The guys from Beakins Moving & Storage aren’t the ones who ignored the Subpoena though.
[SEGUE]
The empty file folders … for me … yeah, not so much. My mother’s an inveterate reader and still loves her hardcover books. She always has a drawer full of dust jackets, though, because she takes them off while she’s reading the book.
The dust jackets being in a drawer, though, doesn’t guarantee that she sold the actual volumes to North Korea.
Maybe she did, and maybe the empty file folders at MAL do correspond to documents illegally transferred out of his possession.
But I don’t think it’s a given. They could match up with documents also found at MAL.
This is like Ray Liotta in Goodfellas franticly searching for this coke stash so he can get some money to go on the run. Right after the cops busted him. I’m think Melania flushed them all down the toilet.
Only the most incompetent prosecutor could screw this up. Trump has left a veritable Mount Everest of evidence lying out in plain sight for years. You’d have to be a blindfolded Three Stooges prosecutor to not get this done.
I wouldn’t think that amounted to probable cause. DOJ has to have sworn evidence to believe that the missing property will be found in the location to be searched. That means they need something more than: “It’s missing, and he has another property.”
Maybe he sold the car.
Maybe he gave it to one of his kids.
Maybe it’s in a garage that no-one knows about.
Maybe he sent it to a wrecker and it doesn’t exist anymore; been stripped for parts.
DOJ needs a witness of some sort to say that the missing car is in garage located at property B. Maybe the witness heard him say that’s where it is. Maybe they peeked in the window and saw it. Maybe they saw his son-in-law drive the car into the garage.
That’s what probable cause is, to convince a federal magistrate judge that a warrant should issue.
And, it has to be relatively recent. “I saw the car in the garage on property B back in February” wouldn’t cut it. Cars are mobile; small property even more so.
The 4th Amendment imposes strict standards for search warrants, derived from the common law.
How do you know the folders had documents in them? Others Dopers who have personal experience with classified documents have posted up-thread that folders and cover sheets can be kept in supply cabinets, or just photocopied. And, documents can be taken out of the covers, and returned to the person doing the briefing, or shredded, or sold (worst case), or stolen by foreign agents after their round of golf (worster case).
How do you know that he stole documents, rather than it just being an accident when moving? How do you know that the documents are at B or C? DOJ can’t just get a warrant to cover every property that the target owns. That’s a fishing trip, and not allowed. There has to be something substantial to support the conclusion that the documents will be at B or C. Maybe testimony from another golfer, who says that the target showed them the docs. Or testimony from housekeeping, who say them on the target’s desk regularly. Or testimony from someone who thinks they’re at risk from their personal involvement, and are willing to flip. DOJ needs something more than “docs are missing, and he owns property at B or C, so give us permission to search B and C.”
I dont understand why the empty covers would matter so much. If he sold secret documents to someone, wouldnt he simply give them a copy? Why would the foreign power (for instance) need the original documents? Isnt the information the key part, so that a copy of the information would suffice?
Same goes for any intruders into MarALago who wanted the documents, they would surely just take snapshots of the documents so that nobody was the wiser about their theft? The documents would never dissapear?
So those empty folders must have another explanation as far as i can see.
(Oh edited to add): Perhaps those empty folders were taken by Donald because he beleived they contained something? Maybe he only read the headline on the cover and took whatever he fancied, whithout checking each and every one?
Assuming they were empty, never-used folders, he may have grabbed a stack of them to put papers into to impress the people he wants money from. Like when he would sign blank papers for the camera, claiming they were legislation.
On the Probable Cause thing … aside from the whole IANAL thing, I truly can’t speculate on which way an application would go, but … to quote the Congressional Research article that I linked to in post #2650 above:
That sounds like the kind of bar that I could clear with a running start.
I can easily imagine why/how this could happen. First the why. I think even Trump is smart enough to know that he can’t publicly display or give away actual secret documents, but he can and did with the folders (posted above). So I could easily imagine him wanting a bunch of the folders to give to VIP visitors, display in his various establishments, raffle off to his supporters, or simply sell on ebay.
As to the how, based on some of the other posts it sounds like among those who work with secret documents, these folders are almost like stationary. He could have seen a pile on the way out of a secret meeting and grabbed a handful. He could have asked an underling to get him a pile to take home, it could be that every time he was handed a secret document in a folder he walked off with the folder. Who’s going to stop him. He’s the president if he wants some folders as a souvenir, he’s welcome to them.
Does the how matter? He was repeatedly informed that he was unauthorized to be in possession of the documents and he repeatedly misled and stonewalled government officials trying to reclaim them.
No doubt. He’s clearly guilty of violating all sorts of laws based on the documents they did find. I’m just staying that the presence of empty folders may not have contained additional documents that he stole.
Big, strong, manly moving men (really just the toughest guys), with tears in their eyes asked "President Cheetoface? Sir? Are these classified documents supposed to go with you?”
Or, do we wait because indicting him now will rile up his base, causing more of them to vote. If Trump isn’t indicted until after the elections, we may get a higher percentage of sane votes.
