A Deeply Fractured US

[KevinB]

It always gets tricky when you are charged with trying to figure out what is a lawful order and what isn't.

Personal take is that if you object to the boss's orders that much the correct action is to quit (mutiny) and take your chances in court.

Conscientious Objector Mohammed Ali is still my hero.

When you are a 4* you have had years to learn. You can’t just resign at that level when the CinC does something illegal. That said, I have not seen anything to the point that then President Trump was attempting to order the Military to do anything like some have alleged.

Milley (as much as I am not a fan of him) makes a good point that the oath isn’t to the President but the Constitution…

I, [name], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.

 

[Brad Sallows]

Here is the second count of the Bragg indictment, all 34 are all similar with changes to dates and voucher numbers. High lighted in yellow it says there was intent to commit another crime and conceal it. For the life of me I can't find this "other crime" in the indictment. Is this usual practice to do this?


Trump Indictment

The other crime is a federal crime, which Bragg claims he doesn't have to specify, so he hasn't specified it. The common understanding is that the federal crime is supposed to be campaign finance law. There are some complications with that: one, that the statute of limitations for that particular crime has expired; two, that the federal government looked at it and decided not to prosecute, probably because a prior case against John Edwards (money from campaign donations to hide an extramarital affair - sound familiar?) didn't get any convictions; three, that Bragg has no jurisdiction (it's federal, not state); four, that even if Trump had to disclose it to the FEC, that wasn't required until early 2017, too late for any information about it to be publicly released in time to affect the 2016 election.

 

[kkwd]

I was watching Andrea Mitchell Reports on MSNBC this afternoon. Michael Steele, the former chair of the RNC was a guest and he said that people have been talking about Trump every day since 2016. Kind of ironic in that he owes his job on the network co-hosting "The Weekend" on MSNBC to Trump. If it wasn't for DJT (the stock symbol for Trump's new public offering) he wouldn't have that job.

 

[KevinB]

Donald Trump’s Nine Lives — The Atlantic

The former president got his latest reprieve when a court reduced the $464 million bond in his fraud case. March 25, 2024 Donald Trump loves the musical Cats, and like the titular creatures, the former president seems to have nine lives. Today, in the face of yet another near-death financial...

apple.news

 

[Kirkhill]

When you are a 4* you have had years to learn. You can’t just resign at that level when the CinC does something illegal. That said, I have not seen anything to the point that then President Trump was attempting to order the Military to do anything like some have alleged.

Milley (as much as I am not a fan of him) makes a good point that the oath isn’t to the President but the Constitution…

I, [name], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.

And apparently Article 2 of that constitution specifies the chain of command....

 

[kkwd]

Donald Trump’s Nine Lives — The Atlantic

The former president got his latest reprieve when a court reduced the $464 million bond in his fraud case. March 25, 2024 Donald Trump loves the musical Cats, and like the titular creatures, the former president seems to have nine lives. Today, in the face of yet another near-death financial...

apple.news

More like the Roadrunner.

 

[FJAG]

And apparently Article 2 of that constitution specifies the chain of command....

That said, every individual has the duty to disobey an order from the chain of command that is manifestly unlawful. Determining what is manifestly unlawful, in Canada, is set out in R v Finta [1994] 1 SCR 701

Military orders can and must be obeyed unless they are manifestly unlawful. When is an order from a superior manifestly unlawful? It must be one that offends the conscience of every reasonable, right‑thinking person; it must be an order which is obviously and flagrantly wrong. The order cannot be in a grey area or be merely questionable; rather it must patently and obviously be wrong. For example the order of King Herod to kill babies under two years of age would offend and shock the conscience of the most hardened soldier.

 

[Kirkhill]

That said, every individual has the duty to disobey an order from the chain of command that is manifestly unlawful. Determining what is manifestly unlawful, in Canada, is set out in R v Finta [1994] 1 SCR 701

Adjectives. Jobs for lawyers. But only real lawyers.

 

[Brad Sallows]

Donald Trump’s Nine Lives — The Atlantic

The former president got his latest reprieve when a court reduced the $464 million bond in his fraud case. March 25, 2024 Donald Trump loves the musical Cats, and like the titular creatures, the former president seems to have nine lives. Today, in the face of yet another near-death financial...

apple.news

"Nine lives". Perhaps people are just trying too hard with too many fringe legal theories, and as a result he wins more than he would if a handful of conventional charges were brought to bear.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

"Nine lives". Perhaps people are just trying too hard with too many fringe legal theories, and as a result he wins more than he would if a handful of conventional charges were brought to bear.

Perhaps fringe legal theories are all they have. Can't find anything real, so tie up his time and money. If something sticks, all the better for them. Election interference masquerading as political lawfare.

 

[QV]

Perhaps fringe legal theories are all they have. Can't find anything real, so tie up his time and money. If something sticks, all the better for them. Election interference masquerading as political lawfare.

So far, that is all they have. This entire operation is designed to impact his electoral outcome.

As long as this keeps up the next election results should be in his favor and "to big to rig".

 

[brihard]

So far, that is all they have. This entire operation is designed to impact his electoral outcome.

As long as this keeps up the next election results should be in his favor and "to big to rig".

I think it’s difficult to argue that the Florida classified documents case relies on ‘fringe legal theories’. The things you can and cannot legally do with classified material are very settled, as is the concept of obstructing justice by deliberately concealing and withholding documents responsive to a subpoena. The front legal theory in that case is that somehow TS//SI material can somehow be ‘personal’ documents, or that classified records, even if given presidential records status, can be hidden and withheld from the National Archives. That’s the case where he’s in real trouble once it gets to trial.

