Brief explanatory note: a motion to dismiss can only assume all the facts in the indictment are true, and they still don’t amount to proof of the crime(s) charged. If you can’t prove that, you lose the motion. Period.This is it? This is the grand PRA legal theory they’ve been previewing for 18 months?
— Bradley P. Moss (@BradMossEsq) February 23, 2024
What a joke. Their argument is that Trump designated all the records as personal, he did so while President, no one can scrutinize how he did so, and therefore his possession can’t https://t.co/yTJyfk8gZQ
Is based on turning the Clinton case into something it was not. Trump has taken the view that Clinton’s case means presidents can RECLASSIFY agency records as personal presidential records without scrutiny under the PRA. That’s not what that case was about. Clinton designated
— Bradley P. Moss (@BradMossEsq) February 23, 2024
to reclassify them, he had to do so through a written process (which I guarantee he never did). And, of course, that’s a matter for TRIAL. Not a motion to dismiss.
— Bradley P. Moss (@BradMossEsq) February 23, 2024
And here is the other thing, which I thought Trump would address but does not. Let’s say he did reclassify
This is just to delay and raise money. And the way he’s doing that is to spend money on lawyers like somebody else is paying for it. A practice that’s going to cost him, sooner or later. Wasting money on motions like this is not an economical use of funds.as mine since his motion never addresses it.
— Bradley P. Moss (@BradMossEsq) February 23, 2024
This motion is such a let down. I was expecting a lengthy diatribe about the PRA’s history but this is nothing more than Tom Fitton’s legal fantasy.
Cannon will reject this easily.
/end
No comments:
Post a Comment