How can anyone still take the WSJ Editorial Board seriously? I rarely read it, but they say: "But it’s striking, and legally notable, that the indictment never mentions the Presidential Records Act (PRA) that allows a President access to documents, both classified and unclassified, once he leaves office. It allows for good-faith negotiation with the National Archives. Yet the indictment assumes that Mr. Trump had no right to take any classified documents." What? Upon Trump's leaving office, custody of all documents went to NARA under 44 U.S.C sec 2203 (g)(1): "Upon the conclusion of a President's term of office...the Archivist of the United States shall assume responsibility for the custody, control, and preservation of, and access to, the Presidential records of that President." Nothing about "it allows for good-faith negotiation." In any event, NARA did engage in plenty of negotiation. And Parlatore was out lying about how the Archivists were negligent in not establishing a repository to let Trump have 2 years to go through the docs. But that's only true when a former President informs NARA that he intends to build a Presidential library, which Trump did not do. https://www.cnn.com/2023/06/09/politics/national-archives-refutes-trump-claim-classified-documents-indictment/index.html
I do not know the relevant law, but is that not disingenuous on the part of the WSJ? Sounds more to me like mashing together the fact that former officials retain security clearances. I'm sure it's not in there that those docs can simply be stored in your shower.
You have to wonder if Trump was so loose with confidential documents after he was no longer President, how many secrets did he share during his term. He seems like the type who wants to share secrets so that people know he is important.
yes, but he's likely even much more strongly motivated by the ability to trade info for access for his business. It was/is potentially the first really serious easy money he would ever have access to. For those that don't understand his business, it's been an exceedingly fraught and slow growing business that needs access to locales, etc, namely outside the U.S. (my ltd understanding of Trump Inc's real estate biz model is a bit like being the AirbNb version of Mariott lux hotels, whatever that really means. (Tom Barack said it once). Sounds pretty bottom-feeder to me, from a financial angle.)
So glad that I have been following you for quite some time. Your fabulously clear explanations of complex issues make me feel at least halfway on top of things. Keep up the good work!
Also... If he wins the nomination, doesn’t he get intelligence briefings ahead of a possible transition? So while on trial for violations of the Espionage Act, he will be privy to classified information once again?
I still can't wrap my head around a third-world country allowing an indicted criminal to be nominated, elected and installed as its leader -- let alone the USA not disqualifying said person on these circumstances.
Happy Indictment Weekend! I sat up until 3am listening to the It's Complicated broadcast on the Indictments. No time for sleep 😂😂😂BTW... Also I went ahead and took the Enneagram test and got The Achiever. 💪
Wolf Blitzer tweeted that Trump’s indictment carries a maximum penalty of 20 years imprisonment, while Geraldo Rivera tweeted that President Biden should pardon Trump in exchange for his agreement to drop out of the presidential race. While I highly doubt either of those outcomes will result, if Trump is convicted, is there a law that empowers the judge to bar Trump from EVER running for office again in lieu of a prison term? I think tens of millions Americans, including myself, would be satisfied with that penalty which is the next best thing to NEVER hearing from Trump again!
As Asha wrote, there are no restrictions for ppl running for prez or being prez even if they are indicted or convicted. And your creative solutions sound like they run very contrary to rule of law concepts and processes, but i'm not sure
When has trump ever honored a contract, anyway? But on the note of pardons, it would be nice if Biden pardoned all of the dupes whom trump has used to commit the crimes to which he never, ever is held accountable.
Totally disagree, they made a conscious choice to believe TFG. If we pardon everyone who made a bad decision, there would be no one in prison. The idea is to keep people from making bad decisions.
Congratulations Asha on your ABC News Legal Consultant Gig!!!!!!!
They are lucky to have you, Asha😊
They are lucky to have you, Asha!!
Stay safe and stay strong!!
Freedom and Democracy is on the offensive for once. We shall not stop defending USA - Rule of Law - Democracy. Trump & his mindless supporters are forced by facts on the ground IE the Indictment to think again and that’s good.
All Honor and Respect to the Defenders of Rule of Law! 🇺🇸🙏
Yes Excellent Point!! I saw Kirsten Powers on a cnn panel yesterday making this profound observation but they did not get it. They seem to be uninterested in what their guest attendee subject matter experts say. They just quickly move to ask another question. In my fumble opinion trump feeds off of public attention on him no matter positive or negative. He is almost like no human center whatsoever - no values - no principles - no beliefs - no morals - strictly transactional - you do this for me and I pay you x dollars or provide some other payoff. We in the USA are not at all understanding of this yet I heard David Sanger this morning on npr commenting “well at least the classified NATSEC docs have been returned to the Nara archives” as if the Russians North Koreans others have not already paid a trip to Mara Lago parking their boat at the tunnel leading into the bowels of Mara Lago and paid the fee tk take iPhone photos of the docs of their interest. I am Damn concerned for the future of our Democracy. When the leaders of our Rule of Law don’t seem to get it well it’s disturbing. Stay strong all!!
perfect point re Sanger's comment and how utterly irrelevant it is to the actual potential damage done, and future damage can occurr if any already taken data is later sold to bad actors. Ppl just don't seem to grasp the quite possibly extreme risks we will face over the next decade, even if just one detail was obtained.
