BOMBSHELL: FBI Staged Fake Photo of Classified Documents for PR Purposes

[JimL]

He STOLE them!

Yes as in swiped, past tense of steal, he he stole them.

A) I'm not a Republican

I don't believe I said anything about your political affiliation. If I were to I'd define you more by the term Trumpster.

2) Jim, if you want to actually engage the thread topic, you can stay, but take your psychotic and delusional TDS crap elsewhere.

I did engage in the topic. I answered directly to a question posed by Sparko regarding the purpose of the trial..

Are you against free speech as well CP?

[Cow Poke]

I did engage in the topic. I answered directly to a question posed by Sparko regarding the purpose of the trial..

It's your psychotic TDS crap I'm objecting to, Jim - stop it or leave.

[seer]

Why would you want the trial put off until after the election which means there will be no trial at all?

So he wins...We don't need another Kangaroo court...

[Cow Poke]

I see you added this after I responded, Jim....

...Are you against free speech as well CP?

I withdraw my objection - feel free to continue to show what an incredibly stupid and Trump-deranged goofus you are.

[seer]

No, the trial being before the election is to inform the electorate whether they are voting for a criminal who stole classified documents, had his minions hide those documents, lied to and obstructed the FBI's attempt to retrieve them and also knowingly shared (recorded on tape) classified secrets with others.
There are those here of course who would still vote for him, as we know he tried to overthrow an election and they would still vote for the treasonous ex-president, but there are those supporters of his who still care about truth and people should know for certain whether he's guilty or not before casting their vote. I understand that doesn't apply to the CP's, MM's Ronson's, seer's and many others here, but not all republicans have lost their minds completely.

[JimL]

It's your psychotic TDS crap I'm objecting to, Jim - stop it or leave.

Psychotic tds stuff is your own definition of what? That I say Trump is treasonous, that I call his supporters Trumpster's? Is that what you're saying that I can't say. But you can call democrats pinko commie Marxist and so on. Is that the kind of thing you're saying you can say but others can't say?

[Cow Poke]

Psychotic tds stuff is your own definition of what? That I say Trump is treasonous, that I call his supporters Trumpster's? Is that what you're saying that I can't say. But you can call democrats pinko commie Marxist and so on. Is that the kind of thing you're saying you can say but others can't say?

Not playing, Jim. I withdrew my objection.

[RumTumTugger]

Well, the handling of evidence in Washington DC certainly doesn't impact the collection of evidence in Palm Beach, FL so that's out as an issue here. It may have some value for Trump's defense down the road if the defense can convincingly assert that document order in a particular box is relevant and that order was significantly mismanaged at collection. But that hasn't happened yet.
Here, you're arguing that Trump kept these highly-classified documents in a secure location. Aside from being irrelevant (he didn't have a right to possess the documents at all), there is nothing to suggest, from this photo or otherwise, that documents were moved from one room to another during collection before being identified.
So we've got a series of non sequiturs in service of a predetermined conclusion. Personally, I doubt even Judge Cannon is going to go for that when and if these matters come to a point of ruling and I've yet to see anyone even try to explain why the preservation of document order, in this case, is important.
In the Hur investigation of Biden, document order actually was important to Hur's case, as he alleged that Biden personally curated the contents of containers. No one here has yet complained that Hur's team mishandling the order in those containers invalidates the investigation, let alone proves that the investigation was a frame-up. In the Mar-a-Lago case, document order isn't nearly as important, as the prosecution only needs to show that Trump possessed these documents, knew of their existence at Mar-a-Lago, and refused to return them.
-Sam

Let me put this as simply as possible for you screwing up the chain of custody in handling the evidence, which the FBI admitted it did. is the same as the same tainting it and tends to get such evidence termed as unusable in a trial. For example lets take The O.J Simpson trial the police were only accused by the defense taunting of of the DNA evidence and the prosecution could not prove they didn't taunt because they it so the judge ruled the DNA as inadmissible, it could not even be mentioned during the trial and O.J. got off. Notice the defence did not to prove the accusation of such taunting the prosecution, because of the mishandling of the DNA evidence could not prove that it didn't get taunted in some way. Here we have the FBI admitting they mishandled/taunted the evidence after they took it Washington D.C. and you are saying it does not matter because it was not in Florida it happened?

