Maybe I’m overly optimistic, but I cannot help but feel the law is steadily closing in on the tfg. He is flailing about and tossing obstacles desperately - and manages delays with some of it - but Garland and the DOJ are way smarter than he and his lawyers are.
As you pointed out in a recent newsletter, Judge Cannon has made an ass of herself (not your words…) The DOJ response craftily gives her an avenue to redemption while not angering the trump base (most of whom I imagine are too ignorant to understand the nuances of the various elements at play) and while also allowing the DOJ to move forward.
DW, I believe you masterfully have demonstrated, regardless of the outcome of the immediate dispute at-hand, that those of us who spent many months distressing over whether those at the top up to and including Trump would be held accountable seemingly had underestimated DOJ’s acumen under A.G. Garland’s auspices.
There is no dispute at hand there is multiple violations of the law and our security and Garland and the DOJ are doing their job. The problem we all have is the media has sensationalized the situation and their commentary in most cases is not admissible in a court of law and won’t convict Trump. Our biggest concern has to be the Federalist judges that Republicans have planted and the ability to get a fair decision.
Stephen, Robert lists the filings by both parties and then clearly articulates the disagreements between the DOJ and Trump’s attorneys. I grant, contrary to the Trump attorneys, that only the DOJ has satisfied the burden of proof. Additionally, I would note that the only way to resolve the concerns posed by the Republican appointed Federalist judges is to expand both the Supreme Court and the lower courts, a feat we can accomplish if we hold the House and pick up perhaps as many as 4 Senators willing either to reform or abolish the filibuster, allowing the Democratic Majority leader to bring the legislation to the floor for debate and a vote.
As a final point, I would note that Robert, in past newsletters, has referenced compelling arguments for expanding the High Court.
All good points. Biden is against expanding the courts because of his long history in the Senate. The D’s would need more Senators and hold the House. There are a myriad of things Biden needs to do to secure the integrity of the Executive branch and it’s unwritten agreements which require definition. The J6th hearings should provide a roadmap on how to strengthen the safeguards to our elections and the electoral vote count. D’s abandoned rural and working people over the years and we need to get them back. Lots of work to do but it starts with wins in November.
Stephen, I sense you and I pretty much are in synch. I merely would add that were we to hold the House and pick up at least 2 Senators willing either to reform or abolish the filibuster, that I would advise the Majority Leader promptly to bring the combined Freedom to Vote: John R. Lewis Act to the floor for debate and a vote.
I agree but add that we need to also win at the local Governor and state government levels to balance states rights against the wishes and rights of a majority of voters.
ALEC is even more libertarian than the Federalist Society-they want to abolish Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, safety standards for workers, the EPA and anything that can help the people of the U.S. and is all for MORE big money control. Quote from an article about ALEC: "ALEC meetings are a pay-to-play political scheme, providing fee-paying corporate members of ALEC with private access to lawmakers, where, behind closed doors, they propose model laws to serve their economic interests. All of this takes place outside of public and transparent democratic institutions, where laws are developed the old-fashioned way. " Their track record regarding COVID is NOT good.
I don’t disagree that the situation for tfg is getting worse, but it is requiring increasingly outrageous crimes to bring this about. I wouldn’t have thought more was needed than Jan 6, but now I see it is requiring fake electors, stolen documents, fraudulent fund raising. I won’t be surprised if we haven’t yet reached the bottom of this barrel. Discovering proof of treason and giving or selling the secrets to foreigners is not beyond the realm of possibility. We can only hope that tfg will bring down the entire GOP before he goes to jail or leaves the country.
DK, I sense from your reply that you fully appreciate that the burden of proof to convict rests solely with the DOJ. In the interim, the damage caused by Trump’s 2016 ascendence to the Presidency, in my view, is incalculable. I also would note I believe it will take devastating losses over several election cycles to rid the Republican Party of Trumpism.
We are far from a conviction, but closer to an indictment.
I don't know what "Trumpism" is. When he is out of the picture there will be other GOPers who have learned that there is no lie too big, not outrageous claim too far from reason, no dog whistle too loud, etc. Trump himself is a loser that we may miss when the methods are employed by less obviously damaged pols (DeSantis, Youngkin, Abbott)....for now, as far as elections go, he is the vile, narcissist, traitor that keeps on giving by taking money away from legitimate candidates, putting Republican candidates in a bind (appeal to his base by fawning over him or appeal to independents by keeping away from him), motivating those that hate and fear him.
DK, Though I believe the only thing worse than indicting and failing to convict, is failing, for the sake of accountability, to indict. Nonetheless, neither I nor anyone else knows how Main Justice will evaluate benefits and risks. As for Trumpism, the term refers to a “style of governance…” and a “set of mechanisms for acquiring and keeping control of power associated with Donald Trump and his political base.” As I indicated in my earlier comment, in my view, Trumpism has so infiltrated the Republican Party that severe losses over several election cycles is the sole antidote for purging itself of this toxic extremism.
DK, there is a direct line between Hitler, Orban and tRump. Using the democratic process, Orban took control of the media, judiciary, Fidesz gov't., casted opponents as existential threats and himself as the savior, used voter suppression tactics to put cronies in office, bribed office holders, etc. all under the auspices of an illiberal democracy. Sound familiar? It's a tried and true playbook. As Barbara has stated the road to salvation is to get out the vote!
From an old dictionary somewhere, seems to fit “trump’ery, n. To deceive, cheat, 1. Deceit, fraud, 2. Anything calculated to deceive by false show; anything externally splendid but intrinsically of little value; worthless finery, 3. Things worn out and of no value; useless matter; trifles; rubbish; nonsense. Trump’ery, a. trifling; showy but worthless; trashy; paltry.”
Jeri, While I agree that far right MAGA extremists are never gone, my point was to underscore that so long as they control the Republican Party, we remain in an untenable and precarious position, wherein our democracy cannot afford for the Democratic Party to lose either House, let alone cede ground at either the state or local level.
Me too. My husband is the same kind of deliberate, thorough decision maker. Though it drove me nuts at the beginning, I’ve come to appreciate that style.
There are a lot of positive developments. When the news of the search at Mar a Lago first broke everyone was assuming that it would benefit Trump politically, and there is evidence in polls that it has improved his standing among the GOP base. Though as I learn more I find it hard to believe it will benefit Trump in the long run. My biggest fear is him finding a way to run out the clock, which appears to be his current strategy.
Nicholas, Speaking as one of A.G. Garland’s loudest detractors for longer than I dare admit, I have come around to conceding that DOJ is quite formidable and that Trump is no match, particularly when matters of national security are at stake. Admittedly, I could be wrong. Still, at a time when I fear we could be running out the clock on democracy itself, I feel personally responsible for affirming the acumen of an institution that unequivocally is committed to upholding the Constitution and the rule of law.
Well said. It doesn't take a "thinking" judge to approve a search warrant. But it does often take one to see past the legal pandering and delay tactics.
As someone who has written search warrant applications and served the warrant s I respectfully disagree about the first point. If a judge approved a faulty warrant application that is the first misstep in the collapse of a successful prosecution. A fourth amendment violation of the first water. The judge must be highly critical of the underlying facts upon which the search is predicated.
Could you please elaborate? I understand the first part of your comment but not the last sentence. Which judge are you referring to there, the judge that approved the warrant or judge cannon? (or both…)
I know who approved the warrant. My question is whether the last sentence refers to Reinhart or Cannon. Both need to be critical of the underlying facts
I was referring only to Reinhart as judge who had to be aware of the underlying crime and fully aware of the circumstances and location where evidence items are suspected to be held. That includes specific facts leading investigators to believe items are in the location. Actual persons who gave information, direct statements by them. The location identified by legal description. Not just a physical address.
