# FBI Search and Seizure at Trump's Mar-A-Lago Residence, August 8, 2022, Case Dismissed July 15, 2024 **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Tags:** trump\ **Created:** [August 8, 2022, 11:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fbi-search-and-seizure-at-trumps-mar-a-lago-residence-august-8-2022-case-dismissed-july-15-2024/969329 "2022-08-08T23:18:32Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 299
**Author:** ![Exapno\_Mapcase](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/exapno_mapcase/32/1051_2.png) [@Exapno\_Mapcase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exapno_Mapcase)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2023, 7:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fbi-search-and-seizure-at-trumps-mar-a-lago-residence-august-8-2022-case-dismissed-july-15-2024/969329/5961 "2023-06-15T19:45:12Z")
> [@Moriarty](#): > > But she has a _lifetime_ appointment, they said…and this is her shot at becoming a _Supreme Court Justice_, they said…and she’s a _trump judge_, they said… Yeah, I keep seeing that in this thread. Does anyone other than people who are already sure she’s going to throw the match believe that she has better than a million-to-one chance at the nomination, even with a Republican president and a Republican Senate? Or that the Democrats wouldn’t filibuster her nomination and shut down the Senate until the next presidential election? There’s so much fantasy in this thread we should send it to HarperCollins and tell them that since George R.R. Martin isn’t getting his fantasy to you, here’s a million words that is wilder than anything he can dream up. ---
**Author:** ![CoolHandCox](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/coolhandcox/32/16233_2.png) [@CoolHandCox](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CoolHandCox)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2023, 7:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fbi-search-and-seizure-at-trumps-mar-a-lago-residence-august-8-2022-case-dismissed-july-15-2024/969329/5962 "2023-06-15T19:46:05Z")
re: recusal. I didn’t expect her to either, and I don’t think she should. She’s the Judge because Jack put her in play by filing in SDFL, and the luck of the draw (although a good chance it’d be her). She appears qualified, just very new. She was also appointed during Covid, so whatever lack of judicial experience she has would be influenced by that as well. She was a SDNY prosecutor from 2013 - 2020, so it’s not like she’s new to the trial process. re: recent Order. Also, I’d just add regarding the order and my previous comments about Judge/Jurors being exempt from needing clearances. That exemption doesn’t apply to Court staff who will be handling the documents. The Court staff also need clearances, and I’m guessing working through all that now. ---
**Author:** ![Atamasama](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/atamasama/32/12961_2.png) [@Atamasama](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Atamasama)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2023, 7:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fbi-search-and-seizure-at-trumps-mar-a-lago-residence-august-8-2022-case-dismissed-july-15-2024/969329/5963 "2023-06-15T19:50:52Z")
As stated earlier in this thread, that’s 14 days of experience as a **judge** in a **criminal** trial. She has handled civil cases before (as you recall, she handled the case where Trump tried to sue the government over the documents). She has a lot of experience in criminal trials as a prosecutor, and that should help serve her. Not to say I’m defending her, I don’t doubt she was the worst possible choice for this case, but it’s not as bad as that comment might sound at first. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2023, 8:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fbi-search-and-seizure-at-trumps-mar-a-lago-residence-august-8-2022-case-dismissed-july-15-2024/969329/5964 "2023-06-15T20:01:02Z")
I don’t think that her having been nominated by the defendant can be taken as grounds for recusal. After all, every judge was nominated by the defendant, by his political rivals, or by his political allies. On the other hand, she does have the appearance of impartiality (thanks to the way she previously handled matters involved in this case), and that is a valid reason for her to recuse herself. ---
**Author:** ![Great\_Antibob](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e47c2d/32.png) [@Great\_Antibob](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Great_Antibob)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2023, 8:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fbi-search-and-seizure-at-trumps-mar-a-lago-residence-august-8-2022-case-dismissed-july-15-2024/969329/5965 "2023-06-15T20:02:30Z")
> [@Moriarty](#): > > But the law says this is enough because it presumes that the political process will ensure that only qualified people (in your sense) will be both nominated and confirmed. No, the law does not presume that. The people who wrote the law presumed it and did not bother to explicitly add any additional qualifications, leaving the practical details to those who followed. That’s not a meaningless distinction. Such distinctions between the literal text of the Constitution and the intent of those who wrote it (to the extent we can determine intent from the Federalist papers and other writings from the period) have clearly had major consequences up to the current day, including in this case Federal judgeships. > [@Chronos](#): > > she does have the appearance of impartiality Guessing from context you meant ‘partiality’? ---
