Tonight while watching MSNBC, I was struck by the focus given to the statement from Employee 4, "I don't have the rights." Perhaps I misread the intent. It sounded like the people I heard were making this guy out to be some kind of saint because he refused to delete the files on the server. But that phrase is I.T. talk. "Rights" in server lingo simply refers to required permissions. Someone who administers a server has "admin rights", and someone with a standard user account would not have those. So I took the phrase to simply mean he quite literally couldn't erase anything because he did not have the "rights" on the server to perform that function. I mean, I guess he could've taken a baseball bat to the server, and he didn't, so that's something. And maybe he is a saint. But it just sounded like too many people were reading too much into the word "rights."
Wow- I should have picked up on that. The servers literally would not allow Employee 4 to delete the files digitally. A dialogue box would have come up saying “sorry, you do not have the required permissions to delete these files. Please contact the system administrator”. I heard something about a plan to flood the area with water from the swimming pool. Maybe that was Plan B?
Ditto. After all, I've said quite a bit about file permissions over the years, most of it unprintable. I wondered about the 's' but went no farther. Good call, Brad!
While I agree with your explanation, Brad, let’s give Employee 4 credit for taking the ethical path. Regardless of the reason he couldn’t delete the files, his first inclination was “I am not able to do that.” I argue that a less
honorable person might have tried to bypass the system administrator.
Michele, Brad does have another job as a Platform expert. See my comment now recorded below. Brad should send his resume to Jack Smith's Team.
UPDATE: I reviewed the Transcript & Brad's reference to "Admin rights" is correct. The word used by 'Employee 4' was "rights" plural not singular adding credibility to Brad's trade jargon analysis. Spot on Brad.
Wow, Brad. While you’ve hit upon the plausible double meaning of a word, I expect we might have to wait for a trial (if there is one) for Employee 4’s intended meaning.
Thank you. "Plausible double meaning" is about the best one can say about it. Anyone who's listened to oral history tapes or, for that matter, edited a manuscript knows better than to hang a whole interpretation on one pronunciation or spelling of a word.
Now we need learn whoever in the Trump Org. had the "rights" to delete the server files. Was this system administrator person ever contacted? If so, what happen?
Any request like that would have raised more questions at T. Org. "Who wants this done?", "Why do you want them deleted?", "I will need authorization in writing for that, especially for security videos." The conspiracy would have to widen to include more people. TFG would have to become personally involved. "Its for the 'boss'."
I agree with Heather Wimberly a "Plan B" is required. An "accident" to flood the server room.
And even if the files were deleted from the MAL server or destroyed were there backups in some cloud? I believe "BACKUP EVERYTHING" is the mantra for system administrators.
Employee 4 saying “he would not know how to do that and that he did not believe that he would have the rights to do that.” when it came to deleting the videos from the server sure sounds like “computer speak” to me too.
Thank you for the clarification, Brad. You made me laugh “I guess he could’ve taken a baseball bat to the server, and he didn’t, so that’s something. And maybe he is a saint. But....etc.”
You hit upon the nub of Employee 4's response in IT jargon. "I don't have the rights!"
Exactly.
Still: Employee 4's lack of IT system privileges made it impossible for "4" to comply with "THE boss's" order: Delete the whole thing . . . which, of course, was tantamount to destruction of incriminating evidence.
So "4" is still in a golden position. S/he will be free of criminal charges and can be compelled to testify against Trump.
So, if "4" did not have courage before, S/he will definitely need courage.
Trump is well-known to dox his opponents and with malicious intent expose anyone who stands up to him to mortal damage both personally and to the family and loved ones of any whistleblower!
That's a very valuable Comment Brad, It's SUBSTANCE not SYNTAX. "Server Rights", duties to protect the Platform & duties to protect Users is a rapidly developing area of civil & criminal law. I think it is time for you to get your resume out there & by all means cite your above Comment verbatim. THANK YOU.
Very interesting point. I hadn't picked up on that, but you have a point. If that is the case, then why didn't they go to the person who did have the rights to delete the videos?