And specific details and descriptions of items to be recovered.
The track record or reputation and experience of the officer making the application is to be considered as is the likelihood of the veracity of any informant’s information.
One of the most important and critical activities of any police officer is the invasion of a citizens home. I always wanted the most critical judge to approve a warrant application.
As a Brit, living in Tanzania, I thought it might be interesting for some of you to read my reflections on the passing of our Queen. For the record, I am broadly supportive of the functions of the Royal Family while being frustrated by individual members and the wider scope of the privilege.
Elizabeth was 96 years old. There are very few people that are living in the UK who are older than her and even fewer that have memories of the life and times before she was born. She has, simply, been the one constant in everyone's lives: during the good and bad, the painful and joyful, through the mistakes and success. Love it or hate the monarchy, she has been part of our identity as a nation and as citizens for nigh on a century. And I think all of us feel that we have lost a part of ourselves.
The closest example I can use to describe it - but still fails to capture the sheer magnitude - is probably the death of Nelson Mandela.
She came into a world where the British Empire was still powerful and omniscient across large swathes of the world. She stayed in London during the war and even volunteered as a driver and mechanic as part of the effort. She and her sister snuck out of the Palace, incognito, to join the Victory parades in 1945. She was Queen when Britain finally and belatedly recognized the independence of the ex-colonies into Nation States and sought to redress the relationship as one of equals within the Commonwealth, which she was very proud of. She was there during the economic challenges of the 70's and early 80's and the Cold War. She saw in the digital age, the dramatic widening of our horizons, the end of apartheid. She saw huge social change and social justice that are still ongoing today with the me-too movements, the black lives matter, abortion rights, equal representation, LGBTQ+ rights. And she saw the narrowing of our global views on the last few years, the increased nationalism, intolerance and the invasion of Ukraine.
She saw, 14? Prime Ministers come and go and I think most of them, even the most rambunctious, have admitted that they were in awe of her at their weekly meetings and not a little scared. She had views and an in-depth knowledge of politics that was only shared with them. Her devotion to her role was unstinting and extraordinary. it was her greatest weakness and her greatest strength.
She did make mistakes (the relationship and death of Princess Diana - the argument over taxes and the cost of maintaining the extended royal family) - and she certainly sacrificed her family life to duty. At times she felt more remote from the national conversation than was wise. But she has been our constant, our reliable point of reference and was part of who we are as a nation. We are all fallible at times, including the Queen, and that gave her humanity.
If you want to distill the Queen's character and the place she holds in our lives to one photograph, for me it is the one in Church at the funeral of her husband or so many years, Prince Philip. If anyone was going to be given a free pass during COVID to mourn, it would be the Queen. But she refused, and sat, all by herself in her very visible grief. She chose to stand with all people who had had similar grief, isolation and loss in their lives. She chose to be one of us.
Charles will be a different king, he is a different person. He comes with strong views on climate, the environment, the importance of helping the disadvantaged. We are not used to a Monarch with a strong personal philosophy. He also comes with the baggage of a personal life lived on the front pages of newspapers that his mother did not have to content with till later. He is a mix of radical and very reserved, more sensitive and thoughtful than many imagine (as his broadcast yesterday showed) and quite private and conservative. Seventy three is quite late to launch on a new career path and he has big shoes to step into.
My condolences to you and to all Brits, wherever they live. The Queen represented steadfast courage, starting with WWII. We are sorely missing her type of honest backbone worldwide.
Keep calm and carry on, indeed.
As Democrats, we should seriously adopt her brand of dogged fortitude to reclaim democracy in the face of sly Republicans and its MAGA Machine. We CAN do it!
The more I learn about the Queen, the more I simply respect her as a person. One could easily create an "ethics class" for school that explains her challenges and how she faced them. Elizabeth is an example for us all. I speak as a rabid "anti-monarchist".
Charles now has an opportunity to redeem his kingly name. The first two Charles were hardly role models. More importantly, I see that he has already possibly established two ground breaking paths. The first is that he has spoken of a "slimmed down" monarchy. Perhaps he will redirect some of the antique "pomp and circumstance" resources to better causes. Such as funding efforts to combat the Climate Crisis. I think if Charles were to become an outspoken leader with respect to the human impact on the planet, he would be following his passions and could make a difference. Those that view this as a "partisan path" simply reveal their selfish self imposed ignorance and stupidity. So be it. Earth First! Go for it Charles.
It is true, the first two Charles' were not good role models. But I think his choice of that name signals something down to earth and straightforward. To start as he means to go on. Charles is his name and it is how everyone knows him. His grandfather and many before him, changed their names on becoming king. It will be a test of how adaptable the Monarchy is as to whether he is able to carry on his climate advocacy.
My condolences on the loss of Queen Elizabeth. In some ways I feel President Joseph Biden is like Queen Elizabeth. He has served the country for many decades. I see in him a real dedication to the United States and its Constitution; a hard working man who has stepped up at one of the most difficult and dangerous times in our country with dedication and fidelity. I am glad he is our president in this time.
Yes, it is exactly that same dedication to the higher principle. History will judge him very well, when all the made for TV soundbites from the right have died and long been forgotten..
I've learned a lot about the Queen in the last month or so, and especially since her passing. The one thing I would add to the short list of things she did wrong: it's my impression, anyway, that she discouraged the marriage of Charles and Camilla before Diana came into the picture. It's obvious to make Charles and Camilla belonged together, and that Charles and Diana did not.
But I'm otherwise extremely impressed with the Queen, and I'm almost sorry that the US is not a Commonwealth nation. I'm very impressed with the ritual of transfer of power, where the outgoing tenders resignation to the Queen, and the incoming is anointed by her. We could sure do well with such a ritual, given how our last transfer of power went down.
Elizabeth was truly a unifying force in UK, partly the result of her hiding whatever political views she had.
I was also very impressed with how she became a mechanic during WWII, that being part of her contribution to the war effort. She is also quite the driver, hazing poor Prince Abdullah:
"As instructed, the Crown Prince climbed into the front seat of the Land Rover, with his interpreter in the seat behind. To his surprise, the Queen climbed into the driving seat, turned the ignition and drove off. Women are not – yet – allowed to drive in Saudi Arabia, and Abdullah was not used to being driven by a woman, let alone a queen. His nervousness only increased as the queen, an Army driver in wartime, accelerated the Land Rover along the narrow Scottish estate roads, talking all the time. Through his interpreter, the Crown Prince implored the Queen to slow down and concentrate on the road ahead..."
That is indeed a great story. And it is really touching that many of the remembrances of the Queen shared by public figures do reflect on her humanity and sense of humour as much as the role that she played in our history. As I mentioned in a pervious reply, those decisions with Princes Margaret, Camilla and eventually Diana were all bad miss-steps and I feel that they were all from a time where the people in charge of the mystique of the Monarchy and the centuries-old traditions held sway. They were collective decisions, not hers alone. It took time for them to realize that the Monarchy is about the people, at the end of the day, or it cannot survive. The rapid social change from the 60's to the 80's left the Monarchy as an institution, out of touch and it is testament to the Queen's character and humanity that she was able to bring it back front and centre.
