Spring forward.
To delete this message, click the X at top right.

US v. Trump - Espionage Act - (9:23-cr-80101) District Court, S.D. Florida

Abandon reality, all ye who enter here. *Democracy*Under*Threat*

Will this case go to trial before the primary elections?

Yes, and it will be a wonderful circus
29
24%
No, Judge Cannon will dismiss the case on a motion to dismiss
6
5%
No, Trump’s attorneys will work out a plea bargain
2
2%
No, the case will be in the appeals court through the 2024 election
24
20%
No, Judge Cannon will grant numerous motions to delay the case
35
28%
No, this case will NEVER go to trial, but I don't know what will happen
10
8%
Some other option, which I will describe in a post.
4
3%
Debilitating brain aneurysm
13
11%
 
Total votes: 123

User avatar
northland10
Posts: 5598
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 6:47 pm
Location: Northeast Illinois
Occupation: Organist/Choir Director/Fundraising Data Analyst
Verified: ✅ I'm me.

US v. Trump - Espionage Act - (9:23-cr-80101) District Court, S.D. Florida

#426

Post by northland10 »

realist wrote: Sat Jul 15, 2023 4:07 pm
Reality Check wrote: Sat Jul 15, 2023 2:31 pm
Off Topic
chancery wrote: Sat Jul 15, 2023 1:46 pm :snippity:
Nada. The index page is still stuck on Docket No. 77.
Weird. I just looked at the page again and No. 77 is gone. It skips from 76 to 78.
Ditto for me.
The reason for the oddities is that there are actually 3 different pages for the case. I am not sure why Recap/Courtlistener did that but there there it is.

Below are the links to the three different pages which we we call 69, 70, and 71 (based on the number in the links 67490069, 6490070, etc.). I have placed the links also inside the code function so you can see the full text as well.

Link 69 includes all the docs from 76-78 (so it's divine), link 70 is Chancery's one that is missing the last doc, and link 71 is the one that skips doc 77.

Note, if somebody goes to Pacer with Recap and updates one of them, the results I mentioned will change, of course.

https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/67 ... s-v-trump/

Code: Select all

https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/67490069/united-states-v-trump/
https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/67 ... s-v-trump/

Code: Select all

https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/67490070/united-states-v-trump/
https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/67 ... s-v-trump/

Code: Select all

https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/67490071/united-states-v-trump/
101010 :towel:
User avatar
Foggy
Dick Tater
Posts: 9554
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 8:45 am
Location: Fogbow HQ
Occupation: Dick Tater/Space Cadet
Verified: as seen on qvc zombie apocalypse

US v. Trump - Espionage Act - (9:23-cr-80101) District Court, S.D. Florida

#427

Post by Foggy »

Dang, N10, you're a master of this stuff. :towel:
Out from under. :thumbsup:
chancery
Posts: 1314
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 1:24 pm
Verified:

US v. Trump - Espionage Act - (9:23-cr-80101) District Court, S.D. Florida

#428

Post by chancery »

Amazing! Thanks for your expert sleuthing.
User avatar
Reality Check
Posts: 2177
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 3:46 pm
Verified: ✅ Curmudgeon
Contact:

US v. Trump - Espionage Act - (9:23-cr-80101) District Court, S.D. Florida

#429

Post by Reality Check »

N10. I should have checked the URL's. Good work. :thumbsup:
chancery
Posts: 1314
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 1:24 pm
Verified:

US v. Trump - Espionage Act - (9:23-cr-80101) District Court, S.D. Florida

#430

Post by chancery »

Off Topic
northland10 wrote: Sun Jul 16, 2023 7:10 am The reason for the oddities is that there are actually 3 different pages for the case. I am not sure why Recap/Courtlistener did that but there there it is.
Mike Lissner, Executive Director of the Free Law Project, responded early this morning to the informal trouble ticket I sent them on Saturday:
Hi [chancery], the problem is that we have an old, hard to fix bug with criminal cases. What happens is we wind up with multiple webpages for them. So, for example, this is a (bad) mirror of this case's docket:

https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/67 ... s-v-trump/

The one you sent was:

https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/67 ... s-v-trump/?