So Employee 4 said "rights" instead of "right" and you're assuming it's IT talk? Unless I had reason to believe that this is what Employee 4 meant, and not, say, something along the lines of "that's not within my rights," it does seem a stretch.
For whatever reason, Employee 4 not only declined to assist, he also apparently provided prosecutors with testimony about what went down. Whether that makes him a hero or a saint, I don't know, but Kipling's lines about being able to keep your head when those around you are losing theirs do come to mind.
Susana, agree with your Paragraph 2, thank, you. "Tech Talk" (I call it "Trade Jargon"] is not a matter of assumptions -- no assumptions. Brad is a Translator who speaks the language. Perps, can always challenge the translation in Court if they want to risk emphasizing their guilt to a Jury.
My #1 question is "Why does anyone assume that Employee 4 is talking 'trade jargon'?" Brad may speak "the language" but how does he, or any of you who agree with him, know that Employee 4 is speaking that particular language? If I made such assumptions in my work as an editor, I'd have a piss-poor reputation -- and I'd deserve it.
To be clear, I didn't mean to imply that I was right, or that mine was the only interpretation of a phrase. I simply meant that when I heard that phrase, I immediately took it to mean in the technological sense, having uttered those words myself on many occasions, though not in conjunction with a crime. Even now, most of us at work don't have Admin rights to install a program on our own workstations. Rights is an even more common term when you're discussing servers, and the verbiage, as written, is consistent with the way that would be expressed.
I realized you were putting it out there as a possibility -- and it *is* a possibility. What surprised me was the number of commenters who seemed to think it was the one and only possible answer. In retrospect, I'm chalking it up to it being the (U.S.) middle of the night when many of us have tired brains. :-)
I thought it had something to do with not being able to access the server, but because it wasn't mentioned anywhere, maybe "rights" was a typo and it was supposed to be "right." My guess is that in exchange for his testimony, Employee #4 was given immunity for helping to relocate boxes. We'll see.
Permission to write on (or delete) a file may be separate from the sys admin permissions. Otherwise the whole enterprise would be @ the mercy of the system administrator, who it's true better be a "trusted" person, but maybe you don't want to put your whole organizational life in their hands. Of course it depends on how carefully the system is set up, but if you put a lot of thought into it you probably wouldn't want the system admin to be able to delete files you might need to detect nefarious activities by intruders or employees.
What a great article! You make learning enjoyable. I have one thought. Why isn’t the goal of running for president to evade prosecution the same as him being “a flight risk?” He just hides in another way. He shouldn’t be allowed to use the election as an escape. He should have no escape.
If the States would simply obey the Constitution (remember he doesn't even need indictment, let aloe conviction to be ineligible for office, just that he was seen to "engage" in "or given aid or comfort".Millions of us heard those words go the the Capitol and fight like hell. His name should not appear on any ballot for any office civilian or military. email your Secretary of State.
I'm glad you're staying on this point, Fay. Everyone needs urging to contact their Governor, Sec'y of State and local State Legislator to insist they take him off the ballot for any future election, federal or state, for "giving aid and comfort" to those who "rebelled against" Congress at the Capitol.
The 14th Amendment of the Constitution demands it.
This is true except that at the moment it is only indictments and he is still innocent until proven guilty by a jury. Fact that he currently has no defense doesn't stop him from a trial with rights.
Hence, our public dilemma to get him convicted before voting as that is the enactment of the 14th. Otherwise, it's a race to get the public against him, or the obvious for the GOP party to disqualify him in some fashion.
The former presidents own words are in fact offering comfort to the insurrectionists. The Constitution does not say "having been convicted of" offering such comfort.
If he is found guilty of a seditious conspiracy, that would be a concrete reason, but giving aid and comfort is not a crime...just a disqualifying factor according to the Constitution. His own words which have been recorded are proof of that.
I agree with this and his republican colleagues should have the fortitude with the evidence in public domain that he is a National Security risk and was offering aid and comfort.
The first evidence as a US Official was kicking out US Press to have a closed session (without WH persons) with only RU Lavrov and Kislyak and the photo coming by way of RU photographers inside the Oval. That was the main start of his official aid and comfort as a US Gov't official. Not simple pleasantries/decorum.