My admiration stems from photo of her as mechanic during WW2, take that chicken chump. To me her worse gaff was in denying Charles the right to marry Camilla in the first place. I’m old enough to remember that she was the one who was not good enough for the royals because she was a commoner. Live and learn and QE2 did just that, all her life.
Her decision to become a mechanic also really showed her own determination to do what was right. Camilla-gate first time round was indeed a mistake, though I suspect it was more her royal courtiers and protocol advisers than just her own decision. A similar mistake was made with Princess Margaret with very unhappy results. Both stem from a time when the Monarchy as an institution was considered more important than the Monarchy's relationship with the public. It was failing to move with the times and understand that the social barriers were rapidly tumbling throughout the country. That lesson was not really learnt until Diana.
Wow Thank you so much for this ! That was a beautiful testimony to her life , her service and her strong commitment to her people. I’m so sorry for your loss. Please know we are feeling it here too. Perhaps not in the same way but she has been an icon for decades ( all of my 61 years) ❤️🤗To you !
Team Trump was venue shopping and found a friendly court. How does the judge who authorized the search warrant feel about Cannon ruling in this case? How can a target of criminal probe involve a different court n the case?
It’s so hard for me to understand what keeps the MAGA crowd glued to Trump. Can’t everyone see by now that his actions put every citizen in the United States (and perhaps beyond) at risk. I mean, the empty classified document folders...what is going on?
This may be a delaying tactic on Trump’s part or a “throw everything at the wall and see what sticks strategy.” Unfortunately, that strategy seems to have worked for him in the past. My hope is that this is coming to some kind of end for him, but then others are waiting in the wings to try their hand at being the next Trump. I can’t begin to understand how different the United States would be under another Trump or Trump-like administration.
Sep 10, 2022·edited Sep 10, 2022Liked by Robert B. Hubbell
Whack-A-Mole! What madness that we, the majority of citizens of this great country, sit here watching Trumps obscene nonsense play out whilst waiting for reason to prevail. It defies the law of nature! To think that a slithering, noxious, killing bug is running around our feet and we cannot stomp it out (I’m no bug or spider killer but you get the idea). We must stay focused and fight to end power for this madman and others like him. …I don’t use ‘madman’ lightly or without giving it thought, it’s madness from start to … finish. Focus! Vote!
Karen, I appreciated your comment. It is madness, and it’s difficult to be so powerless. Until Trump, I never thought Democracy was so fragile and so uncertain. It came as a shock to me. So yes, focus, do my part, vote, and remember to breathe and stay as centered as I can.
While I'm in complete agreement with you about TFG, messing with his name seems juvenile, and thus undercuts your message.
Furthermore, the "rump" is a very important part of the human body, and deserves not to be associated with TFG. It is one of several features that evolved so that our ancestors could run for hours in pursuit of prey animals, as Harvard's Daniel Lieberman has written, something no other primate can do (They can't run, period). (Other adaptations for running were the achilles tendon, the nuchal ligament (holds our heads steady while running) and relative hairlessness, to stay cool during pursuit of prey.
I would also point out that the derriere is a secondary sex characteristic, and to many of both genders, often a very attractive one.
No need to Capitalize the "t". And rather than using his name, a lot of people refer to him as "the former guy" or TFG. And some by his initials. If you leave out the middle initial, you get DT, which also stands for delirium tremens.
Here I confess to my being gullible, or just not thinking things through:
I literally was capitalizing the 2nd letter of his name so that I didn't capitalize his name it never even occurred to me that it was that was making a joke about rumps! (Insert Embarrassed face here!).
Slowly Trump is losing support. Even FOX has somewhat abandoned him and are being critical because they see the hand writing in the wall. All the wantabee’s will, run away once he becomes more of a political liability. For now I hope he helps D’s win the mid terms.
They have drunk the kool-ade. They are enthrall to a cult of personality. They don't think for themselves. Those of us who are awake to reality, and see the emperor has no clothes on, need to step up and for the rest of our lives vote for the people who are dedicated to the higher principle of democracy.
Remember when he said he could go out in the street and shoot someone in cold blood and his supporters would still support him? Unfortunately he was right !
Please spend this weekend being with trees and water and loved ones and fixing things with your hands. And if you have to read make it your own version of Jane Austin or Donna Leon. I have the sense it may be the last chance you get a chance to truly rest and replenish yourself for a while. The only time I was ever in Sequoia Park was in October. Admidst the big trees there were deciduous yellows plants and smaller trees changing into autumn clothes. And it was quiet.
As a former mental health therapist working for a County government, I had to operate under HIPAA laws regarding the privacy of the clients. I had to sign out any charts that I needed and had to return them by the end of the day, where they were stored in a locked file cabinet, in a locked room, in a locked building. There were special protocols in place if charts had to be transported to another County facility. We could not leave charts in our car, take them home, etc. Our clerical staff kept track and would immediately start a search for any missing charts. If a staff person was fired, they were escorted out of the building, and the administrators cleaned out their desks to ensure the fired staff person didn't take anything that wasn't theirs or damage County property.
If a County agency has such privacy protections in place, it seems to me that there has to be staff in the federal government who have the role of tracking classified documents, to make sure that only those authorized to see them have access, to know where the documents are at all times and to make sure that they are secured properly. It seems like there should/must be a tracking system for all these documents, so that it would be immediately known that some were missing. How was it possible for Trump to have the ability to remove these highly sensitive documents from the White House in the first place, never mind keep them for this long, when they are a security threat? Why was he given such deferential treatment, knowing who he is and the "clear and present danger" his actions present to our country? I am having a hard time wrapping my head around how this happened!
I know no one wanted to cross him, but I would hope that there are career staff and even partisan staff who care about our democracy and understood the security risks of allowing these documents to leave the White House who would have notified higher up administrators of these security breaches. I haven't seen any reference to the role others in the administration have played in allowing the removal of highly classified docments. Who was negligent in their duty of tracking these documents? Who packed the boxes, and couldn't they see that the documents were clearly marked Top Secret, etc., and question it? Trump couldn't, and wouldn't, do all of the grunt work of packing on his own. Was there more than negligence at play here-did Trump have people actively helping him remove and keep these documents? I guess no one thought to look to see what was in the boxes that were being sent to Mar-a-Lago.
HCR recently wrote about the concept of the unitary executive branch. It is kind of brief but worth reading, if you have not already. The links are good, too.
“The concept of the unitary executive said that, as head of his own branch of government, the president did not have to submit to any oversight or check by Congress.”
One part of us is 'dedicated to the higher principle" of democracy, while another part of us is dedicated to their own personal power. This is the reason voting is so so so important. We need to keep electing and keep electing those dedicated to the higher principle of democracy.
I am certain that all trump wants is to delay the legal proceedings against him until he gets to be president again (OMG NO!). It is a clear pattern from his past, and about all he can do to delay his arrest for keeping highly classified documents. He is hoping to be president again so he can pardon himself and all his criminal friends. As far as I can see, he is another Hitler, and he wants to be our dictator if he wins the presidency.
I used to work at the Y12 nuclear facility in Oak Ridge, TN where I held a "Q" clearance for access into areas where weapons components were worked on. I had to go through severe training of the various aspects of holding a national security clearance, and was told that this clearance was the most serious aspect of my job. Any violation of my clearance would result in dire consequences for me with the possibility of nearly instant jail time, or if I was guilty of espionage, I could be put to death. It is WAY past time for us to stop pussy footing around with trump! Indict him and throw him in jail ASAP!
