It would be a super invasive violation of people's privacy. The whole data brokering business is sketchy. Supposedly it's not hard to go from this sort of data to IDing people though.
Mike Lindell was nearly bankrupted
Wasn't this from civil suits, not prosecutions?
I guess [Trump] assumed, and I would have thought, that I would have looked at putting into effect a provision of 13848 that would have allowed the machines to be secured in four or five states or cities," Powell said, referring to a draft executive order Trump considered signing, but did not, that would have given the Director of National Intelligence the ability to conduct an assessment of any information indicating that a .......
I think this is not about the EO itself, but a course of action based on this EO.
There's been other reporting that talks about this draft that Trump did not put into action and I think it's referring to that
They pleaded guilty last month.
That means the prosecutors have had to turn this evidence over to the other defendants as part of discovery.
This type of stuff most likely comes from the defense counsel. There's lots of reasons to get this stuff out early
ABC News has obtained portions of videos of the proffer sessions of both Ellis and Sidney Powell, two attorneys who aided Trump's efforts to overturn the election. The videos for the first time reveal details of what they have told law enforcement since agreeing to cooperate last month in the district attorney's election interference case.
Ellis, in her proffer session, informed prosecutors that senior Trump White House official Dan Scavino told her "the boss" would refuse to leave the White House despite losing the election, and alluded to two other instances she said were "relevant" to prosecutors -- but appeared to be prevented from disclosing those in the video portions obtained by ABC News due to attorney-client privilege, which hindered portions of her proffer.
Powell, meanwhile, explained to prosecutors her plans for seizing voting machines nationwide and claimed that she frequently communicated with Trump during her efforts to overturn the 2020 election -- though both now claim she was never his attorney.
In the session, Powell reiterated the false assertion that Trump won the election -- but acknowledged in the video that she didn't know much about election law to begin with.
"Did I know anything about election law? No," she told Fulton County prosecutors. "But I understand fraud from having been a prosecutor for 10 years, and knew generally what the fraud suit should be if the evidence showed what I thought it showed.
Have the 2000 mules producers said this?
I don't think they are even claiming this.
They bought cell phone location data from a data broker. Anonymized cell phone data.
So they would have to deanonymize it somehow.
There's no footage from Arizona in 2000 Mules I believe. I think it's all from the GA senate elections in 2021. And there's some dramatic reenactments.
The AZ thing was completely separate from the movie.
The filmmakers LATER claimed a fraud case in Yuma Arizona was due to the movie, but the Sheriff said this wasn't so. Here's the details of the case.
First off, it was a local primary election. Not the General Election for president. It was in San Luis, Arizona, a town of 37,000 in Yuma county.
https://www.sanluisaz.gov/CivicAlerts.aspx?AID=430&ARC=769
San Luis, Arizona — The City of San Luis held its primary election on Tuesday, August 4, 2020, where voters had their first opportunity of this election cycle to elect candidates for three at-large seats on the City Council amongst other county and state offices.
You can see here to see no presidential elections were part of this election. Look for Yuma County https://azsos.gov/sites/default/files/2020_Primary_Canvass.pdf
Secondly it didn't involve paid mules, it involved the ex-mayor of the town and a friend of hers. 4 ballots were involved.
https://www.azag.gov/press-release/yuma-county-women-sentenced-their-roles-ballot-harvesting-scheme
Third she was arrested and indicted way years before 2000 Mules was made. She was arrested shortly after this election in 2020 and 2000 Mules came out in May 2022.
is this for speciality models? looking it up Ford was only making 500 GTs
it's for the first year, so it might be about folks flipping the truck. Like sneakers or something.
Trump's Tax Lawyer Sherri Dillon is now testifying.
Don Jr is off the stand.
Gave a history of the Trump Organization. Covered a lot of properties that are not part of the case. Trump lawyers introduced Trump Marketing Material and Promotions as evidence. AG lawyers objected, but the judge let the evidence saying there's no jury involved, so it won't be an issue. Over 100 Trump slides of property were part of testimony.
Cross examination was just two questions about recent news in the Trump businesses
Don Jr brought up Trump International Hotel in Waikiki, Hawaii, saying it was one of the "most successful" real estate projects in the state's history. The AG brought up the new that just happened today.
The owner of the Trump International Hotel Waikiki is rebranding the property, buying out a licensing agreement with the former US president’s company and joining Hilton Worldwide Holdings Inc.’s system
Trump had also mentioned 40 Wall Street. The AG mentioned its occupancy rate has dropped and it was placed on a lender's watchlist
https://therealdeal.com/new-york/2023/02/13/trumps-40-wall-street-on-lender-watchlist/
The mortgage was moved to a special service early this week. https://commercialobserver.com/2023/11/40-wall-street-transfers-to-special-servicing-amid-trump-fraud-trial/
or even worth news.
you're joking right?