I agree. I think if all the statements made by him, as well as documented actions, were compiled, there would be quite a convincing case against allowing him to run for any office, ever. Therefore, we have everything to gain by urging everyone to contact the appropriate state officials (Governor, Secretary of State and their local legislator, for starters) and ask them to initiate the removal of this traitor from any future ballots, state and federal, in their respective states. I won't hold my breath hoping his republican colleagues (actually, cronies) find the backbone to acknowledge the fact that he IS a national security risk.
He should do us all a favor and renounce his U.S. citizenship and leave the country for good.
I like that idea. I could suggest that in Maryland. If acted on, Maryland could simply inform the R Party that Trump's name won't be on a Maryland primary ballot. The majority in MD does not vote Republican so neither the Rs or Ds give much attention to us ever. The Rs would then have to contest the decision knowing it actually gains them nothing down the road in 2024. If they lose the argument it might get a few more bluish states to follow suit. It could mean no majority for tjd if the states don't even have him on the ballot. However, can you do a write in during the primaries - because I would not be surprised if the Rs in Maryland would do just that.
This is referring to Sheila’s comment that trump shouldn’t be allowed to use the election as an escape -- that that’s a kind of flight risk. And i meant to add that he’s using the campaign to obstruct justice.
No he won't. Narcissists are generally not suicidal. To them, suicide is anathema to the elevated opinion they have of themselves.
Trump's most effective defense has always been to claim he is the victim of evil forces that hate his greatness and want to "take him down" because he is perfect. Trump believes he is the perfect man, the Chosen One, in large part because it's what he's been told by his acolytes all his life. Being elected in 2016 convinced him his delusions of grandeur weren't delusions.
I doubt he would kill his wonderful perfect self. /s I think he will abscond to Russia, or more likely a friendly-to-him Middle Eastern country without an extradition treaty with the US.
Is it possible that another reason Trump & his attorneys are hoping to get non-SCIF access to the documents is to argue that, if they can be viewed outside a SCIF then they must not have been that important/serious to warrant being classified? Trump keeps coming back to his excuse train (I didn’t take them, but if I did, they weren’t really that secret...) and it would fit right in with it.
Sigh. Trump Employee 4 is a solid candidate for hero? No hero I recognize would have been in the employ of the mob boss in the first place. No, TE#4 is just a smarter rat, jumping the sinking ship. Jack Smith is the hero here, all the livelong day.
Whenever I think of he who shall not be named brings back the horror of the boys in the park with himself pronouncing them guilty. Before that he was just a rich guy promising but not always paying off the winners to win amazing things. Look what he has done built on greed and hate.
His very existence is stained with residue from the sleaze resulting from his support of the Preppy Murderer , and his rage against those wrongly charged jogger case!
And this poker hand was dealt face-up since he came down the escalator. He’s never wavered from his modus operandi. The Little Red Book of Trump doesn’t have many pages.
There is no mystery in why Trump has succeeded throughout his life in getting others to take the fall for him. If they don’t, Trump promises “retribution” on their family members, or those they hold most dear. He openly has threatened current prosecutors and their families. It’s his modus operandi.
Thank you, Joyce. I appreciate you shepherding us through a political horror tale. Now I know what to watch from Trumps appointed judge. I keep shaking my head and thinking, he can't be this stupid, then feeling sad that it only takes loathsome constant lies and somebody else's money to win the Presidency.
Thanks for that excellent summary and so quick too.
Democracy hangs on a thread. And on the end of that thread is Jack Smith. It’s disturbing to me that there are so many what ifs relating to Cannon - will she, won’t she. Too bad this case can’t be transferred to the Hunter Biden Judge. I’m guessing she would cut to the chase. Just guessing.