If I had done what trump did, I would have been in jail so fast it would be dizzying! It really frosts me that he is being allowed to flaunt America's national security rules and being allowed to run free while his money allows him to buy the best lawyers, break the law, and get away with it. The man is a Clear and Present Danger to America and to all of it's citizens, and he needs to be in jail now! Of course, with all his crimes exposed and he has a fair trial, per the law.
Thank you. This is a good reminder of all the folks, like yourself, who take the privilege (burden?) of clearance to heart, realizing the consequences to self and country with any abrogation of the trust.
Sep 10, 2022·edited Sep 10, 2022Liked by Robert B. Hubbell
The thing that continues to puzzle me is how ANYONE can claim that a classified document is subject to either attorney client or executive privilege. if the job of a Special Master is to review documents for privilege, what is s/he doing looking at classified documents?
What attorney prepared such document for trump? If it was so prepared, why was the privilege not waived as soon as the document was allowed to be seen by anyone with the appropriate security privilege? That's how attorney-client privilege works.
Assuming that executive privilege can be claimed by trump at all now that he's not president (a big assumption given the Supreme's holding in the Nixon case) what "close advisor" prepared the document for trump's particular use? Further, the history of executive privilege shows it rests on the concept of separate powers: it is intended to protect certain (limited) types of advice to the president from scrutiny by either the legislative or judicial branch. In this case a) those who prepare and classify such documents AND b) the FBI/DOJ are ALL PART of the executive branch. No separation of powers issue exists. Why can a member of Congress with the proper security clearances be allowed to see them (as has long been the practice) if the separation of powers prevents them looking at such documents?
In all the many discussions of the Mar-a-Lago search issues that I have read, I haven't found anyone who has raised this simple question. What have I missed?
Is it possible Judge Cannon was unfamiliar with the concept of executive privilege and its exception for crime & fraud? Is it possible she didn’t know President Biden waived privilege for these matters? I find it hard to believe...but is it even possible for a judge not to know these things?
I don't know how she could not have known this stuff unless her head was buried in the sand, which if she's a MAGAt it might well have been. It may have been confirmation bias, not seeing what didn't fit her preconceptions and only willing to see what the trump team told her. I still can't figure how they argued that privilege remotely applied. The whole argument has been about whether trump can claim it, not about what its moving parts are. '
Remember, I am only talking the classified stuff here. Other documents may, shall we say, at least once been privileged. Though again, the separation of powers idea seems to have gotten mislaid.
But it took me a brief skip through Wikipedia, for heaven's sake, to firm up my recollection of the separation of powers basis for the privilege (I read the cases cited, not just the Wikipedia Narrative, for those who might be ready to yell about Socialist Wikipedia).
How can we function as a society with judges who don't know how to check Wikipedia??
Although I appreciate the general tone of optimism in the comments, I am reserving mine for now. Given the circumstances and nature of the Mar-a-Lago documents, any of us would have been promptly arrested had we taken classified materials. Either the law says he could take them or he can’t. Appears the law says no. He cannot claim that he did not know about the material. The material was in his private residence and even in his personal office. This slow slog through the legal aspects of all this just seems to affirm Judge Cannon’s notion of trump being a special case due to his high profile and political ambitions. We are, sadly, faced with a justice system that has a problem applying laws evenly and promptly to those deemed the “1%”. If trump is eventually indicted, it will have strained our justice system, and the very notion that laws apply equally to all, which, last I checked, is a cornerstone of our “democracy”.
I am also grateful that the ex president who lost the election only listens to his own counsel,
because he always steps in it when he opens his mouth. His selfish infantile thinking and his bully
pulpit led him to believe he was actually intelligent. But he has never considered that the people
who listen to him..(none of who are the brightest bulbs in the chandelier) are actually in the basket that Mrs Clinton warned us about. Her remark was perhaps not the most timely during an election. But we have all learned that what she referred to was an underbelly of discontent in States who's elected officials were in it only for personal gain and power. His same motive entirely .
I think it was speculated that she will stand by for a SCOTUS nomination....of course, sometime during Trump's next eight presidencies, also made possible by the SCOTUS.
The remembrances about Queen Elizabeth’s long reign remind us of the limits of power and the comparative almost unlimited sphere of influence. As a constitutional monarch, she had virtually no political or governmental power, yet she was formally titled the sovereign. We will probably never know the extent of her actual influence on life and policy in the UK and Commonwealth, but former Prime Minister John Major, in his brief tribute on BBC, spoke of her regularly manifested wisdom and deep knowledge in their regular conversations about matters of state and wide consequence.
It is good to be reminded of the distinction between power and influence because all of us have limited power to control events, but all have - and each of us has - a sphere of influence with others with whom we can and regularly do share our values, beliefs and relevant knowledge. Because the Queen was a public figure for over 70 years, we had the opportunity to discern her major character and personality traits. We know of her strong sense of duty that motivated and guided her actions that reflected her care for “her people” around the world and her willingness to dedicate her long life to public service. It is likely that those same character and personality traits were evidenced in her private conversations with Prime Ministers and others in positions of governmental or ecclesiastical power, as John Major indicated had been the case in his experience. Similarly, each of us has a sphere of influence in which our character traits and values are manifested as we tell “our story” about what and who we care about, what we are grateful for, and what angers or concerns us enough to prompt or seek remedial action. The Queen did not let the lack of power prevent her from using her influence to affect the lives of others to the extent she could. Nor should we.
You wrote: "The parties did not agree on a special master. The government suggested two retired judges, while Trump proposed a retired judge and a private attorney who is a member of the Federalist Society and married to a judge on the 11th Circuit Court of Appeal—which would hear any appeal from Judge Cannon’s rulings. If Judge Cannon appoints the private attorney candidate as special master, the House should begin impeachment proceedings for Judge Cannon ASAP."
Perhaps the House should begin preparation right now, as this probably will come to pass, if Loose Cannon performs true to form.
Maybe I’m overly optimistic, but I cannot help but feel the law is steadily closing in on the tfg. He is flailing about and tossing obstacles desperately - and manages delays with some of it - but Garland and the DOJ are way smarter than he and his lawyers are.
As you pointed out in a recent newsletter, Judge Cannon has made an ass of herself (not your words…) The DOJ response craftily gives her an avenue to redemption while not angering the trump base (most of whom I imagine are too ignorant to understand the nuances of the various elements at play) and while also allowing the DOJ to move forward.
Monday will tell
DW, I believe you masterfully have demonstrated, regardless of the outcome of the immediate dispute at-hand, that those of us who spent many months distressing over whether those at the top up to and including Trump would be held accountable seemingly had underestimated DOJ’s acumen under A.G. Garland’s auspices.
There is no dispute at hand there is multiple violations of the law and our security and Garland and the DOJ are doing their job. The problem we all have is the media has sensationalized the situation and their commentary in most cases is not admissible in a court of law and won’t convict Trump. Our biggest concern has to be the Federalist judges that Republicans have planted and the ability to get a fair decision.
Stephen, Robert lists the filings by both parties and then clearly articulates the disagreements between the DOJ and Trump’s attorneys. I grant, contrary to the Trump attorneys, that only the DOJ has satisfied the burden of proof. Additionally, I would note that the only way to resolve the concerns posed by the Republican appointed Federalist judges is to expand both the Supreme Court and the lower courts, a feat we can accomplish if we hold the House and pick up perhaps as many as 4 Senators willing either to reform or abolish the filibuster, allowing the Democratic Majority leader to bring the legislation to the floor for debate and a vote.
