(08-29-2023 02:49 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  lol---and yet we still have people here who think this prosecution isn't political.

Whether they choose to admit it or not, they know it’s political. They may be able to lie to everyone but they can’t lie to themselves.

You will be surprised at what hatred can do to a persons common sense or the way they see the law. So in this case and just about everything else when it comes to Trump....

they do believe the lies and never question them. Change the name to almost any other person they would go "wow, can't believe this" Or "this isnt the system I know"

(08-29-2023 07:59 PM)WKUYG Wrote:  You will be surprised at what hatred can do to a persons common sense or the way they see the law. So in this case and just about everything else when it comes to Trump....

they do believe the lies and never question them. Change the name to almost any other person they would go "wow, can't believe this" Or "this isnt the system I know"

Are we just suppposed to wait until 2026 as Trumps’s lawyer requested? What other case have been given that amount of time?

(08-29-2023 08:14 PM)Mr_XcentricK Wrote:  

(08-29-2023 07:59 PM)WKUYG Wrote:  You will be surprised at what hatred can do to a persons common sense or the way they see the law. So in this case and just about everything else when it comes to Trump....

they do believe the lies and never question them. Change the name to almost any other person they would go "wow, can't believe this" Or "this isnt the system I know"

Are we just suppposed to wait until 2026 as Trumps’s lawyer requested? What other case have been given that amount of time?

Jan 6th prisoners who requested a speedy trial.

(08-29-2023 08:14 PM)Mr_XcentricK Wrote:  

(08-29-2023 07:59 PM)WKUYG Wrote:  You will be surprised at what hatred can do to a persons common sense or the way they see the law. So in this case and just about everything else when it comes to Trump....

they do believe the lies and never question them. Change the name to almost any other person they would go "wow, can't believe this" Or "this isnt the system I know"

Are we just suppposed to wait until 2026 as Trumps’s lawyer requested? What other case have been given that amount of time?

There are Jan6 protestors just having their day in court as we speak — that’s about 3 years. Those cases are not nearly as complex and rife with legal challenges as this case. The defendant is the one that constitutionally has a right to a speedy trial — many wanted it and they were denied that right; here Trump doesn’t want it and yet the the judge and prosecutors are trying to rush it through at seemly record speed. Go away clown

(08-29-2023 08:28 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(08-29-2023 08:14 PM)Mr_XcentricK Wrote:  

(08-29-2023 07:59 PM)WKUYG Wrote:  You will be surprised at what hatred can do to a persons common sense or the way they see the law. So in this case and just about everything else when it comes to Trump....

they do believe the lies and never question them. Change the name to almost any other person they would go "wow, can't believe this" Or "this isnt the system I know"

Are we just suppposed to wait until 2026 as Trumps’s lawyer requested? What other case have been given that amount of time?

Jan 6th prisoners who requested a speedy trial.

1,000 people or 19. So not the same thing.

(08-29-2023 03:13 PM)tennis2k4 Wrote:  All he has are delay tactics because he knows he's guilty.

Justice in America, everyone.

(08-29-2023 07:45 PM)CardinalJim Wrote:  

(08-29-2023 02:49 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  lol---and yet we still have people here who think this prosecution isn't political.

Whether they choose to admit it or not, they know it’s political. They may be able to lie to everyone but they can’t lie to themselves.

Yeah its worse. They know and like it. They are the ones that lined the streets and waved the little swastika flags.

The issue that Chutkan points out is that the defendant has/ had access to much of the discovery all along. In much of the documents, Trump actually has the documents.

If someone in court asks for a continuance based on 'Judge, *I* have possession of too many of my own documents to review in x months' --- that would be laughed out of court.

I will grant you Smith asked for a very aggressive first date -- Jan 2.

Trump asked for a laughably long time -- 2.5 years.

The judge actually asked them in the hearing if they had *any* other position than the holistically brain dead March 2026 -- they refused.

Given the Trump intransigence on sticking with a laughably long date -- Chutkhan came down with 7 mos. The downside of requesting, and sticking to, a date that is shallowly and excessively long.

Lastly, the issue is 11 million documents. Not in anyway an insurmountable issue in the modern legal world.
Added to that --- about 3 million are Secret Service documents, probably utterly useless to either party.
But included as caution to be over-inclusive.