So grateful for your clarification and explanation of this important story about TFG and the fact he has an honest employee. “So, if you’re looking for a hero this week, Trump Employee 4 is a solid candidate. The allegation that Trump tried to destroy video evidence pushes this case over the top. It demonstrates he was conscious of his guilt. When Employee 4 testifies at trial that "DE OLIVEIRA told Trump Employee 4 that 'the boss' wanted the server deleted,” it’s chef’s kiss.” Hoping this new information moves this case forward. Every day, I wonder how TFG manages to escape being behind bars. And supported by his political party. He’s a known criminal and waiting months or years for trials and allowing him to run for President with all this evidence should not only be reconsidered. It should not be allowed, because he led an Insurrection. Section 3, 14th amendment. We watched that with our own eyes. No amount of gaslighting will tell us any other story.
I find it interesting that a DeOlivera, a Valet, is suddenly promoted to Property Manager in January 2022. Not to disparage Valets, but the skill set for a Valet is very different than for a Property Manager. It seems trump perhaps was buying loyalty, getting all his ducks in a row and called in his marker in April 2022.
I'm not so sure a low-level Property Manager at MAL would entail much property management. He might just be a key custodian. However, in that case, he would have access to storage room keys, etc. DeOlivera is in this case up to his neck.
The way Aileen let her integrity (what little she may have had) succumb to tfg’s legal whims and wishes in the past…. We can hope that past in not prologue though there’s every reason to believe it very well might be.
From where I sit she seems to be dragging her feet a little which plays as her being supportive of tfg’s well known delay tactics.
The Appeals Court should remove her, but they can't unless Smith moves for her recusal and does it very soon. He has to first file a motion, or make it verbally on the record while in Aileen's court. When she denies it, he must then file a motion in the Appellate court. The longer Aileen is presiding in this case, the less likely she can be removed unless she screws up the way she did last year with that special master bullshit.
An intricate situation where there are no winners on the TFG side of the aisle. Do you have specific thoughts Joyce on Employee #4’s reason for refusing to delete the footage when asked? Doesn’t the fact that he testified say anything positive about his character or is he just playing the odds? I hope more information comes to light. Maga-gate continues to reap only sorrow for all of us but perhaps it is now running in a new direction with the help of Jack Smith. Many thanks for thorough insights into today’s quagmire. Much appreciation for all those who protect America behind the scenes and to you for sticking with us 🇺🇸🗽
Tonight while watching MSNBC, I was struck by the focus given to the statement from Employee 4, "I don't have the rights." Perhaps I misread the intent. It sounded like the people I heard were making this guy out to be some kind of saint because he refused to delete the files on the server. But that phrase is I.T. talk. "Rights" in server lingo simply refers to required permissions. Someone who administers a server has "admin rights", and someone with a standard user account would not have those. So I took the phrase to simply mean he quite literally couldn't erase anything because he did not have the "rights" on the server to perform that function. I mean, I guess he could've taken a baseball bat to the server, and he didn't, so that's something. And maybe he is a saint. But it just sounded like too many people were reading too much into the word "rights."
Wow- I should have picked up on that. The servers literally would not allow Employee 4 to delete the files digitally. A dialogue box would have come up saying “sorry, you do not have the required permissions to delete these files. Please contact the system administrator”. I heard something about a plan to flood the area with water from the swimming pool. Maybe that was Plan B?
"Wow- I should have picked up on that."
Ditto. After all, I've said quite a bit about file permissions over the years, most of it unprintable. I wondered about the 's' but went no farther. Good call, Brad!
While I agree with your explanation, Brad, let’s give Employee 4 credit for taking the ethical path. Regardless of the reason he couldn’t delete the files, his first inclination was “I am not able to do that.” I argue that a less
honorable person might have tried to bypass the system administrator.
Kudos if he’s cooperating with the prosecution.
I hope he has another job. He'll probably need one soon.
At least he won’t be in prison
I hope he’s in Witness Protection.
I'd be scared if I were him.
Michele, Brad does have another job as a Platform expert. See my comment now recorded below. Brad should send his resume to Jack Smith's Team.
UPDATE: I reviewed the Transcript & Brad's reference to "Admin rights" is correct. The word used by 'Employee 4' was "rights" plural not singular adding credibility to Brad's trade jargon analysis. Spot on Brad.