Listening to It's Complicated Episode 28. This leads me to a question, Asha, do you still have your mind? I've heard two explanations (as to why Judge Cannon). (1) Her past connection to the process (though - given her rulings - that would seem almost more disqualifying to me) and (2) dumb luck. Whatever the reason, though I've not lost my mind, I am beside myself (my Brit friend would say incandescent with rage) that this has happened and how it could/will impact the trial and the rule of law.
I haven't listened to Episode 28 yet, but, FWIW, I heard Stephanie Pell, a former federal prosecutor in the Southern District of FL on Lawfare Live yesterday. She said two things about the assignment of the judge. One was that it was likely not that her previous case was related cause it was too long ago. The second is that until we know more about it, it was, as you put it, dumb luck.
Yes. I also heard that Smith can request a different judge. It’s a routine option at the start if the person shows a valid reason and this is valid in my view. No harm no fuss they can select a different judge.
From Slate: Smith, for his part, has the option of requesting a different judge; 11th Circuit precedent allows reassignment when the presiding judge appears unable to put “previous views and findings aside.” (This is a nice way of saying that they’re in the tank for the defendant.) Trump would surely fight such a request, and it’s impossible to say where the 11th Circuit would come down.
Thank you, Ms. Rangappa, for helping us to understanding what is going on related to the TFG's crimes and grift. Let's hope many more get the memo and turn out in 2024 and make sure he never gets close to the WH again.
How can anyone still take the WSJ Editorial Board seriously? I rarely read it, but they say: "But it’s striking, and legally notable, that the indictment never mentions the Presidential Records Act (PRA) that allows a President access to documents, both classified and unclassified, once he leaves office. It allows for good-faith negotiation with the National Archives. Yet the indictment assumes that Mr. Trump had no right to take any classified documents." What? Upon Trump's leaving office, custody of all documents went to NARA under 44 U.S.C sec 2203 (g)(1): "Upon the conclusion of a President's term of office...the Archivist of the United States shall assume responsibility for the custody, control, and preservation of, and access to, the Presidential records of that President." Nothing about "it allows for good-faith negotiation." In any event, NARA did engage in plenty of negotiation. And Parlatore was out lying about how the Archivists were negligent in not establishing a repository to let Trump have 2 years to go through the docs. But that's only true when a former President informs NARA that he intends to build a Presidential library, which Trump did not do. https://www.cnn.com/2023/06/09/politics/national-archives-refutes-trump-claim-classified-documents-indictment/index.html
I do not know the relevant law, but is that not disingenuous on the part of the WSJ? Sounds more to me like mashing together the fact that former officials retain security clearances. I'm sure it's not in there that those docs can simply be stored in your shower.
A formal library would never cross trump's mind. Where's the chaos in that?
You have to wonder if Trump was so loose with confidential documents after he was no longer President, how many secrets did he share during his term. He seems like the type who wants to share secrets so that people know he is important.
yes, but he's likely even much more strongly motivated by the ability to trade info for access for his business. It was/is potentially the first really serious easy money he would ever have access to. For those that don't understand his business, it's been an exceedingly fraught and slow growing business that needs access to locales, etc, namely outside the U.S. (my ltd understanding of Trump Inc's real estate biz model is a bit like being the AirbNb version of Mariott lux hotels, whatever that really means. (Tom Barack said it once). Sounds pretty bottom-feeder to me, from a financial angle.)
So glad that I have been following you for quite some time. Your fabulously clear explanations of complex issues make me feel at least halfway on top of things. Keep up the good work!
Looks like the ink is dry. Congrats on ABC!
Also... If he wins the nomination, doesn’t he get intelligence briefings ahead of a possible transition? So while on trial for violations of the Espionage Act, he will be privy to classified information once again?
I still can't wrap my head around a third-world country allowing an indicted criminal to be nominated, elected and installed as its leader -- let alone the USA not disqualifying said person on these circumstances.
Berlusconi’s body is still warm, friend. (Elected to Senate, but still.)
Asha, and happy weekend to you. Congratulations on the more permanent/predictable gig with ABC. How is Pancake dealing with his target letter?
Now I’ll catch up on It’s Complicated. Cheers!
