Fogbow

raison de arizona wrote: ↑Fri Jul 28, 2023 3:20 pm Investigate the investigators!

W. Kevin Vicklund wrote: ↑Thu Jun 08, 2023 7:54 pm Tonight's the night Jack’s gonna make it happen
Tonight he'll put all other things aside
Give in this time and show me some attention
He’s goin' for those charges it’s due time

I want to stop you, delay you
Set my minions on you
I want to halt you, fault you
I just can't give it up
And can you move real slow, just let it go

I'm so indicted, and I just can't hide it
I'm about to lose control and I’ll try to fight it
I'm so indicted, and I just can't hide it
And oh no, oh no, oh no, oh no, oh no I’m so screwed

And we shouldn't even think about this witch hunt
Those declassified documents are mine
This election interference makes me worry
As if you're not playin' around, Jack, that ain’t fine

I'm so indicted, and I just can't hide it
I'm about to lose control and I’ll try to fight it
I'm so indicted, and I just can't hide it
And oh no, oh no, oh no, oh no, oh no I’m so screwed, I’m so screwed
Oh shit I’m screwed

Oh Jack, I want to stop you, delay you
Set my minions on you
I want to halt you, fault you
I just can't give it up
And can you move real slow, just let it go

I'm so indicted, and I just can't hide it
I'm about to lose control and I’ll try to fight it
I'm so indicted, and I just can't hide it
And oh no, oh no, oh no, oh no, oh no I’m so screwed, I’m so screwed

Look what you do to me
You got me freaking out (Freaking out)
How did you get to me?
I'll never give it up

And I'm so indicted (Look what you do to me)
Oh Jack (You got me freaking out)
I'm freaking out yeah, oh I’ll try to fight it (Yeah)
You, you, you, you, you got me (I'll never give it up)
(Oh no oh no) Oh, no I’ll fight it Jack
And I'm so indicted (Look what you do to me)
And I just can't hide it (You got me freaking out)

W. Kevin Vicklund wrote: ↑Tue Aug 01, 2023 6:37 pm Encore!

sugar magnolia wrote: ↑Thu Jul 27, 2023 1:40 pm How perfect would it be if he's indicted on the 50th anniversary of Nixon's impeachment. They have until midnight to make that happen.

The special counsel investigation into Donald Trump secured a search warrant of the former president’s Twitter account, @realDonaldTrump, according to a newly unsealed court filing.

The search was so secret that Twitter was barred from telling Trump the search warrant had been obtained for his account, and Twitter was fined $350,000 because it delayed producing the records sought under the search warrant.

TOPSHOT - US President Donald Trump speaks to supporters from The Ellipse near the White House on January 6, 2021, in Washington, DC. - Thousands of Trump supporters, fueled by his spurious claims of voter fraud, are flooding the nation's capital protesting the expected certification of Joe Biden's White House victory by the US Congress. (Photo by Brendan Smialowski / AFP) (Photo by BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI/AFP via Getty Images)
Takeaways from the indictment of Donald Trump for efforts to overturn his 2020 election defeat
The special counsel’s office, which is now working on the criminal case against Trump in DC District Court related to his efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election, sought the warrant in January 2023.

Court was worried Trump would ‘flee from prosecution’
Twitter and special counsel Jack Smith’s office spent several months litigating the question of whether Trump should be told about the search warrant.

The dispute came to light on Wednesday when the DC Circuit Court of Appeals unsealed a decision upholding a district court ruling in favor of prohibiting Twitter from telling Trump.

The district court, according to the DC Circuit’s opinion, “found that there were ‘reasonable grounds to believe’ that disclosing the warrant to former President Trump ‘would seriously jeopardize the ongoing investigation’ by giving him “an opportunity to destroy evidence, change patterns of behavior, [or] notify confederates.”

The district court also concluded the non-disclosure order was necessary because it “found reason to believe that the former President would ‘flee from prosecution,’” a footnote says.

“The government later acknowledged, however, that it had ‘errantly included flight from prosecution as a predicate’ in its application,” the footnote said. “The district court did not rely on risk of flight in its ultimate analysis.”

This story is breaking and will be updated.

The district court
thus held Twitter in contempt and imposed a $350,000 sanction
for its delay.

Kendra wrote: ↑Wed Aug 09, 2023 1:10 pm https://www.cnn.com/2023/08/09/politics ... index.html

The special counsel investigation into Donald Trump secured a search warrant of the former president’s Twitter account, @realDonaldTrump, according to a newly unsealed court filing.

The search was so secret that Twitter was barred from telling Trump the search warrant had been obtained for his account, and Twitter was fined $350,000 because it delayed producing the records sought under the search warrant

Kendra wrote: ↑Wed Aug 09, 2023 1:43 pm I'm still trying to read the whole court filing, it appears it's related to J6. Wonder what they found there. If memory serves, judges don't grant warrants unless the investigators can show they're going to find evidence of a crime there.

RTH10260 wrote: ↑Wed Aug 09, 2023 2:06 pm

Kendra wrote: ↑Wed Aug 09, 2023 1:43 pm I'm still trying to read the whole court filing, it appears it's related to J6. Wonder what they found there. If memory serves, judges don't grant warrants unless the investigators can show they're going to find evidence of a crime there.

Possible two kinds: (1) suggesting and promoting the Big Lie, and (2) inciting the J6 riot and not condemning it, eg indirectly supporting the events.

poplove wrote: ↑Wed Aug 09, 2023 3:51 pmI'm seeing a few tweets suggesting it's the DMs on Jan 5 & 6 that investigators are looking at.

Was Jack Smith's appointment unconstitutional? He has no more authority than Taylor Swift, amicus brief argues

BY DEBRA CASSENS WEISS
DECEMBER 21, 2023, 2:21 PM CST

Special counsel Jack Smith’s appointment was unconstitutional, leaving him powerless to obtain a quick U.S. Supreme Court decision on immunity claims by former President Donald Trump, according to an amicus brief signed by former U.S. Attorney General Edwin Meese and two law professors.

“Not clothed in the authority of the federal government, Smith is a modern example of the naked emperor,” the Dec. 20 amicus brief argues. “Improperly appointed, he has no more authority to represent the United States in this court than Bryce Harper, Taylor Swift or Jeff Bezos.”

The law professors who co-wrote the brief with Meese are Steven G. Calabresi of the Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law and Gary S. Lawson of the Boston University School of Law.

Calabresi summarized the arguments in a post for the Volokh Conspiracy.

The brief argues that Attorney General Merrick Garland “exceeded his statutory and constitutional authority” when he appointed Smith in November 2022. Because Smith’s appointment was unconstitutional, “every action that he has taken since his appointment is now null and void,” Calabresi argued at the Volokh Conspiracy.



https://www.abajournal.com/news/article ... ief-argues

RTH10260 wrote: ↑Sun Dec 24, 2023 5:26 pm Calabresi summarized the arguments in a post for the Volokh Conspiracy.

bob wrote: ↑Sun Dec 24, 2023 5:40 pm

RTH10260 wrote: ↑Sun Dec 24, 2023 5:26 pm Calabresi summarized the arguments in a post for the Volokh Conspiracy.

"For completeness," the Volokh article.

The constitutionality of the appointment of various counsels' appointments is a pet issue of Calabresi. No court has bit.

Which is unsurprising because if one did, at most, it would just cause delay; it is undisputed that the federal government has the "statutory and constitutional authority" to prosecute federal crimes.