Yup. Spot on.
Brad, Thank you for your important techie-savvy perspective!
Wow, Brad. While you’ve hit upon the plausible double meaning of a word, I expect we might have to wait for a trial (if there is one) for Employee 4’s intended meaning.
Thank you. "Plausible double meaning" is about the best one can say about it. Anyone who's listened to oral history tapes or, for that matter, edited a manuscript knows better than to hang a whole interpretation on one pronunciation or spelling of a word.
Now we need learn whoever in the Trump Org. had the "rights" to delete the server files. Was this system administrator person ever contacted? If so, what happen?
Any request like that would have raised more questions at T. Org. "Who wants this done?", "Why do you want them deleted?", "I will need authorization in writing for that, especially for security videos." The conspiracy would have to widen to include more people. TFG would have to become personally involved. "Its for the 'boss'."
I agree with Heather Wimberly a "Plan B" is required. An "accident" to flood the server room.
And even if the files were deleted from the MAL server or destroyed were there backups in some cloud? I believe "BACKUP EVERYTHING" is the mantra for system administrators.
Sounds like you nailed it Brad.
Employee 4 saying “he would not know how to do that and that he did not believe that he would have the rights to do that.” when it came to deleting the videos from the server sure sounds like “computer speak” to me too.
Thank you for the clarification, Brad. You made me laugh “I guess he could’ve taken a baseball bat to the server, and he didn’t, so that’s something. And maybe he is a saint. But....etc.”
That’s how I interpreted it too - didn’t have admin permissions.
Brad: Right on!
You hit upon the nub of Employee 4's response in IT jargon. "I don't have the rights!"
Exactly.
Still: Employee 4's lack of IT system privileges made it impossible for "4" to comply with "THE boss's" order: Delete the whole thing . . . which, of course, was tantamount to destruction of incriminating evidence.
So "4" is still in a golden position. S/he will be free of criminal charges and can be compelled to testify against Trump.
So, if "4" did not have courage before, S/he will definitely need courage.
Trump is well-known to dox his opponents and with malicious intent expose anyone who stands up to him to mortal damage both personally and to the family and loved ones of any whistleblower!
So, "4" has courage, after all!
That's a very valuable Comment Brad, It's SUBSTANCE not SYNTAX. "Server Rights", duties to protect the Platform & duties to protect Users is a rapidly developing area of civil & criminal law. I think it is time for you to get your resume out there & by all means cite your above Comment verbatim. THANK YOU.
Very interesting point. I hadn't picked up on that, but you have a point. If that is the case, then why didn't they go to the person who did have the rights to delete the videos?
Possibly because they knew they were committing a crime.
True; but they were willing to try with Employee No. 4, why not his supervisor?
You little smarty😁 . No way ethics plays a part with these clowns.
So Employee 4 said "rights" instead of "right" and you're assuming it's IT talk? Unless I had reason to believe that this is what Employee 4 meant, and not, say, something along the lines of "that's not within my rights," it does seem a stretch.
For whatever reason, Employee 4 not only declined to assist, he also apparently provided prosecutors with testimony about what went down. Whether that makes him a hero or a saint, I don't know, but Kipling's lines about being able to keep your head when those around you are losing theirs do come to mind.
Susana, agree with your Paragraph 2, thank, you. "Tech Talk" (I call it "Trade Jargon"] is not a matter of assumptions -- no assumptions. Brad is a Translator who speaks the language. Perps, can always challenge the translation in Court if they want to risk emphasizing their guilt to a Jury.
My #1 question is "Why does anyone assume that Employee 4 is talking 'trade jargon'?" Brad may speak "the language" but how does he, or any of you who agree with him, know that Employee 4 is speaking that particular language? If I made such assumptions in my work as an editor, I'd have a piss-poor reputation -- and I'd deserve it.
To be clear, I didn't mean to imply that I was right, or that mine was the only interpretation of a phrase. I simply meant that when I heard that phrase, I immediately took it to mean in the technological sense, having uttered those words myself on many occasions, though not in conjunction with a crime. Even now, most of us at work don't have Admin rights to install a program on our own workstations. Rights is an even more common term when you're discussing servers, and the verbiage, as written, is consistent with the way that would be expressed.
