Because once again, Trump's team has filed what purports to be a legal document but is, in fact, a performative piece of gibberish drafted to mollify a client who demands that his attorneys do something. Do you think they *know* it's performative gibberish but are just trying to pacify the old man in hopes of maybe someday getting paid? Or do you think they ackshually believe it, and are just as bad at lawyering as their client was at presidenting?
She's one of his, but she can see that he's completely lost the plot at this point. I suspect she'll toss most if not all of it out, if not for the fact they cited no legal authority, then b/c there isn't actually a 4th Amendment issue in question.
"Amendment IVThe right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, *and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause*, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
"Demanding a special master to sort through the documents seized and pull out things which are personal and/or attorney-client privileged is not a monstrously unreasonable request."
I remember reading somewhere that the FBI agents did this in real time when they searched the boxes. Anybody else?
If we're to have a "Special Master", I demand that he be dressed from head to toe in black, with a slick ponytail, a cruel sneer, a dueling scar across one cheekbone, and a riding crop which he occasionally taps against the palm of his hand.
My first choice would be Christopher Lee, closely followed by Alan Rickman, but I understand that neither of those people are an option anymore, so... what's everybody think? Gary Oldman?
"It's possible that DOJ could determine it simply does not have enough to justify prosecution"
Respectfully disagree.I think at this point, they have so much incriminating evidence that they HAVE to do something, even just a slap on the wrist, if for no other reason than because it would look too bad not to at least give him a performative punishment.
I was surprised he didn't try to keep Air Force One.
Especially after he spent $5 million of our money tarting it up. They probably had to burn sage after he left.
Because once again, Trump's team has filed what purports to be a legal document but is, in fact, a performative piece of gibberish drafted to mollify a client who demands that his attorneys do something. Do you think they *know* it's performative gibberish but are just trying to pacify the old man in hopes of maybe someday getting paid? Or do you think they ackshually believe it, and are just as bad at lawyering as their client was at presidenting?
As would William Faulkner.
She's one of his, but she can see that he's completely lost the plot at this point. I suspect she'll toss most if not all of it out, if not for the fact they cited no legal authority, then b/c there isn't actually a 4th Amendment issue in question.
Just FYI:
"Amendment IVThe right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, *and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause*, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
[emphasis mine]
"Demanding a special master to sort through the documents seized and pull out things which are personal and/or attorney-client privileged is not a monstrously unreasonable request."
I remember reading somewhere that the FBI agents did this in real time when they searched the boxes. Anybody else?
*Especially* a werewolf.
I kinda like "the vulgar fuck", although I can't take credit for it.
Fascist assholes.
The most times.Everyone says so.
In the foot? Or maybe in the face? I dunno
Nicely done
If we're to have a "Special Master", I demand that he be dressed from head to toe in black, with a slick ponytail, a cruel sneer, a dueling scar across one cheekbone, and a riding crop which he occasionally taps against the palm of his hand.
My first choice would be Christopher Lee, closely followed by Alan Rickman, but I understand that neither of those people are an option anymore, so... what's everybody think? Gary Oldman?
"It's possible that DOJ could determine it simply does not have enough to justify prosecution"
Respectfully disagree.I think at this point, they have so much incriminating evidence that they HAVE to do something, even just a slap on the wrist, if for no other reason than because it would look too bad not to at least give him a performative punishment.
Only if you had just swallowed a dozen Big Macs without hardly chewing. That would be a major, major movement.