In addition, probably 90% are duplicates. That is a document, a witness transcript where the witness is describing the document, along with a copy of the document.

(08-29-2023 08:28 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(08-29-2023 08:14 PM)Mr_XcentricK Wrote:  

(08-29-2023 07:59 PM)WKUYG Wrote:  You will be surprised at what hatred can do to a persons common sense or the way they see the law. So in this case and just about everything else when it comes to Trump....

they do believe the lies and never question them. Change the name to almost any other person they would go "wow, can't believe this" Or "this isnt the system I know"

Are we just suppposed to wait until 2026 as Trumps’s lawyer requested? What other case have been given that amount of time?

Jan 6th prisoners who requested a speedy trial.

Precisely which J6 prisoners requested a speedy trial and were denied.

(08-29-2023 07:59 PM)WKUYG Wrote:  You will be surprised at what hatred can do to a persons common sense or the way they see the law. So in this case and just about everything else when it comes to Trump....

they do believe the lies and never question them. Change the name to almost any other person they would go "wow, can't believe this" Or "this isnt the system I know"

If anyone else tried to reject electoral votes by fiat, I would actually be supportive in finding out whether this was a criminal act.

Looks like there is a reasonable basis to do so.

Bummer.

I would support that action regardless of who the defendant would be. Imagine that.

(08-29-2023 09:59 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  The issue that Chutkan points out is that the defendant has/ had access to much of the discovery all along. In much of the documents, Trump actually has the documents.

If someone in court asks for a continuance based on 'Judge, *I* have possession of too many of my own documents to review in x months' --- that would be laughed out of court.

I will grant you Smith asked for a very aggressive first date -- Jan 2.

Trump asked for a laughably long time -- 2.5 years.

The judge actually asked them in the hearing if they had *any* other position than the holistically brain dead March 2026 -- they refused.

Given the Trump intransigence on sticking with a laughably long date -- Chutkhan came down with 7 mos. The downside of requesting, and sticking to, a date that is shallowly and excessively long.

Lastly, the issue is 11 million documents. Not in anyway an insurmountable issue in the modern legal world.
Added to that --- about 3 million are Secret Service documents, probably utterly useless to either party.
But included as caution to be over-inclusive.

In addition, probably 90% are duplicates. That is a document, a witness transcript where the witness is describing the document, along with a copy of the document.

SLURP

(08-29-2023 09:59 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  The issue that Chutkan points out is that the defendant has/ had access to much of the discovery all along. In much of the documents, Trump actually has the documents.

If someone in court asks for a continuance based on 'Judge, *I* have possession of too many of my own documents to review in x months' --- that would be laughed out of court.

I will grant you Smith asked for a very aggressive first date -- Jan 2.

Trump asked for a laughably long time -- 2.5 years.

The judge actually asked them in the hearing if they had *any* other position than the holistically brain dead March 2026 -- they refused.

Given the Trump intransigence on sticking with a laughably long date -- Chutkhan came down with 7 mos. The downside of requesting, and sticking to, a date that is shallowly and excessively long.

Lastly, the issue is 11 million documents. Not in anyway an insurmountable issue in the modern legal world.
Added to that --- about 3 million are Secret Service documents, probably utterly useless to either party.
But included as caution to be over-inclusive.

In addition, probably 90% are duplicates. That is a document, a witness transcript where the witness is describing the document, along with a copy of the document.

You know that was completely bullshite as you typed it....

you going to court with 11 million documents in this time frame because the person you are defending had those papers? You're the lawyer that is fighting the case. Not the defendant. I dont usually call you names but damn you must be a stupid ass lawyer if you would go to court without knowing what the documents the government was going to use. Just because they once were in the procession of the defendant

Do you know what every file says that you have from the last 3 years? Have you actually even read every file you have? Going by what you said, you should and shouldn't need any time to read them. Like I said hatred for Trump makes common freaking sense just go out the damn window.

If 90% are duplicates wouldn't that still be over 6 million (1.1 that were not copies and 9.9 /2)? So lets give you the 3 million SS files (still dont know how you think if the government put them in there they are useless). As for those 3 million if something came up in court and you told the judge, sorry judge I thought they were "utterly useless" so now I need time to go over over them.....

the judge would eat you alive and be thinking...dumb***. Take that 3 million out and you still have over 3 million and that is still a lot for 7 months

(08-29-2023 10:34 PM)WKUYG Wrote:  

(08-29-2023 09:59 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  The issue that Chutkan points out is that the defendant has/ had access to much of the discovery all along. In much of the documents, Trump actually has the documents.