I realized you were putting it out there as a possibility -- and it *is* a possibility. What surprised me was the number of commenters who seemed to think it was the one and only possible answer. In retrospect, I'm chalking it up to it being the (U.S.) middle of the night when many of us have tired brains. :-)
I thought it had something to do with not being able to access the server, but because it wasn't mentioned anywhere, maybe "rights" was a typo and it was supposed to be "right." My guess is that in exchange for his testimony, Employee #4 was given immunity for helping to relocate boxes. We'll see.
Likely correct, Marycat.
Yes, you are correct. He/she may not have been ‘moral or ethical’, but simply did not have the ‘electronic’ means to do what was being asked.
Permission to write on (or delete) a file may be separate from the sys admin permissions. Otherwise the whole enterprise would be @ the mercy of the system administrator, who it's true better be a "trusted" person, but maybe you don't want to put your whole organizational life in their hands. Of course it depends on how carefully the system is set up, but if you put a lot of thought into it you probably wouldn't want the system admin to be able to delete files you might need to detect nefarious activities by intruders or employees.
What a great article! You make learning enjoyable. I have one thought. Why isn’t the goal of running for president to evade prosecution the same as him being “a flight risk?” He just hides in another way. He shouldn’t be allowed to use the election as an escape. He should have no escape.
If the States would simply obey the Constitution (remember he doesn't even need indictment, let aloe conviction to be ineligible for office, just that he was seen to "engage" in "or given aid or comfort".Millions of us heard those words go the the Capitol and fight like hell. His name should not appear on any ballot for any office civilian or military. email your Secretary of State.
I'm glad you're staying on this point, Fay. Everyone needs urging to contact their Governor, Sec'y of State and local State Legislator to insist they take him off the ballot for any future election, federal or state, for "giving aid and comfort" to those who "rebelled against" Congress at the Capitol.
The 14th Amendment of the Constitution demands it.
This is true except that at the moment it is only indictments and he is still innocent until proven guilty by a jury. Fact that he currently has no defense doesn't stop him from a trial with rights.
Hence, our public dilemma to get him convicted before voting as that is the enactment of the 14th. Otherwise, it's a race to get the public against him, or the obvious for the GOP party to disqualify him in some fashion.
The former presidents own words are in fact offering comfort to the insurrectionists. The Constitution does not say "having been convicted of" offering such comfort.
If he is found guilty of a seditious conspiracy, that would be a concrete reason, but giving aid and comfort is not a crime...just a disqualifying factor according to the Constitution. His own words which have been recorded are proof of that.
I agree with this and his republican colleagues should have the fortitude with the evidence in public domain that he is a National Security risk and was offering aid and comfort.
The first evidence as a US Official was kicking out US Press to have a closed session (without WH persons) with only RU Lavrov and Kislyak and the photo coming by way of RU photographers inside the Oval. That was the main start of his official aid and comfort as a US Gov't official. Not simple pleasantries/decorum.
Helsinki on a complete utterly disgusting level.
I agree. I think if all the statements made by him, as well as documented actions, were compiled, there would be quite a convincing case against allowing him to run for any office, ever. Therefore, we have everything to gain by urging everyone to contact the appropriate state officials (Governor, Secretary of State and their local legislator, for starters) and ask them to initiate the removal of this traitor from any future ballots, state and federal, in their respective states. I won't hold my breath hoping his republican colleagues (actually, cronies) find the backbone to acknowledge the fact that he IS a national security risk.
He should do us all a favor and renounce his U.S. citizenship and leave the country for good.
I like that idea. I could suggest that in Maryland. If acted on, Maryland could simply inform the R Party that Trump's name won't be on a Maryland primary ballot. The majority in MD does not vote Republican so neither the Rs or Ds give much attention to us ever. The Rs would then have to contest the decision knowing it actually gains them nothing down the road in 2024. If they lose the argument it might get a few more bluish states to follow suit. It could mean no majority for tjd if the states don't even have him on the ballot. However, can you do a write in during the primaries - because I would not be surprised if the Rs in Maryland would do just that.
