the judge granting the request based on their reasoning, period. 

Well, the Trump legal team's incompetence aside, the judge wasn't simply basing on their reasoning as I just quoted you.  The filter team did find documents - and reported finding documents - that are privacy concerns for any citizen, including Trump.

That's not to say that, of course, this is just a delay tactic and Trump got a judge to throw him a bone with a legal technicality, I just don't think that's that big of a deal.  Particularly since Garland wasn't going to publicize any charges before the midterms anyway (and politically probably shouldn't).

18 minutes ago, KalVsWade said:

But yes, another problem is that the special master that will be appointed is going to be appointed by the same apparatus that granted it based on said bullshittery; there is no reason to assume that that person will not be incredibly biased.

There's also no reason to assume Cannon and the special master will engage in a criminal conspiracy to protect Trump - especially when so many people throughout the Biden administration are and will be aware of the documents' contents.

18 minutes ago, KalVsWade said:

I don't get why any level of optimism here is warranted. As usual you're assuming the best based on some 1960 theory of political discourse and an irrelevant historical basis.

I've literally written papers on why Neustadt's (1960) power of persuasion no longer applies today -- indeed I wrote them before Trump was doing anything more than calling into Fox & Friends complaining about Obama's birth certificate.  As usual you don't know what the fuck you're talking about.

18 minutes ago, KalVsWade said:

Do you think that it's likely he wants something that is completely irrelevant, or he wants it because it helps his case?

I think he wants to delay the investigation and this will delay the investigation.

[Kalbear]

1 minute ago, DMC said:

Well, the Trump legal team's incompetence aside, the judge wasn't simply basing on their reasoning as I just quoted you.  The filter team did find documents - and reported finding documents - that are privacy concerns for any citizen, including Trump.

If that were an issue worth anything then a special master should be standard doctrine for ANY seizure of documents in any case. It isn't. Privacy isn't reason for special master and never has been. 

And I believe you know this, so you're arguing the point trumps team wants because...? 

1 minute ago, DMC said:

That's not to say that, of course, this is just a delay tactic and Trump got a judge to throw him on a bone that with a legal technicality, I just don't think that's that big of a deal.  Particularly since Garland wasn't going to publicize any charges before the midterms anyway (and politically probably shouldn't).

There's also no reason to assume Cannon and the special master will engage in a criminal conspiracy to protect Trump - especially when so many people throughout the Biden administration are and will be aware of the documents' contents.

Why wouldn't you assume a criminal conspiracy at this point? Trumps lawyers already attested that no more documents existed and have already been caught in a very clear obstruction charge. Do you think that they're going to stop there? Why? 

This is what I don't get about your argument - you're both assuming more actual competence and more actual behaving with the law than has already been demonstrated. I'm simply taking what they've already done - admitting to breaking the law, obstructing justice - and assuming they're going to continue.

1 minute ago, DMC said:

I've literally written papers on why Neustadt's (1960) power of persuasion no longer applies today -- indeed I wrote them before Trump was doing anything more than calling into Fox & Friends complaining about Obama's birth certificate.  As usual you don't know what the fuck you're talking about.

I didn't know you wrote papers on it! Perhaps you should read what you wrote and act accordingly instead of assuming competence and ethics?

1 minute ago, DMC said:

I think he wants to delay the investigation and this will delay the investigation.

Oh, you're so close. Keep going...why does he want to delay the investigation? What does delay get him? Come on, you're just almost there.

[DMC]

1 minute ago, KalVsWade said:

If that were an issue worth anything then a special master should be standard doctrine for ANY seizure of documents in any case. It isn't. Privacy isn't reason for special master and never has been. 

And I believe you know this, so you're arguing the point trumps team wants because...? 

Yikes.  I agree it's a bullshit decision - and I'm particularly concerned with the executive privilege aspect - but that doesn't change the fact there was a technical basis for Cannon to point to in making her nakedly biased decision.  That's what I'm arguing.

3 minutes ago, KalVsWade said:

Why wouldn't you assume a criminal conspiracy at this point? Trumps lawyers already attested that no more documents existed and have already been caught in a very clear obstruction charge. Do you think that they're going to stop there? Why? 

Because I don't believe a federal judge and whatever special master she appoints are going to risk their careers and freedom to protect Trump -- again, particularly when they could very easily get caught.  I don't know why anyone that believed in political actors acting in self-interest would assume that.

5 minutes ago, KalVsWade said:

This is what I don't get about your argument - you're both assuming more actual competence and more actual behaving with the law than has already been demonstrated.

While I'm sure she's incompetent, Cannon and the special master that still hasn't been appointed yet haven't broken any laws.  At all.

7 minutes ago, KalVsWade said:

Perhaps you should read what you wrote and act accordingly instead of assuming competence and ethics?

There's no assumption of either, as usual you just don't know what the fuck you're talking about.

[Jace, Extat]

Classic liberal brain calculus, regarding 'Garland won't bring charges 'till after midterms... appropriate decision for political purposes' (paraphrased)

Incorrect. Charge him, try him, and then execute him for gross criminality pertaining to the lawful administration of the state before close of business tomorrow. "Gross Criminality Pertaining to the Lawful Administration of the State" isn't a crime? Make it law on Wednesday, after he is executed on Tuesday. The important part is to do it BEFORE YOU LOSE THE LEVERS OF GODDAMN POWER 

Worried that 'overreaching' will hurt you politically? YOU'RE ALREADY DYING POLITICALLY 

ATTACK!

 

 

[Kalbear]

10 minutes ago, DMC said:

Yikes.  I agree it's a bullshit decision - and I'm particularly concerned with the executive privilege aspect - but that doesn't change the fact there was a technical basis for Cannon to point to in making her nakedly biased decision.  That's what I'm arguing.

Again, there is no basis for special masters for privacy as a rule. 

10 minutes ago, DMC said:

Because I don't believe a federal judge and whatever special master she appoints are going to risk their careers and freedom to protect Trump -- again, particularly when they could very easily get caught.  I don't know why anyone that believed in political actors acting in self-interest would assume that.

Okay, follow through - let's say a federal judge gets caught. So? We are already talking about a former potus getting caught, along with all of their lawyers. What does getting caught matter when you never have to fear being punished?

Why do you think this would risk anyones career when people literally have careers because they are willing to do things exactly like this?

This is exactly the magical reasoning I'm taking exception to - you are still operating, without evidence, that people who commit crimes for Trump will be actually punished. 

10 minutes ago, DMC said:

While I'm sure she's incompetent, Cannon and the special master that still hasn't been appointed yet haven't broken any laws.  At all. 

Sure, it's just been Trump and the legal team. I mean, give it some time man - she's only been on the case for a couple weeks.

10 minutes ago, DMC said:

There's no assumption of either, as usual you just don't know what the fuck you're talking about.

You're assuming the threat of breaking the law (ethics) or the threat of losing career (ethics) when neither are so far in evidence. Point of fact, the only people who have ever been punished to any degree of success who have committed crimes for Trump are those who cooperated, like Cohen. As usual you appear to be operating on assumptions of legality that are not represented by the use of power. 

[Zorral]

The DOJ doesn't seem that concerned. Med records for the orange gulp and some accounting/tax? stuff?

He's aimed at on so many fronts at this point, there shall surely be overlapping info dox, one may well think too.