The way I found the one above was to take the URL that emptywheel sent:

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap ... 78.0_1.pdf

And hack off the end:

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap ... sd.648654/

That redirected me to the second URL for the case, above.

Sorry, this bug drives us nuts, but it's hard to fix and we just don't have the resources to do so, so we live with it. It only affects criminal cases, thankfully.

Mike
Kudos once again to northland10.
User avatar
northland10
Posts: 5598
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 6:47 pm
Location: Northeast Illinois
Occupation: Organist/Choir Director/Fundraising Data Analyst
Verified: ✅ I'm me.

US v. Trump - Espionage Act - (9:23-cr-80101) District Court, S.D. Florida

#431

Post by northland10 »

chancery wrote: Mon Jul 17, 2023 8:34 am
Off Topic
Mike Lissner, Executive Director of the Free Law Project, responded early this morning to the informal trouble ticket I sent them on Saturday:
► Show Spoiler
Kudos once again to northland10.
Off Topic
You're welcome. I have sort of an idea of what he was saying and how it impacts criminal cases.

I have previously not entirely understood how criminal cases with multiple defendants would should up on CourtListener, or sometimes even Pacer (which is probably the source of their issue). I had noticed oddities in the past. Having remembered that and realizing that there were two different defendants for the case, I thought I might do a focus search on the case name (something I rarely do) and for only that court to see what came up. Well, I found at least three results and each showed different results, as were mentioned by you and others.

I assume this has something to do with Pacer links up criminal cases with multiple defendants and it is difficult for the Recap process to manage and merge, especially since they are an org of limited resources. Civil cases do not have separate entries and charges entered behind the scenes for multiple defendants.
101010 :towel:
chancery
Posts: 1314
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 1:24 pm
Verified:

US v. Trump - Espionage Act - (9:23-cr-80101) District Court, S.D. Florida

#432

Post by chancery »

Off Topic
northland10 wrote: Mon Jul 17, 2023 2:04 pm I have previously not entirely understood how criminal cases with multiple defendants would should up on CourtListener, or sometimes even Pacer (which is probably the source of their issue). I had noticed oddities in the past. Having remembered that and realizing that there were two different defendants for the case, I thought I might do a focus search on the case name (something I rarely do) and for only that court to see what came up. Well, I found at least three results and each showed different results, as were mentioned by you and others.

I assume this has something to do with Pacer links up criminal cases with multiple defendants and it is difficult for the Recap process to manage and merge, especially since they are an org of limited resources. Civil cases do not have separate entries and charges entered behind the scenes for multiple defendants.
Yeah, I've seen that, separate sub-dockets for each defendant in a multi-defendant case. Each gets a separate sub-docket number, e.g., .1, .2, .3 etc. I forget whether papers and orders for global issues go in the main docket number, or are supposed to be (but sometimes aren't) duplicated in each sub-docket number. It can be a royal pain, and sometimes you have to search several indexes and sub-indexes to find what you're looking for.

But I had assumed that there was only one docket number for US. v. Trump, because I've seen proceedings that are clearly individual to one defendant or the other in the same index.

I should fire up Pacer to check, but there's a little billing problem with my account, that I need to protest, which I don't currently have the energy for, but didn't want to write off.

Edit: Just brought my account current, and will check Pacer anon.
chancery
Posts: 1314
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 1:24 pm
Verified:

US v. Trump - Espionage Act - (9:23-cr-80101) District Court, S.D. Florida

#433

Post by chancery »

https://twitter.com/lawofruby/status/16 ... 3530076160
Lisa Rubin
@lawofruby
In a paperless, just-issued order, Judge Aileen Cannon has notified Trump, Nauta, and the Special Counsel’s office to be prepared tomorrow to discuss something not on the official agenda for a normal CIPA hearing: the trial schedule.
Lisa Rubin
@lawofruby


Specifically, they should be ready to discuss the government’s proposed trial schedule and related deadlines & any “particularized objections thereto” in light of the Speedy Trial Act, the Rules of Criminal Procedure, and the CIPA. 2/