Yeah, another type of flight risk -- or another type of obstruction.
This is referring to Sheila’s comment that trump shouldn’t be allowed to use the election as an escape -- that that’s a kind of flight risk. And i meant to add that he’s using the campaign to obstruct justice.
And raising all that money let’s not forget paying attorneys fees and keeping the rest. It’s madness. Laws clearing need to be changed.
Horribly, narcissists always have a final escape. I firmly believe that when he suspects the jig is up, he will suicide.
No he won't. Narcissists are generally not suicidal. To them, suicide is anathema to the elevated opinion they have of themselves.
Trump's most effective defense has always been to claim he is the victim of evil forces that hate his greatness and want to "take him down" because he is perfect. Trump believes he is the perfect man, the Chosen One, in large part because it's what he's been told by his acolytes all his life. Being elected in 2016 convinced him his delusions of grandeur weren't delusions.
“The worst case of suicide we’ve ever seen”.. humm
Nah, he will never admit he’s a failure! Perhaps, death from eating too many Big Macs! Not the same!
I doubt he would kill his wonderful perfect self. /s I think he will abscond to Russia, or more likely a friendly-to-him Middle Eastern country without an extradition treaty with the US.
What happens if the shell of his personality cracks? It won’t happen slowly.
Where’s Carlos The Jackal when you need him?
When he is no longer of political use to other countries, he will be of no further interest to them. I doubt if they will give him any protection.
Well, death is the traditional means of punishment for a Traitor.
Or worse
Is it possible that another reason Trump & his attorneys are hoping to get non-SCIF access to the documents is to argue that, if they can be viewed outside a SCIF then they must not have been that important/serious to warrant being classified? Trump keeps coming back to his excuse train (I didn’t take them, but if I did, they weren’t really that secret...) and it would fit right in with it.
I'm sure they've thought about that.
I always pictured a SCIF as a supersonic telephone booth…a snug little space. Maybe that’s why TFG is recoiling….he might get stuck in there.
Ala Dr Who
That's exactly what I thought! LOL
Not wanted a SCIF, recognizing the requirement and the sensitivity of the documents &Rutherford implicates him.
Tricky Tricky.
Like I said before, I'm still wishing 45 good health, so he lives long enough to serve prison time.
I do wish they would hurry up though... I may not live to see it.
Come on, dear lady, you will, you will! We're both going to see him dead and buried on the MAL golf course! <3
Sigh. Trump Employee 4 is a solid candidate for hero? No hero I recognize would have been in the employ of the mob boss in the first place. No, TE#4 is just a smarter rat, jumping the sinking ship. Jack Smith is the hero here, all the livelong day.
Yup!
Thank you for your clear rundown on this! I really appreciate all your hard work and excellent commentary.
Whenever I think of he who shall not be named brings back the horror of the boys in the park with himself pronouncing them guilty. Before that he was just a rich guy promising but not always paying off the winners to win amazing things. Look what he has done built on greed and hate.
His very existence is stained with residue from the sleaze resulting from his support of the Preppy Murderer , and his rage against those wrongly charged jogger case!
And this poker hand was dealt face-up since he came down the escalator. He’s never wavered from his modus operandi. The Little Red Book of Trump doesn’t have many pages.
There is no mystery in why Trump has succeeded throughout his life in getting others to take the fall for him. If they don’t, Trump promises “retribution” on their family members, or those they hold most dear. He openly has threatened current prosecutors and their families. It’s his modus operandi.
He learned all about how mob bosses handle things from Roy Cohn.
And his father...it's a "family" thing. Now passed down to Ivanka and Jared. 2 billion in their pocket from the saudis.
Thank you, Joyce. I appreciate you shepherding us through a political horror tale. Now I know what to watch from Trumps appointed judge. I keep shaking my head and thinking, he can't be this stupid, then feeling sad that it only takes loathsome constant lies and somebody else's money to win the Presidency.
Thanks for that excellent summary and so quick too.