As a final point, I would note that Robert, in past newsletters, has referenced compelling arguments for expanding the High Court.
All good points. Biden is against expanding the courts because of his long history in the Senate. The D’s would need more Senators and hold the House. There are a myriad of things Biden needs to do to secure the integrity of the Executive branch and it’s unwritten agreements which require definition. The J6th hearings should provide a roadmap on how to strengthen the safeguards to our elections and the electoral vote count. D’s abandoned rural and working people over the years and we need to get them back. Lots of work to do but it starts with wins in November.
Stephen, I sense you and I pretty much are in synch. I merely would add that were we to hold the House and pick up at least 2 Senators willing either to reform or abolish the filibuster, that I would advise the Majority Leader promptly to bring the combined Freedom to Vote: John R. Lewis Act to the floor for debate and a vote.
I agree but add that we need to also win at the local Governor and state government levels to balance states rights against the wishes and rights of a majority of voters.
My sentiments EXACTLY
Go blue, donating my arse off
Good reflection Thank you !
Agree, Federalist agenda is years in the making. Beware and leery of any association to that party.
True of ALEC as well, both dedicated to republican control
ALEC is even more libertarian than the Federalist Society-they want to abolish Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, safety standards for workers, the EPA and anything that can help the people of the U.S. and is all for MORE big money control. Quote from an article about ALEC: "ALEC meetings are a pay-to-play political scheme, providing fee-paying corporate members of ALEC with private access to lawmakers, where, behind closed doors, they propose model laws to serve their economic interests. All of this takes place outside of public and transparent democratic institutions, where laws are developed the old-fashioned way. " Their track record regarding COVID is NOT good.
Mitch did a superior job of giving chump every evil advantage. I hope this galls him to the bone…
He has no shame and no conscience. Power and money is the name of his game.
I don’t disagree that the situation for tfg is getting worse, but it is requiring increasingly outrageous crimes to bring this about. I wouldn’t have thought more was needed than Jan 6, but now I see it is requiring fake electors, stolen documents, fraudulent fund raising. I won’t be surprised if we haven’t yet reached the bottom of this barrel. Discovering proof of treason and giving or selling the secrets to foreigners is not beyond the realm of possibility. We can only hope that tfg will bring down the entire GOP before he goes to jail or leaves the country.
DK, I sense from your reply that you fully appreciate that the burden of proof to convict rests solely with the DOJ. In the interim, the damage caused by Trump’s 2016 ascendence to the Presidency, in my view, is incalculable. I also would note I believe it will take devastating losses over several election cycles to rid the Republican Party of Trumpism.
We are far from a conviction, but closer to an indictment.
I don't know what "Trumpism" is. When he is out of the picture there will be other GOPers who have learned that there is no lie too big, not outrageous claim too far from reason, no dog whistle too loud, etc. Trump himself is a loser that we may miss when the methods are employed by less obviously damaged pols (DeSantis, Youngkin, Abbott)....for now, as far as elections go, he is the vile, narcissist, traitor that keeps on giving by taking money away from legitimate candidates, putting Republican candidates in a bind (appeal to his base by fawning over him or appeal to independents by keeping away from him), motivating those that hate and fear him.
DK, Though I believe the only thing worse than indicting and failing to convict, is failing, for the sake of accountability, to indict. Nonetheless, neither I nor anyone else knows how Main Justice will evaluate benefits and risks. As for Trumpism, the term refers to a “style of governance…” and a “set of mechanisms for acquiring and keeping control of power associated with Donald Trump and his political base.” As I indicated in my earlier comment, in my view, Trumpism has so infiltrated the Republican Party that severe losses over several election cycles is the sole antidote for purging itself of this toxic extremism.
DK, there is a direct line between Hitler, Orban and tRump. Using the democratic process, Orban took control of the media, judiciary, Fidesz gov't., casted opponents as existential threats and himself as the savior, used voter suppression tactics to put cronies in office, bribed office holders, etc. all under the auspices of an illiberal democracy. Sound familiar? It's a tried and true playbook. As Barbara has stated the road to salvation is to get out the vote!
Eadia, Thanks for the informative reply. Get out the vote and if you can discourage a Republican from voting, go for it.
From an old dictionary somewhere, seems to fit “trump’ery, n. To deceive, cheat, 1. Deceit, fraud, 2. Anything calculated to deceive by false show; anything externally splendid but intrinsically of little value; worthless finery, 3. Things worn out and of no value; useless matter; trifles; rubbish; nonsense. Trump’ery, a. trifling; showy but worthless; trashy; paltry.”
Couldn’t be more on target in my view.
Even if they go underground (which they show no sign of doing), never think that they are gone
Jeri, While I agree that far right MAGA extremists are never gone, my point was to underscore that so long as they control the Republican Party, we remain in an untenable and precarious position, wherein our democracy cannot afford for the Democratic Party to lose either House, let alone cede ground at either the state or local level.
white collar crime takes the skill and tenacity demonstrated by DOJ under leadership of MG
Margaret, As stated in my original comment, I have come to appreciate this way of thinking.
Me too. My husband is the same kind of deliberate, thorough decision maker. Though it drove me nuts at the beginning, I’ve come to appreciate that style.
Yes.
And possibly coinciding with Putin's weakening in Ukraine! Oh the fates if two despots go down.
As with any despot, their last gasp is usually the worst.
There are a lot of positive developments. When the news of the search at Mar a Lago first broke everyone was assuming that it would benefit Trump politically, and there is evidence in polls that it has improved his standing among the GOP base. Though as I learn more I find it hard to believe it will benefit Trump in the long run. My biggest fear is him finding a way to run out the clock, which appears to be his current strategy.
Nicholas, Speaking as one of A.G. Garland’s loudest detractors for longer than I dare admit, I have come around to conceding that DOJ is quite formidable and that Trump is no match, particularly when matters of national security are at stake. Admittedly, I could be wrong. Still, at a time when I fear we could be running out the clock on democracy itself, I feel personally responsible for affirming the acumen of an institution that unequivocally is committed to upholding the Constitution and the rule of law.
Well said. It doesn't take a "thinking" judge to approve a search warrant. But it does often take one to see past the legal pandering and delay tactics.
As someone who has written search warrant applications and served the warrant s I respectfully disagree about the first point. If a judge approved a faulty warrant application that is the first misstep in the collapse of a successful prosecution. A fourth amendment violation of the first water. The judge must be highly critical of the underlying facts upon which the search is predicated.
Could you please elaborate? I understand the first part of your comment but not the last sentence. Which judge are you referring to there, the judge that approved the warrant or judge cannon? (or both…)
Cannon was the judge who approved the warrant. At least that is my understanding. That is why "mods" to it had to go back through her
Reinhart approved the warrant. Cannon approved the request for special a special master
Magistrate Judge Bruce Reinhart approved the original warrant.
Bruce Reinhart approved the warrant.
I know who approved the warrant. My question is whether the last sentence refers to Reinhart or Cannon. Both need to be critical of the underlying facts
I was referring only to Reinhart as judge who had to be aware of the underlying crime and fully aware of the circumstances and location where evidence items are suspected to be held. That includes specific facts leading investigators to believe items are in the location. Actual persons who gave information, direct statements by them. The location identified by legal description. Not just a physical address.
And specific details and descriptions of items to be recovered.
The track record or reputation and experience of the officer making the application is to be considered as is the likelihood of the veracity of any informant’s information.
One of the most important and critical activities of any police officer is the invasion of a citizens home. I always wanted the most critical judge to approve a warrant application.