Do know know another car company that doesn't let you sell your own car?
Is also newsworthy because lots of people won't read the entire legal papers.
Out lived just means you are still alive
Children repeatedly that live their parents.
Seems like we are both right
She never said those things publicly.
Mary taped her.
Though Barry never spoke publicly about disagreements with her brother, audio excerpts from conversations between Barry and her niece, Mary Trump, obtained by CNN in 2020 unveiled Barry delivering sharp criticism of the then commander-in-chief. The Washington Post first obtained the previously unreleased transcripts and audio from Mary Trump
When?
You might be thinking of his niece.
Mary Trump. Similar name.
Which probably means the one guy looks somewhere between the two.
Far too young to be the Podesta too
The witnesses have described the man in the e-fit as being white, aged between 20 and 40, clean shaven, with short brown hair, and of a medium build and medium height
How is this "undeniable proof of rigging?"
It's a bunch of Democrats in a local primary.
In 2022.
One person walks by a couple.
The couple works with a sketch artist individually. Based on their individual descriptions two separate sketches are created.
Two separate sketches of the same person.
It's still only one person. Not two.
The man pictured in two e-fits released by police investigating the Madeleine McCann case was “seen carrying a child” on the night she disappeared, investigators have said.
The images, showing the same man, are based on two eye-witness reports from that night on 3 May 2007, and had never been released to the public until now. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/madeleine-mccann-search-man-pictured-in-two-police-efits-was-seen-carrying-child-on-night-madeleine-disappeared-8879621.html
But the John sketch is of the same person as the Tony sketch.
It's two sketches of the same suspect.
One man walked passed a couple.....the man described him one way, the woman described him a different way.
It was a counting place. Not a polling place. Look at the top of the document.
Central Count
Wisconsin law allows for this
to provide for the adjournment of the canvass to one or more central counting locations
Weren't the eFit sketches only of one person.
Just two people saw the One suspect and each described the one suspect differently? One sketch looked thinner than the other, but it was never two people, right?
You completely ignored the important points I made.
Again this is what I was asking about. What did I ignore?.. if you want me to address them, let me know what they are.
I suspect it's the part you disagree with.
I disagree with your legacy news sounding talking points. I'm not buying your talking points
This is not helpful. I linked to a lot of primary sources. If you think I got facts wrong, point them out.
You keep ignoring the most important points made in my last two posts. How come?
Which points are these?
I think I addressed the main legal issues. And I explained which issues don't apply.
Obama and Clinton to name a few ex-presidents that have plenty of government classified documents.
I'm not sure what you are talking about here. I don't think this is true
The court has ruled that the president when leaving office has the benefit of the doubt of having declassified any records he takes with him.
This is not true. I think you are confusing this with something else.
You seem to forget how our courts work though, it isn't the defendant that has the burden of proving his innocence, it's the other way around.
These documents are marked as classified. This is "prima facie" evidence they are classified. So Trump will need to counter this evidence.
In fact this has already came up in court last year.
"If the government gives me prima facie evidence (a legal term meaning a fact presumed to be true unless disproved) that this is classified, and you decide not to advance a claim of declassification ... as far as I'm concerned that's the end of it," Dearie told Trump's lawyers in his first public hearing on the matter.
Trump has shown an official dated letter of an EO declassifying the documents.
This is exactly the type evidence Trump will need to provide.
However, I believe the documents he did declassify related to the Crossfire Hurricane investigation. None of those documents are the ones in the Indictment.
Even if 'some how' Trump had classified documents, which IMHO is automatically declassified when he left office, the evidence shows that he had the security clearance to have them up to after the MAL FBI raid.
Automatic declassification is not a thing. Your opinion or my opinion about it doesn't matter.
The security clearance is not an issue. The issue is the documents were subpoenaed and he didn't return them. That's what he is charged with
The charges would be the same if he had a clearance. Remember General Petraeus ? He had a clearance when he was convicted.
So the process here is any of the top, top secret evidence will be presented as a redacted summary.
The judge gets to see the evidence and see the defense's (Trump's ) argument.
She then will rule if the redactions are ok
This standard under the Classified Information Procedures Act
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18a/compiledact-96-456/section-4
The court, upon a sufficient showing, may authorize the United States to delete specified items of classified information from documents to be made available to the defendant through discovery under the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, to substitute a summary of the information for such classified documents, or to substitute a statement admitting relevant facts that the classified information would tend to prove.
Space Force
We have some idea of the 32 documents involved in this case. None involve the Space Force.
through the looking glass is a very common phrase.
It's the Second Book is the Alice in Wonderland series. So White Rabbit, down the rabbit hole, all come from the same place.