As for bringing you up Biden who the Democrats and the left treat as if he is above the law I'll let others handle that non sequitur. We are talking about the FBI 's admitting the mis handling the evidence regarding.

[JimL]

So he wins...We don't need another Kangaroo court...

Yes, so everything is a kangaroo court when it comes to your cult leader. But the ridiculous years long republican investigation into Biden which never comes up with any actual evidence of wrong doing on Biden's part is legit, right? The fact is that you really don't care if Trump is guilty or not, and you don't want it to get out that he is guilty because that would expose you all for the fools he's taken you for. You'd rather re-elect a treasonous ex-president than to face up to, admit to, your own stupidity for supporting the creepy old con man all these years.

[CivilDiscourse]

Let me put this as simply as possible for you screwing up the chain of custody in handling the evidence, which the FBI admitted it did. is the same as the same tainting it and tends to get such evidence termed as unusable in a trial. For example lets take The O.J Simpson trial the police were only accused by the defense taunting of of the DNA evidence and the prosecution could not prove they didn't taunt because they it so the judge ruled the DNA as inadmissible, it could not even be mentioned during the trial and O.J. got off. Notice the defence did not to prove the accusation of such taunting the prosecution, because of the mishandling of the DNA evidence could not prove that it didn't get taunted in some way. Here we have the FBI admitting they mishandled/taunted the evidence after they took it Washington D.C. and you are saying it does not matter because it was not in Florida it happened?

As for bringing you up Biden who the Democrats and the left treat as if he is above the law I'll let others handle that non sequitur. We are talking about the FBI 's admitting the mis handling the evidence regarding.

You got "tainted" auto corrected to "taunted" so many times, I'm now sitting here picturing the FBI calling the DNA Names like the toaster scene in ghostbusters 2.

[CivilDiscourse]

Yes, so everything is a kangaroo court when it comes to your cult leader. But the ridiculous years long republican investigation into Biden which never comes up with any actual evidence of wrong doing on Biden's part is legit, right? The fact is that you really don't care if Trump is guilty or not, and you don't want it to get out that he is guilty because that would expose you all for the fools he's taken you for. You'd rather re-elect a treasonous ex-president than to face up to, admit to, your own stupidity for supporting the creepy old con man all these years.

We should learn a lesson from Jim about how to treat others with Grace and Dignity.

[Sam]

Let me put this as simply as possible for you screwing up the chain of custody in handling the evidence, which the FBI admitted it did. is the same as the same tainting it and tends to get such evidence termed as unusable in a trial. For example lets take The O.J Simpson trial the police were only accused by the defense taunting of of the DNA evidence and the prosecution could not prove they didn't taunt because they it so the judge ruled the DNA as inadmissible, it could not even be mentioned during the trial and O.J. got off. Notice the defence did not to prove the accusation of such taunting the prosecution, because of the mishandling of the DNA evidence could not prove that it didn't get taunted in some way. Here we have the FBI admitting they mishandled/taunted the evidence after they took it Washington D.C. and you are saying it does not matter because it was not in Florida it happened?

As for bringing you up Biden who the Democrats and the left treat as if he is above the law I'll let others handle that non sequitur. We are talking about the FBI 's admitting the mis handling the evidence regarding.

Non sequiturs are conclusions which don't follow from their premises or, more loosely, non-applicable points of comparison. In this case, noting that the Hur investigation suffers from the same "reshuffling" problem as is being highlighted here is not a non sequitur or red herring but a proper point of comparison: if the people complaining about that mishandling of documents as a fatal error on the part of the prosecution in Trump's case, they are obliged to treat it as such in Biden's case. They have not done so date and you do not do so here.

I've mentioned that the documents at issue in regards to mismatched placeholders may well not be usable by the prosecution. As already mentioned, however, those documents represent a fraction of the recovered classified material. The prosecution has documents to spare, as it were. So the idea that the whole case must be dismissed over documents that were, at some point during review, reshuffled or a handful of documents not being matched to their placeholders just isn't grounded in reality.