 

[TacticalTea]

I think it’s difficult to argue that the Florida classified documents case relies on ‘fringe legal theories’. The things you can and cannot legally do with classified material are very settled, as is the concept of obstructing justice by deliberately concealing and withholding documents responsive to a subpoena. The front legal theory in that case is that somehow TS//SI material can somehow be ‘personal’ documents, or that classified records, even if given presidential records status, can be hidden and withheld from the National Archives. That’s the case where he’s in real trouble once it gets to trial.

Yeah, both sides are engaging in this weird all-out legal onslaught in which there's dozens of fake cases that get thrown out and then a few things that actually are serious.

Not good for justice or democracy.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

I think it’s difficult to argue that the Florida classified documents case relies on ‘fringe legal theories’. The things you can and cannot legally do with classified material are very settled, as is the concept of obstructing justice by deliberately concealing and withholding documents responsive to a subpoena. The front legal theory in that case is that somehow TS//SI material can somehow be ‘personal’ documents, or that classified records, even if given presidential records status, can be hidden and withheld from the National Archives. That’s the case where he’s in real trouble once it gets to trial.

Just because that's what Smith alleges and has charged him with, doesn't mean any of it is true. You're attributing truth to things that haven't been proven. Certainly, if Trump is guilty, Biden is more so. Maybe Trump should pretend he's a well meaning, doddering old fool and get his charges dropped also. Speaking of which, if Biden continues to say he's fine, then maybe they should charge him accordingly. Everyone seems strangely quiet on that one. Biden's case is much, much more worse than Trumps, but will never see court. That right there casts doubts on Trumps charges.

 

[brihard]

Just because that's what Smith alleges and has charged him with, doesn't mean any of it is true. You're attributing truth to things that haven't been proven.

Obviously my comment is predicated on a finding of guilty. I’ve made that clear more times now than I can count, but I’ll continue to repeat myself on that if you need me to.

Certainly, if Trump is guilty, Biden is more so.

You’re struggling with the key concept of ‘intent’. The vast legal distinction between the two cases has been gone over repeatedly. “Of crap we found some stuff we need to give back” is very different from “Deny we have this stuff, lie to investigators, hide what we can, and then when they search and find it pretend it’s personal property I’m entitled to”. The two fact sets are, uh… pretty dissimilar.

Maybe Trump should pretend he's a well meaning, doddering old fool and get his charges dropped also. Speaking of which, if Biden continues to say he's fine, then maybe they should charge him accordingly. Everyone seems strangely quiet on that one.

Take it up with the Trump-appointed prosecutor who recommended against charges, I guess.

Biden's case is much, much more worse than Trumps, but will never see court. That right there casts doubts on Trumps charges.

And your speculation of It being ‘worse’ is based on what, precisely? That’s quite a claim given the nature of the material seized from Mar-a-Lago.

 

[KevinB]

Just because that's what Smith alleges and has charged him with, doesn't mean any of it is true.

In Trumps own words he had it, and admitted showing it to folks who had no business to see it.

You're attributing truth to things that haven't been proven. Certainly, if Trump is guilty, Biden is more so. Maybe Trump should pretend he's a well meaning, doddering old fool and get his charges dropped also.

Did President Biden mislead the DOJ, Presidential Archives, etc? Or get caught on video trying to fly boxes of classified material out of the area?

I'll wait while you keep grasping...

Speaking of which, if Biden continues to say he's fine, then maybe they should charge him accordingly. Everyone seems strangely quiet on that one. Biden's case is much, much more worse than Trumps, but will never see court. That right there casts doubts on Trumps charges.

Forgot to return and then returned when found, is a lot different that intentionally held on to, obstructed justice about returning, lied tried to move them, and ordered employees to delete video of material being moved. Showing them to foreign nationals and what seems to be to me, is profiteering on their illegal disclosure to foreign governments, including some that have clearly harmed Americas interests with the information.

I can go on...

 

[Fishbone Jones]

And your speculation of It being ‘worse’ is based on what, precisely? That’s quite a claim given the nature of the material seized from Mar-a-Lago.

The Hur report.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

In Trumps own words he had it, and admitted showing it to folks who had no business to see it.


Did President Biden mislead the DOJ, Presidential Archives, etc? Or get caught on video trying to fly boxes of classified material out of the area?

I'll wait while you keep grasping...


Forgot to return and then returned when found, is a lot different that intentionally held on to, obstructed justice about returning, lied tried to move them, and ordered employees to delete video of material being moved. Showing them to foreign nationals and what seems to be to me, is profiteering on their illegal disclosure to foreign governments, including some that have clearly harmed Americas interests with the information.

I can go on...

None of which has been tested in court.

 

[KevinB]

None of which has been tested in court.

True, but when I see Trump saying stuff and being shown doing stuff on video, I tend to think it doesn’t take a court of law to make that a fact.

Some other aspects won’t be gotten into in court, as they affect National Security still to this day.

 

[Kirkhill]

In Trumps own words he had it, and admitted showing it to folks who had no business to see it.


Did President Biden mislead the DOJ, Presidential Archives, etc? Or get caught on video trying to fly boxes of classified material out of the area?

I'll wait while you keep grasping...


Forgot to return and then returned when found, is a lot different that intentionally held on to, obstructed justice about returning, lied tried to move them, and ordered employees to delete video of material being moved. Showing them to foreign nationals and what seems to be to me, is profiteering on their illegal disclosure to foreign governments, including some that have clearly harmed Americas interests with the information.

I can go on...

It is too simple. You're wrong. He's right. Next topic.