If someone in court asks for a continuance based on 'Judge, *I* have possession of too many of my own documents to review in x months' --- that would be laughed out of court.

I will grant you Smith asked for a very aggressive first date -- Jan 2.

Trump asked for a laughably long time -- 2.5 years.

The judge actually asked them in the hearing if they had *any* other position than the holistically brain dead March 2026 -- they refused.

Given the Trump intransigence on sticking with a laughably long date -- Chutkhan came down with 7 mos. The downside of requesting, and sticking to, a date that is shallowly and excessively long.

Lastly, the issue is 11 million documents. Not in anyway an insurmountable issue in the modern legal world.
Added to that --- about 3 million are Secret Service documents, probably utterly useless to either party.
But included as caution to be over-inclusive.

In addition, probably 90% are duplicates. That is a document, a witness transcript where the witness is describing the document, along with a copy of the document.

You know that was completely bullshite as you typed it....

you going to court with 12 million documents in this time frame because the person you are defending had those papers? You're the lawyer that is fighting the case. Not the defendant. I dont usually call you names but damn you must be a stupid ass lawyer if you would go to court without knowing what the documents the government was going to use. Just because they once were in the procession of the defendant

Do you know what every file says that you have from the last 3 years? Going by what you said, you should and shouldn't need any time to read them. Like I said hatred for Trump makes common freaking sense just go out the damn window.

Its mental.

Like i said, these are the flag waving nazis.

(08-29-2023 10:03 PM)MonarchManiac Wrote:  

(08-29-2023 09:59 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  The issue that Chutkan points out is that the defendant has/ had access to much of the discovery all along. In much of the documents, Trump actually has the documents.

If someone in court asks for a continuance based on 'Judge, *I* have possession of too many of my own documents to review in x months' --- that would be laughed out of court.

I will grant you Smith asked for a very aggressive first date -- Jan 2.

Trump asked for a laughably long time -- 2.5 years.

The judge actually asked them in the hearing if they had *any* other position than the holistically brain dead March 2026 -- they refused.

Given the Trump intransigence on sticking with a laughably long date -- Chutkhan came down with 7 mos. The downside of requesting, and sticking to, a date that is shallowly and excessively long.

Lastly, the issue is 11 million documents. Not in anyway an insurmountable issue in the modern legal world.
Added to that --- about 3 million are Secret Service documents, probably utterly useless to either party.
But included as caution to be over-inclusive.

In addition, probably 90% are duplicates. That is a document, a witness transcript where the witness is describing the document, along with a copy of the document.

SLURP

Too stupid to comment on facts or on the issue, so we get the above. Awesome.

Tang why is it the responsibility for someone that hasn't been charged with a crime to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on a lawyer to go over his files just because he might be indicted? That is exactly what this judge is saying.

Also any other case this damn judge is going to tell the DA if you dont plan on using 11 million documents and want this to go to trial at a early date. Its your responsibility to cut that number down to what you are actually going to use.

You and I both know what the DA is going to say. "your honor at this time we dont know which files we will be using"

But the government and this judge expects the defendant to know that or to be versed in 11 million documents just because at some point a lot of them once belonged to Trump. Bet anything this judge can't look at what they jury is going to be told at the end of this trial today (if she had the paper in front of her) and repeat it without rereading it months later at the end of this case. Most of it she has repeated 100 times or more

(08-29-2023 10:34 PM)WKUYG Wrote:  

(08-29-2023 09:59 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  The issue that Chutkan points out is that the defendant has/ had access to much of the discovery all along. In much of the documents, Trump actually has the documents.

If someone in court asks for a continuance based on 'Judge, *I* have possession of too many of my own documents to review in x months' --- that would be laughed out of court.

I will grant you Smith asked for a very aggressive first date -- Jan 2.

Trump asked for a laughably long time -- 2.5 years.

The judge actually asked them in the hearing if they had *any* other position than the holistically brain dead March 2026 -- they refused.

Given the Trump intransigence on sticking with a laughably long date -- Chutkhan came down with 7 mos. The downside of requesting, and sticking to, a date that is shallowly and excessively long.

