Trump 66: Bond, Can't Post Bond

[Xan]

And there's a new one:

Happy Easter to everyone who Donny doesn't hate and hold responsible for his problems!  The "Fauni Wade" is a new one.  Fani finding love just somehow made every case against Donald null and void.  Funny about that...

Couldn't someone please put him in prison??

Edited March 31 by Xan

[GreyhoundFan]

He does seem extra crazed today. 

[onekidanddone]

Take his phone and change his password 

[GreyhoundFan]

[Ozlsn]

Geez Daily Mail is scraping the bottom of the barrel again. Quality "journalism" right there. Try matching Trump up against someone else who isn't running - how about Ronald Reagan?

[WatchingTheTireFireBurn]

I don't think posting that you're 3 or 4% ahead in a poll is really that much of a flex....especially against somebody who isn't even running. Shouldn't he be way ahead of michelle obama?

[thoughtful]

Trump trying to mumble along as Melania (?) recites the Lord's Prayer. Mockler says this was yesterday, but I couldn't find it anywhere else. In any case, Donald clearly has very little clue what the words are:

Spoiler

 

 

[GreyhoundFan]

Oooh, I bet his Depends are in a major twist:

[GreyhoundFan]

He found an underwriter for the reduced bond:

 

[Xan]

In order to get people to forget that he promised a bloodbath if defeated, Donny has now started using the word for Biden.  In a couple of recent Truth Social posts, Donald is calling the problems with immigration "Biden's border bloodbath".  It was be clever if it wasn't so evil.   

[GreyhoundFan]

He’s really prepping his cult to blow up everything:

 

[fraurosena]

Jack Smith has replied to Judge Cannon's request to formulate jury instructions. Mueller-she-wrote had a good review of Smith's positively snarky reaction.

Quote

If you’ve been Listening to the Jack Podcast, or following myself or any number of legal pundits on social media, you’re no doubt aware that Judge Cannon issued an order on March 18th directing both parties - Jack Smith and team trump - to engage with two scenarios and “offer alternative draft text that assumes each scenario to be a correct formulation of the law to be issued to the jury, while reserving counterarguments.”

The law she’s referring to is the Presidential Records Act (PRA). The two competing scenarios she’s basing this order on are:

In a prosecution of a former president for allegedly retaining documents in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 793(e), a jury is permitted to examine a record retained by a former president in his/her personal possession at the end of his/her presidency and make a factual finding as to whether the government has proven beyond a reasonable doubt that it is personal or presidential using the definitions set forth in the Presidential Records Act (PRA).

A president has sole authority under the PRA to categorize records as personal or presidential during his/her presidency. Neither a court nor a jury is permitted to make or review such a categorization decision. Although there is no formal means in the PRA by which a president is to make that categorization, an outgoing president’s decision to exclude what he/she considers to be personal records from presidential records transmitted to the National Archives and Records Administration constitutes a president’s categorization of those records as personal under the PRA.

The trouble is, a president does NOT have authority to categorize classified records as personal. The judge is asking the government to write jury instructions based on a misinterpretation of the law.

Judge Cannon should be the one to interpret the law, and if her interpretation of the PRA is that presidents can categorize classified documents as “personal records”, then she should say so and dismiss the charges. The problem for her is that the 11th circuit has already ruled that classified documents are not personal records, and if she dismisses the charges based on that misinterpretation, Jack Smith can appeal to the 11th circuit. Judge Cannon is avoiding that at all costs because they bench slapped her the last time she ruled incorrectly on this specific issue.

She has also denied without prejudice trump’s motion to dismiss the charges based on the PRA, allowing him to bring up this exact issue again down the road. If he brings it up after the trial jury is empaneled, and she grants trump a dismissal, the government will not be able to re-file the charges because double jeopardy attaches after the jury is empaneled. 

The government had until tonight to respond to her order asking for jury instructions based on the misinterpretation of the PRA. Legal experts including Andrew Weissman posited that Jack Smith could respond by asking the 11th circuit for a writ of mandamus, ordering Judge Cannon to withdraw her weird jury instruction order. I thought the government might respond saying “we are unable to write jury instructions based on a misinterpretation of the PRA.” Some said the government might just follow the order as written. 

It looks like we got a combination of all three. 

The Court has issued an order directing the parties to file preliminary proposed jury instructions and verdict forms for Counts 1-32 of the Superseding Indictment, with a specific requirement that the parties “engage with [two] competing scenarios and offer alternative draft text that assumes each scenario to be a correct formulation of the law to be issued to the jury.” Both scenarios rest on an unstated and fundamentally flawed legal premise—namely, that the Presidential Records Act (“PRA”), and in particular its distinction between “personal” and “Presidential” records, determines whether a former President is “authorized,” under the Espionage Act to possess highly classified documents and store them in an unsecure facility, despite contrary rules in Executive Order (“EO”) 13526, which governs the possession and storage of classified information.

That legal premise is wrong, and a jury instruction for Section 793 that reflects that premise would distort the trial. 

Moreover, it is vitally important that the Court promptly decide whether the unstated legal premise underlying the recent order does, in the Court’s view, represent “a correct formulation of the law.” If the Court wrongly concludes that it does, and that it intends to include the PRA in the jury instructions regarding what is authorized under Section 793, it must inform the parties of that decision well in advance of trial. The Government must have the opportunity to consider appellate review well before jeopardy attaches.

“[T]he adoption of a clearly erroneous jury instruction that entails a high probability of failure of a prosecution—a failure the government could not then seek to remedy by appeal or otherwise—constitutes the kind of extraordinary situation in which we are empowered to issue the writ of mandamus.”