Thanks for the clarification. Appreciated.
Can cheating, manipulating, and Money trump smart. The vices are certainly trying to beat competence and integrity
As a Brit, living in Tanzania, I thought it might be interesting for some of you to read my reflections on the passing of our Queen. For the record, I am broadly supportive of the functions of the Royal Family while being frustrated by individual members and the wider scope of the privilege.
Elizabeth was 96 years old. There are very few people that are living in the UK who are older than her and even fewer that have memories of the life and times before she was born. She has, simply, been the one constant in everyone's lives: during the good and bad, the painful and joyful, through the mistakes and success. Love it or hate the monarchy, she has been part of our identity as a nation and as citizens for nigh on a century. And I think all of us feel that we have lost a part of ourselves.
The closest example I can use to describe it - but still fails to capture the sheer magnitude - is probably the death of Nelson Mandela.
She came into a world where the British Empire was still powerful and omniscient across large swathes of the world. She stayed in London during the war and even volunteered as a driver and mechanic as part of the effort. She and her sister snuck out of the Palace, incognito, to join the Victory parades in 1945. She was Queen when Britain finally and belatedly recognized the independence of the ex-colonies into Nation States and sought to redress the relationship as one of equals within the Commonwealth, which she was very proud of. She was there during the economic challenges of the 70's and early 80's and the Cold War. She saw in the digital age, the dramatic widening of our horizons, the end of apartheid. She saw huge social change and social justice that are still ongoing today with the me-too movements, the black lives matter, abortion rights, equal representation, LGBTQ+ rights. And she saw the narrowing of our global views on the last few years, the increased nationalism, intolerance and the invasion of Ukraine.
She saw, 14? Prime Ministers come and go and I think most of them, even the most rambunctious, have admitted that they were in awe of her at their weekly meetings and not a little scared. She had views and an in-depth knowledge of politics that was only shared with them. Her devotion to her role was unstinting and extraordinary. it was her greatest weakness and her greatest strength.
She did make mistakes (the relationship and death of Princess Diana - the argument over taxes and the cost of maintaining the extended royal family) - and she certainly sacrificed her family life to duty. At times she felt more remote from the national conversation than was wise. But she has been our constant, our reliable point of reference and was part of who we are as a nation. We are all fallible at times, including the Queen, and that gave her humanity.
If you want to distill the Queen's character and the place she holds in our lives to one photograph, for me it is the one in Church at the funeral of her husband or so many years, Prince Philip. If anyone was going to be given a free pass during COVID to mourn, it would be the Queen. But she refused, and sat, all by herself in her very visible grief. She chose to stand with all people who had had similar grief, isolation and loss in their lives. She chose to be one of us.
Charles will be a different king, he is a different person. He comes with strong views on climate, the environment, the importance of helping the disadvantaged. We are not used to a Monarch with a strong personal philosophy. He also comes with the baggage of a personal life lived on the front pages of newspapers that his mother did not have to content with till later. He is a mix of radical and very reserved, more sensitive and thoughtful than many imagine (as his broadcast yesterday showed) and quite private and conservative. Seventy three is quite late to launch on a new career path and he has big shoes to step into.
My condolences to you and to all Brits, wherever they live. The Queen represented steadfast courage, starting with WWII. We are sorely missing her type of honest backbone worldwide.
Keep calm and carry on, indeed.
As Democrats, we should seriously adopt her brand of dogged fortitude to reclaim democracy in the face of sly Republicans and its MAGA Machine. We CAN do it!
Dogged fortitude.... Keep calm and carry on.... definitely!
The more I learn about the Queen, the more I simply respect her as a person. One could easily create an "ethics class" for school that explains her challenges and how she faced them. Elizabeth is an example for us all. I speak as a rabid "anti-monarchist".
Charles now has an opportunity to redeem his kingly name. The first two Charles were hardly role models. More importantly, I see that he has already possibly established two ground breaking paths. The first is that he has spoken of a "slimmed down" monarchy. Perhaps he will redirect some of the antique "pomp and circumstance" resources to better causes. Such as funding efforts to combat the Climate Crisis. I think if Charles were to become an outspoken leader with respect to the human impact on the planet, he would be following his passions and could make a difference. Those that view this as a "partisan path" simply reveal their selfish self imposed ignorance and stupidity. So be it. Earth First! Go for it Charles.
It is true, the first two Charles' were not good role models. But I think his choice of that name signals something down to earth and straightforward. To start as he means to go on. Charles is his name and it is how everyone knows him. His grandfather and many before him, changed their names on becoming king. It will be a test of how adaptable the Monarchy is as to whether he is able to carry on his climate advocacy.
I’m sure Farage is lurking somewhere with his popgun ready to start lobbing salvos at the new King.
My condolences on the loss of Queen Elizabeth. In some ways I feel President Joseph Biden is like Queen Elizabeth. He has served the country for many decades. I see in him a real dedication to the United States and its Constitution; a hard working man who has stepped up at one of the most difficult and dangerous times in our country with dedication and fidelity. I am glad he is our president in this time.
That's a marvelous comparison and statement.
Yes, it is exactly that same dedication to the higher principle. History will judge him very well, when all the made for TV soundbites from the right have died and long been forgotten..
Yes! Dedication to the higher principle! Thank you for those words.
I've learned a lot about the Queen in the last month or so, and especially since her passing. The one thing I would add to the short list of things she did wrong: it's my impression, anyway, that she discouraged the marriage of Charles and Camilla before Diana came into the picture. It's obvious to make Charles and Camilla belonged together, and that Charles and Diana did not.
But I'm otherwise extremely impressed with the Queen, and I'm almost sorry that the US is not a Commonwealth nation. I'm very impressed with the ritual of transfer of power, where the outgoing tenders resignation to the Queen, and the incoming is anointed by her. We could sure do well with such a ritual, given how our last transfer of power went down.
Elizabeth was truly a unifying force in UK, partly the result of her hiding whatever political views she had.
The Queen also had a wonderful sense of humor, as this clip shows. It's my best laugh of the year: https://twitter.com/davidmackau/status/1567894552744271872
I was also very impressed with how she became a mechanic during WWII, that being part of her contribution to the war effort. She is also quite the driver, hazing poor Prince Abdullah:
"As instructed, the Crown Prince climbed into the front seat of the Land Rover, with his interpreter in the seat behind. To his surprise, the Queen climbed into the driving seat, turned the ignition and drove off. Women are not – yet – allowed to drive in Saudi Arabia, and Abdullah was not used to being driven by a woman, let alone a queen. His nervousness only increased as the queen, an Army driver in wartime, accelerated the Land Rover along the narrow Scottish estate roads, talking all the time. Through his interpreter, the Crown Prince implored the Queen to slow down and concentrate on the road ahead..."
https://jalopnik.com/queen-elizabeth-ii-dead-the-gearhead-monarch-1849510494
That is indeed a great story. And it is really touching that many of the remembrances of the Queen shared by public figures do reflect on her humanity and sense of humour as much as the role that she played in our history. As I mentioned in a pervious reply, those decisions with Princes Margaret, Camilla and eventually Diana were all bad miss-steps and I feel that they were all from a time where the people in charge of the mystique of the Monarchy and the centuries-old traditions held sway. They were collective decisions, not hers alone. It took time for them to realize that the Monarchy is about the people, at the end of the day, or it cannot survive. The rapid social change from the 60's to the 80's left the Monarchy as an institution, out of touch and it is testament to the Queen's character and humanity that she was able to bring it back front and centre.