Lastly, the issue is 11 million documents. Not in anyway an insurmountable issue in the modern legal world.
Added to that --- about 3 million are Secret Service documents, probably utterly useless to either party.
But included as caution to be over-inclusive.

In addition, probably 90% are duplicates. That is a document, a witness transcript where the witness is describing the document, along with a copy of the document.

You know that was completely bullshite as you typed it....

you going to court with 11 million documents in this time frame because the person you are defending had those papers? You're the lawyer that is fighting the case. Not the defendant. I dont usually call you names but damn you must be a stupid ass lawyer if you would go to court without knowing what the documents the government was going to use. Just because they once were in the procession of the defendant

Do you know what every file says that you have from the last 3 years? Have you actually even read every file you have? Going by what you said, you should and shouldn't need any time to read them. Like I said hatred for Trump makes common freaking sense just go out the damn window.

If the documents are mine or I control them, I cant ***** about them, nor can I ***** about the time about them. Thems been the rules in litigation for a long, long, long time.

No matter how much you want to go name calling. But then again name calling seems to be the special place where many on this forum seem to retreat to in a blind manner. Good for you.

Quote:If 90% are duplicates wouldn't that still be over 6 million (1.1 that were not copies and 9.9 /2)?

Nope -- think multiple duplicates. That is one document for every time it is mentioned by a witness. I suspect that there are probably about 800k documents in total, plus the 3 million superfluous overproduction of all SS documents.

Modern computer discovery with imaging, search, and smart search --- very doable in the time frame. Welcome to the 20th century.

Apparently Smith has already provided pre-done search indexes on both *his* discovery, and on the public documents that he has utilized from the J6 hearings, *and* on the trump sourced documents (that is documents that were in the communication chain for Trump that hey have pulled up) for the documents by a multitude of parameters.

Quote:So lets give you the 3 million SS files (still dont know how you think if the government put them in there they are useless).

I doubt there is *anything* that is really that touches on the case at all in the SS records. Think about the charges. This is all 'Trump tried to reject electoral votes' ---

The government in criminal cases overproduces discovery. The rule is if the prosecutor doesnt turn over exculpatory evidence -- bad news for the prosecution. So when they access them, out of caution they turn them over.

Quote:As for those 3 million if something came up in court and you told the judge, sorry judge I told they were "utterly useless" so now I need time to go over over them.....

Well, Lauro can knock himself out flipping through them. Not the best use of his time I would suspect. But you keep preaching that up there, why dont you.

Quote:the judge would eat you alive and be thinking...dumb***

Considering you dont know the basics of government discovery, I would lay off the ad hom. Or continue to be an asshat pinhead. No skin off my back.

(08-29-2023 10:34 PM)WKUYG Wrote:  

(08-29-2023 09:59 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  The issue that Chutkan points out is that the defendant has/ had access to much of the discovery all along. In much of the documents, Trump actually has the documents.

If someone in court asks for a continuance based on 'Judge, *I* have possession of too many of my own documents to review in x months' --- that would be laughed out of court.

I will grant you Smith asked for a very aggressive first date -- Jan 2.

Trump asked for a laughably long time -- 2.5 years.

The judge actually asked them in the hearing if they had *any* other position than the holistically brain dead March 2026 -- they refused.

Given the Trump intransigence on sticking with a laughably long date -- Chutkhan came down with 7 mos. The downside of requesting, and sticking to, a date that is shallowly and excessively long.

Lastly, the issue is 11 million documents. Not in anyway an insurmountable issue in the modern legal world.
Added to that --- about 3 million are Secret Service documents, probably utterly useless to either party.
But included as caution to be over-inclusive.

In addition, probably 90% are duplicates. That is a document, a witness transcript where the witness is describing the document, along with a copy of the document.

You know that was completely bullshite as you typed it....

you going to court with 11 million documents in this time frame because the person you are defending had those papers? You're the lawyer that is fighting the case. Not the defendant. I dont usually call you names but damn you must be a stupid ass lawyer if you would go to court without knowing what the documents the government was going to use. Just because they once were in the procession of the defendant

Do you know what every file says that you have from the last 3 years? Have you actually even read every file you have? Going by what you said, you should and shouldn't need any time to read them. Like I said hatred for Trump makes common freaking sense just go out the damn window.