As instructed by the Court, the Government below provides a clear and well-supported jury instruction for the elements of Section 793(e). The proposed instruction correctly instructs the jury that the element of unauthorized possession depends on the plain language of the statute, Executive Order 13526, and the executive order’s implementing regulations, and it makes no mention of purported designations under the PRA. As required by the Court’s order, the Government also provides proposed jury instructions that incorporate the inaccurate legal premises reflected in the Court’s order under Scenario (a) and Scenario (b). 

Jack Smith basically says “you’re basing your order on a misinterpretation of a law that has no bearing on this case, and if you think it does you have to tell us now so we can drag your ass to the 11th circuit before double jeopardy attaches, and if you DO try to pull this off at trial, we will seek a writ of mandamus. I’ve written a PROPER jury instruction, and since you ordered me to, I’ve written the erroneous and completely stupid jury instructions you directed us to write.” I’m paraphrasing, of course. 

He then rubs it in a little and calls his jury instruction Government’s Proposed Jury Instruction: The Jury Is Correctly Instructed that Unauthorized Possession Is Based on Executive Order 13526, Not on the PRA.

Then when it comes time to write up the jury instructions Cannon asked for, he titles the first one: Scenario (a): The Jury Is Incorrectly Instructed that the Defendant Is Authorized to Possess Any Personal Record, Regardless of Classification, and the Jury Is Then Asked to Determine Whether Each Document Is Personal or Presidential 

And he calls the second one: Scenario (b): The Jury Is Incorrectly Instructed that the Defendant Is Authorized to Possess Any Record that He Designated as Personal, and Is Further Incorrectly Instructed that, by Failing to Transfer the Charged Documents to NARA, the Defendant Made the Unreviewable Decision to Designate the Charged Documents as Personal 

I love his style. I really do. 

He then concludes with this: For the reasons set forth above and in the Government’s opposition to Trump’s motion to dismiss based upon the PRA, the Court should reject the legal premise that the PRA’s distinction between personal and presidential records has any bearing on the element of unauthorized possession under Section 793(e). As such, it should deny Trump’s pending motion to dismiss and adopt preliminary jury instructions as proposed by the Government above. If, however, the Court does not reject that erroneous legal premise, it should make that decision clear now, long before jeopardy attaches, to allow the Government the opportunity to seek appellate review. 

That last bit is something I referred to as “Dismiss or get off the pot.” 

 

[GreyhoundFan]

Everything trump touches dies. 

 

[Alisamer]

18 hours ago, GreyhoundFan said:

He’s really prepping his cult to blow up everything:

 

Every accusation is a confession. I really think if he is re-elected he will do everything in his power to guarantee there is never again a presidential election in this country. 

[apple1]

1 hour ago, GreyhoundFan said:

Everything trump touches dies. 

 

Ok, I went over and read that entire article. The more I read the more confused I got. Seemed to me even before reading the article that Trump was after something (a lot of $$) for nothing. My questions started with - how/why would any investors be so gullible as to put up billions for something like this? Then what changed? What's with the multiple lawsuits? How could anyone not see this coming? Aren't there laws about stocks that would have prevented this? ... on and on and on ...

I realize that, money-wise, I only actually understand real-people numbers and budgets, but this really does confuse me.

 

[SassyPants]

2 hours ago, Alisamer said:

Every accusation is a confession. I really think if he is re-elected he will do everything in his power to guarantee there is never again a presidential election in this country. 

Well, I do think another Trump presidency would be pure chaos as Trump would very likely spend the bulk of his efforts on approving/supporting legislation that would secure his private, economic future as well as his protection from prosecution for his various crimes. The country’s business would be a very, very distant priority, if at all. This man sows discontent, hatred, violence and instability. He is the very definition of a shit show. Why anyone would think a second Trump presidency would be good for the US or world is beyond me. If Trump could stop all presidential elections going forward he would have already done it. His power is NOT that great, but man his continual shit show is effing exhausting.

[tankgirl]

6 hours ago, apple1 said:

Ok, I went over and read that entire article. The more I read the more confused I got. Seemed to me even before reading the article that Trump was after something (a lot of $$) for nothing. My questions started with - how/why would any investors be so gullible as to put up billions for something like this? Then what changed? What's with the multiple lawsuits? How could anyone not see this coming? Aren't there laws about stocks that would have prevented this? ... on and on and on ...

I realize that, money-wise, I only actually understand real-people numbers and budgets, but this really does confuse me.

 

I don't have the link but the Guardian and Washington Post seem to be digging out possible links to money laundering that might explain why people are still giving him money. With so much dirty money possibly in play it explains so much. It also explains some of the chaos they are now heading into as well, as they all want to get their money and get out quick before the Feds come in and they all get busted.

Edited April 3 by tankgirl

[GreyhoundFan]

This is what happens when you have a reputation for not paying your lawyers; you get the people who were last in their class. 

 

[fraurosena]

6 hours ago, GreyhoundFan said:

This is what happens when you have a reputation for not paying your lawyers; you get the people who were last in their class. 

 

Can I say that I absolutely love this? Does anyone know if he has blown past the deadline for an appeal yet? Because that would literally have be cackling with glee...

[fraurosena]

More info on the failed filing:

Spoiler

 

 

[fraurosena]

As to his other case, that, if all goes well, starts in just over a week:

 

[fraurosena]

There's a sketchy Russian money connection to Truth Social? Where are those damned pearls when you need to clutch them?

 

[fraurosena]

Update on the bond filing:

 

Wut? He still thinks he's running against Obama... 

Not commenting on his blatant racism, that's too obvious already.

[fraurosena]

This is not a good day for Trump.

[fraurosena]

Judge Cannon is playing chicken with Jack Smith and essentially daring him to appeal to the 11th Circuit.