Haha!
My admiration stems from photo of her as mechanic during WW2, take that chicken chump. To me her worse gaff was in denying Charles the right to marry Camilla in the first place. I’m old enough to remember that she was the one who was not good enough for the royals because she was a commoner. Live and learn and QE2 did just that, all her life.
Her decision to become a mechanic also really showed her own determination to do what was right. Camilla-gate first time round was indeed a mistake, though I suspect it was more her royal courtiers and protocol advisers than just her own decision. A similar mistake was made with Princess Margaret with very unhappy results. Both stem from a time when the Monarchy as an institution was considered more important than the Monarchy's relationship with the public. It was failing to move with the times and understand that the social barriers were rapidly tumbling throughout the country. That lesson was not really learnt until Diana.
Wow Thank you so much for this ! That was a beautiful testimony to her life , her service and her strong commitment to her people. I’m so sorry for your loss. Please know we are feeling it here too. Perhaps not in the same way but she has been an icon for decades ( all of my 61 years) ❤️🤗To you !
I think all Brits have been touched by the esteem in which she was held across the globe. Thank you for your thoughts as well
Team Trump was venue shopping and found a friendly court. How does the judge who authorized the search warrant feel about Cannon ruling in this case? How can a target of criminal probe involve a different court n the case?
I did not realize that Congress could impeach Cannon. It is my strong feeling this should begin immediately.
I agree. Waste no more time. Anticipate further faulty "orders" and possible corruption.
It’s so hard for me to understand what keeps the MAGA crowd glued to Trump. Can’t everyone see by now that his actions put every citizen in the United States (and perhaps beyond) at risk. I mean, the empty classified document folders...what is going on?
This may be a delaying tactic on Trump’s part or a “throw everything at the wall and see what sticks strategy.” Unfortunately, that strategy seems to have worked for him in the past. My hope is that this is coming to some kind of end for him, but then others are waiting in the wings to try their hand at being the next Trump. I can’t begin to understand how different the United States would be under another Trump or Trump-like administration.
Whack-A-Mole! What madness that we, the majority of citizens of this great country, sit here watching Trumps obscene nonsense play out whilst waiting for reason to prevail. It defies the law of nature! To think that a slithering, noxious, killing bug is running around our feet and we cannot stomp it out (I’m no bug or spider killer but you get the idea). We must stay focused and fight to end power for this madman and others like him. …I don’t use ‘madman’ lightly or without giving it thought, it’s madness from start to … finish. Focus! Vote!
Donna; I responded not to incite fear or stress but your comment really gets to the heart of the matter.
Karen, I appreciated your comment. It is madness, and it’s difficult to be so powerless. Until Trump, I never thought Democracy was so fragile and so uncertain. It came as a shock to me. So yes, focus, do my part, vote, and remember to breathe and stay as centered as I can.
While I'm in complete agreement with you about TFG, messing with his name seems juvenile, and thus undercuts your message.
Furthermore, the "rump" is a very important part of the human body, and deserves not to be associated with TFG. It is one of several features that evolved so that our ancestors could run for hours in pursuit of prey animals, as Harvard's Daniel Lieberman has written, something no other primate can do (They can't run, period). (Other adaptations for running were the achilles tendon, the nuchal ligament (holds our heads steady while running) and relative hairlessness, to stay cool during pursuit of prey.
I would also point out that the derriere is a secondary sex characteristic, and to many of both genders, often a very attractive one.
Well, you've improved my way of thinking! I will no longer refer to him in that way. It is juvenile, I see that now.
At the same time starting his name with a capital letter seems to offer a courtesy I do not feel he has earned. What say you David?
No need to Capitalize the "t". And rather than using his name, a lot of people refer to him as "the former guy" or TFG. And some by his initials. If you leave out the middle initial, you get DT, which also stands for delirium tremens.
Ah hahahaha! Fantastic! Delirium Tremens.
Here I confess to my being gullible, or just not thinking things through:
I literally was capitalizing the 2nd letter of his name so that I didn't capitalize his name it never even occurred to me that it was that was making a joke about rumps! (Insert Embarrassed face here!).
I think all of us miss stuff on that level from time to time.
Slowly Trump is losing support. Even FOX has somewhat abandoned him and are being critical because they see the hand writing in the wall. All the wantabee’s will, run away once he becomes more of a political liability. For now I hope he helps D’s win the mid terms.
Trump was not the problem. He was the symptom.
https://www.pbs.org/video/lies-politics-and-democracy-nz4szh/ . Happened to catch Frontline “lies, politics and democracy. Which popped into my mind when I read your comment. The MAGA crowd stays glued but 45 had lots of help from the GOP.
Yes, that was a good one!
They have drunk the kool-ade. They are enthrall to a cult of personality. They don't think for themselves. Those of us who are awake to reality, and see the emperor has no clothes on, need to step up and for the rest of our lives vote for the people who are dedicated to the higher principle of democracy.
Remember when he said he could go out in the street and shoot someone in cold blood and his supporters would still support him? Unfortunately he was right !
Thanks as always.
Please spend this weekend being with trees and water and loved ones and fixing things with your hands. And if you have to read make it your own version of Jane Austin or Donna Leon. I have the sense it may be the last chance you get a chance to truly rest and replenish yourself for a while. The only time I was ever in Sequoia Park was in October. Admidst the big trees there were deciduous yellows plants and smaller trees changing into autumn clothes. And it was quiet.
So Trump’s lawyers request a special master and expect DOJ ( taxpayers) to pay 50 % of the cost. What arrogance !
As a former mental health therapist working for a County government, I had to operate under HIPAA laws regarding the privacy of the clients. I had to sign out any charts that I needed and had to return them by the end of the day, where they were stored in a locked file cabinet, in a locked room, in a locked building. There were special protocols in place if charts had to be transported to another County facility. We could not leave charts in our car, take them home, etc. Our clerical staff kept track and would immediately start a search for any missing charts. If a staff person was fired, they were escorted out of the building, and the administrators cleaned out their desks to ensure the fired staff person didn't take anything that wasn't theirs or damage County property.
If a County agency has such privacy protections in place, it seems to me that there has to be staff in the federal government who have the role of tracking classified documents, to make sure that only those authorized to see them have access, to know where the documents are at all times and to make sure that they are secured properly. It seems like there should/must be a tracking system for all these documents, so that it would be immediately known that some were missing. How was it possible for Trump to have the ability to remove these highly sensitive documents from the White House in the first place, never mind keep them for this long, when they are a security threat? Why was he given such deferential treatment, knowing who he is and the "clear and present danger" his actions present to our country? I am having a hard time wrapping my head around how this happened!
I know no one wanted to cross him, but I would hope that there are career staff and even partisan staff who care about our democracy and understood the security risks of allowing these documents to leave the White House who would have notified higher up administrators of these security breaches. I haven't seen any reference to the role others in the administration have played in allowing the removal of highly classified docments. Who was negligent in their duty of tracking these documents? Who packed the boxes, and couldn't they see that the documents were clearly marked Top Secret, etc., and question it? Trump couldn't, and wouldn't, do all of the grunt work of packing on his own. Was there more than negligence at play here-did Trump have people actively helping him remove and keep these documents? I guess no one thought to look to see what was in the boxes that were being sent to Mar-a-Lago.
I agree. There is another big scandal on the horizon.
HCR recently wrote about the concept of the unitary executive branch. It is kind of brief but worth reading, if you have not already. The links are good, too.
