General Discussion

intrepidity

(7,339 posts)

67. But, as Dearie reminds us, this is a civil case, not criminal

Tue Sep 20, 2022, 03:12 PM

Sep 2022

They're saying that it isn't their job to prove that documents had been declassified... it's the prosecution's job to prove that they had not been. And, legally, they have a point.

The burden is on plaintif to prove need for relief.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

76 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Trumps lawyers are telling us they have no defense in the secret document investigation. [View all] fightforfreedom Sep 2022 OP

Yep. The desk is decisive but they simply were on his property underpants Sep 2022 #1

TFG's life's work... RevBrotherThomas Sep 2022 #21

The courts' life work is also keeping TFG entangled in them until he croaks. Ocelot II Sep 2022 #30

Ok he is guilty. The Jungle 1 Sep 2022 #2

You get a break when you are part of the cabal. multigraincracker Sep 2022 #3

Its 50/50 in the Supreme Court. They have ruled against Trump in prior cases. 3Hotdogs Sep 2022 #4

There's no honor among thieves. Meadowoak Sep 2022 #5

There is no honor in endangering the National Security of the US of A. Justice matters. Sep 2022 #29

I think it's worse than that. Johonny Sep 2022 #35

How do you figure a 6/3 or with Roberts, a 5/4 split is 50/50? Bev54 Sep 2022 #68

Maga math Ray Bruns Sep 2022 #76

That makes it frivolous. no_hypocrisy Sep 2022 #6

That's why so many Trump lawyers get in trouble. fightforfreedom Sep 2022 #7

This message was self-deleted by its author fightforfreedom Sep 2022 #8

Even Dershowitz conceded they had probable cause for the warrant and enough to indict Jarqui Sep 2022 #9

+1, uponit7771 Sep 2022 #16

TY for this recap. Duppers Sep 2022 #20

good summation. Thank you Evolve Dammit Sep 2022 #26

Thanks. Excellent recap. n/t ms liberty Sep 2022 #69

That isn't what they're telling us FBaggins Sep 2022 #10

Wow, according to you the criminal case should be thrown out. fightforfreedom Sep 2022 #12

Strawman much? FBaggins Sep 2022 #18

This message was self-deleted by its author wnylib Sep 2022 #28

Huh inthewind21 Sep 2022 #42

Wishful thinking FBaggins Sep 2022 #44

It's not necessary to call someone a "person of interest" VMA131Marine Sep 2022 #55

You have it exactly backwards VMA131Marine Sep 2022 #17

That's an argument that hasn't been challenged and upheld in court in similar circumstances FBaggins Sep 2022 #23

Regarding the hypothetical example, wnylib Sep 2022 #36

How credible is it? Not very FBaggins Sep 2022 #39

Re: Your second paragraph. wnylib Sep 2022 #58

I think that's somewhat circular FBaggins Sep 2022 #63

Your first paragraph argument does not wnylib Sep 2022 #65

re: "prosecution's job to prove that they had not been. And, legally, they have a point." thesquanderer Sep 2022 #46

There is indeed plenty of precedent... but you aren't going to like it FBaggins Sep 2022 #51

Your analogy is inappropriate VMA131Marine Sep 2022 #53

Not really FBaggins Sep 2022 #56

You're ignoring that the documents themselves VMA131Marine Sep 2022 #61

Documents that have proper and correct classification markings VMA131Marine Sep 2022 #52

That's always been the case before... but it is the question here FBaggins Sep 2022 #54

Again, properly marked documents are presumptively VMA131Marine Sep 2022 #57

Sounds like a perfect Catch-22 intrepidity Sep 2022 #66

The PRA isn't written so ambiguous as to make any document TFG can think of a "personal record" ... uponit7771 Sep 2022 #24

That's why is absolutely matters whether some of the documents are classified FBaggins Sep 2022 #31

Under PRA (link) "Personal records" are defined and not willy nilly anything a president claims. uponit7771 Sep 2022 #38

The definition and Congress' legislative intent seem pretty clear to me FBaggins Sep 2022 #41

Jackson's ruling in regards to Clinton tapes in "sock drawer" case Clinton's tapes were CLEARLY ... uponit7771 Sep 2022 #48

No it didn't. FBaggins Sep 2022 #62

We agree that NARA doesn't have authority to designated records but that's not ... uponit7771 Sep 2022 #64

But, as Dearie reminds us, this is a civil case, not criminal intrepidity Sep 2022 #67

I believe you are mistaken. EndlessWire Sep 2022 #71

This message was self-deleted by its author John Fante Sep 2022 #75

Their only defense will be to pardon all the convicted in the future Mr. Ected Sep 2022 #11

Indeed! Duppers Sep 2022 #22

Why does everyone keep forgetting Donald Trump has an army of judges on his side? Heather MC Sep 2022 #13

According to some people would should just surrender, it's hopeless. fightforfreedom Sep 2022 #15

Why inthewind21 Sep 2022 #45

We definitely got lucky however Heather MC Sep 2022 #59

Cannon WILL be removed from the bench Obvious85 Sep 2022 #14

Not a chance FBaggins Sep 2022 #32

Judge Cannon will find him not guilty. Turbineguy Sep 2022 #19

And then she'll ask "where's my Mercedes?" peppertree Sep 2022 #25

Um... Cannon isn't presiding over a criminal case FBaggins Sep 2022 #33

Not quilty inthewind21 Sep 2022 #47

America has had 3 people @ the level of espionage that Trump might have been at and they were: Botany Sep 2022 #27

"All Trump and his lawyers can do is delay, create chaos in the justice system." progressoid Sep 2022 #34

I think when Cannon brought up a defense they didn't ask for Johonny Sep 2022 #37

I have had the thought that Cannon doesn't believe what she says, but rather... thesquanderer Sep 2022 #50

I think that is right. kentuck Sep 2022 #40

This analysis seems top notch as usual by Emptywheel Jarqui Sep 2022 #43

re: "irrelevant when it comes to the possible charges listed in the warrant. It is not a defense" thesquanderer Sep 2022 #49

In the meantime, Babyshit Yellow will see if he can whip up some violence. jeffreyi Sep 2022 #60

If it doesn't go to trial by Jan 2025, DeSantis will pardon him. carpetbagger Sep 2022 #70

Desantis the Dork may need a pardon by 2024. fightforfreedom Sep 2022 #72

You'd almost think they're just wanting to delay, delay, and milk the rubes. Beartracks Sep 2022 #73

Judge Dearie is not going to let him delay this issue. Hamlette Sep 2022 #74