This reinforces my suspicion she will set a new scheduling order -- and likely with some sort of trial date -- at or soon after tomorrow’s hearing. Stay tuned. 3/
Here's the order (Docket No. 81):
PAPERLESS ORDER: The parties shall be prepared to discuss the Government's Motion for Continuance and Proposed Revised Scheduling Order 34 at the CIPA Section 2 pretrial conference scheduled for July 18, 2023, including the proposed deadlines contained therein [34-2] and particularized objections thereto, in light of 18 U.S.C. § 3161, the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, and the CIPA. Signed by Judge Aileen M. Cannon on 7/17/2023. (kts) (Entered: 07/17/2023)
In my view, defendants' arrogant and conclusory response to the government's proposed schedule didn't include any particularized objections, so I'm cautiously pushing my low optimism level up a small notch.

Edit: fixed the docket number
User avatar
Dr. Ken
Posts: 2450
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2021 7:12 pm
Contact:

US v. Trump - Espionage Act - (9:23-cr-80101) District Court, S.D. Florida

#434

Post by Dr. Ken »

Didn't know where to put this as I couldn't remember the thread for teixeira. But he's using Donald trump being charged for the same crime as a defense.
ImageImagePhilly Boondoggle
User avatar
RTH10260
Posts: 14353
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:16 am
Location: Switzerland, near the Alps
Verified: ✔️ Eurobot

US v. Trump - Espionage Act - (9:23-cr-80101) District Court, S.D. Florida

#435

Post by RTH10260 »

Maybe, just maybe, IFF you could give all the documents back to the military and acid clean the internet .... :twisted:
User avatar
Kendra
Posts: 10497
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2021 10:17 am

US v. Trump - Espionage Act - (9:23-cr-80101) District Court, S.D. Florida

#436

Post by Kendra »

:waiting:

I heard on the teevee that security is tight at today's hearing, no phones in courtroom so no live tweeting. Also, if any reporter leaves the courtroom, they're not letting him/her back in, so might be quiet until it's over. Oh well, the target letter news is enough :popcorn: to chew on until then.
User avatar
Kendra
Posts: 10497
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2021 10:17 am

US v. Trump - Espionage Act - (9:23-cr-80101) District Court, S.D. Florida

#437

Post by Kendra »

Looks like lunch break. CNN showed video of Jack Smith carrying a Subway sandwich and getting escorted into his huge black SUV.
User avatar
Volkonski
Posts: 11592
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 11:06 am
Location: Texoma and North Fork of Long Island
Occupation: Retired mechanical engineer
Verified:

US v. Trump - Espionage Act - (9:23-cr-80101) District Court, S.D. Florida

#438

Post by Volkonski »

Oh Jack. Is Subway the best available? :( Sure your name is Smith but that need not condemn you to a lifetime of Wonder Bread.

Come to the North Fork. I'll treat you to a really fine sandwich at a proper Brooklyn style Italian restaurant or an equally proper Jewish delicatessen. :thumbsup:

We have these right next to each other not a half a mile from here.
“If everyone fought for their own convictions there would be no war.” ― Leo Tolstoy, War and Peace
User avatar
raison de arizona
Posts: 17656
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:21 am
Location: Nothing, Arizona
Occupation: bit twiddler
Verified: ✔️ he/him/his

US v. Trump - Espionage Act - (9:23-cr-80101) District Court, S.D. Florida

#439

Post by raison de arizona »

Kendra wrote: Tue Jul 18, 2023 12:45 pm Looks like lunch break. CNN showed video of Jack Smith carrying a Subway sandwich and getting escorted into his huge black SUV.
News at 11.
“Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.” —John Adams
User avatar
RTH10260
Posts: 14353
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:16 am
Location: Switzerland, near the Alps
Verified: ✔️ Eurobot

US v. Trump - Espionage Act - (9:23-cr-80101) District Court, S.D. Florida

#440

Post by RTH10260 »