“The concept of the unitary executive said that, as head of his own branch of government, the president did not have to submit to any oversight or check by Congress.”
https://heathercoxrichardson.substack.com/p/september-8-2022
One part of us is 'dedicated to the higher principle" of democracy, while another part of us is dedicated to their own personal power. This is the reason voting is so so so important. We need to keep electing and keep electing those dedicated to the higher principle of democracy.
How in the world can we have such an incompetent government. And now the whole world knows making us terribly vulnerable.
I am certain that all trump wants is to delay the legal proceedings against him until he gets to be president again (OMG NO!). It is a clear pattern from his past, and about all he can do to delay his arrest for keeping highly classified documents. He is hoping to be president again so he can pardon himself and all his criminal friends. As far as I can see, he is another Hitler, and he wants to be our dictator if he wins the presidency.
I used to work at the Y12 nuclear facility in Oak Ridge, TN where I held a "Q" clearance for access into areas where weapons components were worked on. I had to go through severe training of the various aspects of holding a national security clearance, and was told that this clearance was the most serious aspect of my job. Any violation of my clearance would result in dire consequences for me with the possibility of nearly instant jail time, or if I was guilty of espionage, I could be put to death. It is WAY past time for us to stop pussy footing around with trump! Indict him and throw him in jail ASAP!
If I had done what trump did, I would have been in jail so fast it would be dizzying! It really frosts me that he is being allowed to flaunt America's national security rules and being allowed to run free while his money allows him to buy the best lawyers, break the law, and get away with it. The man is a Clear and Present Danger to America and to all of it's citizens, and he needs to be in jail now! Of course, with all his crimes exposed and he has a fair trial, per the law.
Thank you. This is a good reminder of all the folks, like yourself, who take the privilege (burden?) of clearance to heart, realizing the consequences to self and country with any abrogation of the trust.
The thing that continues to puzzle me is how ANYONE can claim that a classified document is subject to either attorney client or executive privilege. if the job of a Special Master is to review documents for privilege, what is s/he doing looking at classified documents?
What attorney prepared such document for trump? If it was so prepared, why was the privilege not waived as soon as the document was allowed to be seen by anyone with the appropriate security privilege? That's how attorney-client privilege works.
Assuming that executive privilege can be claimed by trump at all now that he's not president (a big assumption given the Supreme's holding in the Nixon case) what "close advisor" prepared the document for trump's particular use? Further, the history of executive privilege shows it rests on the concept of separate powers: it is intended to protect certain (limited) types of advice to the president from scrutiny by either the legislative or judicial branch. In this case a) those who prepare and classify such documents AND b) the FBI/DOJ are ALL PART of the executive branch. No separation of powers issue exists. Why can a member of Congress with the proper security clearances be allowed to see them (as has long been the practice) if the separation of powers prevents them looking at such documents?
In all the many discussions of the Mar-a-Lago search issues that I have read, I haven't found anyone who has raised this simple question. What have I missed?
Is it possible Judge Cannon was unfamiliar with the concept of executive privilege and its exception for crime & fraud? Is it possible she didn’t know President Biden waived privilege for these matters? I find it hard to believe...but is it even possible for a judge not to know these things?
I don't know how she could not have known this stuff unless her head was buried in the sand, which if she's a MAGAt it might well have been. It may have been confirmation bias, not seeing what didn't fit her preconceptions and only willing to see what the trump team told her. I still can't figure how they argued that privilege remotely applied. The whole argument has been about whether trump can claim it, not about what its moving parts are. '
Remember, I am only talking the classified stuff here. Other documents may, shall we say, at least once been privileged. Though again, the separation of powers idea seems to have gotten mislaid.
But it took me a brief skip through Wikipedia, for heaven's sake, to firm up my recollection of the separation of powers basis for the privilege (I read the cases cited, not just the Wikipedia Narrative, for those who might be ready to yell about Socialist Wikipedia).
How can we function as a society with judges who don't know how to check Wikipedia??
Although I appreciate the general tone of optimism in the comments, I am reserving mine for now. Given the circumstances and nature of the Mar-a-Lago documents, any of us would have been promptly arrested had we taken classified materials. Either the law says he could take them or he can’t. Appears the law says no. He cannot claim that he did not know about the material. The material was in his private residence and even in his personal office. This slow slog through the legal aspects of all this just seems to affirm Judge Cannon’s notion of trump being a special case due to his high profile and political ambitions. We are, sadly, faced with a justice system that has a problem applying laws evenly and promptly to those deemed the “1%”. If trump is eventually indicted, it will have strained our justice system, and the very notion that laws apply equally to all, which, last I checked, is a cornerstone of our “democracy”.
Robert, Thank you for all your hard work!
I am also grateful that the ex president who lost the election only listens to his own counsel,
because he always steps in it when he opens his mouth. His selfish infantile thinking and his bully
pulpit led him to believe he was actually intelligent. But he has never considered that the people
who listen to him..(none of who are the brightest bulbs in the chandelier) are actually in the basket that Mrs Clinton warned us about. Her remark was perhaps not the most timely during an election. But we have all learned that what she referred to was an underbelly of discontent in States who's elected officials were in it only for personal gain and power. His same motive entirely .
(an aside- love your phrase re not being the brightest bulb in the chandelier!)
One has to wonder what types of pressure, threats, or possibly incentives were presented to Judge Cannon to obtain the ruling..
I think it was speculated that she will stand by for a SCOTUS nomination....of course, sometime during Trump's next eight presidencies, also made possible by the SCOTUS.
Will the Pinchbeck Pimp finally be hoist on his own Petard?
Will the Loose Cannon be Fired?
Stay tuned...
The remembrances about Queen Elizabeth’s long reign remind us of the limits of power and the comparative almost unlimited sphere of influence. As a constitutional monarch, she had virtually no political or governmental power, yet she was formally titled the sovereign. We will probably never know the extent of her actual influence on life and policy in the UK and Commonwealth, but former Prime Minister John Major, in his brief tribute on BBC, spoke of her regularly manifested wisdom and deep knowledge in their regular conversations about matters of state and wide consequence.
It is good to be reminded of the distinction between power and influence because all of us have limited power to control events, but all have - and each of us has - a sphere of influence with others with whom we can and regularly do share our values, beliefs and relevant knowledge. Because the Queen was a public figure for over 70 years, we had the opportunity to discern her major character and personality traits. We know of her strong sense of duty that motivated and guided her actions that reflected her care for “her people” around the world and her willingness to dedicate her long life to public service. It is likely that those same character and personality traits were evidenced in her private conversations with Prime Ministers and others in positions of governmental or ecclesiastical power, as John Major indicated had been the case in his experience. Similarly, each of us has a sphere of influence in which our character traits and values are manifested as we tell “our story” about what and who we care about, what we are grateful for, and what angers or concerns us enough to prompt or seek remedial action. The Queen did not let the lack of power prevent her from using her influence to affect the lives of others to the extent she could. Nor should we.
You wrote: "The parties did not agree on a special master. The government suggested two retired judges, while Trump proposed a retired judge and a private attorney who is a member of the Federalist Society and married to a judge on the 11th Circuit Court of Appeal—which would hear any appeal from Judge Cannon’s rulings. If Judge Cannon appoints the private attorney candidate as special master, the House should begin impeachment proceedings for Judge Cannon ASAP."
Perhaps the House should begin preparation right now, as this probably will come to pass, if Loose Cannon performs true to form.
Ha!