**Author:** ![Aspenglow](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aspenglow/32/76_2.png) [@Aspenglow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aspenglow)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2023, 8:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fbi-search-and-seizure-at-trumps-mar-a-lago-residence-august-8-2022-case-dismissed-july-15-2024/969329/5966 "2023-06-15T20:03:49Z")
I never held Cannon’s appointment against her. It was those rulings – two of them, not just one – by the Eleventh Circuit in the Special Master debacle. Those weren’t the rulings of a judge tethered to the rule of law. She swung for the fences, and the Eleventh pointed that out – twice – in their rebukes of them. I’ve worked for a fair number of judges. I’ve seen them make cringe-worthy errors. I’ve seen them brushed back by appellate courts. I’ve seen them be embarrassed by those rulings and try to improve. I’ve never seen anything as egregious as Cannon’s seemingly willful disregard for legal precedent as those rulings. She didn’t just not take the glaring hint from the Eleventh in their first ruling. She basically flipped them off, until they took her toy away in the second ruling. I hope her judicial temperament has improved in the interim. I doubt it, though she may be a little chastened by her colleagues and public opinion. We’ll see soon enough. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2023, 8:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fbi-search-and-seizure-at-trumps-mar-a-lago-residence-august-8-2022-case-dismissed-july-15-2024/969329/5967 "2023-06-15T20:06:04Z")
> [@Great\_Antibob](#): > > Guessing from context you meant ‘partiality’? Ah, yes, good catch. ---
**Author:** ![EddyTeddyFreddy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eddyteddyfreddy/32/18796_2.png) [@EddyTeddyFreddy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/EddyTeddyFreddy)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2023, 8:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fbi-search-and-seizure-at-trumps-mar-a-lago-residence-august-8-2022-case-dismissed-july-15-2024/969329/5968 "2023-06-15T20:13:03Z")
> [@Moriarty](#): > > Jack Smith (who, I heard, was glaring at donald during the arraignment) I daresay a person who’s dedicated his professional life to rooting out corruption and criminality would despise The Donald. ---
**Author:** ![Sage\_Rat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sage_rat/32/399_2.png) [@Sage\_Rat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sage_Rat)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2023, 8:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fbi-search-and-seizure-at-trumps-mar-a-lago-residence-august-8-2022-case-dismissed-july-15-2024/969329/5969 "2023-06-15T20:16:08Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > What has been interpreted by courts to mean that? Where is it guaranteed? The phrase doesn’t appear in US law. Courts don’t interpret the meaning of laws that don’t exist. In a strictly legal context, we’re guaranteed “the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed” and everything extends from the specifics of that phrase in the 6th Amendment. The phrase “a jury of your peers” is shorthand for this, that references the origin of the standard, set in the Magna Carta. ---
**Author:** ![Robot\_Arm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/robot_arm/32/18280_2.png) [@Robot\_Arm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robot_Arm)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2023, 8:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fbi-search-and-seizure-at-trumps-mar-a-lago-residence-august-8-2022-case-dismissed-july-15-2024/969329/5970 "2023-06-15T20:19:08Z")
> [@Atamasama](#): > > We’ll see if Trump asks for a 6 month extension and she says, “Yes sir, here is the Diet Coke you asked for as well sir.” With tears in her eyes? ---