Congratulations on ABC News!
Happy Indictment Weekend! I sat up until 3am listening to the It's Complicated broadcast on the Indictments. No time for sleep 😂😂😂BTW... Also I went ahead and took the Enneagram test and got The Achiever. 💪
Thanatos dies with sunshine.
Wolf Blitzer tweeted that Trump’s indictment carries a maximum penalty of 20 years imprisonment, while Geraldo Rivera tweeted that President Biden should pardon Trump in exchange for his agreement to drop out of the presidential race. While I highly doubt either of those outcomes will result, if Trump is convicted, is there a law that empowers the judge to bar Trump from EVER running for office again in lieu of a prison term? I think tens of millions Americans, including myself, would be satisfied with that penalty which is the next best thing to NEVER hearing from Trump again!
As Asha wrote, there are no restrictions for ppl running for prez or being prez even if they are indicted or convicted. And your creative solutions sound like they run very contrary to rule of law concepts and processes, but i'm not sure
When has trump ever honored a contract, anyway? But on the note of pardons, it would be nice if Biden pardoned all of the dupes whom trump has used to commit the crimes to which he never, ever is held accountable.
Totally disagree, they made a conscious choice to believe TFG. If we pardon everyone who made a bad decision, there would be no one in prison. The idea is to keep people from making bad decisions.
Happy Indictment Weekend to all!!👍🇺🇸
Congratulations Asha on your ABC News Legal Consultant Gig!!!!!!!
They are lucky to have you, Asha😊
They are lucky to have you, Asha!!
Stay safe and stay strong!!
Freedom and Democracy is on the offensive for once. We shall not stop defending USA - Rule of Law - Democracy. Trump & his mindless supporters are forced by facts on the ground IE the Indictment to think again and that’s good.
All Honor and Respect to the Defenders of Rule of Law! 🇺🇸🙏
disappointing how much vid time showing duffer don. free campaign publicity
Yes Excellent Point!! I saw Kirsten Powers on a cnn panel yesterday making this profound observation but they did not get it. They seem to be uninterested in what their guest attendee subject matter experts say. They just quickly move to ask another question. In my fumble opinion trump feeds off of public attention on him no matter positive or negative. He is almost like no human center whatsoever - no values - no principles - no beliefs - no morals - strictly transactional - you do this for me and I pay you x dollars or provide some other payoff. We in the USA are not at all understanding of this yet I heard David Sanger this morning on npr commenting “well at least the classified NATSEC docs have been returned to the Nara archives” as if the Russians North Koreans others have not already paid a trip to Mara Lago parking their boat at the tunnel leading into the bowels of Mara Lago and paid the fee tk take iPhone photos of the docs of their interest. I am Damn concerned for the future of our Democracy. When the leaders of our Rule of Law don’t seem to get it well it’s disturbing. Stay strong all!!
perfect point re Sanger's comment and how utterly irrelevant it is to the actual potential damage done, and future damage can occurr if any already taken data is later sold to bad actors. Ppl just don't seem to grasp the quite possibly extreme risks we will face over the next decade, even if just one detail was obtained.
The recording cut off before we got to hear what Comey said! What was it?
Pretty wild…Brian saying CIA counsel knew ahead of election night that Trump would win—holy hell, drunken Rangappa, good night😘
Listening to It's Complicated Episode 28. This leads me to a question, Asha, do you still have your mind? I've heard two explanations (as to why Judge Cannon). (1) Her past connection to the process (though - given her rulings - that would seem almost more disqualifying to me) and (2) dumb luck. Whatever the reason, though I've not lost my mind, I am beside myself (my Brit friend would say incandescent with rage) that this has happened and how it could/will impact the trial and the rule of law.
I haven't listened to Episode 28 yet, but, FWIW, I heard Stephanie Pell, a former federal prosecutor in the Southern District of FL on Lawfare Live yesterday. She said two things about the assignment of the judge. One was that it was likely not that her previous case was related cause it was too long ago. The second is that until we know more about it, it was, as you put it, dumb luck.
Yes. I also heard that Smith can request a different judge. It’s a routine option at the start if the person shows a valid reason and this is valid in my view. No harm no fuss they can select a different judge.
From Slate: Smith, for his part, has the option of requesting a different judge; 11th Circuit precedent allows reassignment when the presiding judge appears unable to put “previous views and findings aside.” (This is a nice way of saying that they’re in the tank for the defendant.) Trump would surely fight such a request, and it’s impossible to say where the 11th Circuit would come down.
Enjoy the overseas trip!
Thank you, Ms. Rangappa, for helping us to understanding what is going on related to the TFG's crimes and grift. Let's hope many more get the memo and turn out in 2024 and make sure he never gets close to the WH again.