Yes, but apparently you still think that an unverified recording is legit evidence.
FBI Search and Seizure at Trump's Mar-A-Lago Residence, August 8, 2022, Case Dismissed July 15, 2024
“The Government’s Motion does not explain why filing the list with the Court is necessary; it does not offer a particularized basis to justify sealing the list from public view; it does not explain why partial sealing, redaction, or means other than sealing are unavailable or unsatisfactory; and it does not specify the duration of any proposed seal,” Cannon wrote in the order Monday.
I don’t think this is a good thing. Yeah,
transparency and all that, but these people don’t deserve to spend the next year dodging MAGAts.
CNN has the tape of Loser Donald waving around his classified documents.
MeidasTouch has a video on this now. Jack Smith basically said “Do I need to fucking spell it out?”
That recording is… even worse than what anyone could imagine.
Put a cork in that coke.
Oh my. “Isn’t that amazing? This totally wins my case, you know.” Erm…
(But I’m still a bit mind-boggled as to how so much actual and potential evidence is published and re-hashed in the media before getting anywhere near trial - our sub judice rules are AFAIK much tighter).
I will thank you not to invent things and pretend I think them.
Gotta love the part where he said “this is off the record.” He knew damn well he wasn’t supposed to be showing or discussing that material. He did it anyway.
Do we have any idea what “case” he was babbling about?
I’ve known a few reporters and press photographers in my day, and as one reporter said, “Any time you hear an interviewee say, ‘This is off the record,’ you pay careful attention, because typically, whatever they say, show, or demonstrate should be on the record. Which is where you put it.”
It was alluded to in that CNN article.
CNN has previously reported that Trump at the time was furious over a New Yorker article about Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Gen. Mark Milley that said Milley argued against striking Iran and was concerned Trump would set in motion a full-scale conflict.
In the previous CNN report linked in that quote, they also stated:
Trump was complaining in the meeting about Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Mark Milley. The meeting occurred shortly after The New Yorker published a story by Susan Glasser detailing how, in the final days of Trump’s presidency, Milley instructed the Joint Chiefs to ensure Trump issued no illegal orders and that he be informed if there was any concern.
Basically, Trump kept throwing a childish tantrum about how Mark Milley had claimed previously that Trump wanted to attack Iran, and went behind Trump’s back in telling the Joint Chiefs to check with him first before doing something crazy on Trump’s orders. (Milley thought that Trump would do something reckless, illegal, and dangerous on the way out of the White House, good thing for all of us that never happened, right? 
) Trump was using the document which reportedly had top secret information about a proposed strike against Iran to show that no, it wasn’t his plan to attack Iran, others had made that plan, and he was holding the proof.
Really, it’s the kind of thing that you’d expect someone in middle school to do; incriminate himself to show someone else up over a minor spat that he thought made him look bad.
Sure, but I think it’s more than that in this case. Saying “off the record” shows that Trump specifically wanted the conversation to be kept secret. To me, that shows evidence of intent and guilt.
Does anyone know the source of this recording; who, in the meeting, made it? Will that person have to testify to its authenticity if it’s used in the trial?
Which doesn’t exclude the possibility that he’d asked for a plan to be prepared in the first place. Or maybe there were already contingency plans in place and perhaps for other countries as well.
That’s purely speculative - but I imagine governments do it all the time: I’m sure I read somewhere that the UK military had a contingency plan for war with France even for a time in the early 1920s (there was a sticky patch in relations at the time),
I’m pretty sure I read in a military biography (can’t remember which) that there are departments of people whose job it is to game out even the most unlikely scenarios. It’s been a lot of years so my memory is vague, but I think the example given was, “Not that we’re ever going to roll tanks into Montreal, but if we had to, this is what it might look like.” Somebody in Quebec might be upset to learn this and conclude that the US “has a plan” to invade them, but that’s not really what it means at all. There are drawers and drawers full of these scenarios, on hand and ready for reference, just in case. And we assume everybody else is doing the same, and therefore this is all unremarkable.
Not that I would expect a spectacularly uninformed dummy like Trump to have any kind of awareness of the details of how the real world functions. Who knows what the hell he was waving around, or what was in the weakly flickering campfire he calls a brain as he was doing so.
We’ve had contingency plans for over a hundred years now, famously the inter-war Rainbow plans, so called because different plans for different enemies were all identified by colors.
Rainbow-5 was the one used as the overall strategy adopted during WWII and it was leaked by the Chicago Tribune and the Times Herald three days before the attack on Pearl Harbor.
The articles, both by the Tribune 's Washington correspondent, Chesly Manly, revealed plans to build a 10-million-man Army with a five-million-man expeditionary force to be sent to Europe in 1943 in order to defeat Nazi Germany.[11]
The publication ignited a storm of controversy in the U.S., with isolationist politicians claiming Roosevelt was violating his pledge to keep the country out of the European war, while Secretary of War Henry L. Stimson accused the newspapers of unpatriotic behavior and suggested it would be a dereliction of duty for the War Department not to plan for every contingency. Germany publicly ridiculed the plan the next day, doubting “whether the entire world shipping would be sufficient to transport 5,000,000 troops to Europe, much less supply them there.”[12]
Privately, the German general staff saw the publication of the plans as extremely valuable intelligence and used its threat of a five-million-man U.S. force in 1943 to argue for temporarily stalling the faltering invasion of the Soviet Union, and concentrating German forces in the west. Hitler vehemently rejected that idea. Historian Thomas Fleming suggests that Germany might have prevailed against the UK and the U.S. if he had not. The source of the leak has never been determined, with speculation listing several possibilities, including disgruntled or isolationist military officers and even President Roosevelt himself.[11][13]
It would not surprise me to learn somewhere in the bowels of the Pentagon there is a plan written by some colonel on what to do is a flying saucer lands in The Mall and Michael Rennie steps out.
It was a recording made by the writers of a book (it’s billed as a memoir) about Mark Meadows, donald’s chief of staff.
Yes, to get the recording into evidence, a person who was present when it was made (presumably one of the writers, as that staffer you hear probably won’t make for a cooperative witness) will have to testify, so as to “authenticate” the recording.
https://www.newsobserver.com/news/politics-government/article276198766.html
ETA: just an fyi, but some evidence is considered “self authenticating”. This is not an example, but that includes things like certified court documents, negotiable instruments, and newspaper articles.
Why would that publisher go to Mara Lardo in the first place? A Mark Meadows book wouldn’t sell enough copies to pay for the gas to get there. In the old days, the Party would buy up enough copies to make the NYT bestseller list. I don’t think he can count on that boost if he rats on trump.
nevermind
It came out a year and a half ago. He already grabbed his cash.
It sold 22,000 copies.
ETA, the takeaway from that headline should be the ‘flopped’ part, not the ‘cashed in’ part. Comey and Bolton’s books sold over a half million copies each.