**Author:** ![Aspenglow](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aspenglow/32/76_2.png) [@Aspenglow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aspenglow)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2023, 8:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fbi-search-and-seizure-at-trumps-mar-a-lago-residence-august-8-2022-case-dismissed-july-15-2024/969329/5971 "2023-06-15T20:21:02Z")
Moderating: > [@Chronos](#): > > “A jury of one’s peers” isn’t actually a thing, in the US. It is in the UK, but there it just means that nobles will be tried by nobles and commoners will be tried by commoners. The US doesn’t have that distinction. > [@EllisDee](#): > > I also feel like “jury of your peers” keeps it to average citizens, as opposed to setting up some kind of professional juror system. > [@Exapno\_Mapcase](#): > > More than a dozen cases about classified documents have been tried in the past couple of decades and I’ve never heard of any requiring jurors to have clearances first. > [@CalMeacham](#): > > [Scene: _Planet of the Apes_ (1968)] > > Taylor (Charlton Heston): I demand a trial by a jury of my peers! > [@Northern\_Piper](#): > > Trial by the House of Lords was abolished in 1948. > > [Judicial functions of the House of Lords - Wikipedia](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_functions_of_the_House_of_Lords#:~:text=to%20ameliorate%20this.-,Abolition,tried%20by%20juries%20of%20commoners). > [@Chronos](#): > > What has been interpreted by courts to mean that? Where is it guaranteed? The phrase doesn’t appear in US law. Courts don’t interpret the meaning of laws that don’t exist. > [@Stratocaster](#): > > The Sixth Amendment and its subsequent interpretations. > [@Sage\_Rat](#): > > The phrase “a jury of your peers” is shorthand for this, that references the origin of the standard, set in the Magna Carta. Let’s drop this hijack now. I’ve let it run on for awhile, and while it is a worthwhile subject for discussion, it’s much too general for this thread. If you want me to split the topic, let me know and I’ll do that. Thanks. ---
**Author:** ![Dung\_Beetle](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dung_beetle/32/7945_2.png) [@Dung\_Beetle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dung_Beetle)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2023, 8:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fbi-search-and-seizure-at-trumps-mar-a-lago-residence-august-8-2022-case-dismissed-july-15-2024/969329/5972 "2023-06-15T20:26:37Z")
> [@Moriarty](#): > > Jack Smith (who, I heard, was glaring at donald during the arraignment) I think he just has Resting Glare Face. ---
**Author:** ![Pleonast](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pleonast/32/1183_2.png) [@Pleonast](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pleonast)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2023, 8:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fbi-search-and-seizure-at-trumps-mar-a-lago-residence-august-8-2022-case-dismissed-july-15-2024/969329/5973 "2023-06-15T20:27:25Z")
> [@Moriarty](#): > > > [@Pleonast](#): > > > > up until she directs the verdict to be not guilty. > > She’d have to make findings of fact on the record. She couldn’t just dispose of the case with a bang of her gavel. “I find the evidence does not support a guilty verdict.” Bang! I don’t think she’ll actually do that; it’s my nightmare scenario. I expect she’ll simply do a poor job until she uses up the circuit’s patience and gets removed from the case. ---
**Author:** ![Ann\_Hedonia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ann_hedonia/32/319_2.png) [@Ann\_Hedonia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ann_Hedonia)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2023, 8:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fbi-search-and-seizure-at-trumps-mar-a-lago-residence-august-8-2022-case-dismissed-july-15-2024/969329/5974 "2023-06-15T20:28:48Z")
> [@CoolHandCox](#): > > Re: whether the jury will need to see the documents. Absolutely. > > The prosecution needs to prove the documents were “national defense information”. This is now a term of art that Courts have defined to mean closely held national security information, classified or not. Closely held is further defined, meaning not in the public domain or known publicly. > > So, Trump could have a top secret document, but if the public is aware of the information, then it’s not national defense information and there is no crime. For example, if I had the document Reality Winner sent to the intercept, I’m not committing espionage. It’s public info. If someone leaks the document in its entirety, the damage is done but that doesn’t mean there is no damage. But I don’t know if I agree with you about the document becoming non-sensitive just because the information in it is public. Let’s take, for example, a report by an agent working in a government office in a foreign country. The agent makes a classified report that does not name the agent. The report says “I can confirm that situations A, B and C are happening with absolute certainty, I have suspicions that situations D and E are happening but I can’t confirm 100%, and I have no idea what’s happening with situations F and G”. Now most people reading that report would not see any identifying information that could compromise the agent. But someone familiar with foreign government office the agent is embedded in, there may be a very small subset of people that would have access to full information about ABC, rumors about DE and no access to information on FG. So, in the wrong hands, the report could lead to the agent being identified. Now, even if the report is old and the ABCDEFG foreign situation is a matter of history and all the facts on the ABCDEFG situation are public, that old report could pose a danger to the agent if they are still embedded. Such is the nature of classified info, especially human intelligence. ---