Now, Judge Cannon has made a point of not grounding this case in reality — at least not until the point of reversal by higher court — but, as I understand it, one of the reasons that the prosecution is asking for explicit rulings now is precisely to preserve the ability to appeal. So even if Cannon were to grant a dismissal, she'd run a high risk of reversal by appellate court (and probably finally be booted from the case).

-Sam

[JimL]

We should learn a lesson from Jim about how to treat others with Grace and Dignity.

Well sometimes you just got to tell it like you see it. Like it is! Besides since when did you conservatives become such snowflakes. I thought us liberals were supposed to be the snowflakes.

[CivilDiscourse]

Well sometimes you just got to tell it like you see it. Like it is! Besides since when did you conservatives become such snowflakes. I thought us liberals were supposed to be the snowflakes.

Continue demonstrating how to treat others with the utmost respect. You show us all everyday how best to treat our fellow man.

[Sparko]

Sparko is saying something extremely similar to what I've been explaining so I'm not sure why you invoking me here is doing you any favors. He's wrong that this is the reason Judge Cannon provided for delaying the trial date but we're both saying that out-of-order documentation is not, as has been suggested here, a necessary problem for the prosecution, much less a fatal one. That the government cannot match all classified documents with the handwritten placeholder sheets that were used after the investigative team ran out of official sheets is a problem for those documents. But it's not a chain of custody problem and, given that the ordering of the documents is not an important aspect of the prosecution's case (that we know of), there isn't cause for a dismissal.

To reiterate from the other thread:

Source: Case 9:23-cr-80101-AMC Document 522 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/03/2024. pp. 7-8

3. Preservation of Which Boxes Contained Documents With Classification Markings

The Government has taken steps to ensure that documents and placeholders remained within the same box as when they were seized, i.e., to prevent any movement of documents from one box to another. The FBI was present when an outside vendor scanned the documents in connection with the now-closed civil case (see, e.g., Trump v. United States, Case No. 22-81294- CIV-CANNON, ECF No. 91 at 2 (requiring the Government to inventory the property seized from Mar-a-Lago); id. at ECF No. 125 at 3 (requiring the Government to “make available to Plaintiff and the Special Master copies of all Seized Materials” in electronic format by October 13, 2022)), and the boxes were kept separate during that process. When the FBI created the inventories, each inventory team worked on a single box at a time, separated from other teams. And during defense counsel’s review, any boxes open at the same time (and any personnel reviewing those boxes) were kept separate from one another. In other words, there is a clear record of which boxes contained classified documents when seized, and this information has long been in the defense’s possession, as discussed infra at 9.

4. Location of Classified Documents Within Each Box

Since the boxes were seized and stored, appropriate personnel have had access to the boxes for several reasons, including to comply with orders issued by this Court in the civil proceedings noted above, for investigative purposes, and to facilitate the defendants’ review of the boxes. The inventories and scans created during the civil proceedings were later produced in discovery in this criminal case. Because these inventories and scans were created close in time to the seizure of the documents, they are the best evidence available of the order the documents were in when seized. That said, there are some boxes where the order of items within that box is not the same as in the associated scans.3 There are several possible explanations, including the above-described instances in which the boxes were accessed, as well as the size and shape of certain items in the boxes possibly leading to movement of items. For example, the boxes contain items smaller than standard paper such as index cards, books, and stationary, which shift easily when the boxes are carried, especially because many of the boxes are not full. Regardless of the explanation, as discussed below, where precisely within a box a classified document was stored at Mar-a-Lago does not bear in any way on Nauta’s ability to file a CIPA Section 5 notice.

© Copyright Original Source

-Sam

I am not sure why the boxes of documents are even important at this point in the trial. The defense would not have access to them in the first place. They would just get the inventory list and whatever scanned documents (mostly redacted) that the government decided they could get. Once scanned, the boxes are just put in storage. If anyone were going to tamper with the documents they would tamper with them BEFORE they were scanned or tamper with the scanned versions (adding/subtracting etc) since that is all the defense would have access to. Changing the contents of the actual boxed documents after the scan would not do anything as far as I can tell.

Also, Trump admits he had classified documents, he just argues that he declassified them.