Democracy hangs on a thread. And on the end of that thread is Jack Smith. It’s disturbing to me that there are so many what ifs relating to Cannon - will she, won’t she. Too bad this case can’t be transferred to the Hunter Biden Judge. I’m guessing she would cut to the chase. Just guessing.
Once this National Disgrace is over with, let’s hope that we put in firewalls to protect democracy.
We need to do that now and win both houses.
That's a double standard I could live with.
So grateful for your clarification and explanation of this important story about TFG and the fact he has an honest employee. “So, if you’re looking for a hero this week, Trump Employee 4 is a solid candidate. The allegation that Trump tried to destroy video evidence pushes this case over the top. It demonstrates he was conscious of his guilt. When Employee 4 testifies at trial that "DE OLIVEIRA told Trump Employee 4 that 'the boss' wanted the server deleted,” it’s chef’s kiss.” Hoping this new information moves this case forward. Every day, I wonder how TFG manages to escape being behind bars. And supported by his political party. He’s a known criminal and waiting months or years for trials and allowing him to run for President with all this evidence should not only be reconsidered. It should not be allowed, because he led an Insurrection. Section 3, 14th amendment. We watched that with our own eyes. No amount of gaslighting will tell us any other story.
I find it interesting that a DeOlivera, a Valet, is suddenly promoted to Property Manager in January 2022. Not to disparage Valets, but the skill set for a Valet is very different than for a Property Manager. It seems trump perhaps was buying loyalty, getting all his ducks in a row and called in his marker in April 2022.
Speaking of skill set, we might go back to requirements for POTUS or for that matter SCOTUS. some rewriting is in order.
I'm not so sure a low-level Property Manager at MAL would entail much property management. He might just be a key custodian. However, in that case, he would have access to storage room keys, etc. DeOlivera is in this case up to his neck.
Brilliant Joyce! Thank you so much for breaking all of this down for us.
excellent post. two things: is trump's logic is that he already looked at the docs at Mar A Lago and so why shouldn't he again?????
The question of what to do with Secret Service detail while tRump is in prison? Assign them to Employee 4. He's gonna need protection if he testifies.
This situation is not looking pretty.
Thinking of you, Joyce, and sending my love.
Always expect the worst from this alleged "judge" who obviously got her law degree out of a box of Cracker Jacks.
The way Aileen let her integrity (what little she may have had) succumb to tfg’s legal whims and wishes in the past…. We can hope that past in not prologue though there’s every reason to believe it very well might be.
From where I sit she seems to be dragging her feet a little which plays as her being supportive of tfg’s well known delay tactics.
Unfortunately, not true. She has a degree from Duke and University of Michigan, JD...
E Sonoma, then she should know better than to blatantly allow Trump to drag his feet as she is doing
Her long game in my opinion is to get removed from the trial by the Circuit Appeals Court
She doesn't have to do that. Instead, she can simply recuse. It would regain some of the respect she lost.
If she recuses on her own, she’s letting Trump down. If the Appeals Court removes her, political mayhem occurs on the MAGA Crybaby Market
The Appeals Court should remove her, but they can't unless Smith moves for her recusal and does it very soon. He has to first file a motion, or make it verbally on the record while in Aileen's court. When she denies it, he must then file a motion in the Appellate court. The longer Aileen is presiding in this case, the less likely she can be removed unless she screws up the way she did last year with that special master bullshit.
An intricate situation where there are no winners on the TFG side of the aisle. Do you have specific thoughts Joyce on Employee #4’s reason for refusing to delete the footage when asked? Doesn’t the fact that he testified say anything positive about his character or is he just playing the odds? I hope more information comes to light. Maga-gate continues to reap only sorrow for all of us but perhaps it is now running in a new direction with the help of Jack Smith. Many thanks for thorough insights into today’s quagmire. Much appreciation for all those who protect America behind the scenes and to you for sticking with us 🇺🇸🗽
I hear you and concur, however it’s best not to shoot the messenger.
Apologies if that’s how it came across
Which further proves my point that scoring high enough on the LSAT to get in is no proof of actual intelligence.