**Author:** ![Son\_of\_a\_Rich](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/son_of_a_rich/32/5439_2.png) [@Son\_of\_a\_Rich](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Son_of_a_Rich)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2023, 9:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fbi-search-and-seizure-at-trumps-mar-a-lago-residence-august-8-2022-case-dismissed-july-15-2024/969329/5975 "2023-06-15T21:45:07Z")
Knowing Jack was staring at him must have made him uncomfortable AF. He probably wanted to look over so bad. ---
**Author:** ![Aspenglow](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aspenglow/32/76_2.png) [@Aspenglow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aspenglow)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2023, 9:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fbi-search-and-seizure-at-trumps-mar-a-lago-residence-august-8-2022-case-dismissed-july-15-2024/969329/5976 "2023-06-15T21:46:44Z")
If Trump never looked at Smith, how would Trump know Smith was staring at him? ---
**Author:** ![dougrb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/76d3ee/32.png) [@dougrb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dougrb)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2023, 9:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fbi-search-and-seizure-at-trumps-mar-a-lago-residence-august-8-2022-case-dismissed-july-15-2024/969329/5977 "2023-06-15T21:50:54Z")
> [@Son\_of\_a\_Rich](#): > > He probably wanted to look over so bad. [https://www.politicalflare.com/2023/06/jack-smith-stared-at-trump-throughout-hearing-but-cowardly-trump-refused-to-ever-look-back-at-smith/](https://www.politicalflare.com/2023/06/jack-smith-stared-at-trump-throughout-hearing-but-cowardly-trump-refused-to-ever-look-back-at-smith/) ---
**Author:** ![JKellyMap](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jkellymap/32/15880_2.png) [@JKellyMap](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JKellyMap)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2023, 10:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fbi-search-and-seizure-at-trumps-mar-a-lago-residence-august-8-2022-case-dismissed-july-15-2024/969329/5978 "2023-06-15T22:08:09Z")
> [@Son\_of\_a\_Rich](#): > > Maybe she’ll inadvertently fuck up in Biden’s favor 🙂 I agree with the sentiment (hoping she’ll make a mistake that further damages Trump’s chances of being found not guilty) — and agree it could happen — but please, let’s not ever describe this case as “Biden v. Trump.” It’s “Trump v. the People of the United States of America.” Not just technically, but in its very essence. ---
**Author:** ![PhillyGuy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ed655f/32.png) [@PhillyGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PhillyGuy)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2023, 10:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fbi-search-and-seizure-at-trumps-mar-a-lago-residence-august-8-2022-case-dismissed-july-15-2024/969329/5979 "2023-06-15T22:17:11Z")
> [@"Ann\_Hedonia](#): > > But I don’t know if I agree with you about the document becoming non-sensitive just because the information in it is public. Suppose it’s about a plan bring hatched with the Israelis to bomb Iran. And the plan was reported on Politico. I’d say it depends on whether the Politico story ran before or after Trump waved the document around. If I was on the jury, I would want to be very sure it was a real secret before sending someone to prison for violating the Espionage Act. Then, you guys might not want me on this particular jury. I’m more outraged about him trying to steal the election — especially directly with the Georgia call, but also, indirectly, by illegally paying off a porn star to remain silent. ---
**Author:** ![ThelmaLou](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thelmalou/32/390_2.png) [@ThelmaLou](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ThelmaLou)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2023, 10:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fbi-search-and-seizure-at-trumps-mar-a-lago-residence-august-8-2022-case-dismissed-july-15-2024/969329/5980 "2023-06-15T22:19:49Z")
Chameleon eyes? > Chameleons can move their eyes completely independently of one another. **They can see in almost any direction** , giving them almost 360° vision. Their divergent, constantly shifting eyes coupled with their strange swaying movement give chameleons a peculiarly neurotic air. > > [Source](https://www.opticianonline.net/content/features/animal-vision-seeing-in-all-directions/) The “neurotic air” part fits, too. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fbi-search-and-seizure-at-trumps-mar-a-lago-residence-august-8-2022-case-dismissed-july-15-2024/969329.md?page=298) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fbi-search-and-seizure-at-trumps-mar-a-lago-residence-august-8-2022-case-dismissed-july-15-2024/969329.md?page=300)