"Special Counsel Jack Smith sighting in DC after Trump says he's target of Jan. 6 probe"

Was it expected that he would go in hiding :?: :blackeye:
User avatar
Suranis
Posts: 5830
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 5:25 pm

US v. Trump - Espionage Act - (9:23-cr-80101) District Court, S.D. Florida

#441

Post by Suranis »

RTH10260 wrote: Tue Jul 18, 2023 1:37 pm "Special Counsel Jack Smith sighting in DC after Trump says he's target of Jan. 6 probe"

Was it expected that he would go in hiding :?: :blackeye:
It would cause him physical pain. The guy craves attention like Crack. That's one reason he cant shut up - Announcing indictments allows him to see mentions of him spread through the internet.

It probably causes him pain that most of his unhinged rants don't get any attention at all, no matter how much he fills them with shocking content.
Hic sunt dracones
User avatar
northland10
Posts: 5598
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 6:47 pm
Location: Northeast Illinois
Occupation: Organist/Choir Director/Fundraising Data Analyst
Verified: ✅ I'm me.

US v. Trump - Espionage Act - (9:23-cr-80101) District Court, S.D. Florida

#442

Post by northland10 »

Suranis wrote: Tue Jul 18, 2023 1:55 pm
RTH10260 wrote: Tue Jul 18, 2023 1:37 pm "Special Counsel Jack Smith sighting in DC after Trump says he's target of Jan. 6 probe"

Was it expected that he would go in hiding :?: :blackeye:
It would cause him physical pain. The guy craves attention like Crack. That's one reason he cant shut up - Announcing indictments allows him to see mentions of him spread through the internet.

It probably causes him pain that most of his unhinged rants don't get any attention at all, no matter how much he fills them with shocking content.
And this is why they see no risk in him absconding. If he ran off to Russia, he would not be able to hold his rallies or bask in his follower's worship of him at MAL (or crash a wedding). It would also make it harder to campaign. Yes, he has LE around him all the time, but the need of attention is the real hook to keep him here.

I would almost be happier if he absconded and left us alone.

As for the risk of him sharing now 2-year-old secrets with Putin.... I would be disappointed in Putin if his team had not already figured out Trump "look at me" docs. Eventually, Vlad will end up calling him Loser at every opportunity. Putin needs him disrupting the US, not annoying him in Russia.
101010 :towel:
User avatar
Kendra
Posts: 10497
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2021 10:17 am

US v. Trump - Espionage Act - (9:23-cr-80101) District Court, S.D. Florida

#443

Post by Kendra »

RTH10260 wrote: Tue Jul 18, 2023 1:37 pm "Special Counsel Jack Smith sighting in DC after Trump says he's target of Jan. 6 probe"

Was it expected that he would go in hiding :?: :blackeye:
Smith was in DC and not at the court in Florida? My bad, I assumed and posted in the wrong thread :oldlady:
User avatar
raison de arizona
Posts: 17656
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:21 am
Location: Nothing, Arizona
Occupation: bit twiddler
Verified: ✔️ he/him/his

US v. Trump - Espionage Act - (9:23-cr-80101) District Court, S.D. Florida

#444

Post by raison de arizona »

CNN: Judge in Trump classified documents case tells prosecutors that a mid-December trial date would be too soon

https://twitter.com/AnnaBower/status/16 ... 74924?s=20
Anna Bower @AnnaBower wrote: New: As Judge Aileen Cannon made her debut at a hearing in the classified documents case, she appeared disinclined to grant the Special Counsel’s request for a December trial date…but also seemed skeptical of Trump & Nauta’s bid to delay the trial until after the 2024 election.
During a nearly 2 hour hearing, Cannon peppered both defense counsel and prosecutors with questions about the anticipated discovery & motion practice timeline.

But she put off setting a trial date from the bench, indicating instead that she will enter a written order “soon.”
Cannon expressed skepticism toward DOJ’s claim that Trump & Nauta’s case could realistically proceed to trial by Dec. 11 because it is not unusually “complex.” She repeatedly noted that she is unaware of any case involving classified info that proceeded to trial within 6 months.