If 90% are duplicates wouldn't that still be over 6 million (1.1 that were not copies and 9.9 /2)? So lets give you the 3 million SS files (still dont know how you think if the government put them in there they are useless). As for those 3 million if something came up in court and you told the judge, sorry judge I thought they were "utterly useless" so now I need time to go over over them.....

the judge would eat you alive and be thinking...dumb***. Take that 3 million out and you still have over 3 million and that is still a lot for 7 months

It’s easier to hide chit in 11,000,000 pages. You’re gonna have to go through them all.

I’m surprised Clarence even gave it a try, although he completely ignores the real signature of government judicial harassment. THE DATE SET ON THE MONDAY BEFORE SUPER TUESDAY. Double lolzs, sparkles. Bummer.

(08-29-2023 11:03 PM)WKUYG Wrote:  Tang why is it the responsibility for someone that hasn't been charged with a crime to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on a lawyer to go over his files just because he might be indicted? That is exactly what this judge is saying.

Not quite. The judge is saying since you have had access for <fill in the blank months>, you should have made use of that. There was no secret that there was an investigation into *your* conduct going on, specifically into *particular* conduct.

Id agree with you if Trump was blindsided out of the blue. That simply isnt the case.

Quote:Also any other case this damn judge is going to tell the DA if you dont plan on using 11 million documents and want this to go to trial at a early date. Its your responsibility to cut that number down to what you are actually going to use.

The law results in just the opposite. A charging authority has a duty to turn over exculpatory evidence. Prosecutors tend to over disclose, because if they withhold they run the risk of error that might short circuit the entire case.

Quote:You and I both know what the DA is going to say. "your honor at this time we dont know which files we will be using"

Smith has done just the opposite from what I gather. In addition to a fully indexed search outline (which modern discovery services do), he has provided to the defense an outline of the documents and evidence that were used to underlie each of the items in the indictment, and highlighted documents that underlie much of the rest of his case.

(08-29-2023 11:29 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(08-29-2023 10:34 PM)WKUYG Wrote:  

(08-29-2023 09:59 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  The issue that Chutkan points out is that the defendant has/ had access to much of the discovery all along. In much of the documents, Trump actually has the documents.

If someone in court asks for a continuance based on 'Judge, *I* have possession of too many of my own documents to review in x months' --- that would be laughed out of court.

I will grant you Smith asked for a very aggressive first date -- Jan 2.

Trump asked for a laughably long time -- 2.5 years.

The judge actually asked them in the hearing if they had *any* other position than the holistically brain dead March 2026 -- they refused.

Given the Trump intransigence on sticking with a laughably long date -- Chutkhan came down with 7 mos. The downside of requesting, and sticking to, a date that is shallowly and excessively long.

Lastly, the issue is 11 million documents. Not in anyway an insurmountable issue in the modern legal world.
Added to that --- about 3 million are Secret Service documents, probably utterly useless to either party.
But included as caution to be over-inclusive.

In addition, probably 90% are duplicates. That is a document, a witness transcript where the witness is describing the document, along with a copy of the document.

You know that was completely bullshite as you typed it....

you going to court with 11 million documents in this time frame because the person you are defending had those papers? You're the lawyer that is fighting the case. Not the defendant. I dont usually call you names but damn you must be a stupid ass lawyer if you would go to court without knowing what the documents the government was going to use. Just because they once were in the procession of the defendant

Do you know what every file says that you have from the last 3 years? Have you actually even read every file you have? Going by what you said, you should and shouldn't need any time to read them. Like I said hatred for Trump makes common freaking sense just go out the damn window.

If 90% are duplicates wouldn't that still be over 6 million (1.1 that were not copies and 9.9 /2)? So lets give you the 3 million SS files (still dont know how you think if the government put them in there they are useless). As for those 3 million if something came up in court and you told the judge, sorry judge I thought they were "utterly useless" so now I need time to go over over them.....

the judge would eat you alive and be thinking...dumb***. Take that 3 million out and you still have over 3 million and that is still a lot for 7 months

It’s easier to hide chit in 11,000,000 pages. You’re gonna have to go through them all.

I’m surprised Clarence even gave it a try, although he completely ignores the real signature of government judicial harassment. THE DATE SET ON THE MONDAY BEFORE SUPER TUESDAY. Double lolzs, sparkles. Bummer.

Got it. Just more empty, no evidence chanting of rank conspiracy stuff. About what I expect from you, chuckles.....