Yet Cannon also resisted arguments from Trump’s legal team, who urged her to consider his status as Republican Presidential frontrunner when setting a trial date.

She indicated that she would instead focus on factors such as the volume of discovery & complexity of the case.
Trump’s co-defendant, Walt Nauta, appeared in court alongside attorneys Stanley Woodward & Sasha Dadan.

Woodward argued that setting a firm trial date is unrealistic bc he needs to review discovery before advising Nauta as to whether he should “sever” his trial from Trump’s.
“Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.” —John Adams
User avatar
Dr. Ken
Posts: 2450
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2021 7:12 pm
Contact:

US v. Trump - Espionage Act - (9:23-cr-80101) District Court, S.D. Florida

#445

Post by Dr. Ken »

ImageImagePhilly Boondoggle
User avatar
AndyinPA
Posts: 9856
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:42 am
Location: Pittsburgh
Verified:

US v. Trump - Espionage Act - (9:23-cr-80101) District Court, S.D. Florida

#446

Post by AndyinPA »

Let me know when she changes it to later.
"Choose your leaders with wisdom and forethought. To be led by a coward is to be controlled by all that the coward fears… To be led by a liar is to ask to be told lies." -Octavia E. Butler
User avatar
Kendra
Posts: 10497
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2021 10:17 am

US v. Trump - Espionage Act - (9:23-cr-80101) District Court, S.D. Florida

#447

Post by Kendra »

https://www.cnn.com/2023/07/21/politics ... index.html
Media organizations, including CNN, asked a magistrate judge Friday to unseal court filings related to seven search warrants the Justice Department sought in the investigation into former President Donald Trump’s handling of classified documents.

The existence of the seven warrants – which were sought in addition to the warrant federal investigators secured to search Mar-a-Lago last summer – was only made public last week. Their existence was revealed in a court order from Magistrate Judge Bruce Reinhart allowing the warrant materials to be shared with attorneys for Trump and his co-defendant in the classified documents prosecution, Walt Nauta. The court-approved warrants allowed investigators to search devices and accounts, according to the court filing, though more details are not available at this time.

The new filing seeking public access to those documents – which likely include what the government filed in court to get approval for the searches – noted that the media organizations already successfully sought the partial unsealing of the Mar-a-Lago search warrant materials.
User avatar
bob
Posts: 5386
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2021 12:07 am

US v. Trump - Espionage Act - (9:23-cr-80101) District Court, S.D. Florida

#448

Post by bob »

If the trial does start on May 20, it technically will occur before some states hold their primaries.

But I expect the Republicans will have selected their nominee by then.
Image ImageImage
User avatar
Slim Cognito
Posts: 6555
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 9:15 am
Location: Too close to trump
Occupation: Hats. I do hats.
Verified:

US v. Trump - Espionage Act - (9:23-cr-80101) District Court, S.D. Florida

#449

Post by Slim Cognito »

So the likely GOP candidate will be defending himself in an espionage trial in May, maybe. Theoretically, it could still be going on about the time he’s officially nominated.
Pup Dennis in training to be a guide dog & given to a deserving vet. Thx! ImageImageImage x4
User avatar
Foggy
Dick Tater
Posts: 9554
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 8:45 am
Location: Fogbow HQ
Occupation: Dick Tater/Space Cadet
Verified: as seen on qvc zombie apocalypse

US v. Trump - Espionage Act - (9:23-cr-80101) District Court, S.D. Florida

#450

Post by Foggy »

I think this case has become something of a sideshow. No, it isn't going to trial before the election.

But on the bright side, it doesn't matter. The indictment itself told the story. Everyone knows what he did, and he's not getting anything back, so his opportunity to further damage the United States of America is pretty much limited. He can tell all the lies he wants about it. We know what he did.

And there are other cases to make this one less important. IMHO.

Maybe the Republicans should have their convention in Miami, so he can attend the trial too also. :mrgreen:
Out from under. :thumbsup:
Post Reply

Return to “The Big Lie & Aftermath of The Former Guy”